Problems and issues of national development in the newspaper " Kazakh adebieti "

Literary, cultural and art newspaper of an independent Republic of Kazakhstan – „Kazakh literature‟ was a judge of justice and truth, and a preacher of national power having the trouble in its eighty five years of history. The edition had a mission to build and develop social concept leading the culture of the nation for the purpose of the country. It has been a part of history of the country being the source of political and social life of the nation. Many problems of the country had been solved by courtesy of the newspaper which couldn‟t be ignored. During the Soviet Union the paper supported the mission of the nation in spite of Communist party which was cruel and violent. Because of it, the editors of the edition were precarious between fifties and eighties. Almost all the leaders of the newspaper were well-known writers, poets, publicists and personalities who showed them to be the real sons of their nation. During all periods of its history, the national edition united around itself and brought up ardent publicists, and with the power of a sharp word they fought for the bright future of their native land, for the fulfillment of the nation‟s cherished desires. Therefore, from the mid-1950s to the 1980s, its editors-in-chief did not stay long in their post.


Introduction
National identity nourishes the life of any community of people, which turns it into a national community. Without a self, the nation cannot set conscious goals, coordinate its actions and aspirations. In general, the problem of one's own identity has existed since ancient times, always worried people, regardless of the conditions of the social system in which they were.
The recognition of their own national identity by the Kazakh people was historically formed under the conditions of Kazakhs joining both the Russian and Soviet empires, when in the recent past an attempt was made to artificially create a "new historical community -the Soviet people", which, in our view, could no longer to be crowned with success. The aspirations of the administrative planting of the "new historical community -the Soviet people" could not undermine the national feelings of people, did not eliminate ethnic self-identification. From birth, from the first lullabies, a person begins to feel like Kazakh, Russian, Ukrainian, Georgian, and Uzbek. And this feeling cannot be knocked out, no matter what caliber of ideological shells.
Journalism as a unique institution raises and considers various aspects of the problem of national identity, topical issues of interethnic relations. In different periods of ethnos development, it changed methods and approaches to the development of this topic. In addition, in this regard, it has accumulated a wealth of experience. The necessity of scientific comprehension of the accumulated theoretical and empirical material determines the relevance of the topic of the given article.
The problems of national development have long attracted the attention of foreign and highly qualified social scientists. A large amount of information on the topic of this article contains research by foreign scientists. For example, in the works of Arendt (1979), D'agostino (1988), Pipes (1991a); Pipes (2000b), Huntington (2003), Brzezinski (1988a); Brzezinski (1999b), Avtorkhanov (1988), Zhelev (1991), Brutskus (1988), Shendel and Zurcher (2001) and others critically comprehend the imperial essence of the Soviet state, its national doctrine, which amounted to assimilation small peoples to large, to leveling the ethnic identity of peoples and on the basis of Russification, to the forcible formation of a super nation of the Russian-Soviet type, the issues of nationalism and ethnic arrangements are being considered and in the context of the Islamic world in general, the life of the peoples of Central Asia after the dissolution of the ideocratic empire, in particular.
Certain information of interest is contained in the writings of scholars of Central Asia and Kazakhstan, working on the history and theory of journalistic science. So, for example, in the works of Amandosov (1987); Bekhozhin (1976); Ernazarov and Akbarov (1976); Kenzhebaev and Zhozhakeev (1950); Barmankulov (1994); Sadykov (2012); Irnazarov (2004) and others studied the problems of the formation of the periodical press development, audiovisual media, and substantiated theoretical and practical problems of journalism in the region.
These studies were carried out taking into account national peculiarities and illustrate the stages of the development of journalism in the second half of the twentieth century, in the years of independence and made a definite contribution to the problem under study, but they did not specifically address issues of national identification and national identity in journalism.

Materials and Methods
The article relies on such scientific principles as integrity, objectivity, universality, concreteness, and historicism. The comparative matching, analytical-synthesizing, and critical methods were used in the process of the research.
The methodological basis of the work was the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, laws and normative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the activities of the media. The theoretical basis of the study was the works of scholars of Kazakhstan and abroad on the history, theory, and practice of journalism.
Theoretical propositions, conclusions and recommendations contained in the articles can be used in the further study of the problems of the theory and practice of the media, as well as questions of improving national policy, interethnic relations and the role of the press in developing the topic of national identification and national identity of the Kazakh people.
The materials of the article, its conclusions and recommendations can be used in preparing general and special courses on the theory and practice of journalism in Kazakhstan, political science, history, and other social science disciplines. The results of the research can contribute to enhancing the scientific study of a number of issues of the development of national journalism, highlighting various problems of the state structure of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The use of the materials of the article can also provide some assistance to journalists practitioners in covering the problems of national policy, developing new ideas and approaches in covering the issues of national construction in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The materials of the research are used in the educational process in the preparation of bachelor's and master's degrees in "Journalism" and "Political Science" at K.A. Yasawi International Kazakh-Turkish University, Al Farabi Kazakh National University, and L. Gumilyev Eurasian National University.

Results
The first issue of the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" was published on January 10, 1934, although the idea of its creation was already long ripened. The meeting of all the writers and editors of district newspapers of Soviet Kazakhstan was held on February 26, 1932. In accordance with the decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU "On the restructuring of artistic literary organizations," the Association of Proletarian Writers and its structural division KazAPP were dissolved, whose members were not so much eager for creativity as they were engaged in splitting, and squabbling. Instead, the organizing committee of the Writers' Union of Kazakhstan was created and its first plenum was held. Zhansugirov made a report on the "Restructuring of literary organizations and the duties of writers of Soviet Kazakhstan". He, in particular, noted that along with the creation of a new organization, it was necessary to establish a separate publication that educates and unites not only creative people, but also broad sections of the population.
After some time, the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" appeared. The first editor was appointed 32-years-old G. Musrepov. The representatives of Kazakh literature actively participated in organizing the newspaper and setting up its work.
In the initial years, the publication of the newspaper was not systematic, for example, in 1934, 31 issues were published, in 1935-35 issues, 1936-50, 1937-54, 1938-17, 1939-2, and in 1940-6. In the first issue of the newspaper on the front page was written that the newspaper was published once every 5 days, but for various reasons this frequency was not maintained. The intervals between the numbers reached 6-9 days, and sometimes up to 10-13 days. In 1934, the circulation ranged from 1 to 3 thousand, and in 1935 it reached 3, 5 thousand. All six issues, published in 1940, were published in the month of January.
In the issue of the newspaper of January 16, 1940 was published the article "Talқylau mazhіlіsі" (Meeting discussion), which attracted attention. It referred to the discussion at the Presidium of the Kazakhstan branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences (January 5, 1940) of the article by Lakunin entitled "On the Kenessary Rebellion" (Lakunin, 1940). The article dealt with the fact that "The historian Lakunin at a meeting of the Presidium justified his article, "About Kenessary Rebellion" published in the magazine "Bolshevik of Kazakhstan". In it, Lakunin denied the historical significance of the Kenessary revolt. Blaming Kenesary and his associates in the usual robbery, he ignored this fact of the national liberation struggle of the Kazakh people. His opinion contradicts the theory of Marxism-Leninism on this issue and the historical truth of the Kazakh people. "Further, the newspaper referring to the textbook "History of the Peoples of the USSR" edited by Professor Shestakov, emphasizes that the uprising led by Kenessary was part of the national liberation movement and was of a people's revolutionary character, and Kenessary was one of the leaders of the national movement of the Kazakh people.
In the works of writers and poets of the 19th century, Kenessary, like Nauryzbay-batyr, was praised as a positive hero. The speech of Ismagambet Ismayilov on the literary image of Kenesary was also given here. He cited many examples from oral folklore in which the people lovingly sang of Kenessary and Nauryzbai. He was supported by historians Adilgereyev, Timofeyev, Zhirenshin, Suleimenov, Akynzhanov. They, giving a negative assessment of Lakunin"s article, spoke positively about the popular uprising and argued with concrete examples that the national liberation movement launched against the tsarist colonizers was in fact a revolutionary movement. Speakers also criticized Lakunin"s statement that "the Kazakh people were illiterate and therefore could not be among the leaders of the struggle." The value of this article lies in the fact that it was written at a time when many members of the intelligentsia were persecuted and accused of being "counter-revolutionary", of "Turkic nationalism" and recognized as enemies of the people. Thus, the famous historian Yermukhan Bekmakhanov, who wrote about the personality of Kenesary as a freedom fighter, was criticized for several years and was sentenced to 25 years. Following him, Kaim Zhumaliev, who wrote about the national liberation movement of Isatai -Makhambet, was also convicted for 25 years. In addition to them, some other historians were repressed. It was at such a time that the article was published, which testifies to the civic maturity and courage of the editorial staff of "Kazakh adebieti".
The publication of the newspaper, suspended on the eve of the Second World War, was resumed 15 years later on January 14, 1955. That was after Stalin"s death, at the beginning of the "thaw". Prominent representatives of the literature, headed by Musrepov and Mukhanov, prepared the decision of the Secretariat of the Writers' Union and persuaded the republic's leadership to resume the publication of the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti". The talented poet Syrbay Maulenov was appointed as its editor. The pressure on the newspaper was weakened, although the communist ideology was still at its apogee. Representatives of the national intelligentsia were not rehabilitated yet and it was considered a crime to recall them.
All publications wrote about production and about the everyday life of five-year plans and socialist competition, political campaigns, and about the fulfillment of plans and commitments. Issues related to the fate of the nation, with the aspirations of the people, topical historical and cultural problems remained out of sight of the newspapers. Therefore, the revival of "Kazakh adebieti" became a significant phenomenon in the cultural life of the people.
From the very first issues the newspaper showed that it does not change its main purpose -to serve the development of the nation and its culture. The newspaper paid special attention to the native language. This question began to acquire relevance, then the cycling epic began to lead to the fact that the increase in the Russian-speaking population gradually began to crowd the sphere of application of the Kazakh language.
After the Twentieth Party Congress, at which the personality cult was debunked, it became possible to talk about many things openly. But during this period, the writers also remained fear and aversion. However, despite all this, the "thaw" opened the way for discussion and criticism, albeit superficial, mistakes in public life. It came under criticism and lost its meaning "agreement theory", which at one time pressed on literature and art.
The leaders of the newspaper, beginning with S. Maulenov, S. Shaimerdenov, Z. Moldagaliyev and ending with ordinary employees, understood well that they could serve the people by discussing the burning issues on the pages of "Kazakh adebieti". And, indeed, the newspaper from the very first issues began to show character. Reading the files of those times, you can see that, wanting to be in the thick of life and being in constant search, editor S. Maulenov and other employees worked carefully on each material. In 1956, the newspaper experienced a great rise. On its pages were published articles about the dismal state of national schools, the national language, history and culture. For example, an article by R. Berdybaev entitled "The Greatest Cultural Wealth" (Berdybaev, 1956) caused a great public outcry.
It pointed out an obstacle in teaching the Kazakh language and literature in schools to the development of the nation and native language. The article expressed dissatisfaction. According to the newspapers, during this period the policy of Russification began to be pursued openly, which gained more and more positions. Children who graduated from schools in schools with excellent could not enter higher education institutions, because in the entrance exams, they had to write an essay in Russian, whereas not only compositions, but also dictation in Russian was given to them with difficulty. This policy also manifested itself in the fact that many newspapers and magazines were published in Russian and Kazakh languages, and the number of the first ones grew, and the newspaper "Kazakhstan mughalіmі (teacher)" and the magazine "Kazakhstan Communists" were all translation issues from Russian. In school curricula, the hours of learning Kazakh were sharply reduced.
After this publication, several employees of the Institute for the History of the Party, namely T. Kakishev, R. Sarsenbayev, H. Khasanov, T. Alisherov, A. Baishin, A. Mukhtarov, K. Abildaev, K. Aliaskarov, signed the article in which national experience in the treatment and breeding of livestock, which is not inferior to the experience and knowledge of other nations. And so that this experience will not be lost, the authors emphasize the need to open a branch in the veterinary institute where training would be conducted in the Kazakh language (Kakishev, 1956). The critic M. Karatayev openly opposes the ideological dictates and the errors caused by them that occurred when creating the history of Kazakh literature. Neybgar, Dulat, Shortanbay were recognized as "feudal", and Mashһur Zhusip Kopeev and Nurzhan Naushabayev were declared "nationalists". They included many talented poets who expressed "political distrust". "The black list includes almost all samples of rich Kazakh oral literary creativity. Thus, the history of Kazakh literature was distorted and depleted. Why did this happen? Is our literature really so poor? Is there nothing worthy in it?
The perversion of the history of literature influenced the thoughts and the development of the people's consciousness and deleting the names of significant poets and writers who contributed to the art of the artistic word is the unprincipled and real attempt ..."-M. Karatayev wrote (Kakishev, 1956).
The literary scholar Beisembay Kenzhebayev, in his article, assesses the rich heritage of some writers of the 1920s and speaks about the need to publish it (Kenzhebaev, 1956). According to the author, the victims of the Stalinist repressions are the glorious sons of the people Smagul Saduakas, Yergali Aldongarov, Giengali Tilepbergenov and others. Such speeches on topical issues of national life were published on the pages of the newspaper for six months. This alerted the Republican Party leadership. On December 10, 1956, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China adopted a closed decision "On the errors of the newspapers "Kazakh adebieti" (Decision of The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, 1956). The editor of the newspaper S. Maulenov was punished. This document criticized the "political mistakes" made by the newspaper.
After this decision, the organ of the Central Committee of the CPC, the newspaper Socialist Ukraine, in an article entitled "On enhancing the culture of the Kazakh people" criticized some of the newspapers, accusing them of misunderstanding or a negative understanding of the problems of developing the culture of the people. It also pointed to a number of materials published in the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti". Among them were the articles of R. Berdibayev, A. Narymbetov, M. Karatayev, T. Kakishev, A. Mukhtarov and others. They were accused of incorrect coverage of issues of training national personnel, the development of literature and art, print publications, education in the Kazakh language. The main party newspaper of the republic accused the "Kazakh adebieti" of insufficient awareness and even sabotages (Socialist Kazakhstan, 1959a).
The newspaper "Socialist Kazakhstan" denied the existence of all these problems, allegedly due to lack of evidence and accused "Kazakh adebieti" that it did not always take into account the need for a critical approach to assessing the manifestations of bourgeois ideology, and that the newspaper made mistakes that prevent further strengthening of friendship between peoples, they harm the cause of educating the working people in the spirit of proletarian internationalism. The editor-in-chief, S. Maulenov, the Office of the Writers' Union and its former chairman G. Mustafin were accused together with the authors of the articles.
The newspaper "Kazakh adebieti", under the leadership of S. Maulenov, didn"t stop at anything and was not afraid of anything in the course of awakening the national consciousness of the people in those years. For this, the editor-in-chief, employees and authors of articles were persecuted. R. Berdibayev was removed from office and expelled from the party. In the spring of 1957, accused of "bourgeois" and "nationalism", S. Maulenov was removed from the post of editor-in-chief, and J. Moldagaliyev was removed from the post of deputy editor, T. Abdirakhmanov from the post of responsible secretary. Openly opposed to the policies of the Center and the defenders of national essay writers-publicists were severely punished along the line.
In that Soviet era, bold and truthful articles and other works written from the standpoint of the interests of the nation were not left unattended by the government and the party.
In 1959, on July 2, the organ of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China "Socialist Kazakstan" published an editorial entitled "The incomprehensible position of the newspaper" Kazakh adebieti " (Socialist Kazakhstan, 1959b). According to the main newspaper of the republic, the level of "Kazakh adebieti" is low and it does not pay enough attention to the real topic of the day. Apart from single sketches and essays, it assigns too much space to "archival treasures" and conversations about the history of literature. " The performance of the party newspaper, as it was then, should have been followed by organizational conclusions. But the Writers' Union of Kazakhstan defended the newspaper and its editor. It was made possible at that time by: the commission of the secretariat of the Union of Writers of the Republic, agreeing with many accusations, sided with the new editor of the newspaper Z. Kabdolov. The leadership of the Writers' Union thanks "Socialist Kazakhstan" for a critical article, which should be perceived as an aid to "Kazakh adebieti", and urges the editors to draw correct conclusions from party criticism. Thus, thanks to the support of the Writers' Union, the editor Z. Kabdolov avoids punishment and remains at his post. The position of Kazakh writers, poets and publicists of that period gives an accurate description of Sheriyazdan Eleuken. According to him, despite the "thaw" after the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU in political life, "the language of the creative intelligentsia was still constrained".
The development of the national Kazakh spirituality, art and literature in the 1950s-1970s has great historical significance in the further development of the Kazakh nation. The Soviet-era newspaper files show that the pressure of the Center"s authorities caused growing discontent and opposition fighting for the national interests of the intelligentsia.
Despite the constant pressure of the Center, "Kazakh adebieti" sought to remain an expression of the interests of its people. She raised questions not only of literature and art, but also spoke about the need to increase the national cadre in production, about improving the improvement of villages, criticized the thoughtless attitude to the land when the party called for an increase in virgin lands, etc.
The second half of the 1970s was a period of great achievements for Kazakhstan. The republic annually handed over billions of pods of grain to the country's granaries, an order after the order was attached to its banner, and the head of the republic, DA A. Kunanev, became a member of the Politburo of the CPSU Central Committee and twice Hero of Socialist Labor. Kazakhstan has turned into a "standing planet" and a "laboratory of friendship of nations", and all this was avidly told in the media.
In 1977-1980, the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" was led by the writer-publicist Sain Muratbekov. He recalls that at that time it was impossible to publish other articles, except praising the socialist way of life and the achievements of a socialist society. Topical issues of literature and art more and more faded into the background. Probably, this was stagnation in literary life. S. Muratbekov believes that all this was the fruit of that time and that policy (Muratbekov, 2004).
Censorship in Kazakhstan was strong at that time, and it was notable for its special vigilance. According to S. Muratbekov, although the names of Shakarim and Gumar Karashev were included in the anthology of Kazakh poetry published in Leningrad, the article devoted to that anthology was not mentioned because they were on the black list of censors who carefully control the media.
The departments of the Central Committee, too, with zeal controlled every step, every breath of the newspaper. For example, in honor of the 90th anniversary of academician K. Satpayev, "Kazakh adebieti" prepared a whole strip. But the propaganda and agitation department of the CPC Central Committee interferes in this matter. The first deputy head of the department expresses dissatisfaction with the fact that K. Satpayev is given such an honor, and by calling the duty editor, he informs the censorship that that number of the newspaper has been returned. The chief editor, risking his position, calls S.N. Imashev, secretary of the Central Committee, and explains the situation. The secretary, having familiarized himself with the names of the authors of the materials of the strip, reduces them by half to the page dedicated to K. Satpayev, although in a truncated form, it is still published. This is just one example of how a newspaper was subjected to strict controls.
However, there have been cases in the history of the newspaper that are curious and will not call otherwise. Writer-publicist S. Muratbekov, on behalf of the head of the department of culture of the Central Committee of the CPC, M. Yessenaliyev, prepared a letter to the Central Committee of the CPSU with a request to allow the expansion of the volume of the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" But for 4 years this problem has not been resolved. But here comes the book "General, the General Secretary of the CPSU Central Committee L. I. Brezhnev." There is only one phrase about the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" in it. And this played a decisive role: M.I. Essengaliyev summoned S. Muratbekov to the department of culture of the Central Committee of the CPC and asked him to temporarily suspend the subscription to the newspaper until determining its volume and price. It takes 2 months, and on December 17, 1978, an order is received to double the volume of the newspaper. For the past forty years, it has been published in 16 stripes of A3 format.
There is one more period in the history of the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti", the 80s-90s of the last centurywhich was the period of the creative rise of the newspaper. From autumn 1980 to mid-1989, it was headed by S. Murtaza. In the early 1980s, under "developed socialism" it was not easy to tell the truth and stand up to defend national history and national values. This is evidenced by the publication of the time. And already during perestroika and publicity about "white spots" and "black holes" in the fate of a nation, people began to learn for the first time from the pages of the newspaper.
A special place in the newspaper took the events of December 1986. In the Resolution of the Central Committee of the CPSU "On the educational patriotic and international work of the Kazakh Republican Party Organization" on the Kazakh people was stamped "nationalists" (Resolution of the central committee of the CPSU, 1987). This event was commented in different ways on allied and republican editions and opinions sometimes contradicted each other, which touched the national pride of the Kazakhs. A member of the USSR Supreme Council and USSR People"s Deputy Mukhtar Shakhanov made an unprecedented statement from the tribune of the first congress of people's deputies of the USSR in which he spoke of the immense injustice allowed by the center and the need to revise the assessment of the December 1986 events in Almaty. The speeches of Mukhtar Shakhanov became the basis for the creation of a special commission of the Supreme Soviet of the Kazakh SSR on the December events. The newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" (Tabeev, 1989) took the most active part in covering the work of this commission.
After the publication of "Kazakhdebieti" on this and other issues of the national policy of the USSR, other publications also, albeit indirectly, began to raise these topical issues.
Thus, during the period of perestroika and democratization of the society, the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" promoted the growth of national consciousness. With their publications, Kazakh journalists, scientists, and writers created a complete picture of the life of their people on its pages. By eliminating the "white spots" and filling the "black holes", they contributed to raising the cultural level of the nation, and thus helped to define its place in the history of the human community, to comprehend not only its past, but also to contribute to the identity of the Kazakh ethnic group.
Republican national publications led by "Kazah adebieti" began to get rid of the marginality that had lasted for many years, while historians and writers and publicists began to move away from socialist dogmatism, they tried to objectively evaluate the essence of the national processes that took place. Tempered on the protection of national interests, which did not change the aspirations of the people in different difficult periods of its history, the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti", was already paving the way for the development of Kazakh journalism of independent Kazakhstan. Due to this, the national publications of the country turned into an open arena for discussing the tasks of creating the future of the country.
In defense of national interests, the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" in the Soviet years, boldly and quickly responded to all the alarming signals in the field of economics, literature, culture, art, etc. It is worth noting that to their honor, and some party leaders have sought to use the platform "Kazakh adebieti." For example, the secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Kazakhstan Ozbekali Dzhanibekov, known for his national interests, published an article "Eldik -bіrlіk belgіsі" (Country is a sign of unity), in which he talks about the problems of the language and notes that language is not only a means of transmitting thought, but also education. He further dwells on the measures implemented to implement the "Law on Language" and regrets the weak pace of this work (Zhanibekov, 1990).
The dignity of a people is in its language. The time has come for the development of the native language. Language is a vulnerable place of any nation; therefore, taking into account the multinationality of our republic, work in this direction must be conducted tactfully and carefully. The language formed by centuries, in the last 20-30 years under socialism, has lost its wings, was left without its pearls.
The national spirit remains in the memory of history. Until recently, we said that before the revolution, only 2% of the Kazakhs were literate, that the people led a nomadic lifestyle, did not build cities, almost did not develop science, culture, etc. And they believed in it, because truth and history books were not written in the textbooks, and the volumes of these textbooks were such that they can be compared to the thickness of a knife blade. The study of the history of Kazakh literature is limited so far only by the 15th century.
For many years, national journalism, which served socialist dogmatism, at last became objectively and without fear of covering events, and thereby bringing the independence of the country closer. The masters of the artistic word, empathizing together with the people, began to openly discuss all the urgent issues.
Soviet ideologues argued that the October Revolution had dragged illiterate and uncultured Kazakh people from its dark past and said that Soviet power had given it state, housing, and work. Introducing these myths into the consciousness of generations, they wanted to turn them into an axiom. But they were opposed by the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti". It wrote about the ancient civilization, rich history, language, traditions, customs and rituals of the nation, spoke about the great, personalities and fighters for the people's cause. It was the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" that was the flagship in the struggle for national interests in all periods of that time.

Discussion
After the proclamation of independence, Kazakhstan has defined its direction in politics and the economy of the country. He created all the attributes of an independent state. It was necessary to build a new system of social life. According to the publicist G. Zhumadilov, literary figures also contributed to this matter. This literature bows to the people. It supports the state when it cares about the welfare of the people and stands up against the government when it does not consider the opinion of the people. This can be cited many examples from the history of world and Kazakh literature.
Kazakhstan, having rich natural resources, can provide society with a stable life and satisfy all its needs. An independent country in this direction began to take its first steps. Despite the common socialist roots, each of the CIS countries had different ways to overcome the crisis. And it was logical, since each of them had a different historical geopolitical situation, ethnic composition and economic power. Kazakhstan was faced with the question of choosing a path and a model of development, about creating a new structure of society and the ideological life of the country.
In the early years of independence, there were people who believed that its achievement was an accident, the result of the collapse of the communist system. This opinion was shared by a part of the Kazakh intelligentsia.
These sentiments had to be resolutely resisted, and this was undertaken by Kazakh journalists. Thus, they prepared a response to an article published in the Kazakh newspaper Caravan, "There is no future of Kazakhstan without Russia," sponsored by N. Massanov and the philosopher N. Amirkulov. It says that the world consists of a core and periphery, in which the core is the north coast of the Atlantic, regions of the Mediterranean and Black Sea, and in the case of the Russian Empire, the regions of Moscow and St. Petersburg. According to them, civilization and industry develops only in these regions, and the rest simply exist due to the supply of raw materials. Kazakhstan also belongs to "distant periphery", which cannot live independently (Massanov and Amirkulov, 1994).
Therefore, these authors argued that the wealth of some countries, and the poverty of others, is predetermined by fate itself. They see no other way for Kazakhstan, except with Russia. In their article, they also took up prophecy, predicting the voluntary accession of some regions of Kazakhstan to Russia in the first half of the twenty-first century, as had already happened once in the 50s of the seventeenth century. Similar thoughts were expressed by others. For example, the People"s Congress party called on Kazakhstan, which had just gained independence, to become part of Russia and form a confederation with it. They did not understand or did not want to understand the essence of Independence, because they are accustomed to always rely on others. This step was negatively perceived by the public of Kazakhstan and caused its discontent.
The writer K. Zhumadilov strongly objected to the authors of the article published in the "Caravan". "With these statements, these two citizens with academic degrees show that they belong to the environment, which is called" marginal "by the people -he wrote. -Previously, we looked with pity on those who did not know the native language and traditions of their people, the Russian-speaking generations, but it turns out we were wrong. They have now grown to the point of going against their nation. The fact that some of them have their own philosophy changing into a political force. They bring the geographic environment to the forefront and thus justify the entire colonial system and imperial policy" (Zhumadilov, 1994).
In general, referring to the study of the role of the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" in covering the problems of national development of Kazakhstan, we note that the very socio-economic situation in the country of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century ideology crisis, apathy in the national consciousness and feelings demanded from Kazakh publicists flaming materials . Therefore, well-known journalists and scholars who have deeply realized this are louder and louder from the pages of this authoritative publication Protecting and defending national interests, the newspaper, beginning with the first steps of independence, as in former times, is at the height of its position. Steadily following its professional and moral principles, it is a true workshop of Kazakh publicists.

Conclusion
In the process of research, the role of the newspaper "Kazakh adebieti" in the process of Kazakhstan development was highlighted. Researched studies and works take into account national peculiarities and illustrate the stages of the development of journalism well enough and made a definite contribution to the problem under study.
In the article, was made an attempt for an integrated and systemic study of the coverage of issues of national identification and national identity of the Kazakh people in the press of Kazakhstan during the period of perestroika. The rethinking of the national question in the late Soviet period in the republic's press proceeded in parallel with the process of democratization of the society and facilitated the circulation of the periodical press of Kazakhstan to national values and the development of the process of national self-identification of the Kazakh people.