|
An attempt by Russia's State Duma to define Russian national
identity has run into trouble with the country's Muslims and national minorities.
The driving force behind a new bill on national identity was President Vladimir
Putin himself, who has argued that Russians and Russia need to have a better
sense of who they are. But when the bill was sent out for discussion last month
by Russia's republican and regional parliamentary assemblies, it ran into a
storm of protest. Deputies in Tatarstan, which has a large Muslim population,
say it's an attempt to strengthen and formalize the dominant role of Russians
in the state and therefore runs counter to the constitution.
The idea of defining a concept of Russian national identity
is almost as old as Russia itself -- and just as elusive. Yet Russian leaders
cannot, it seems, resist the temptation to try. In post-Soviet times, Boris
Yeltsin made his contribution through the new constitution of the Russian Federation
and the start of a debate on the Russian national idea.
Grigory Yavlinsky, the leader of the opposition Yabloko party,
has appealed for a break from the imperial past. The Russian national idea,
he says, should be based on respect.
But such modest ambitions are not in keeping with President
Putin's vision of a muscular new Russia pumped up by petrol and gas.
The problem is easily enough defined: how to create a sense
of shared identity in a country divided by race, language, religion and, increasingly,
class and wealth? How to give a sense of purpose to a new state that is still
only just emerging from the ashes of the Soviet Union?
Putin's answer is taking the shape of a bill on the fundamentals
of state national policy, which sees its main aim as strengthening the formation
of a united multicultural society. Few, it seems, have any problem with that.
Where some do have a problem, though, is with the "consolidating
role" assigned by the bill to the Russian people ("Russkii narod")
in "providing the unity of the country and strengthening the vertical of
power." Perhaps they sense an echo of the guiding role assigned the Russian
people in the Soviet Union?
Provocative and Unconstitutional?
The proposed legislation has stirred up a hornets' nest of
protest in the predominantly-Muslim republic of Tatarstan, which has grown used
to a considerable measure of autonomy in the years since the Soviet collapse.
On March 3, its State Council Committee on Culture, Science, Education, and
National Affairs flatly rejected the bill. Foat Galimullin, a deputy in the
republican parliament, discussed this issue with RFE/RL's Tatar-Bashkir Service.
"We have already survived that unrealistic experiment
to create a Soviet nation during the era of the USSR," Galimullin said.
"And now, once more, we have plans to create the Russian nation. I consider
this law provocative in principle and I think that it should be for sure rejected."
Indus Tahirov, another deputy in Tatarstan's parliament, said
the bill was at odds with the federal constitution, which emphasizes the multiethnic
nature of the Russian people (Rossiskii narod).
"The bill cannot be accepted in its present form, first
of all because it is not in accordance with the norms of international law,
secondly because it contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation,
and thirdly because it does not strengthen mutual understanding among the peoples
of the country because of the articles, which especially stand out concerning
the Russian language and the Russian people."
Tahirov and other deputies have taken particular issue with
the provisions of the bill on the Russian language. Tufan Minnullin points out
that a demand contained in the bill that every citizen should know the Russian
language is at odds with the federal constitution. What does "know"
mean, he asks, and what is the punishment to be for not knowing?
"This is a very insidious law. It gives the impression
of defending the Russian people, but in essence it is directed against the Russian
people. It appears to compliment the Russian people but actually it sets the
Russian people up against all the other peoples. Then there is that terrible
article where it states that citizens of the Russian Federation are obliged
to know the Russian language. What does it mean: "obliged"? If they
have to imprison me, what will they do?"
Kremlin Fears Of New Demographics
It is not just Russia's religious and ethnic minorities who
are alarmed. Russia's Public Chamber -- set up last year as a sort of collective
ombudsman to monitor the work of parliament, as well as federal and regional
bodies -- was dismissive, with one member suggesting the bill looked liked scraps
torn at random from someone's dissertation.
The chamber has set up its own committee to examine the bill,
which will report back in three months. Valery Tishkov is the head of its Commission
on Tolerance and Freedom of Conscience and a leading expert on ethnicity and
nationalism. He told RFE/RL's Russian Service that he sees no place for a "consolidating
role" for the Russian people in the modern Russian state.
"We should be talking not just about the multicultural, complex composition
of the Russian people, but also about its unity. It is impossible to create
one people out of 100 peoples. We should not be talking about how to make one
nation out of 100, but about the recognition -- recognition not formation --
of our genuinely existing unity, while at the same time preserving all our traditions."
The fact that this legislation is already running into trouble
suggests how much Russia may be changing. At the heart of the debate over the
new legislation lies the Kremlin's fear over Russia's demographic future. Russia
is a multiethnic country, whose large Muslim population is growing as fast as
the ethnic Russian population is shrinking. The country's national and religious
minorities are becoming increasingly aware of their growing weight and importance
in society. The Russian national idea may never be quite the same again.
Extract
from: Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
|