Minority Ethnic Mobilization In The Russian Federation

Discusses the spread of nationalism in the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation.

This book provides a comprehensive overview of the norms and practices of ethnic diversity management in the Russian Federation in the last twenty years. It examines the evolution of the legal framework, the institutional architecture and the policies intended to address the large number of challenges posed by Russia’s immense ethno-cultural diversity. It analyses the legal, social and political changes affecting ethno-cultural relations and the treatment of ethnic minorities, and assesses how ethnic diversity both influences and is shaped by transformations in Russian politics and society. It concludes by appraising how successful or otherwise policies have been so far, and by outlining the challenges still faced by the Russian Federation.

This book explores how the Volga Tatars, the largest ethnic minority within the Russian Federation, a Muslim minority, achieved a great deal of autonomy for Tatarstan in the years 1988 to 1992, but then lost this autonomy gradually over the course of the Putin era. It sets the issue in context, tracing the history of the Volga Tatars, the descendants of the Golden Horde whose Khans exercised overlordship over Muscovy in medieval times, and outlining Tsarist and Soviet nationalities policies and their enduring effects. It argues that a key factor driving the decline of greater autonomy, besides Putin’s policies of harmonisation and centralisation, was the behaviour of the minority elites, who were, despite their earlier engagement in ethnic mobilization, very acquiescent to the new Putin regime, deciding that co-operation would maximise their privileges.

This book explains how state institutions affect ethnic mobilization. It focuses on how ethno-nationalist movements emerge on the political arena, develop organizational structures, frame demands, and attract followers. It does so in the context of examining the widespread surge of nationalist sentiment that occurred through the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It shows that even during this period of institutional upheaval, pre-existing ethnic institutions affected the tactics of the movement leaders. It challenges the widely held perception that governing elites can kindle latent ethnic grievances virtually at will to maintain power. It argues that nationalist leaders can't always mobilize widespread popular support and that their success in doing so depends on the extent to which ethnicity is institutionalized by state structures. It shifts the study of ethnic mobilization from the whys of its emergence to the hows of its development as a political force.

Twenty-five million Russians live in the newly independent states carved from the territory of the former Soviet Union. When they or their ancestors emigrated to these non-Russian areas, they seldom saw themselves as having moved "abroad." Now, with the dissolution of the USSR, these Russians find themselves to be minorities—often unwelcome—in new states created to fulfill the aspirations of indigenous populations. Will the governments of these newly independent states be able to accept the fact that their populations are multi-national? Will the formerly dominant and privileged Russians be able to live with their new status as equals or, more often, subordinates? To what extent do the new regimes' policies of accommodation or exclusion establish lasting patterns for relations between the titular majorities and the minority Russians? Developing the concept of interactive nationalism, this timely book explores the movement of Russians to the borderlands during the Russian Empire and Soviet times, the evolution of nationality policies during the Soviet era, and the processes of indigenization during the late Soviet period and under the newfound independence of the republics. The authors examine questions of citizenship, language policy, and political representation in each of the successor states, emphasizing the interaction between the indigenous population and the Russians. Through the use of case studies, the authors explore the tragic ethnic violence that has erupted since the demise of the Soviet Union, and weigh strategies for managing national conflict and developing stable democratic institutions that will respect the rights of all ethnic groups. Jeff Chinn is associate professor of political science at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Robert Kaiser is assistant professor of geography at the University of Missouri-Columbia.

Valery Tishkov is a well-known Russian historian and anthropologist, and former Minister of Nationalities in Yeltsin's government. This book draws on his inside knowledge of major events and extensive primary research. Tishkov argues that ethnicity has a multifaceted role: it is the most accessible basis for political mobilization; a means of controlling power and resources in a transforming society; and therapy for the great trauma suffered by individuals and groups under previous regimes. This complexity helps explain the contradictory nature and outcomes of public ethnic policies based on a doctrine of ethno-nationalism.

The collapse of the Soviet Union provides several situations where the presence of Russian-speaking minorities produces a potential challenge to the consolidation of former Soviet Republics as independent democracies. My dissertation examines ethnic relations in two former Soviet Republics: Ukraine and Kazakhstan. The goal of this dissertation is to answer the question of how different degrees of institutionalization of ethnically defined territorial minorities--i.e. when provided with institutions of political and cultural autonomy--create stimulus for elites to engage in ethno-political mobilization. My research question is the following: What explains variation in the degree of ethno-political mobilization by Russian-speaking minorities, in newly emerged states that were once former Soviet republics, especially Ukraine and Kazakhstan? My dependent variable, consequently, is a qualitatively evaluated degree of ethnopolitical mobilization by Russian minorities. I hypothesize that if an ethnic minority is a regional majority in an ethno-federal or autonomous territorial unit, the institutional and ethno-demographic structure of this situation will create a stimulus for elites and political entrepreneurs (regional government officials, labor unions leaders, etc.) to present ethno-political claims--as opposed to non-ethnic, civic, socio-economic appeals for support--that are both electoral and non-electoral. This hypothesis is narrowed to the conditions of the nationalizing newly emerged states, and the following case studies are proposed to be tested in the dissertation: the Crimea and the Donbas region in Ukraine (two similar regions where different levels of ethnic mobilization of Russian-speakers took place during the early 1990s), and the Qaraghandy in Northern Kazakhstan, the region where Russian-speakers were successfully integrated into the dominant Kazakh nation. The dissertation, after examining these three mentioned case studies, will test a hypothesis that the institutionalization of ethnically defined territorial structures and the provision of minorities with autonomous institutions may intensify ethnic mobilization under certain conditions and produce conditions leading to ethnic mobilization. This hypothesis is consistent with already existing institutionalist theories, arguing that demographic factors determine the ability to use institutions of autonomy as mobilizing tools. Consequently, ethno-demographic differences between Russian-speakers in the three cases within two different former Soviet Republics are defined by their institutions' different types and arrangements. This theoretical argument, if proved, will also have a practical meaning: once the conditions under which autonomy produces ethnic mobilization are identified, it will be suggested not to implement autonomy in such cases where the potential for ethnic mobilization exists.

This 2002 study examines the process of the disintegration of the Soviet state.