Monday, March 4, 2019

Moscow Wants to Destroy Republics Not Non-Russian Languages, Goryunov Says


Paul Goble

            Staunton, March 4 – Tatars and other non-Russians can effectively defend themselves only if they understand that Moscow’s goal is the destruction of their state institutions rather than their languages and cultures and then work to defend those institutions rather than focus on cultural and linguistic issues alone, Maksim Goryunov says.

            The Russian commentator says that the Tatars and other non-Russians have failed to understand what Moscow plans and thus are defending against secondary threats rather than the primary ones, focusing on the defense of languages and cultures rather than republic institutions (business-gazeta.ru/article/414567 reposted at region.expert/echpochmak/).

            After the Soviet Union disintegrated, Goryunov continues, many in Moscow concluded that the Bolsheviks had been wrong to set up the non-Russian republics because that did not save the country as the communists had hoped but rather set the stage for the demise of the Soviet Union and, if nothing is changed, for that of the Russian Federation as well.

            This shift in policy was never declared “ex cathedra,” he says.   At the official level, Moscow appeared to “remain true to Soviet humanism, but experts close to the powers that be began to say that Russia must forget Lenin and follow the path of France,” which has actively promoted the elimination of “borders” among Brittany, Corsica and Normandy.” 

            The alternative for Russia was the Chinese approach, but Russians did not want to be viewed as equally repressive and therefore preferred the soft variant of destroying non-Russian entities offered by France. “Three former ministers for nationality affairs, Valery Tishkov, Vladimir Zorin and Valery Mikhaylov, all came out in favor of ‘the French path.’”

The Moscow Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, to which these people are linked, is “the main consultant to Moscow on issues of nationality policy.” It recently issued a monograph on “how successfully France assimilated the borderlands.” This French approach is the reaction to Beloveshchaya pushcha.”

The old Soviet policy of using non-Russian entities to hold the country together has been rejected, Goryunov says.  And that change requires that the Tatars and other non-Russians adapt. They were able to live in a country which did not reject their right to self-determination. “Now they must learn to live in a federation which is seeking to become a unitary state like France.”

Academician Tishkov and his experts, Goryunov continues, “believe that ethnicity is hostile to democracy and to civic enlightenment. This is their basic conviction. A society organized on the basis of ethnicity, they are certain, is inclined to force, authoritarianism and corruption.”

As a result, “Tishkov proposes not to Russify (russifitsirovatsya)but to non-ethnic Russianize” (rossiyanizirovat) the peoples of Russia. “According to Tishkov’s plan, a Tatar, having become a non-ethnic Russian nonetheless remains a Tatar,” speaking the language with family and friends and wearing a tubeteika.

“The difference between him and a Tatar today concerns the number of capitals. For Tishkov, this is the principle question. Tatars today have two capitals, Moscow and Kazan. Besides, Tatars have two Kremlins, two presidents and two parliaments.” He believes this threatens the territorial integrity of Russia.

That is the opposite of the view of Lenin and Stalin who supported national republics in order to keep the country together and allow it to modernize. “Tishkov thinks otherwise. From his point of view, Marxists headed by Lenin committed a mistake by allowing the Tatars and the rest to form their republics.”

Languages and culture can remain as decorations, but the institutions of the republics must be eliminated, Tishkov and those who follow him believe.  This should be done in a gradual and soft way as France has done rather than in a rapid and harsh way as the Chinese are doing.n

According to Tishkov’s plan, Goryunov says, “’the beautiful Russian Unitary Federaton of the future’ will be populated by non-ethnic Russians who will have one capital, one Constitution and one Kremlin. They will begin to speak Russian but they will remember their roots … but they will not have a separate territorial unit.”

“Museums, yes; lessons in school, yes; restaurants, yes’ but a district with an administration which speaks Tatar, absolutely not.” And consequently, Tatars and others must understand that “Moscow is attacking the republics and not the languages.”  Moscow will tolerate the languages and cultures as long as they are not supporting republics. 

“A cultural community, unlike a political one, does not have its own territory. It is extra-territorial,” Goryunov says. Moscow will support Tatar and the other non-Russian languages to the extent that they are not linked to republics, but it will seek to “deprive republics of their status” and reduce them to an ordinary oblast. “That is Tishkov’s plan.”

But if one looks at the defenses the Tatars and others are erecting in the name of defending themselves, it becomes obvious that they are fighting not against the main thrust but against feints of one kinds or another, not in defense of republics and republic institutions, but in favor of language and culture alone.

That is a recipe for disaster, Goryunov says, because Moscow is prepared to concede at least for a time on issues of language and culture because it wants to destroy the republics – and that is not what the Tatars and others in their national strategies are talking about at all.  Moscow couldn’t be more pleased.

“The Tatars must have a campaign in support of the republic and its constitution. The parliament must become more active. If the parliament is working, the people will assemble around it. In our time,” the Russian commentator says, “the most reliable means of preserving a people is not culture but a parliament working like a clock.”

Cultures change, but parliaments remain. Unfortunately, the State Council of Tatarstan is anything but active. That needs to change: if the parliament wakes up, “the Tatars can aspire to immortality. If however the sleep of the parliament turns out to be too deep, the Tatars will soon become like the French fantasies of Academician Tishkov and those like him.”

No comments:

Post a Comment