Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 17 – The Russian
government and many Russian nationalists insist that ethnic Russians are a
homogeneous unity, but in fact, Vadim Shtepa says, despite similar languages
and cultures, those in one region are radically different from those in another
because of their histories and geographical positions.
Thus, the editor of the After Empire
portal points out, the residents of Vladivostok and those of Kaliningrad are
just as different as Canadians and New Zealanders even though the first two are
within the borders of a single country and the latter are not (ukrinform.ru/rubric-world/2404396-vadim-stepa-redaktor-sajta-after-empireposle-imperii.html).
At present, he tells Oleg Kudrin of
Ukrinform, far from all Russians are conscious of these distinctions or prepared
to act on them – doing so would land them in legal difficulties – but in Russia
historically people have often changed almost overnight from supporters of one
paradigm to another, be it in 1917 or 1991 or 2014.
“Already today,” he continues, “practically
everywhere one can see the dissatisfaction of residents of various oblasts and
republics with a situation in which they are deprives of all regional
self-administration, their resources are taken away by Moscow, and the center
appoints their heads. These protest
attitudes will grow.”
Russia today is not a federation
whatever it calls itself, Shtepa says; and it cannot become one by central
fiat. It has to grow from the bottom up
rather than the top down, and the regions need to decide what powers to
delegate and what ones to retain. In a real federation of the future, Moscow
might not be the capital.
Shtepa argues that the United States
organized itself precisely as a federation “as an alternative to the British
Empire.” The same thing ultimately needs to happen in Russia as well. Regional
parties need to be permitted – they aren’t now – and so “today, regionalists
and federalists in the RF exist as informal net movements,” often based abroad.
No comments:
Post a Comment