Paul
Goble
Staunton, April 20 – Residents of
the Republic of Tatarstan are now paying Moscow every year 4557 times more than
did medieval Muscovy when it was under the so-called Tatar Yoke that Russians continue
to describe as an unbearable burden and one they blame for many of the
shortcomings of their political culture.
That difference has been calculated
by Kazan scholars on the basis of the latest research and is offered in a
commentary about Russia, the Mongol Yoke, and Tatarstan by Rashit Akhmetov, the
editor of the independent “Zvezda Povolzhya,” in the current issue of his
newspaper (no. 14 (694), April 17-23, 2014, p. 1).
Akhmetov argues that it is important
to return to the question of the Mongol “yoke” because in many ways, Kremlin
leader Vladimir Putin is casting himself as the latest incarnation of Ivan the
Terrible who was the first Moscow leader to “raise Rus from its knees” not only
by his conquest of vast territories but by his self-isolation of Russia from
the world.
To be sure, the Kazan editor says,
Ivan did not present his project at the time as “the ingathering of Russian
lands” but simply as “the conquest of other peoples.” But there are some important commonalities.
For example, he used Orthodoxy to oppose “Catholic Europe and Muslim Turkey,” the
two of which combined as a “common enemy with which no compromise was possible.”
Indeed, under his guidance, “the
construction of the Russian state” became “an isolationalist project,” and that
isolation and the imperial ideology related to it, not the Mongol yoke that
Russians like to blame has been responsible for Russia’s authoritarian regimes
and backwardness.
Thus, Akhmetov continues, it is not
entirely correct to speak of Russia as “the Golden Horde’s heir.” Were it,
Russia would be a very different place.
The Horde did not repress its own people in an equally savage way. And
it did not impose serfdom, something that would have been almost impossible in
nomadic or semi-nomadic society.
No, he says, “the tradition of ‘war’
with one’s own people is Muscovite ‘know-how,’” and there is no reason to blame
the Mongols or the Tatars, all the more so because the Moscow yoke on peoples
living within its borders is so much heavier than was the Mongol one on peoples
living within its.
Indeed, Moscow has recently
highlighted this reality by complaining that people in eastern Ukraine are
being forced to send 70 percent of their incomes to Kyiv while remaining silent
about the fact that the people of Tatarstan are having to send 80 percent of
theirs.
But even more seriously, the Kremlin
today is again isolating Russia in order to protect its own power, lashing out
in all directions. “But one must not base a policy on opposing the entire
world,” Akhmetov says. “Sooner or later, [such an approach] is condemned
failure and collapse.”
Having mentioned Ukraine, the Kazan
editor then turns his attention to the Crimean Tatars, with whom the Kazan
Tatars are related. He notes that there are no indications that Moscow will
follow through on its promises to the Crimean Tatars and suggests that as
Moscow strengthens its position there, the “political” weight of that community
is likely to decline.
But Moscow’s continuing pressure on
the Crimean Tatars could backfire on the Russian leadership because many in the
world’s Muslim community, who have been neutral toward the Kremlin up to now,
are likely to view Russian oppression of the Crimean Tatars as “the last drop”
and oppose what Putin is doing.
That could put the Kremlin leader in
a difficult position all the more so because in the face of worsening relations
with the West, Putin is seeking to turn eastwards. In order to try to obscure
what he is doing to the Crimean Tatars, Akhmetov says, Moscow may turn to the
Kazan Tatars as intermediaries.
The president of Tatarstan has
already gone to China, “a visible result of Russia’s turn to the east,”
Akhmetov says, and just one of the ways in which “the importance of Tatarstan
is increasing.” Indeed, he suggests, Kazan “could become a showcase of Russia
in the East much as Tashkent was in the past.”
That is even more likely to be the
case, he concludes, because “the Muslim countries and China will cooperate with
greater interest with Kazan than with Moscow.”
And that in turn sets the stage for new divisions in Kazan between those
who see Moscow’s yoke as increasingly unbearable and those who believe the best
way to lighten it is the work with the Kremlin.
No comments:
Post a Comment