https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
1222
THE TRANSFER OF RUSSIAN SPECIALISTS TO INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES IN
TASHKENT BETWEEN 1970 AND 1975
Zaripov Jahongir Gulmurodovich,
2nd-year doctoral student at Bukhara State University
Annotation :
This article explores the historical and socio-economic implications of the
relocation of Russian specialists to industrial enterprises in Tashkent between 1970 and 1975.
Drawing on archival sources, statistical data, and scholarly literature, the study examines the
strategic motives behind this policy, its role in accelerating industrial development, and its
impact on workplace dynamics within the Uzbek SSR. The results show that the transfer
significantly boosted technological progress and productivity, particularly in aviation, electronics,
and mechanical engineering sectors. However, the influx of non-local specialists also introduced
linguistic and cultural barriers, reinforced dependency on external human capital, and
contributed to structural inequalities within the labor hierarchy. The findings underscore the dual
nature of Soviet regional development policies—technically effective yet socially imbalanced—
and provide insights relevant to contemporary debates on labor migration and postcolonial
industrial policy in Central Asia.
Keywords:
Soviet Union; labor migration; Russian specialists; Tashkent; industrial policy;
regional development; Uzbekistan; workplace integration; Soviet Central Asia; historical
analysis
INTRODUCTION
The 1970s marked a critical period in the industrial development of the Uzbek Soviet Socialist
Republic, particularly in the capital city of Tashkent. Following the devastating earthquake of
1966, Tashkent underwent a massive reconstruction and modernization process, which required
not only material resources but also skilled human capital (UNESCO, 1970). In this context, the
Soviet central government implemented a strategic policy to relocate qualified specialists,
engineers, and industrial managers from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic
(RSFSR) and other Slavic republics to Uzbekistan. This policy was driven by the need to support
the rapid expansion of industrial enterprises and to accelerate technological modernization in the
Central Asian republics (Smith, 1981).
Between 1970 and 1975, hundreds of Russian specialists were transferred to various sectors in
Tashkent, including machine building, electronics, textile production, and metallurgy. These
specialists played a vital role in the design, management, and operation of newly established or
expanding industrial enterprises (Kalinina, 1984). Their expertise filled a significant gap in the
local workforce, which, at that time, lacked sufficient numbers of technically trained personnel.
As a result, this influx of human capital contributed not only to production efficiency but also to
the transfer of technical knowledge and Soviet industrial culture to the local Uzbek context
(Petrov & Saidov, 1987).
The relocation of Russian specialists to Tashkent was also part of the broader Soviet policy of
"inter-republican cooperation," which aimed to balance regional development while maintaining
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
1223
centralized control from Moscow. However, while the policy contributed to economic growth, it
also created social and cultural tensions. The presence of large numbers of non-indigenous
professionals often led to linguistic and cultural barriers within the workplace and wider society
(Keller, 2001).
Despite its significance, the scholarly analysis of this migration and its impact on Uzbekistan’s
industrial and social fabric remains limited. This article aims to explore the socio-economic role
of Russian specialists transferred to Tashkent’s industrial sector between 1970 and 1975,
analyzing the motivations behind their relocation, the institutional mechanisms involved, and the
long-term consequences of their presence in the republic.
RESULTS
The findings of this research confirm that between 1970 and 1975, the relocation of Russian
specialists to Tashkent was a key component of Soviet regional development policy aimed at
accelerating the industrial capacity of the Uzbek SSR. According to archival data from the
Central State Archive of Uzbekistan, more than 4,500 qualified specialists from the RSFSR and
other Slavic republics were officially transferred to work in Tashkent’s growing industrial sector
during this period (Kalinina, 1984). These individuals were primarily engineers, project
managers, technologists, and skilled technicians who were integrated into major industrial
enterprises such as the Tashkent Aviation Production Association, the Tashkent Textile Combine,
and the Electronic Instrumentation Plant.
Statistical records from the
USSR Statistical Yearbook (1976)
indicate that by 1975, the share of
Russian and Slavic nationalities in technical and administrative positions in Tashkent-based
factories reached 38%, compared to just 21% in 1970. This shift reflects not only the influx of
specialists but also the central government’s prioritization of Russian-language technical
education and management standards across Soviet republics (Smith, 1981).
The presence of Russian professionals brought significant changes to production processes.
Archival reports from
Gosplan UzSSR
show that industrial output in selected enterprises where
Russian specialists were placed increased by an average of 27% between 1971 and 1975,
particularly in the fields of mechanical engineering and electronics. For example, the Tashkent
Electrotechnical Plant doubled its annual output from 1972 to 1975 due to the adoption of
advanced designs and quality control systems introduced by transferred specialists (Petrov &
Saidov, 1987).
In addition to technical improvements, the transfer had a visible impact on the social and
linguistic environment of workplaces. Russian was institutionalized as the main language of
production and documentation in many large enterprises, leading to increased demand for
Russian-language education among Uzbek workers. However, this also contributed to a sense of
cultural dislocation for some local employees, who faced challenges in adapting to new
workplace norms (Keller, 2001).
Overall, the relocation of Russian specialists to Tashkent in the early 1970s resulted in
measurable industrial gains and played a pivotal role in modernizing key sectors of the Uzbek
SSR’s economy. However, it also introduced new social dynamics that shaped interethnic
relations and workplace hierarchies for years to come.
RESULTS
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
1224
The analysis of archival materials and official statistical reports reveals that between 1970 and
1975, the Soviet government relocated over 4,500 Russian specialists to industrial enterprises in
Tashkent as part of a targeted policy to accelerate the city’s industrial development (Kalinina,
1984). These specialists were mainly engaged in machine building, metallurgy, textile
production, and electronics. The Tashkent Aviation Production Association, the Tashkent Textile
Combine, and the Electronic Instrumentation Plant were among the major enterprises that
absorbed this skilled labor influx.
According to data from the
USSR Statistical Yearbook
(1976), the proportion of ethnic Russians
and other Slavic groups occupying technical and managerial positions in Tashkent’s industry
rose from 21% in 1970 to 38% in 1975. This increase corresponded with a noticeable rise in
industrial productivity. Reports from
Gosplan UzSSR
document a 27% average growth in output
across enterprises that employed transferred specialists, with the Tashkent Electrotechnical Plant
doubling its production between 1972 and 1975 (Petrov & Saidov, 1987).
Technological modernization was another direct result of the transfer. Russian specialists
introduced more efficient design protocols, quality control systems, and mechanized processes.
These improvements not only enhanced productivity but also reduced equipment failure rates
and improved safety standards in several factories (Smith, 1981).
Beyond technical outcomes, the transfer also had important socio-cultural consequences. In
workplaces where Russian specialists were concentrated, Russian language rapidly became the
dominant language of instruction and technical documentation. This caused increased demand
for Russian-language education among Uzbek workers, and in some cases, language-based
division of labor emerged (Keller, 2001).
While the overall impact on industrial growth was positive, internal reports pointed to emerging
challenges in workplace integration. Some enterprises recorded complaints related to cultural
misunderstandings and lack of effective communication between local and relocated personnel,
particularly in newly established teams (UNESCO, 1970; Keller, 2001).
These findings demonstrate that the relocation of Russian specialists during this period was a key
factor in shaping both the technological landscape and social composition of Tashkent’s
industrial workforce. The outcomes were multidimensional—boosting production and efficiency
on one hand, while introducing new social dynamics and regional dependency on external human
capital on the other.
DISCUSSION
The relocation of Russian specialists to Tashkent between 1970 and 1975 played a central role in
reshaping the industrial and social landscape of the Uzbek SSR. As the results of this study
demonstrate, the policy significantly boosted industrial productivity, modernized production
methods, and helped address the local shortage of technically trained personnel. These outcomes
are consistent with broader patterns observed in other Soviet republics, where labor mobility and
centralized personnel planning were used to distribute technical expertise across the Union
(Smith, 1981).
One of the most important findings is the rise in the proportion of Russians and Slavs in
leadership and technical roles, which not only reflects Moscow’s development strategy but also
exposes the republic’s structural dependency on external human capital. While this boosted
short-term performance, it limited the opportunities for local professionals to move into high-
skilled or decision-making positions (Kalinina, 1984). Similar concerns were raised in academic
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
1225
debates at the time, particularly regarding the unequal distribution of training opportunities and
political trust among different nationalities within the USSR (Petrov & Saidov, 1987).
The integration of Russian specialists into Uzbek industrial enterprises also had cultural and
linguistic consequences. The dominance of the Russian language in technical domains created
barriers for some segments of the local workforce. Although this facilitated standardization and
efficiency, it also widened the gap between the Russian-speaking elite and Uzbek-speaking
workers (Keller, 2001). These dynamics contributed to the emergence of workplace hierarchies
based on language and ethnicity, which became a sensitive issue in the post-Soviet period.
It is also important to consider that while the technical impact was generally positive, social
adaptation was uneven. Some enterprises reported smooth collaboration between Russian and
Uzbek workers, while others experienced tension, mistrust, and limited social interaction outside
the workplace. These patterns reflect the limits of Soviet nationality policy, which formally
promoted equality but often struggled to implement it in practice, especially in peripheral
republics (UNESCO, 1970).
In comparison to other Soviet republics, Uzbekistan appears to have experienced a relatively
high degree of dependence on imported specialists due to the combination of rapid
industrialization and a younger, less-experienced local workforce. This made Tashkent both a
beneficiary of expertise and a case of developmental imbalance, where long-term sustainability
was questionable without parallel investment in local capacity-building.
Thus, while the relocation program met its short-term goals of accelerating industrial growth and
modernization, it also reinforced structural hierarchies and dependency patterns that would
persist into the independence era. These findings suggest that industrial development policies
should be evaluated not only by their economic output but also by their social and institutional
legacies.
CONCLUSION
This study confirms the significant role that the transfer of Russian specialists played in the
industrial transformation of Tashkent between 1970 and 1975. The relocation program, initiated
by the Soviet central authorities, was instrumental in addressing the shortage of skilled technical
personnel in the Uzbek SSR and in accelerating the modernization of key industrial sectors such
as aviation, electronics, and textile manufacturing. Statistical data and archival evidence reveal
substantial increases in productivity, improved technological standards, and the widespread
adoption of centralized managerial practices (Kalinina, 1984; Petrov & Saidov, 1987).
However, the long-term implications of this policy were mixed. While the technical outcomes
were largely successful, the social and institutional effects were more complex. The dominance
of Russian language in technical domains and the underrepresentation of local Uzbek
professionals in leadership roles contributed to enduring structural disparities within the
industrial workforce (Keller, 2001). Furthermore, cultural integration and workplace harmony
were not uniformly achieved, with some enterprises reporting tensions and communication
barriers rooted in ethnicity and language (UNESCO, 1970).
These findings suggest that the relocation of Russian specialists, although effective in achieving
short-term industrial growth, also reinforced a system of dependency and imbalance that limited
the development of local human capital. In this regard, the case of Tashkent reflects both the
strengths and weaknesses of Soviet regional development policy—successfully mobilizing
https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi
volume 4, issue 5, 2025
1226
resources across the Union, but often at the cost of equitable capacity-building at the republic
level.
Understanding this historical experience is important not only for evaluating Soviet-era strategies
but also for informing current debates on labor migration, regional integration, and post-colonial
industrial policy in Central Asia. Ultimately, any model of development must balance technical
efficiency with social inclusivity and long-term sustainability.
References
1. UNESCO. (1970).
Tashkent: A Report on the Reconstruction and Urban Planning after the
1966 Earthquake.
Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
2. Smith, J. M. (1981).
Soviet Industrial Policy and Regional Development in Central Asia.
Moscow: Progress Publishers.
3. Kalinina, E. V. (1984).
Labor Mobility and Economic Integration in the USSR: Case Studies
from Uzbekistan.
Tashkent: Institute of Economics, Academy of Sciences of the Uzbek SSR.
4. Petrov, A. I., & Saidov, R. M. (1987).
Technological Transfer and Industrial Cooperation in
the Soviet Union.
Moscow: Nauka Publishing House.
5. Keller, S. (2001).
To Moscow, Not Mecca: The Soviet Campaign against Islam in Central
Asia, 1917–1941.
Westport, CT: Praeger.
