Paul Goble
Staunton,
February 21 – Vladimir Putin’s decision to make the study of the titular languages
of the non-Russian republics was one of the worst he has ever made, Emil Pain
says, because without such government support, minority languages will decline
and ultimately disappear. It was made on his own, and he must take full responsibility
for it.
In
a wide-ranging 6000-word interview with Tatyana Zavalishina of Kazan’s Business-Gazeta,
Pain, one of Russia’s most distinguished specialists on ethnic conflicts, says
bliuntly that “world practice shows that without political defense national
langauges do not survive! Neither the family nor individual efforts can save
them” (business-gazeta.ru/article/414250).
And this threat to
the survival of non-Russian languages is sparking real resistance among their
speakers. Tatarstan has always had “a high degree of ethno-national
self-consciousness.” But what is striking is tha tin Komi and Chuvashia, local
speakers are outraged by what Putin has done, viewing it as a threat not just to
their languages but to their nations.
This is an indication that the
situation is becoming worrisome, the ethno-sociologst says. One must remember that
the demand in the Baltic republics to leave the Soviet Union began with
language issues. That is, language is an extremely sensitive factor.” It must
be protected and “any voluntarism in ethno-linguistic issues is extremely
dangerous.”
That is why, Pain says, the decision
about making the study of the langauges of the titular nations of the non-Russian
republics was so misguided. It was taken “personally” by Putin, he continues; and
it was imposed without discussion and even before this move was approved by the
Duma.
“In Russia,” he continues, “the
Russian language is the state language for the entire territory. It will be a
required subject even if it is also a national language. But if Tatar is the state
language on its territory, then it must be studied as a state language. Here
there can’t be any question!”
“Either you recognize the language
as a state language or your refuse to recognize it as a state language. And
such a situation, in which it is legally a state language but in fact has
ceased to be one is at the very least strange,” the Moscow scholar says. More than that, he strongly implies, it is extremely
difficult.
In the course of his interview, Pain
made many other important observations. Among the most important are the
following:
·
Except
for the Russian powers that be, no other government in the post-Soviet space
considers the disintegration of the USSR as “a geopolitical catastrophe.” They
view is as something that gave them important new opportunities.
·
“The
threat of disintegration in the Russian Federation is less than it was in the USSR.
Russia although it is similar to the Soviet Unioin is at the same time
essentially different. It has an ethno-political core which did not exist in
the Soviet Union especially at its end.”
·
Both
in the 1990s and now, Moscow focused on maintaining the territorial integrity
of the country – in the first period by federalization and in the second by “strengthening
the power vertical.”
·
“All
subjects of the Russian Feederation to a significant extent must be grateful to
Tatarstan for the word ‘subject’” given that Kazan “struggled for raising the status
of subjects of all regions and in this sense achieved a great deal.”
·
Conflicts
in the 1990s were primarily between the center and the periphery; now they are
mostly within cities between the indigenous population and immigrants.
·
With
the retreat from federalism, there has been a decline in the interest of people
in taking part in government activity.
·
Further
amalgamation of regions of the Russian Federation is almost “completely excluded.
No one will touch this senstivie issue in the coming years, I am certain,” Pain
says.
·
Unlike
in most countries where ethnic phobias and prejudices remain relatively stable
with the same enemies and friends existing over many decades, in Russia, peple
shift from one enemy to another because people feel in pain but “like children”
cannot say why they are hurting.
·
Before
deciding whether to create a ministry for nationality affairs, it is necessary
to decide what it would actually do. If it remains only a central institution,
it will reinforce the centralism of the Russian state and not achieve much.
·
The
greatest outflow of population in percentage terms is “not from the Far East
but from the North Caucasus Federal District.” This represents, “a voting with
one’s feet.” Today it is the region where ethnic conflicts are the most likely
to occur.
No comments:
Post a Comment