The first session examined aspects of interethnic relations and nationalism before and after the Soviet collapse. Carnegie Moscow Center’s Alexey Malashenko moderated.
The History of Post-Soviet Russian Nationalism
- The End of the Twentieth Century: From perestroika through to the end of the 1990s, Russian nationalism was, in the words of Alexander Verkhovsky of the SOVA Center for Information and Analysis, a “historical reconstruction.” It was characterized by attempts to reconstruct the pre-revolutionary ultra-nationalist Black Hundreds movement, and influenced by the notion of transplanting German Nazism or Italian fascism to Russian soil. This nationalism was ultimately unsuccessful, Verkhovsky said.
- After 2000: Russian nationalism underwent deep and rapid change after 2000, Verkhovsky noted. Its leaders no longer looked for historic roots; instead, they sought to shed the legacy of the 1990s, with its ideas of a specifically Russian path for development, and instead to build a national state “like everyone else.” Verkhovsky added that Russian nationalists have been attempting to create a party along the lines of the ultra-right parties in European parliaments. However, the most active representatives of modern nationalism, unlike its predecessor in the 1990s, in general seem focused on violent action, which prevents the successful establishment of a Western-European-style nationalist party.
Interethnic Relations and Ethnic Minorities in the USSR and the Post-Soviet Period
- During the USSR: Emil Pain of the Center for Ethnopolitical and Regional Studies commented that many ethnic minorities in the former Soviet Union take a positive view of the internationalism and “friendship of peoples” of the Soviet period. They do not view the Soviet policy as assimilationist or focused on russification, he explained, because they felt that their own national identity was always highlighted and everyone “knew just who they were.” At the same time, Pain noted, Soviet civic-political identity held sway over ethnic-religious identity during this period. This created a hierarchy of identities that created opportunities for integration, Pain said, unlike assimilation, where the ethnic majority absorbs the minority, or multiculturalism, where the minority gets some advantages through positive discrimination policies.
- After the Soviet Union’s Collapse: The early 1990s was characterized by a rapid religious and ethnic mobilization among the non-Russian ethnic minorities, while the Russian ethnic majority remained in a state of indifference, Pain said. But the situation changed after the start of the first Chechen war (1994), when, as Pain said, the activities of ethnic minorities started to quiet down, while the Russian majority became more active.
- The 2000s: Pain noted that by the start of the 2000s, a reverse process had begun, with the minorities once again becoming more active. The ethno-political elites of the early 1990s had been replaced by new leaders who were less well known but more radical in outlook. He added that political preferences have changed too, with national-democracy giving way to conservative traditionalism.
A Multi-Ethnic and Unstable Region: the Situation in the North Caucasus
- “Supranational” Insurgents: Grigory Shvedov of the website Caucasian Knot stressed that the conflict in the North Caucasus is not currently ethnic in nature. Those fighting against Russia do not associate themselves with a specific ethnic group, but see themselves as part of a supranational organization, Shvedov added.
- Less Violence: Shvedov noted that the 1007 people were killed and injured as a result of the smoldering conflict in the North Caucasus between January to September 2011. In 2010, 1710 people were killed or injured. There were fewer terrorist attacks and murders in the region over January-September 2011 than over the same period in 2010, Shvedov said, meaning that there is no evidence of increasing violence in the North Caucasus as authorities have claimed. This drop in violence is perhaps linked to the willingness of security and law enforcement authorities to conduct a dialogue with the insurgents. However, Shvedov cautioned, it is still not possible to speak of the region as stabilized. Russian security and law enforcement personnel still suffer a high number of casualties, people in the region still do not trust the authorities, and the slogan “Quit feeding the Caucasus” is gathering support in the rest of the country.
Mikhail Gorbachev and the National Question
William Taubman of Amherst College in the United States said that Gorbachev’s time as president of the USSR was characterized by a unique combination of idealism and optimism, which prevented him from recognizing the seriousness of the ethnic issue in the country. Gorbachev believed in a reformed version of socialism which he thought would appeal not just to the Russian majority but to ethnic minorities too, Taubman explained. Gorbachev himself grew up near the multi-ethnic North Caucasus and, based on his own experience, assumed there was just one possible solution—interethnic cooperation—and believed sincerely in the “united family of Soviet peoples.” He established the Plenum on National Issues in 1989 to address the problem, but it was already too late to stop the Soviet Union from disintegrating. Gorbachev admitted himself that his approach to ethnic policy did not produce positive results, Taubman added.