National Minorities in Putin's Russia

Diversity and Assimilation

Federica Prina

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2015
• Print ISBN: 9781138780828
• eBook ISBN: 9781317672432
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Ethnic Studies
• Index: Social Sciences

Using a human rights approach, the book analyses the dynamics in the application of minority policies for the preservation of cultural and linguistic diversity in Russia. Despite Russia's legacy of ethno-cultural and linguistic pluralism, the book argues that the Putin leadership's overwhelming statism and promotion of Russian patriotism are inexorably leading to a reduction of Russia's diversity. Using scores of interviews with representatives of national minorities, civil society, public officials and academics, the book highlights the reasons why Russian law and policies, as well as international standards on minority rights, are ill-equipped to withstand the centralising drive toward ever greater uniformity. While minority policies are fragmented and feeble in contemporary Russia, they are also centrally conceived, which is exacerbated by a growing democratic deficit under Putin. Crucially, in today's Russia informal practices and networks are frequently utilised rather than formal channels in the sphere of diversity management. Informal practices, the book argues, can at times favour minorities, yet they more frequently disadvantage them and create the conditions for the co-optation of leaders of minority groups. A dilution of diversity, the book suggests, is not only resulting in the loss of Russia's rich cultural heritage but is also impairing the peaceful coexistence of the individuals and groups that make up Russian society.

1 Introduction

Federica Prina

DOI: 10.4324/9781315770451-1

This book is about Russia’s unique cultural and linguistic diversity. A multiplicity of ethnic, religious and linguistic communities inhabit its territory – including Slavic, Finno-Ugric, Turkic and Asian groups. According to the 2010 census, ethnic Russians¹ amount to 80.9 per cent of the population, meaning that nearly one-fifth of the citizenry identify themselves as belonging to other ethnic groups. The 2010 census lists 193 ethnic groups and subgroups besides Russians: starting from the biggest minority, the Tatars (3.87 per cent of the population), followed by Ukrainians (1.40 per cent), Bashkirs (1.15 per cent), Chuvashes (1.05 per cent) and Chechens (1.04 per cent); the rest of the population is made up of a myriad of much smaller groups.² Multi-ethnicity is legally entrenched: the Russian Constitution states that ‘the bearer of sovereignty and the only source of power in the Russian Federation shall be its multinational people’.³ And, while the Russian language is spoken by nearly the entire population of Russia (99.49 per cent), another 169 languages were recorded in the census.⁴ Of these, 39 were languages of instruction in schools and 50 were taught as subjects,⁵ while the regional media also operate in the languages of minorities. Religious diversity is similarly considerable: while ethnic Russians tend to identify with the Russian Christian Orthodox faith, four religions are regarded as traditional religions of Russia (Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism).⁶ Islam is the largest religion after Orthodox Christianity: in 2010 there were over 16.4 million Muslims in Russia.⁷ Russian citizens are further affiliated to numerous other faiths.⁸ Yet, despite these exceptional levels of diversity, the Russian language and culture dominate Russia’s public life. The plurality of minority cultures and languages occupy only a marginal space in the cultural life of the Russian Federation.

Over the years, the ‘national question’ has been of great salience in the multi-ethnic Russian empire and Soviet Union. Challenges linked to inter-ethnic tensions have also been a characteristic of post-Soviet history – ranging from the re-assertion of forms of minority nationalism; to the Chechen conflicts (with the spill-over of violence to the wider North Caucasus); to the growth of Russian nationalism and ‘migrantphobia’; to the recent belligerency of Russia in relation to former Soviet states. Russian foreign policy in the former Soviet Union has led to international concern at egregious violations of international law – including in the shape of military intervention (South Ossetia and Ukraine). Such major, attention-grabbing events cause the more mundane, day-to-day majority–minority relations within Russia to recede into the background. What this book highlights is not the much-researched ethnically motivated strife (the Chechen conflicts, militant Islamic fundamentalism), violent hate crime against specific ethnic groups (particularly Roma or persons originating from the Caucasus or Central Asia), or relations between the Russian government and former Soviet republics. Rather, the book investigates what happens within the borders of the Russian Federation among ethnic groups that rarely make the headlines, and their efforts to promote their cultural and linguistic rights. Nevertheless, Vladimir Putin’s adoption of patriotism as a quasi-ideology, and its more ‘banal’ manifestations, described in this book, go a long way in explaining Russia’s attitudes vis-à-vis former Soviet countries and Western actors alike.

This book explores Russia’s patterns of diversity and assimilation. Ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity have been crucial components of past and unfolding Russian history. In the construction of identities, (ethnic) Russians have become accustomed to ‘imagining’ themselves in relation to the many ethnic groups with whom they have coexisted, whether over decades or centuries (Opalski 2001: 299). Ethnicity has been embedded in the very organisation of society of the Soviet Union and Russian Federation. It is still entrenched in its federal structure (with 21 ethnic republics), and there are countless references to Russia’s ‘multinational’ character in laws, policy documents and public statements. A history of diversity (and particularly Soviet-induced ethnic federalism) cannot be nullified even by the most militant Russian nationalist leaders. At the same time, strong countervailing tendencies inexorably advance the assimilation of ethnic minority communities into the Russian majority. These are partially the result of globalisation, by which non-dominant (and non-marketable) languages and cultures tend to disappear unless positive measures are adopted by states to actively preserve them; yet they are also the result of (domestic) homogenising tendencies diluting Russian citizens’ diversity. They originate from impulses towards statism and Russian patriotism, and are accompanied by the frequent exclusion from the public sphere of persons belonging to minorities, along with the marginalisation of their concerns.

When examining the dynamics of minority policies in Russia, two systems come into play which are analysed in this book: the domestic legal environment and political scene; and international mechanisms for the protection of minorities, their languages and cultures, which are also applicable in Russia. Both systems intervene to impact upon the domestic sphere: they are intertwined and at times overlapping. International instruments carry with them the potential to enhance the welfare of minorities, given the substantial corpus of relevant standards – treaties and recommendations by international bodies, as well as international case-law – that has developed especially since the 1990s. Some of these standards can complement the (largely declarative and underdeveloped) Russian legislation in the area of cultural rights of minorities, yet they also generate difficulties linked to the phenomenon of ‘legal transplantation’. Meanwhile, there are obstacles in the implementation of both domestic and international law, with informal practices playing a significant role in these dynamics. Thus, this book provides an analysis of the processes surrounding the application of minority policies, demonstrating how actual (informal) practices often contrast with formal standards. It further shows the complexities in the process of relevant international standards filtering down to domestic law and practice. Hence, the book does not focus on normative questions, but on the empirical dynamics at work in the implementation of minority policies. In particular, it examines the interplay of factors that contribute to ethnic, cultural and linguistic homogenisation in Russian society – including the reasons why international standards and domestic law remain, overall, unequipped to withstand the movement towards advancing uniformity.

Russia faces formidable challenges posed by its exceptional ethno-linguistic and cultural diversity, combined with its enormous size. It goes without saying that Russia is a significant player in the international arena, whose potential inter-ethnic conflicts can have destabilising effects well outside its borders.⁹ At the same time, tensions in the ‘near abroad’ – former Union republics of the USSR – are, in turn, reflected internally within Russia. The ethnic groups that have been affected by conflicts since the Soviet Union’s collapse have fellow nationals in Russia (i.e. Georgians, Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Abkhaz, Ossetians, Moldovans and Ukrainians): internal and external tensions can be mutually reinforcing. Thus, the limited effectiveness of Russia’s minority policies in safeguarding the country’s remarkable linguistic and cultural diversity – even when supplemented by international standards and monitoring – could not only result in the loss of its cultural heritage, but also impair the peaceful coexistence of the individuals and groups that make up Russian society.

Main findings

This book argues that informal practices – together with centralism in some spheres, and localism in others – lead, overall, to an advancing cultural homogenisation and a dilution of diversity in Russia. Informal practices relate both to the application of international standards, and minority-related Russian law and policy, as well as the functioning of Russian institutions. The form of centralism analysed here consists of a centre-driven discourse around patriotism, as well as a widening democratic deficit caused by restricting the devolution of powers and civil participation to the regions. Localism (primarily understood in the sense of laissez-faire attitudes) relates to the limited state support for minority languages and cultures to counteract the progressive disappearance of linguistic diversity that is common in a globalising world. The main factors at play are outlined below.

Homogenising Moves

Russia continues to display remarkable levels of diversity and a form of federalism that is partially ethnicity-based. However, general moves towards cultural homogenisation, including as part of an overarching discourse around patriotism, can be discerned. Such homogenising tendencies do not originate from a sort of Russian imperialism aiming at Russification for its own sake – rather, they are instrumental to the furtherance of statism, which is promoted by the political leadership. They manifest themselves in an exclusively cultural discourse around minority policies, stripped of a political component, and at times a dilution of the salience of (non-Russian) ethnicity, through the promotion of a ‘civic’ form of nationalism. However, such ‘civic’ nationalism often falls back on ‘ethnic’ (Russian) attributes to concretise otherwise largely abstract principles. In parallel to this, the combined effects of Russia’s unique diversity and territorial vastness lead to a preoccupation with unity and cohesion. This, in turn, results in a drive to level difference, rather than in policies targeted to pursue unity and equality in tandem with the preservation of diversity.

An alternation of centralism and localism. Russia’s policies for diversity management are predominantly centralised, with feeble mechanisms for the participation of minorities in their conceptualisation and implementation – in terms of consultation, political participation and local autonomy. This situation has been exacerbated by a deepening of the democratic deficit under the Putin leadership. On the other hand, alongside discernible moves towards centralisation and uniformity, a condition of laissez-faire often prevails at the regional and local levels: the implementation of relevant minority policies and standards are not part of a comprehensive plan complete with targets, while laws and programmes regulating them tend to be declarative. Thus, policies for the enhancement of linguistic and cultural diversity are generally dependent on the discretion and goodwill of public officials, and may be easily neglected.

A prevalence of informal practices. Soviet institutions and models, particularly ethnic federalism, have given an impulse to ethnic mobilisation from the perestroika onwards; in turn, ethnic mobilisation itself has employed, and has been moulded around, the existing ethnicity-based institutional framework (Gorenburg 2003). Such institutions are resilient, and have successfully made the transition into the post-Soviet period, with few – or just cosmetic – alterations. At the same time, interview data for this research and secondary sources point to the limited effectiveness of such institutions. Informal practices affect their impact, while also intervening to compensate some of their shortcomings. This results in informal practices and networks frequently being utilised in lieu of formal channels – in the sphere of diversity management, as well as in Russian politics and society more generally. The use of these informal channels produces a sort of dynamics in state–minority relations that can, in some instances, reflect a form of co-optation of leaders of minority groups and the development of symbolic, rather than instrumental, policies around ethnic diversity (Osipov 2010, 2012). Informal practices come into play not only in relations between the political leadership (particularly the ruling party, United Russia) and minorities, but also in the interaction between the members of minority groups themselves, through concurring and intertwining inter- and intra-group dynamics.

The complex interaction of domestic and international standards. Circums...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of tables
• Acknowledgements
• List of abbreviations
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Diversity, national minorities and cultural rights: Russia and beyond
• 3 Minority rights standards: domestic to international – and back to domestic
• 4 Law, informal practices and minorities’ cultural rights
• 5 Strengthening the state through homogenising centralism
• 6 Interculturalism or acculturation? The education system
• 7 Participation through cooperation? Minority associations and state institutions
• 8 National cultural autonomy: real or fictitious participation?
• 9 Minorities’ voices: ad hoc consultation and (a)political participation
• Conclusion
• Appendix: respondents
• Bibliography
• Index