Paul
Goble
Staunton, June 1 – If the leaders of
Kazakhstan or Belarus adopt policies like those Ukraine did, there is no
guarantee that those two countries might not suffer the fate that the eastern
regions of Ukraine are now facing, according to Valery Tishkov, director of
the Moscow Institute of Ethnology and
Anthropology and a former Russian nationalities minister.
In an interview given to
Mir-Politika.ru, Tishkov said that “no one can say anything in advance” but the
Belarusian opposition has been “very radical and Russophobic,” even though “Belarus is simply a territory through which
have passed various armies” (mir-politika.ru/13800-tishkov-severnyy-kazahstan-mozhet-postich-sudba-yugo-vostoka-ukrainy.html).
“If
suddenly the line of the leadership and the line of the opposition
intelligentsia were to come together, then no one could guarantee that both in
Belarus and in Kazakhstan would” there not be changes in a negative direction
regarding Russia and Russians, the ethnographer says. Indeed, there is evidence
of such a trend in Kaakhstan.
Already
there is a manifestation of Kazakh ethnic nationalism which speaks against the
conception of the president about a Kazakhstan civic nation. And Northern
Kazakhstan which is primarily populated by Russians could overtake the fate of
the south-east of Ukraine.” Tishkov added that he “hopes this will not happen.”
Most of Tishkov’s interview is
devoted to the nature of nationalism and to the situation in Ukraine. With regard to nationalism, the ethnographer
says it is important to distinguish between “nationalism in the name of the
state” which adopts a messianic position and “nationalism which seeks a special
status for this or that nationality.”
If
the former is apparently acceptable in his eyes, the latter “ethnic nationalism”
bears “a negative character.”
Nationalism
can appear in any country and has in “all the countries which were formed after
the disintegration of the USSR.” Where
governments pushed for the “construction of an ethnocratic state,” he argued,
that immediately led to “conflicts,” as in early post-Soviet Georgia where the
government declared “’Georgia Only for the Georgians.’”
A
similar conflict arose and has intensified in Ukraine, he continued, “between
ethnic Ukrainians, who have declared themselves and their language the only
masters of the new state, and Russians, Hungarians, Carpatho-Rusins, and other
groups of minorities.”
Nationalism
is most common, Tishov suggested, in countries “where there is poor
administration, where the state is constructed without a taking into account of
regional historical-cultural differences, where there are no programs for the
support of small groups and where the priority of the language and cultural
tradition of only one part of the population is affirmed.”
Those
things come out in the open especially when here is a political struggle, economic
crises, and a corrupt elite, he added. And when they do the most varied events
can trigger a conflict between the dominant group and minorities. In Ukraine now, he asserted, “Ukrainian
ethno-nationalism of a chauvinist kind” is predominant.
Those resisting
it are doing so not on a purely ethnic plane but also “in the name of a
regional and cultural-historical community.” They are seeking “worthy
representation in a large state or if they cannot achieve such a status and legal
guarantees” then”exit from the common state and the establishment of their own
formation or a joining together with another state.”
“Such is a worldwide norm,” Tishkov
said.
Russians and Ukrainians are
culturally similar but the idea that they are fraternal peoples who have never
been in conflict is “a myth.” Moreover, as Sigmund Freud pointed out in his
arguments about the narcissism of small differences, the smaller the differences
among peoples, the more important each difference becomes and the more likely
it will be a source of conflict.
Neither in tsarist nor in Soviet
times did Ukrainians and Russians view each other as the enemy. But now, as a result of “the geopolitical
competition” between the West and Russia, that has changed, with the West
seeing an expansion of its influence in Ukraine as a way to limit and weaken
Russia.
No comments:
Post a Comment