Paul
Goble
Staunton, March 31 – Vitaly Suchkov,
head of the Moscow city nationality policy department, told a Duma roundtable
on Thursday that the new nationality policy document should drop any references
to “tolerance” or “multi-culturalism,” both of which come from the West, and
replace them with the Russian term “inter-ethnic concord.”
Doing so, he insisted, will allow
the document to fit in more closely with Russian laws. In addition, he urged that the document be
revised to stress that Moscow will be “defending the interests not only of
national minorities but also of the majority,” the ethnic Russians (nazaccent.ru/content/26912-iz-strategii-gosnacpolitiki-predlozhili-ubrat-multikulturalizm.html).
That was hardly the only dissenting
note sounded at this meeting. Gusen Shakhpazov, the head of the Lezgin
Federation of National Cultural Autonomies said he was unpleasantly surprised
that the term “’divide peoples’” had been dropped from the latest version of the
document as had any reference to promoting non-Russian languages and cultures.
Participants from Tatarstan
specifically complained about the document’s failure to devote more attention
to issues of maintaining the country’s linguistic multiplicity. Others objected
to provisions having to do with the non-Russian media and to any changes at all
from the previous version of the nationality policy document.
The openness, even heatedness of the
discussion, became possible for two reasons. On the one hand, the Presidential
Council on Inter-Ethnic Relations pronounced itself unsatisfied with the document
and called for a new draft by April 27 (nazaccent.ru/content/26848-prezidentskij-sovet-ne-odobril-novyj-variant.html).
And on the other, Magomedsalam
Magomedov, the deputy head of the Presidential Administration and former head
of Daghestan, said that everyone should stop treating the draft as if it were a
sacred text. This document, he declared, “is not the Bible and not the Koran” (nazaccent.ru/content/26217-strategiyu-gosudarstvennoj-nacionalnoj-politiki-izmenyat-v.html).
Clearly, the debate
about this issue is heating up, a trend underscored by a meeting of the experts’
advisory council to the Federal Agency for Nationality Affairs that took place
on the same day as the Duma session (nazaccent.ru/content/26913-strategiyu-gosnacpolitiki-obsudili-na-zasedanii-obshestvennogo.html).
It too was marked by dissent. Academician
Valery Tishkov, the principal author of the new document, publicly complained
that the Agency had pushed forward two draft laws without securing the
preliminary agreement of the advisory council, a violation of the rules as
established by the Agency and something he said he had complained about.
Others complained that the head of
the Agency had not bothered to attend the advisory council’s meetings, but an
aide to that official countered that the members of the council had been “insufficiently
active” and only now were making their proposals and objections heard.
No comments:
Post a Comment