Paul
Goble
Staunton, September 22 – In yet
another unintended consequence of Vladimir Putin’s regional amalgamation
program, Buryat districts he arranged to be included in Irkutsk oblast appear
to have been the source of votes that kept the pro-Kremlin United Russia
party’s gubernatorial candidate there from winning in the first round.
The case is interesting in its own
right given the complexities of relations between Buryats and Russians in the
Trans-Baikal, but it is important as an indication of something relatively few
analysts have focused on: the way in which the ethnic factor plays out in
Russian elections, even in the absence of regional, religious, or ethnic
parties.
In any political system, the impact
of a minority on an electoral outcome is clearest when the election is close and
the vote of the minority could make the difference between winning and losing,
when the candidates on one or both sides appeal to the group, and when there is
a tradition of the ethnic minority voting differently than the ethnic majority
in the past.
All these things are true in Irkutsk
oblast, Sergey Basayev of the AsiaRussia portal writes in an article entitled “’The
Buryat Factor’ in the Irkutsk Elections,” one of the most detailed examinations
ever of how ethnicity plays a role in the electoral process in Putin’s Russian
Federation (asiarussia.ru/articles/9176/).
In
the first round of gubernatorial elections on September 13, incumbent United Russia
governor Sergey Yeroshenko won 49.60 percent, while his communist opponent
Sergey Levchenko won 36.61 percent. Because no one won 50 percent, there will
be a second round on September 27.
Irkutsk
was the only one of the 20 Russian regions where the incumbent did not win in
the first direct elections of governors in Russia since 2005. In some, the
incumbents won with “Chechen” style margins; in others, they slipped by; but
only in Irkutsk did the United Russia candidate fail to get 50 percent.
There
are at least three reasons why this happened, Basayev says. Someone had to be
first; the communists built on their success in earlier municipal elections;
and Irkutsk has a tradition of voting this way. In 2001, its voters sent the
race into the second round – and many at the time blamed the Buryat vote or its
falsification for that outcome.
“In
the political mythology of [the region] there is still alive the legend” that
the man who was declared the winner would have lost had it not been for last
minute “manipulations” of the votes from Buryat areas, which had been added to
the Irkutsk oblast for the vote even though they were not formally part of the
region.
This
time around the Buryats may have played a similar role not because they did not
vote for the United Russia incumbent but because the level of turnout in Buryat
areas was so much smaller than elsewhere. Had it been the same, the incumbent
would have won easily in the first round.
The
incumbent is certainly going to try to boost turnout among the Buryats, and
thus, Basayev says, if he can get Buryat turnout up to a figure within two or
three percent of the region as a whole, “it is not excluded that in the second
round the ‘Buryat factor’ will again as 14 years ago give victory to the
current head of the region.”
At
the same time, the Buryat factor also plays a role in the calculations of the communist
opposition candidate. On the one hand, he can expect to pick up support from
those who voted for other opposition figures and who will be encouraged by the
fact that they pushed the election into a second round.
And
on the other, the opponent clearly will see his task as boosting participation
in predominantly Russian areas while doing little to boost it in Buryat ones –
even as he tries to pick up some votes there by making promises to the Buryat
community just as the incumbent governor has done.
Because
both candidates have promised to name a Buryat to be senator from Irkutsk –
although different candidates – the Buryats are likely to win from the
elections whoever comes out on top. And
that in turn will likely cause all future candidates to view them as a group to
whom promises must be made and kept.
Moreover,
Basayev suggests, it has another consequence as well: because both competitors
have to make promises to the Buryats in the hope of winning votes, the Buryats
are in a position to vote on the basis of other identities and issues, something
that makes the ethnic politics of these elections both less and more than it
would otherwise be.
No comments:
Post a Comment