Paul
Goble
Staunton, October 18 – The new
Russian Nationalities Policy Strategy, which is to replace one in place since
1996, drops references to the state-forming role of the [ethnic] Russian people”
and refers instead to their “unifying role” in producing “a unique
socio-cultural civilizational community, the multi-people [non-ethnic] Russian
nation.”
That change among others has already
outraged many Russian nationalists who resent that Russia is not a nation
state, “a Russia for the Russians,” but instead a federation in which the
ethnic Russians may be first among equals but whose government, in their view,
in an effort at “political correctness,” defers too much to the non-Russians
living among them.
Today’s “Kommersant” provides a
summary of the new document, one that President Vladimir Putin in August called
on his Council of Inter-Ethnic Relations to prepare and that the paper said “completely
satisfied the Kremlin and will be subject to an all-people discussion” in the
near future (www.kommersant.ru/doc/2047014).
The draft document was prepared, the
paper notes, by four former nationalities ministers – Valery Tishkov,
Vyacheslav Mikhaylov, Vladimir Zorin and Ramazan Abdulatipov, with the
participation of Presidential Administration and government officials. And it “looks
more politically correct that the previous draft which was prepared by the
Regional Affairs Ministry.”
Removed from the earlier document
is any reference to “the state-forming role of the Russian people,” a phrase
that is highly offense to many in the republics. Instead, it says that: “thanks
to the unifying role of the [ethnic] Russian people, the many centuries of
inter-cultural and inter-ethnic interaction on the historic territory of the
Russian Federation has been formed a unique socio-cultural civilizational
community, the multi-people [non-ethnic] Russian nation.”
“Thus,” “Kommersant” continues, “citizens
of the Russian Federation recognize their all-Russian civic identity.” But the
authors acknowledge that “’negative factors conditioned by Soviet nationality
policy and the weakening of statehood in the 1990s’ became the cause of ‘an
outburst of ethnic mobilization, ethno-territorial separatism, and
religious-political extremism.”
Also playing a definite role in
producing “the threat of disintegration,” the authors say, Russia has
experienced “a high level of social inequality in society and regional
differentiation, ethno-politicization of various spheres of life,’ and also ‘corruption, failings of the law-enforcement
system, and the distrust of citizens in the organs of power.’”
The new document calls for “concrete”
efforts to achieve greater income equality among the regions, “the equality of
citizens before the law and the courts,” and transparency in the treatment of “’situations
connected with international conflicts’ and ‘the constant monitoring of the
situation’” to prevent things from getting out of hand.
Vladimir Zorin, one of the members
of the working group, told “Kommersant” that the reason that Russia needed a
new nationalities strategy document is that “the world has changed [since
1996], and there are new challenges.” And Vyacheslav Mikhaylov, another member,
said that the strengthening of the state opens the doors for improving
federalism.
Although “Kommersant” says that the
Kremlin like the document, not everyone in the Russian Federation does. Mikhaylov said he had already received “about
40” emails about it. He said “not one was negative,” but he said these were “stylistic”
corrections. One of the biggest
objections, he reported, is that the document did not define “a national idea.”
But as the discussion of the document spreads,
others are likely to object vigorously.
Dmitry Dyomushkin, a Russian nationalist, has already objected to what
he calls the document’s overly “politically correct” treatment of non-Russians,
something he said Moscow is often guilty of (www.nr2.ru/moskow/interview/408820.html).
By pandering to the non-Russians and
denigrating the ethnic Rusians, Dyomushkin continued, the Russian government,
while saying it is trying to “avoid the disintegration of the country in fact
may achieve exactly the opposite results,” with many ethnic Russians deciding as
a result that their country would be better off if the non-Russians were
jettisoned. Indeed, “if there were
a referendum now, a majority would call for separating the Caucasus from Russia.”
No comments:
Post a Comment