Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 12 –Vladimir
Putin’s campaign against liberalism and secularism is opening the way for a violent
clash of civilizations – Orthodox Christian and Islamic – within the borders of
the Russian Federation, a conflict that will weaken and could tear that country
apart, according to two thoughtful commentaries over the last ten days.
The first, offered by Yekaterina
Shchetkina on Kyiv’s “Delovaya stolitsa” portal, begins with the observation
that the issue of the wearing of the hijab in a small school in Mordvinia has
become an all-Russian one because of the intervention of Chechnya’s Ramzan Kadyrov and Moscow television
(dsnews.ua/society/musulmanskie-skrepy-kadyrov-prisoedinit-mordoviyu-k-chechne-02022017220000).
What is happening
and what the Kremlin is trying with its “struggle with religious extremism,” to
delay because it can no longer preventis a Huntingtonian “clash of
civilizations,” one Orthodox Christian and the other Islamic that the Harvard
scholar said would split the Russian Empire along the Dnepr but that is more
likely to divide it along the Volga or the Oka.
She notes that the Russian
Federation “already now is quite sharply divided into regions” that are
dominated by religious culture, Orthodox or Islamic, rather than linked together
by secular values and that these differences are increasingly leading people in
them to oppose secular laws issued by Moscow.
The hijab controversy, Shchetkina
argues, is “symptomatic” of this and of what she calls a threat to the empire
which is “beginning to lose out to the interests of the regions” and the
cultures which define them. That is
because “the rules adopted in local communities are turning out tobe more
important than decrees from Moscow.”
The Russian reaction to Islamic
headgear, she continues, reflects a deeper fear among Russians that no one is going
to come from Moscow and defend Russians against them and that “the problems of
the minority, including the Slavic, Chrisstian and Russian speaking interest
Moscow and lead it to action only at the geopolitical level.”
In short, there is a sense that “the
reality of the present-day Russian Empire does not completely correspond with
its ideology just as the reality of ‘the countryof immigrants’ doesn’t correspond
with the idea of closing borders.” But because of this, the response of the
majority in both cases is often harsh and crude and that in turn generates a response
among all others.
Russia with its ever larger Muslim
minority is “for some reason trying to construct its myth of unity on an
Orthodox basis.” One can easily understand why that is so given the past, but
the future, with the share of Muslims rising, is going to be very different and
far more Islamic.
Shchetkina concludes with a warning:
“The ‘typical Russian’ of the coming 20 to 30 years will be distancing himself
from that part of ‘the Rus heritage’ which is defined by Slavic membership and
Christian belief. Having done away with
Western ‘chimeras’ of liberalism and secularism, the Russian ideologues will
remain face to face with Islamization.”
That will not be a battle that they
will find it easy to win, Shchetkina suggests.
In the course of an extraordinarily
wide-ranging and length interview at the Yeltsin Center in Yekaterinburg,
Russian director Aleksandr Sokurov addresses many of the same issues and
suggests an even more apocalyptic outcome (znak.com/2017-02-09/rezhisser_aleksandr_sokurov_idet_k_tomu_chto_v_rossii_razrazitsya_religioznaya_voyna).
He suggests that a horrific
religious war is coming in Russia as a result of demographic change and
government policy and that such a war will be far worse than any civil war that
the country has experienced in the past because there will be no basis for
compromise and so it will become a fight to the death.
In this coming battle, Sokurov
argues, the ethnic Russians will be at a serious disadvantage. The Sovietization,
degradation and alcoholization of the Russians has left that people “non-religious,”
these things have not had a similar impact on the Muslim nationalities of the
country.
The current Russian government, he
says, has failed to understand that and has thus behaved “absolutely criminally”
in the way in which it has ordered “relations with religions. We are committing a gigantic error in giving
part of the powers to the Orthodox Church” because it is dominated by radicals
who will make things even more unstable.
“As soon as a decision will be taken
about the creation of an Orthodox party, which will become one of the official
state parties, the mechanism for the destruction of the country will begin to
operate.” The Russian Orthodox Church is seizing property in order to make sure
it will be rich, forgetting that in response there will “appear major Muslim
parties.”
When that occurs and it will if
nothing changes, “the issue of the existence of the Rsusian Federation” will
take center stage. In some places, the
Orthodox will take power; in others, the Muslims will. And when they
confrontone another, “an inter-religious war will begin, the most horrible kind
of war there can be.”
Preventing that from happening
requires an understanding that bringing religion into politics is dangerous
because if one brings in one faith, one will be compelled to bring in another and
because, Sokurov says, at the present time, the Muslims are a far more dynamic
force than the de-religionized Russians.
Europeans, he says, have proceeded
more cautiously, but “it is time for them to undertand that ther eis a much
more dangerous opponent than Russia: this is the Muslim revolution because ISIS
is not simply a terrorist organization. It is a revolutionary ideological
movement of the Muslim world.”
“It can arise in any place just like
Bolshevism,” and countering it requires dealing with its ideological power and
not just its military capabilities. ISIS
is “lead by principles similar to” those of the Bolsheviks and that may give
some clues as to how it must be combatted internationally and in Russia itself.
Like Lenin and the Bolsheviks, ISIS
is convinced that “Christianity has outlasted itself, is collapsing and that
Christian civilization should be replaced by its new order,” in the current
case, “Muslim political.” And “because
rockets will not defeat an idea,” fighting it requires an ideological approach.
Otherwise, its opponents “condemn themselves to defeat.”
No comments:
Post a Comment