Paul
Goble
Staunton, February 11 – Ever more
non-Russians recognize that Vladimir Putin’s program of constitutional reform
both by what he will succeed in imposing on that document and even more by what
others are pushing and thus adumbrating Moscow’s policies are a direct attack
on federalism, the existence of non-Russian republics, and the future of their
nations.
Ilnar Garifullin, who writes for the
Idel.Real portal, says that what is taking place in Moscow represents a
concerted attack on the non-Russians and their republics but will backfire on
the Russian government, generate further instability, and thus threaten the territorial
integrity of the Russian Federation (idelreal.org/a/30418839.html).
Calls to change the preamble of the
Constitution threaten to transform both in law and in practice the Russian Federation
into “simply ‘Russia,’” he says, and Academician Valery Tishkov’s call to insert
language in Article 2 about a non-ethnic Russian nation as the goal of the
state would reinforce that, the Tatar commentator says.
Especially threatening are calls,
from Duma leaders like Vyacheslav Nikonov, to eliminate references to “the
multi-national people” and replace them with the curious but dangerous term “the
multi-people non-ethnic Russian nation,’” an idea that flows directly from
Tishkov’s suggestion.
And the KPRF has called for the insertion
into the country’s basic law of language about ethnic Russians as “’the state
forming people,’” a proposal that has been celebrated by “many chauvinistically
inclined political circles who dream about the rebirth of the Russian Empire”
and nationality and religious policies that would promote that.
These initiatives, Garifulliln suggests,
“do not simply destroy the current federative system of our country but are in
the closest possible way connected with each other.” And that means that even if none of them is
adopted, they reflect a broad swath of opinion in Moscow and are likely to
drive policy in the future.
What does all this mean? The answer
is clear: replacing “nation” with “people” “automatically presupposes that the
peoples of Russia will lose their status as subjects … In essence, the
republic-forming ethno-nations will be reduced to the level of some
ethnographic groups.” And “once there
are no nations but only those, they won’t have status as subjects.”
The non-Russian peoples of the
Russian Federation will thus be lowered “to the level of some Indians or aborigines,
for whom at most there will exist territories where they live, folklore, and
nothing more.”
And in support of this is “a tight
ideological union among the party leadership of the KPRF which remains attached
to Leninist traditions, the Orthodox Church, and the monarchist-black hundreds. An interesting combination! … What kind of
state are they proposing to build for us?”
There has been a clear sign that
those holding these views are already moving as the debate on the amendments
continues. That was the retirement of Ildar Gilmutdinov from his post as head
of the Duma’s committee on nationality affairs – “a signal that from now on,
the peoples of the Russian Federation should not have any even formal or status
levers of influence.”
That is because, Garifullin
continues, Gilmutdinov from Daghestan and a sometime defender of national
rights has been replaced by the Russian Oleg Nikolayev who was at the center of
the scandal that arose when Vladimir Putin decided to make the study of
non-Russian languages voluntary.
This unholy alliance against the republics,
he says, clearly has as it working slogan: “One country, one faith, and one
people,” but the non-Russians should not give up because by moving in this
direction, Moscow and its agents are driving the country ever more deeply into “an
era of instability” from which it is likely to emerge as a very different place
than these people want.
Their attacks on non-Russian nations
and non-Orthodox religions not only are energizing those for whom these
identities are important, but they are elevating the values of both for many in
the Russian Federation who have not devoted much attention to them. Thus, those pushing for a revived empire are
creating their own nemeses just as has happened before.
Even so, the non-Russians cannot “completely
stop the process of changing the Constitution.”
But by protesting and showing the counterproductive nature of many of the
notions being spread about, we can “stop the flood of insane ideas.” If we fail to do so, he says, then “after the
changes in the Constitution we will really wake up in a different country.”
No comments:
Post a Comment