CEU eTD Collection

G ROUP T In partial Department ofInternational Relations and European Studies HE C R OHESION OHESION AND C USSIAN fulfilment ASE OF Supervisor: Professor BélaGreskovits Central European University

of the requirements forof the thedegreeofMaster of Arts - SPEAKERS AFTER Word count: 17,230 E Budapest, Hungary Kristiina Silvan Submitted to STONIAN AND 2015 By M

INORITY

L B 2004 ATVIAN

ARGAINING

:

CEU eTD Collection can significantly affect minority across time. behaviour claim minority demonstra thesis this statements, elite and data quantitative descriptive as well as structure opportunity both from Drawing demands. cha to trying is minority sub different within emerge that opportunity bargaining of interpretations competing minority,fragmented an is majority and minority the both among cohesion group demonstrate, Latvia and state. Estonia of "nationalising" cases the the as However, of policies the from suffer that minorities the of radicalisation i into translate should years recent in pronounced clearly been has that abroad compatriots its of causes the promoting in interest Russia's bargaining, ethnic and mobilisation minority on literature the to According projects. building nation and monoeth elites' majority the from stemming measures policy restrictive fromsuffered re the Latvian Russian and Estonian the by employed measures bargaining of repertoire the examines thesis This - establishment of Estonia and Latvia as independent states, Russophone minorities have have minorities Russophone states, independent as Latvia and Estonia of establishment e ta etra spot os o tu atmtcly rnlt it intensifying into translate automatically thus not does support external that tes - rus a dcsvl hme efcie claim effective hamper decisively can groups - making. Instead, group cohesion among both the ethnic majority and minority minority and majority ethnic the both among cohesion group Instead, making. - speaking minorities to improve their position in the post inthe their position toimprove speaking minorities llenge a majority that is united in opposition to the minority's minority's the to opposition in united is that majority a llenge important theoretical

varia A BSTRACT ble affectingclaim ble

rmwrs f tnc agiig n political and bargaining ethnic of frameworks i

ncreased bargaining leverage and and leverage bargaining ncreased - making efforts. In the case of a of case the In efforts. making - making - 2004 era. Ever since since 2004 era. Ever –

especially if the the if especially nic state nic CEU eTD Collection Russian during for Kowalczyk Kamil boyfriend my and friends family, my thank to like would I least, not but Last day. every new something learn to environment perfect the with IRES wonderful my University, European Central the thank to want also I generally, More that. after track for angle me helped tirelessly who Popovic, Russian of topic the on thesis my write to bargainingme ethnic inspired on work compelling whose Jenne, K. Erin t to want also I chapters. draft my regarding questions useful and comments detailed his for as well as process, writing thesis the during patience and guidance support, Firs t and foremost, I want like to thank my supervisor, Professor Béla Greskovits, for his his for Greskovits, Béla Professor supervisor, my thank to like want I foremost, and t

the - speakers. my

times of emotional of times

thesis in the beginning, and Daniel Izsak, who made sure I remained on good on remained I sure made who Izsak, Daniel and beginning, the in thesis ore mates course

- speaking minorities in the first place. I would also like to thank Milos thank to like also would I place. first the in minorities speaking

distress, and for listening to my endless reflecti endless my to listening for and distress, s el a well as A ( CKNOWLEDGEMENTS and other Internatio other and s friends from other departments for providing me me providing for departments other from friends s ii

nal Relations students Relations nal

bearing with me me with bearing ) hank Professor hank

to find a good a find to ons on Baltic Baltic on ons CEU eTD Collection Bibliography Conclusion Chapter 4 Chapter 3 Chapter 2 Chapter 1 Introduction List ofAbbre ListFigures of and Tables Table of Contents Acknowledgements Abstract 4. 4 4. 2 4. 1 3. 5 3. 4 3. 3 3. 2 3. 1 2. 4 2. 3 2. 2 2. 1 1. 4 1. 3 1. 2 1. 1 4. 3

...... – – – –

......

an asset? Russian Latvia thelobbyWhen enough: isnot Framing actor and Opportunity inEstonia threatRussian theBalticStates in "If from taken enemycome theEast, not a the has detour": does it Perceived bargaining Explaining minorityclaim The language 2012Russian referendumLatvia in 2007Estonian of BronzeCrisis Soldier toestablishculturalAttempts autonomy inEston yearsSupport for restrictive policies 25 state after TheToday's claims thatremain:communities aspirations Russophone ofthe Issues oflegitimacy: represents Who theRussian Diversity oftheand minorities Russophone fragmentation stateRussian and abroad" the"compatriots "Nationalising"Latvia state and policies inEstonia Origins theRussian ofthe Developing"stateopportunity": the ofgroup andminority cohesion bargaining andMinorities opportunities perceived and threats Research sourcesand ofdata methodology Disabled minorities? Cycles collectiveDisabled minorities? ofcontentious action after2004 Bet Backgroundto studyingLatvia ofEstoniaminorities and Russophone Conceptualising minority thedynamics claim of

......

...... viations weena and rock place: a Russian hard

...... -

...... speakers and the ongoing Ukrainian Crisis: Isspeakers ongoingand the Ukrainian Crisis: a Russia threator

......

......

......

...... T ABLE OF - - ...... speaking communi making: "triadicmaking: nexus"ethnic and of the theory ......

...... iii ...... C

ONTENTS ......

...... -

...... speakers intoday's societies ties ......

...... - ia ...... -

making ......

speakers? ......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

......

.

57 54 50 49 46 44 44 41 38 36 32 27 27 25 21 18 16 16 12 11

iii iv iv

ii 8 7 7 1

i

CEU eTD Collection

L IST OF F IGURES AND iv

T ABLES

CEU eTD Collection ZaRYa UN TB/LNNK OSCE NGO MP NCA NATO LRU EU CoE

European Union ofEuropeCouncil For Native LanguageFor Native [ United Nations Latvian of(Coalition two right ForFatherlandIndependenceFreedom/Latvian and National Movement Organisation and Co for Security non Member ofParliament non North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Latvian Union (party) Russian - - governmental organisation territ orial autonomy cultural

L IST OF

Za RodnoyZa Yazyk A

-

wing v BBREVIATIONS

- operation inEurope

parties) ] (Latvian] movement andparty)

CEU eTD Collection 4 3 2 1 many of minority. minds the of members the in exist still unjustifiable, perceived treatment, such from stemming s are life everyday speakers' Baltic today's in role no plays ethnicity that assume to wrong be would it Ukraine, Eastern in Russians with Russian that out point habitually critics Although 2013. in peninsula the of annexation Russia's since written been have states Baltic the in place taking scenario" "Crimean a of possibility the at hinting articles of hundreds not wit did not that regions in even conflict off spark can country a within divisions ethnic that demonstrated tot of cent heterogeneous Baltic three the of third the Lithuania, Unlike after Latvia and Estonia study post both of Scholars

98 Networks Informal of Power Transformative The believe capital, Commercio, Latvia's M. Riga, in upon. infringedliving Russians are rights of % 95 that found study 2010 a example, For voting laws. and education, language, citizenship, categories: book support 1996 his to the early1990s in in wereintroduced laws 1. These Chapter in in detail willdiscussed state be "nationalising" Brubaker Rogers by c a to refer I commas inverted in "nationalising" word the using By country’sminority, biggest 348 p. Duvold, 6.1%. Poles, the and 6% Belarussians and Russians populations, total the of 84% comprise Lithuanians ethnic Lithuania, States', Baltic the in Support Political and Identification Territorial Demos: and Ethnos between 'Democracy Berglund, S. and Duvold K. furtherdetails. for Bal the from alienation perceived with linked closely originally their citize those Russian only speaking with strictly are compatriots" "Russian While societies. Latvian and Estonian the of section n hs hss apy h tr "Russian term the apply I thesis this In

mother tongue mother

h rsoain f soi ad ava s ootnc ain tts n gnrly al no four into fall generally and states nation monoethnic as Latvia and Estonia of restoration the ness l populations. al

States

populations with sizeable Russophone minorities Russophone sizeable with populations ethnic violence in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union theSoviet ofthe collapse aftermathethnic of inthe violence

si, "Russian nship, and identify with the Russian culture. The identification of the Russophone minority was was minority Russophone the of identification The culture. Russian the with identify and Mn "ainlsn" as n plce ta seriously that policies and laws "nationalising" Many .

- Soviet studies and ethnic mobilisation have been equally appealed to to appealed equally been have mobilisation ethnic and studies Soviet 4

Moreover, ethnic Estonians and Latvians that still see Russia as a as Russia see still that Latvians and Estonians ethnic Moreover, 2 East European Politics and Societies and Cultures and Societies and Politics European East

Twenty

il n lc today. place in till

the two countries re countries two the - speakers" and "Russophones" include all those who speak Russian as as Russian speak who those all include "Russophones" and speakers" - - or er atr te non cii i Urie has Ukraine in crisis ongoing the after, years four I speakers" rather than "(ethnic) Russians" to talk about the given given the about talk to Russians" "(ethnic) than rather speakers" NTRODUCTION - usa Mnrt Pltc i Post in Politics Minority Russian speakers in speakers ainls Reframed. Nationalism (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010) p. 2010) Press, Pennsylvania of University (Philadelphia: 1

States

3

t s hs o srrsn ta grievances that surprising not thus is It Estonia and Latvia have little in common in little have Latvia and Estonia - mre s needn sae i 1991. in states independent as emerged

Etna n Latvia and Estonia ,

tic languages and cultures. See Chapter 2.1 2.1 Chapter See cultures. and languages tic ertain type of state behavior as described described as behavior state of type ertain The set of legislation enacted by a a by enacted legislation of set The 1

that comprise 30 to 40 per 40 to 30 comprise that - oit ava n Kyrgystan: and Latvia Soviet

(28 (2), May 2014) p. 342 In 342 p. 2014) May (2), feature a fc Russian ffect . Dozens, if . Dozens, if

ethnically

that their their that - CEU eTD Collection 9 8 7 6 5 while the fourthanalytical oneisan one,constitutingcore the thethesis. of descripti are three First puzzle. this from emerged questions research Four 2000s and 1990s the throughout ways various in processes building state and nation monoethnic the resisting activity collective in engagedhave minorities the that fact giventhe puzzling, is This Russian of fraction a by up picked been only have they countries, both in emerged Russian of situation the improving considerably at aimed bargaining nexus triadic of model Brubaker's Rogers making, Balticthe in mobilisation instigateethnic it protecting in interest Russia's in veiled been both have 2013, of annexation Crimean the and 2008 of War Georgian the resulted relations. in normalised ethnic NATOand 2 Union in European the to accession the nor policies integration neither Baltic thr primary

autonomy and resisting the relocation of the Bronze Soldier monument in Estonia, organising a Russian Russian a organising non Estonia, in establishing monument Soldier for Bronze lang the mobilisation of example, relocation the for resisting and include, autonomy contestation of cycles Such 2007) Press, CornellUniversity London: Jenne, E. in presented is theory The New Europe model The (Surrey: p. 101 2009) Ashgate, BerginP. E. Integration', and Ehin, A. 361 & p. Berglund, Duvold Spruds, 'Entrapment in the Discourse of Danger? Latvian Danger? of Discourse the in 'Entrapment Spruds, 9 uage referendum in Latvia, and resisting education reforms in both countries. both in reforms resisting and education Latvia, in referendum uage Russian . Research Question 1: chance of getting their voices heard? claim ethnic successful ResearchPuzzle: post the in borders its beyond conflicts major two in involvement Russian

8 pr , a t ter tt svriny ae lo eand oeht upcos f those of suspicious somewhat remained also have sovereignty state their to eat

is presented in R. Brubaker, R. in presented is

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) Press, University Cambridge (Cambridge: - dc afraiey Yt hs a nt en h cs. lhuh aia claims radical Although case. the been not has this Yet affirmatively. edict speakers wishing to preserve a cultural link to the Russian state. Russian the to link cultural a preserve to wishing speakers

Why have the Russophone minoritiesRussophone the haveWhy

What claims have emerged in the post - making although, judging by the political climate, they could have a good a have could they climate, political the by judging although, making

s "compatriots abroad". Can Russia's new Russia's Can abroad". "compatriots s Identity and Foreign and Policy: Baltic Identity Ethnic Bargaining: The Paradox of Minority Empowerment Empowerment Minority of Paradox The Bargaining: Ethnic Nationalism Reframed: Nationhood and the national question in the in question national the and Nationhood Reframed: Nationalism

6

States 2

, too? too? Two, claim minorityexplaining theories -

Russian Interaction in the Context of European European of Context the in Interaction Russian 7

in Estonia and Latvia failed at engaging inengaging at Latviafailed and Estonia in - n Ei Jnes hoy f ethnic of theory Jenne's Erin and speakers in Estonia and Latvia have have Latvia and Estonia in speakers - 2004 era? - Russian Relations and Foreign and Relations PolicyRussian

- found assertiveness assertiveness found

- e n character, in ve territorial cultural cultural territorial 5

In essence, In - - 2004 era, 2004 (Ithaca a (Ithaca 004 have have 004 spea kers. kers. nd nd - CEU eTD Collection 14 13 12 11 10 Russian Latvian 2007, a in monument of WW2 Soviet relocation the resist to been has Estonia in activity contentious Russophone of peak h authorities central the challenging policies. state restrictive and minorities Russian large are countries two the foremost, and increasing their bargaining leverage double a as leaders minority certain by perceived been seems opposite the Instead, intervention. actor's lobby external make the about worry not members its if does even concessions claims minority of resistance its in united is that majority a demonstrate, claim in framing of significance the and success bargaining of perceptions different for rationale the unravel structure opportunity political on model Tarrow's Sidney action. of courses sub Russian of community the like minorities fragmented Extremely minority. ethnic the of behaviour bargaining the effects that factor mi the and majority the both of cohesion group arguesthat thesis This

of norms and incentives incentives and norms of Kelley, J. example, for see, selection, case in justification similar a For Estonia and Russia in Survival and (Eds.), Lonkila M. Liikanenand I. Alapuro, Russian the of Position the in Dimensions 'International Korhonen, A. S. Tarrow, Russian ofthe fragmentation diversity and The affectingminorityclaim both variables significant are actor lobby an of external support t recognise and bargaining ethnic of theory base Jenne's on I analysis myInstead, behaviour. minority affecting variable only the is cohesion group that claim to wish not do I - groups Two major factors have contributed to the case selec case the to contributed have factors major Two Research Question 4: Research Question 3: Research Question 2: 11 Pow

ht ecie hne fr agiig d bargaining for chances perceive that er in Movement (3rdMovement er in Ed.) - making. As some some As making.

to hold true: Russia's decisiveness to protect "compatriots abroad" has has abroad" "compatriots protect to decisiveness Russia's true: hold to

(Princet

Does Does group cohesion affect bargaining success? If yes, why? Who has voiced these claims? How representative are they mi of the How have policy on: Princeton University Press, 2004) Press, University on: Princeton

(Saarijärvi: Kikimora, 2004) 199 p. 2004) Kikimora, (Saarijärvi: 13 as taken as (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011) Press, 160 University p. Cambridge (Cambridge: . comparable

ntne o mnrt brann i te atc States Baltic the in bargaining minority of instances Beyond Post Beyond - - - speaking minorities is discussed in section 3.1 section in is discussed minorities speaking makers and majority populations reacted to these claims? speakers in Estonia and Latvia consist of various various of consist Latvia and Estonia in speakers different forms different 3

- due to their similar historical experiences, experiences, historical similar their to due Soviet Transi - speakers' mass mobilisation in 2012 was 2012 in mobilisation mass speakers' feety n tu pooe different promote thus and ifferently - 14 edged sword, decreasing rather than rather decreasing sword, edged

hat the presence of repressive policies and and policies repressive of presence the hat oee, ept te similarities, the despite However,

tion of Estonia and Latvia. First Latvia. and Estonia of tion tion: Micro Perspectives on Challenge Challenge Microon Perspectives tion: in the two countries. While the While countries. two the in

-

Speaking Minority in Estonia', in R. R. in Estonia', in Minority Speaking Ethnic politics in Europe: the power power the Europe: in politics Ethnic nority is an additional an is nority - making. 12

s ple to applied is

nority? 10

CEU eTD Collection 15 demonstrate and structure opportunity political of model Russian Latvian and Estonian of cases the to applied when limited is power explanatory theories' the that argued is it bargaining, claim minority explaining theories two the of overview an After work. the throughout employed data of description a and methodology research on note a with starts It project. the in used speakers thatas cana minorities ofanalysis. distinct unit form come soon growingsocio the and integrationof patterns sub various of interpretations the through filtered is it when blurred more even becomes explicit, ever hardly while actor, external an of support perceived The minorities. by chosen making claim of repertoire and capacity bargaining the affecting variable important an is cohesion societie Baltic the in question" "Russian the of state current the mapping by contribution empirical an providing majority of complexity the assess can one that the combining by only is It alike. minority the and majority the of sections different representing elites political of statements public Baltic the in conducted surveys of the key tasksofproject. this mobilisation in differences the Understanding the for pushing at aimed

A detailed description of these events in provided in chapter 4. Ain chapter inevents provided ofthese description detailed - group representatives. Moreover, as in as Moreover,representatives. group - making, Rogers Brubaker's model of triadic nexus and Erin K. Jenne K. Erin and nexus triadic of model Brubaker's Rogers making, h tei cnit o fu catr. h frt hpe cnan te hoeia bo theoretical the contains chapter first The chapters. four of consists thesis The opinion statistics, descriptive from data its draws thesis This

hn t s o ogr ennfl o osdr soin n Ltin Russian Latvian and Estonian consider to meaningful longer no is it when s, the thesis also has theoretical implications by suggesting that group group that suggesting by implications theoretical has also thesis the s,

eonto o Rsin s h scn ofca sae language. state official second the as Russian of recognition

States , as well as from discourse analysis of legal texts and texts legal of analysis discourse from as well as , - paes Catr . itoue Sde Tarrow's Sidney introduces 1.3 Chapter speakers. - group solidarity is growing weaker due to uneven uneven to due weaker growing is solidarity group - numbers and figures with thick, qualitative data data qualitative thick, with figures and numbers economic gap between su gapbetween economic 4 behaviour –

minority relations accordingly. In addition to addition Inaccordingly. relations minority

in seemingly similar countries is one is countries similar seemingly in s its potential for contributing to the the to contributing for potential its s

b ol ad sociological and polls - groups, 's theory of ethnic ethnic of theory 's a time might time a dy dy 15 - -

CEU eTD Collection 16 claim for opportunities of) (lack perceived and support actor lobby su continuing their and majorities Latvian and Estonian ethnic the to devoted is 3.4 section following The processes. building nation and state the of nature monoethnic the towards stance their on depending elites Russophone by voiced claims in how demonstrate sections These sub different by voiced be to continue that claims the and community char diverse and fragmented its minority: Russophone the Russian capturesgeneral opinion Baltic the that saying Estonian an detour", a taken has it East, the from come not does enemy the "If is centralperce thethesis: the to an of study a on closes chapter The policies. compatriot Russian the of evolution the and state Russian the nexus": "triadic the of actor third the discusses 2.3 Section polic policies. Baltic the in emerged which communities in majorities fragmentation the case, Baltic i bargaining ethnic and cohesion study bargaining ofminority Baltic inthe

O. Norgaard, Norgaard, O.

soi n Latvia and Estonia e epoe b te soin n Ltin tts ht iety fet Russian affect directly that states Latvian and Estonian the by employed ies h tid chapter third The to background some provides chapter second The - 16 speakers in Estonia and Latvia in the post the in Latvia and Estonia in speakers

vis h scn scin f h catr nlds n vriw f h "nationalising" the of overview an includes chapter the of section second The The Baltic states after independence Baltic after states The - à - vis

the minority question is alsofirst questionis the minority at discussed thechapter. the end of

. It starts by examining the historical origins of the Russian the of origins historical the examining by starts It . pport for restrictive policies. In the last section I return to the issue of issue the to return I section last the In policies. restrictive for pport begins begins i

ved Russian threat to Baltic threat Russian sovereignty.ved ofthissection title The f h Rsohn mnrt ad h uiy f tnc Baltic ethnic of unity the and minority Russophone the of where the second chapter chapter second the where peetd T dmntae its demonstrate To presented. s on Russia perfectly.on Russia - group diversity has created legitimacy concerns and how how and concerns legitimacy created has diversity group can be divided into "radical" and "moderate" ones ones "moderate" and "radical" into divided be can States

(Cheltenham: E. Elgar Publishing, 1996) p. p. 170 1996) Publishing, Elgar (Cheltenham: E. States 5

. In thegroupthe model subsequent of . chapter

- bv al s rsl o Sve settlement Soviet of result a as all above 2004 era. The three first sections focus on focus sections first three The era. 2004

the study of study the acter, the present acter,the ends

by looking at the status of of status the at looking by

explana - making in today's Baltic Baltic today's in making -

groups of the minority.the of groups Russophone minorities minorities Russophone other aspect that is the is that aspect other - t day leaders of the the of leaders day ory power in the the in power ory

- - speakers. speaking speaking

CEU eTD Collection af confirmed the thesis, this of limitations the effect. to due However, paralysing a have can success bargaining of chances of interpretations competing suppor their to it communicating and support the framing ones the are representatives minority crucial, is actor lobby external claim minority affecting whichdifferent theprevalence of narratives theminority within isespecially in crisis, Ukrainian ongoing the during competition framing the of analysis an with closes r language Russian 2012 the and crisis, Soldier Bronze 2007 Baltic the in States contestation of cycles recent three in outcomes different explain to applied States : the attempts to establish non establish to attempts the : .

ial, h cnlso hglgt te i the highlights conclusion the Finally, coh group and bargaining ethnic of model the chapter, final and fourth the In e suyn te fet f ru chso i ohr ae o ehi bargaining. ethnic of cases other in cohesion group of effect the studying ter - aig n soi ad ava Wie ecie spot rm an from support perceived While Latvia. and Estonia in making ters. In the case of a fragmented minority, the emergence of emergence the minority,fragmented a of case the In ters. - territorial cultural autonomy for Russians in Estonia, the the Estonia, in Russians for autonomy cultural territorial 6

prac o gop oein s variable a as cohesion group of mportance generalizability eferendum in Latvia. The chapter Latvia. The in eferendum

of the model can only be be only can model the of noticeable esion is esion .

CEU eTD Collection minorities’ the improve to conditionality accession to linked pressure external situation. faced longer no countries restrictive of relaxation Russian thetowards legislation to led have could which guaranteed were needs security hard their NATO, and EU two the studying that believe I 17 Yet versa. vice and Latvia in collected that to compared be not could Estonia in collected data or Estonia, for exist not did Latvia about data insightful my of scope the limited significantly has which data primary collect to able not was I pressures time to due limits: its has it examine, and access to easy is data quantitative of kind this While referendums. and elections national from data a In articles. news and/or reports official in shared and agencies polling Latvian elements project. andinthis ofbothdeductive inductiveresearch claim of description empirical thick a which feature studies case four to applied is bargaining ethnic and cohesion group of model The States ca the in that finds project this bargaining, ethnic of theory Jenne's Erin and nexus claim minority of theories prominent two testing bargai the how understanding for essential is activists and officials state politicians, key of statements public Russian the of picture nuanced elit political of statements public of review combinesdescriptive theanalysispublicly of and data statistics availableopinionpoll withthe post the in position their improve to sought have Latvia and Estonian way the examine to is project this of aim The 1 1.

C I have decided to focus on the post the on focus to decided have I HAPTER

, group cohesion has had a major impact in determining minorities' course of action. action. of course minorities' determining in impact major a had has cohesion group , The opinion poll data employed in this data has been collected by Estonian and and Estonian by collected been has data this in employed data poll opinion The Research methodology and sources of data of sources and methodology Research

1 ning position of the minorities is minorities the of position ning

–

C ONCEPTUALISINGTHE D

- speakers. Secondly, after the EU and NATO accession, the p the accession, NATO and EU the after Secondly, speakers.

- - speaking minorities residing in Latvia and Estonia, analysing analysing Estonia, and Latvia in residing minorities speaking 2004 era for t for era 2004 wo reasons. Firstly, after the Estonia and Latvia joined the the joined Latvia and Estonia the after Firstly, reasons. wo es. While descriptive statistical data provides a a provides data statistical descriptive While es. 7 -

aig n h pos the in making YNAMICS MINORITYOF - making, Rogers Brubaker's model of triadic triadic of model Brubaker's Rogers making, perceived - 04 era 2004

research. Moreover, in some instances, some in Moreover, research.

yvrosatr. nadto to addition In actors. various by 17 I trs f ehdlg, it methodology, of terms In .

t - 2004 era. There are thus thus are There era. 2004 n Russophone minorities minorities Russophone n olicy CLAIM - makers in the two two the in makers ddition, I use use I ddition, - se of Baltic of se MAKING

CEU eTD Collection 19 18 re to aim core the relaxed, been since have policies "nationalising" some although 2, chapter in demonstrate the of hegemony political or flourishing, ” promoting state, ”nationalising” re their after "homeland". external and minority national state, "nationalising" a of comprising nexus, ofgroupimplications andunity fragmentation. the to central is which framework structure opportunity political Tarrow's from draw also majority and minority both Baltic of the to elaboration case my introduce the to them apply and two the of overview an provide the Jenne's Erin and nexus triadic of model post the in Latvia and Estonia in minorities Russophone the of position the conceptualising for useful are that frameworks theoretical two are There 2 1. g. e. analysis, my for pivotal was that data access politicalRussophone activists'blogs statements ontheir and websites. to able was I that this to due was f my is Moldova in minority over,Romanian say,states the two countries are p in countries

Brubaker, p. 57 Brubaker, p. 147

soi ad ava rvd txbo css f oes Bruba Rogers of cases textbook provide Latvia and Estonia the of One ethnic bargaining ethnic Explaining minority claim - establishment, arallel was val was arallel -

sals monoeth establish

to alarge extent reasons

why I decided to focus on the Russophone minority in the Baltic the in minority Russophone the on focus to decided I why

uable for a better a for uable to soi ad Latvia and Estonia

ethnic claim ethnic two, which two, comparable. nic nation states has not changed since the early days of of days early the since changed not has states nation nic h langua the - making: the "triadic and nexus"

- introduces the variable of variable the introduces making. To develop my argument further, I will will I further, argument my develop To making.

ory of ethnic bargaining. In this section I will will I section this In bargaining. ethnic of ory oial state nominally 8

understanding in minority bargaining since the since bargaining minority in understanding e clue dmgahc oiin economic position, demographic culture, ge,

tl tick still - independence

all the boxes in Brubaker's list of of list Brubaker's in boxes the all luency in the Russian language. It language. Russian the in luency - ern nation” bearing

group cohesion among cohesion group e' mdl f triadic of model ker's

era: Roger Brubaker's Roger era: States

theory of . 19 a wl as well as ,

s will I As 18

24 CEU eTD Collection 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 mi mobilise can events unexpected of "windows of opening the opportunity". and structure opportunity political of notion the on builds The 1). table (see claims radical more for desires collective creates leverage bargaining increased of perception mere the Jenne, to According players) sub at behaviour regional (particularly actors external how ways the address choose toresist the restrictive policies of a nationalisingstate. behaviour minority to pivotal actors state. three the to kin attention our external drawing for good the is model of Brubaker's characteristic secessionism as such claims extreme interests". their defend to obligation, the even right, the assert and rights, their of violations alleged against protect 'home "the ever: than better 2000s the of Russia assertive new, suits description discrimination". or assimilation of processes cultura demand who alienated politically and organised degrees) varying (to and conscious self "substantial, of description the fit also communities Russophone The independence.

analysis of the political opportunity structure opportunity the political analysisof Ibid. Ibid. Ibid. majority 14 p. Jenne, coalitions". political inclusion in and/or agreements, the from concessions extract negotiate may minority the minorities successful, If institutions. which state to status claimant by group's the over practises majority the with and modes "the means definition author's the in bargaining Ethnic Ibid., Ibid. Ibid. lands' lands' , p. 10. See works by S. Tarrow and P. Eisinger as well as the next section (1.3) of th of (1.3) section next the as well as Eisinger P. and Tarrow S. by works See 10. p. , 39, p. 5 , p. Italics inItalics the original. inItalics the original. bargaining ethnic of theory Jenne's Erin p. p. i fls hr o epann wa kn o re of kind what explaining of short falls it , 67

lsl mntr h stain f hi co their of situation the monitor closely 26

Indeed, according to the ethnic bargaining model, opportunities generated by generated opportunities model, bargaining ethnic the to according Indeed, - state level state

l or territorial autonomy and resist actual or perceived policies or or policies perceived or actual resist and autonomy territorial or l 21

It is noteworthy that Brubaker does not consi not does Brubaker that noteworthy is It 24 , and thus improve the predictive capacity of Brubaker's nexus Brubaker's of capacity predictive the improve thus and ,

- c nrle gvrmn, nldn tase pyet, power payments, transfer including government, ontrolled oiis vn n h asne f ain collective salient of absence the in even norities

9 20

23 s o te xenl oead Brubaker's homeland, external the for As perception of increased bargaining leverage bargaining increased of perception

uls n rbkrs oe b amn to aiming by model Brubaker's on builds - tnc i te e sae, vigorously states, new the in ethnics

pertoire of action the minority can can minority the action of pertoire

der der

ainl minorities national explicit nlec minority influence external national national external is thesis for an for thesis is

support for support 22

- sharing sharing While 25 - . , CEU eTD Collection 30 29 28 27 w action collective contentious in engage to able are Latvia non rather is government central the descripti accurate an not is this However,conflict. inter possible and radicalisation minority entail model the to according would which some Russophone activists see as of a increased demonstration s which Russians, ethnic protect to order in supposedly borders its beyond operations military Russian the of rights the violating policies tirelessly and openly and passports Russian issuing MPs), Russophone allegedly, (and, NGOs Russian funding generously by minority the for support polic repressive to subject is that minority sizeable and defined a to addition In model. bargaining Baltic today's in minorities Russophone The grievances.

will be discussed furtheron. discussed will be different sub theamong lack (or ofit) support of Russian perceptions The 2006) (Ed.) Muiznieks N. in Latvia', in Towards"Compatriots" Policy Foreign 'Russian Muiznieks, N. example, for See, 43 p. Jenne, Ibid. ies of the "nationalising" state, the external lobby actor, Russia, has manifested its its manifested has Russia, actor, lobby external the state, "nationalising" the of ies , 11, p. en hs a, h Rsohn mnrt wud id tef n h "tt o conflict" of "state the in itself find would minority Russophone the way, this Seen

Latvian 27

28 -

Russian Relations: Domestic and Interna and Domestic Relations: Russian

- repressive repressive - speakers. 10 States

tional Dimensions Dimensions tional – on of the situation the of on ned Russian indeed,

29 ersns hr cs fr h ethnic the for case hard a represents

n diin Rsi hs novd in involved has Russia addition, In ithout fearing for their lives their for fearing ithout - criticising upport. groups of the Russophone minority minority Russophone groupsofthe (Riga: University of Latvia Press, Press, Latvia of University (Riga: - speakers in Estonia and and Estonia in speakers . Even if we assume that that assume we if Even . 30

atc lead Baltic ers for for ers - ethnic – ,

the CEU eTD Collection 33 32 31 have may Conversely,desires. action be feasible,the to unfeasibleoptions certain wronglybelieves he if oppor certain of aware be to fail may person "the that argues convincingly Elster opportunities, and desires about writing When chosen. repertoire the determine that activists movement of perceptions it". for avenues open or activity political on constraints certain impose [that] environment the in "elements as structure opportunity political defined 1973, in term the use to first the was soci by employed activity contentious of repertoire the impact demon to of framework the applied have Tarrow Charle Sidney like Authors analysis. movements social of themes central are actions claim through success J 3 1. develop "state titled opportunity". Jenne's world of avoiding s their pronouncing actively wide received not have they communities, the in emerged have claims radical some while reality, the to us take would model enne's model is based on minority's perceptions on bargaining leverage and chances of of chances and leverage bargaining on perceptions minority's on based is model enne's J. Elster, J. March 1973) 11 p. 1973) March P.Eisinger, inBehaviour Protest of Conditions 'The Cities', American 4 (Est 2015 and (Latvia) 2014 in place took that elections of round last the during especially years, recent in dimension ethnic the downplay to tried actively have support Russophone the on mostly rely ( countries two the of parties Centre the example, For 32

of this thesis for a detailed analysis ofclaim analysis detailed a for ofthis thesis

- Although structural opportunities a opportunities structural Although spread support; instead, the majority of Baltic Russians have decided to act otherwise, otherwise, act to decided have Russians Baltic of majority the instead, support; spread Minorities and perceived and Minorities opportunities and threats

Nuts and Bolts f Bolts Nutsand strate how structural changes structural how strate tnc claim ethnic disastrous tunities and therefore not choose the best available means of realising his his realising of means available best the choose not therefore and tunities

results". - - or Social Sciences Sciences Social or making. Perceptions of opportunity and threat of contentious collective contentious of threat and opportunityof Perceptions making. making. 33

pot o mr mdrt rpeettvs n consciously and representatives moderate more for upport sae f opportun of "state 31

Jenne shares this view by pointing out that ethnic that out pointing by view this shares Jenne

n re t udrtn sc bhvor w ne t further to need we behaviour, such understand to order In (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989) p. p. 20 1989) Press, University Cambridge (Cambridge: – re objective, it is, however, the subjective beliefs and beliefs subjective however,the is, it objective, re widening and narr and widening - making in the Baltic states. Baltic the makingin 11 Harmony in Latvia and the Centre Party in Estonia) that that Estonia) in Party Centre the and Latvia in Harmony political opportunity structure opportunity political

t" n peit aiaiig eaiu. In behaviour. radicalising predict and ity"

owing of the opportunity window opportunity the of owing American Political Science Review Review Science Political American

al movements. Eisinger, who who Eisinger, movements. al

in their studies their in onia). onia). s Tilly and and Tilly s

bargaining See chapter chapter See (67, (67, –

CEU eTD Collection 37 36 35 34 can influence therepertoire claims inthe post backing. external significant enjoys it believes it when radicalises minority a model, Jenne's to according earlier, discussed As 4 1. extremely difficult. is minority) the for allies potential of lack the by (characterised majority ethnic consolidated diff promote differentsub that means which opportunity", of "window the of interpretations various Russian framing them. within cleavages and elites ruling the within alignments shifting participation, to access increased opportunity: of window a of opening factors additional three consideration into takes structure opportunity political allies ri the i.e. the challenging government may easily anti provoke openly because minorities the for consequences contradictory has often 160 Tarrow,p. 13 p. Jenne, Jenne, p. 188 p. Jenne, Ibid.

, 165 , p. – Following the theory of ethnic bargaining, the new, assertive Russia that is willing to willing is that Russia assertive new, the bargaining, ethnic of theory the Following opportunity political The with juxtaposed are opportunities political framework, Tarrow'sconceptual In eeoig h "tt o opruiy: ru chso ad mino bargaining and cohesion group opportunity": of "state the Developing h ky needn vral o te tnc bargaining ethnic the of variable independent key the - in collective action. speakers for two reasons. Firstly, diversity of the Russophone community generates generates community Russophone the of diversity Firstly, reasons. two for speakers sks and costs of (in)action. of costs and sks

–

166

rn rprors f cin Scnl, ioiy claim minority Secondly, action. of repertoires erent

- 2004 era demonstrates that variation in 2004 era demonstrates variation that

and effectiveness

structure is useful for understanding the puzzle of Baltic Baltic of puzzle the understanding for useful is structure - 35 37 minority retributions. minority

Moreover, in addition to the availability of influential of availability the to addition in Moreover, However, a detailed analysis of Baltic Russophone Russophone Baltic of analysis detailed a However,

of contentious contentious of 12

36

He He both minority majority and cohesion 34 lo ons out points also

bargaining model action. – Tro' mdl of model Tarrow's , - aig gis a against making

h iprac of importance the

facilitating the the facilitating - threats groups rity rity , CEU eTD Collection and non is majority the and supportive is actor lobby the when fragmentation minority and majority of has it believe will minority the policies, repressive of set the behind united is it signals majority the claim however, of success potential the of perception their changes Tarrow, following ap can minority necessary,the or justified are minority the towards policies repressive believe not do that majority ethnic the among factions are deno silent, remain consciously others but barks dog single a which in dogs of pack a of case a communities' Russophone Latvian no for least at who, those factin is minority the radicalising,of instead However, societies. Baltic the in status equal an for bargain successfully finally to need(ed) the is abroad compatriots its of rights the promote - opportunity. repressive, yielding four possible states of the world: confrontation, success, competition competition success, confrontation, world: the of states possible four yielding repressive, uncing thebarker. The level of the majority's cohesion is crucial for minority claim minority for crucial is cohesion majority's the of level The

less

chances w, want to restrain from claim from restrain to w,want

of successful claim successful of behaviour

divided is 13 not a case of ” of case a not

- making. Table 2 depicts the combinations the depicts Table 2 making.

between those who want to mobilise and mobilise to want who those between ky ic" h Rsohn minorities Russophone the piece" "key proach them as potential allies, which, allies, potential as them proach - making. Seen this way, Estonian and and way,Estonian this Seen making. dog that didn't bark didn't that dog - making, too. If there there If too. making, - ” aig If, making. , but rather but ,

CEU eTD Collection 39 38 sub other from members of support the over" "win to have they since but predicts, sub Some attributes. majority,are the too) of unity the sometimes (and actor lobby the of supportiveness en will claim actors various has minority fragmented Baltic com is minority However, the if Instead, she argues that thepoliciesactors thatarechallenged. thatdonotsupport the This is majority those with allies make can it because concessions receiving of chance real a has minority the another), or reason one (for not do who those and imperative policies repressive is minority united the when However, concessions. make to forced be cannot majority minority, the the support not does actor lobby the as long as because successful be necessarily the is situation Such claim of attempts resist vigorously will it challenge, to tries minority the policies the behind united is majority su of predicts. chances their bargaining affects ethnic meet of they theory resistance the the However, as radicalise to likely indeed is minority the actor, lobby external an of support the of perception the share minority a of members When Ibid., Ibid., 17 p. Jenne, p. 18 p. States whose political existence is universally accepted, and therefore consequential, social fact. b the the of internationalaffairs,speak may onealso of meaningfully speak can analysts policy as Just players". coherent be to homogenous be to not need "groups Jenne, to According gage in a framing competition. The framing competition ensues because the the because ensues competition framing The competition. framing a in gage

gop coherence group , - making and the minority will not be able to find allies within the group. the within allies find to able be not will minority the and making e wt a aoiy ht s pi bten hs wo id otnig the continuing find who those between split is that majority a with met -

groups of the minority might radicalise as the ethnic bargaining t bargaining ethnic the as radicalise might minority the of groups

tt o confron of state

prised of individuals as diverse as the Russian the as diverse as individuals of prised os become does tation ing

14 n motn fco.Ti i bcue ic the since because is This factor. important an

(1). In this situation, the bargaining won't won't bargaining the situation, this In (1).

to represent it, leaders of various sub various of leaders it, represent to behaviour

of ethnic groups at the substate levelsubstatethe at ethnicgroups of hvor f rne r rti in Britain or France of ehaviour ccessful bargaining. If the the If bargaining. ccessful state ofsuccess in reality in - speakers in the the in speakers

intervene to intervene perceived (2). - - groups group, heory heory

39

38

CEU eTD Collection state ofcompetition. ma the of world 3rd the on primarily focus shall I project this of framework this In figure 1). an is majority theminoritywithin engagingethnic whether todetermine in claim However success. of chances their Tarrow,following increase majority,which, would the within allies find to able sub minoritymajority, radicalised fragmented equally an with likely more be will minority the result, a As claim from restrain to reason a of enough be to majority the of opposition vigorous sub some since effectively the in itself claim - making becomes more difficult in practice. If the majority is united, the minority finds minority the united, is majority the If practice. in difficult more becomes making Hence my model suggests that group cohesion within both the minority and the the and minority the both within cohesion group that suggests model my Hence

state of competition competition of state

additional independent variable that can influence minority claim minority influence can that variable independent additional

, in this this in , - groups consider the ambiguous support of the lobby actor and/or and/or actor lobby the of support ambiguous the consider groups state of opportunity opportunity of state 3, n hc i i ual t e to unable is it which in (3), to accommodate. If, however, the minority is met is minorityhowever,If, the accommodate. to 15

(4) a framing competition would first emerge first would competition framing a (4) - group representatives might be be might representatives group - gg i ehi bargaining ethnic in ngage making is worthwhile - making (see (see making - making. trix: the trix: .

CEU eTD Collection 42 41 Russian 40 not Lithuaniadid agriculture, on heavily more relyingeconomy its to Due attractingmigrants. populations. local the in injustice of feelings spurred which services, security Soviet the in duties and enterprises state in positions populations. local the by provided time the at that workforce more required plants industrial large economy: Soviet the of needs labour the by dictated primarily was immigration the out, point Nordgaard As a massi by caused extent great a to was nationality titular the of share the in drop dramatic The Table distinctively as emerged they when era Soviet heteroethnic societies. the until not was it annexation, their had Russians ethnic including minorities, ethnic Although 3). table (see significantly changed countries two the of composition demographic the when minorities Russophone about knowing post of policies" "ethnic the understand to impossible is It 1 2. Ibid., Ibid., Ibid. and Ukrainians Russians, Ethnic 172. p. Norgaard,

1994 1989 1934 Census , 170 , p. ve influx of Russophone migrants from the rest of the Soviet Union during the 1960s. 1960s. the during Union Soviet the of rest the from migrants Russophone of influx ve p. 169 p. 1 - speakers. The terms "Eastern Slav" and "Russian and Slav" terms "Eastern The speakers. Origins ofthe RussianOrigins .

Ethnic Composition of thePopulations andEthnic (1935 Compositionof Latvia Estonia of – 5

date C HAPTER

h seii crusacs ht ed o h emerge the to lead that circumstances specific the 66 61,5 88,2 Estonians (%) Estonia

. It was during the Second World War and the subsequent Soviet era Soviet subsequent the and WarWorld Second the during was It . 2

– MINORITIESOF

B ACKGROUNDTO STUDYI

32,8 35,2 8,2 Eastern (%) Slavs - speaking communitiesspeaking 42

41

The relatively high stand high relatively The

uspoe irns lo ok vr high over took also migrants Russophone Belarusians E 16 STONIA AND -

speakers" can thus be used interchangeably. used canthus be speakers"

54,2 52 77 Latvians(%) Latvia

–

Eastern Slavs Slavs Eastern

-

Soviet Estonia and Latvia without without Latvia and Estonia Soviet NG lived in the two republics before before republics two the in lived

L ard of living was also a factor a also was living of ard R ATVIA

USSOPHONE 39,5 42 12,1 Eastern (%) Slavs

–

make up th up make c of nce – e population of of population e 1994)

the sizeable sizeable the

ol be could - ranking 40

CEU eTD Collection 45 44 43 all of comprise Russian language. and culture Russian the with identify and Estonians nor Latvians ethnic neither are who those all group the in include Baltic the of refers section officially given Russia the societies. about talk to "Russians" just or Russians" "ethnic than factor when non the of fear 20 only t 1980s. According late the during one political distinctively a as emergedonly gap the era, Soviet the during Latvia and Estonia affairs were conducted state all as languages local the learn to required not were Russophones mobility, social for LithuaniansEstonians andwere encouragedinorder Russian toimprove their tolearn chances o 79.5% comprised Lithuanians ethnic of share the 1989 in consequence a as and immigration, Soviet of levels high such experience

See, for example, Kivirähk, p. 4 p. example,Kivirähk, for See, first probablyca they the Russia, be Paevaleht daily popular the in published with time the would at were results poll opinion the connections that fact they theHowever, quo. tight Estonia, had independent whichindependence Estonian against an not were they Thus restructuring. factories in or that plants feared military (rightfully) large in worked speakers Estonian for support of level lower the Kirch, to 4.According p. 2014), Security,December and Defense for Centre International auto Estonia’s greater Russian 'Integrating with albeit Union, Soviet the in remain Russian Estonia of see to half preferred over have that would notes data, same the on elaborating quest Kivirähk, Juhan exact state?' independent The 1990. in twice and 1989 Ide National and Ethnic in twice EMOR institute research Estonian the by New conducted was survey The 1996). Michigan, of (University of Formation titled and workshop Estonia a at in presented Problems 'Social Kirch, M. in Quoted Ibid., n hs ok hv cncosy hsn o pl te em "Russian term the apply to chosen consciously have I work this In culturo two the between split clear a was there the Although % of Russians supported the complete restoration of the Estonian state. Estonian the of restoration complete the supported Russians of % p. 172 p. citizens citizenship legislationcitizenship o based used tension between the two linguistic groups already in the pre the in groupsalready linguistic the two between usedtension

- those who speak Russian as their mother tongue and identify with the Russian Russian the with identify and tongue mother their as Russian speak who those allegiance of Russian of allegiance wees "Russian whereas ,

needne n 90 tm fo ter socio their from stems 1990 in independence

in Russian. in - Speaking Population: Findings of National Defense Opinion Surveys' (Tallinn: Surveys' Opinion Defense National of Findings Population: Speaking

dniy omto ad oil sus n soi, kan ad Uzbekistan and Ukraine Estonia, in Issues Social and Formation Identity o survey data from May 1990, May from data survey o o hs pol a "optit" ( "compatriots" as people these to tity speaking Strictly - speakers ion was 'Do you think that Estonia must get the status of an an of status the get must Estonia that think you 'Do was ion - paes ( speakers" te oa population. total the f n j us sanguinis us sanguinis 17

vis - à - russkoyazychnye vis hwvr "compatriots" however, , the newly independent states was a a was states independent newly the per se per was enacted - cnmc tts Sne ot Russian most Since status. economic , but rather for maintaining the status status the maintaining for rather but , 96 43 - independence period. independence

% hl ehi Latvians, ethnic While

ad "Russophones" and ) in both countries in both of ethnic Estonians but Estonians ethnic of - tnc rus n both in groups ethnic to suffer from economic economic from suffer to sootechestvenniki - speakers" rather rather speakers" nomy. J. Kivirähk, Kivirähk, J. nomy. 44 only include include only

This initial This

- speakers speakers . 45 ntity',

to ) -

CEU eTD Collection 51 50 49 48 47 46 Baltic the in remain to right automatic re demographic Soviet of result a but Russian since Firstly, Russian of majority vast Unio Soviet the to annexation their to prior country the of citizens for citizenship automatic granted ethnic thekey of forms notion of integration, inclusive taken more and towards steps been therehave organisations international from pressure the to due mainly 2000s and 1990s the in relaxed Balt of forms monoethnic promoted on based legislation language and citizenship was exclusive policies of these comprised of core The occupation. Soviet illegal of period a as dubbed now era, ”nationalising” g Estonian and Latvian and Latvian both independence, Upon 2 2. wit culture.

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) p. 96 1998) Press, CambridgeUniversity (Cambridge: States', Baltic in the politics G. ava Smith, V.Law, A. Wilso are old? or English in non 'The Morris, H. translations official their www.saeima.lv. 30/5/2015. Accessed with Latvia of Republic the and Estonia of Republic the of Constitutions centuries". the throughout culture and language Lawhileits theages", constitution Estonian The example,Kelley,for See, 7 pp. &347 Berglund, pp. example,Duvold for See, States', Baltic WithdrawalMilitary Russia's from Linkagein the Diaspora the Explaining Games: 'Compatriot Simonsen, S. h perceived fromalienation thelanguages Baltic and cultures.

n in 1940, and their and 1940, in n

Baltic r n 91 bot 1991, In "Nationalising" state policies in Estonia in "Nationalising" state policies Latvia and 46

(Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005) p. p. 251 2005) (Amsterdam: Rodopi, The identification of the Russophone minority was at least originally closely linked closely originally least at was minority Russophone the of identification The epublics, has encoded changed inthe1991 constitution, not since Europe

policies which were aimed at r at aimed were which policies - citizens of the EU', in D. J. Smith (Ed.), Smith (Ed.), J. D. in the EU', of citizens Etna n Lti otd o the for opted Latvia and Estonia h -

tvian counterpart "guarantee[s] the existence and development of the Latvian nation, its nation,its Latvian ofthe development and existence the "guarantee[s] counterpart tvian Asia - speakers were not considered indigenous residents of the of residents indigenous considered not were speakers ”

n, E. and A.Bohr re Allworth,'Nation - Studies guarantee descendants paes rm h decision the from speakers Nation – 22

(53(3), July 2001) p. 774 July2001) (53(3), - building in the postin the building

[s] [s] the preservation of the Estonian nation, language and culture through through culture and language nation, Estonian the of preservation the c nationhood. ic . 50

This practice marked the deliberate exclusion of the of exclusion deliberate the marked practice This - – shuffling, they were not considered to have the the have to considered not were they shuffling, 8 States

18 eversing the eversing

-

Soviet borderlands identities Soviet ofthe national politics : fe te olpe f h Sve Union. Soviet the of collapse the after 47

The Baltic StatesBaltic The regiontheir and : Europe new

- lhuh h plce wr gradually were policies the Although making

- building and political discourses of identity identity of discourses political and building 'zero' citizenship policy, which only only which policy, citizenship 'zero' ilable online at www.president.ee and and www.president.ee at online ilable ”damage”

overnments introduced a set of of set a introduced overnments arena for two major reasons. reasons. major two for arena

done during the Soviet Soviet the during done u sanguinis jus 49 . Baltic

which States 48 51 ,

CEU eTD Collection 56 55 54 53 52 pro for requirements basic and protection preservation, the atlanguage state titular the of development aimed in legislation language The monolingual. to the transform to been has aim education.The Russian and language Russian of status the to connected ones the weregovernments (orthose who someti optedfor Russian non citizens, Estonian/Latvian naturalised status: their to according groups three in countries both of minorities Russophone the split law citizenship the of existence Yet,the NATO and EU end, Inthe them. prov conditionality accession place, in remain to legislation local their when place hard a naturalisation process. were citizenship automatic for t considered they that fact the and Belarus and Ukraine Russia, in conditions living poorer significantly the by off put elites. political new the by decided policies the with along exp now were era Soviet the during states two the to socialism. state and Union Soviet the from departure Russian Russian) ( the allowing that fears widespread were there Secondly,

See footnote 48 footnote See Kelley,92 pp. Ibid., 188 Norgaard,p. K ivirahk, p. 4 ivirahk,p. A second set of of set second A policy Latvian and Estonian 1990s, the During p. 189 p.

– 95

-

speakers to vote in national elections would jeopardise the two countries' two the jeopardise would elections national in vote to speakers

heir home to be in the Baltic states. Baltic the in be to home heir “ etn te ihs f igitc ioiis ee e b 20, the 2004, by met were minorities linguistic of rights the tecting ainlsn” oiis dpe b te ava ad Estonian and Latvian the by adapted policies nationalising”

constituencies but issued

international organisations were pressuring them to relax to them pressuring were organisations international mes Ukrainian ormes Ukrainian

"non –

Estonian in Estonia and Latvian in Latvia. in Latvian and Estonia in Estonian

- public spaces of the Baltic the of spaces public 19 wanted the draconian citizenship and electoral electoral and citizenship draconian the wanted iie" asot a te bcm sbet to subject became they as passports citizen"

52 -

ected to either leave the country or go or country the leave either to ected Consequently, those who had migrated hadConsequently, who those makers were caught between roc between caught were makers Belarusian 53 allegedly

Most opted for the latter option, latter the for opted Most ed to ed 54

Those who were not eligible not were who Those

) citizenship. ) be somewhat successful somewhat be

p ro States - oit n/r pro and/or Soviet

from bilingual from

- citizens, and citizens, - language 56

While k and and k . 55 -

CEU eTD Collection 60 59 58 57 information portal reads: state Estonian the on reform school the on article an example, For countries. of necessity the language state in education to transition forced the resist parents Russophone some While languages. state unofficial of case the in country European other any in than more is this represent government As Russian. in tuition of 40% arrange to allowed the in organised only is education higher While age. early an at integration linguistic support to order in governments Latvia and Estonian both targetedbeenby has era, Soviet the of remnant a languageschools, failingadequate an todemonstrate language fluency. oflocal level thei losing employees state Russophone of cases controversial been have There check a to subject become might and exams language pass to orga entities, government local and state in language working a as used be should language state the legislation, language the to gradually.beenAccording has language Russian the of status

School Choice in Latvia', in Choice School 'Competit Bloom, S. children's see education, their regarding patterns choice parents' Russophone on study insightful and comprehensive a For (31/1/2013) Russian on tough 'Russian gets Estonia inquisition: 'Language to refer (1/12/2011), speakers' cases, such of overview emotional an and For safety workplace rights, labour and rights S supervision)". administrative public consumer of protection care, health morals, health, safety, e self as well as companies), (or enterprises organisations, institutions, private of Act, "Employees Language that statesEstonian also the of those to similar regulations to addition in Law, Language State Latvian The Language duties". employment Ac or service their perform to necessary is which level the at Estonian use and understand to able be shall bureaus their of employees the and translators th agencies and law public in persons legal of employees as well as authorities, government local of and agencies state of employees and "officials that states §23 infamous the Furthermore, Estonia". in media language Estonia us the in authorities language government Estonian the local and agencies state of state "officials and participation" majority state with organisations the to extend shall state in re The Estonian. administration is authorities public government local and of agencies language "The that states Act Language Estonian the of §10 example, For mployed persons, must use the state language if their activities relate to legitimate public interests (public (public interests public legitimate to relate activities their if language state the use must persons, mployed nisations and enterprises. and nisations Russian - language schools’ transition to partial Estoni partial schools’ to language transition

Estonian State 'Estonia.eu' Estonian Portal Information - agae col rmis nte sniie su. h ntok f Russian of network The issue. sensitive another remains schools language unifying

Russia TodayOnline Comparative Political StudiesPolitical Comparative

the schools system has system schools the titular 57

As a consequence, employees of the public sector are requiredare sector public the of employees consequence, a As

ive Assimilation or Strategic Nonassimilation? The Political Economy of of Economy Political The Nonassimilation? Strategic or Assimilation ive - agae pbi scnay col i bt cutis are countries both in schools secondary public language, we cmais fudtos salse b sae n non and state by established foundations companies, owned tate Language Law of the Republic of Latvia(1999) of the Republic Law of Languagetate ereof, members of legal persons in public law, notaries, bailiffs, sworn sworn bailiffs, law, notaries, public in persons legal of members ereof,

20 an

been voiced by education specialists in both both in specialists education by voiced been - (41(7), July (41(7), 2008) language instruction instruction language

quirement for public administration in Estonian Estonian in administration public for quirement - up by the language inspector. language the by up t of the Republic of Estonia (2011).Estonia of Republic the of t

58

–

What is happening and why?' and happening is What atives often point out, out, point often atives

jb after jobs r - profit profit 60 59 n e - - ,

CEU eTD Collection 63 62 61 b 28.7% to 30.3% from dropped population Russian Estonian the of share the Russians, Baltic the of case independentthe In new,homelands. their in stayed has majority the Federation, Russian the to moved then establishe newly the in living Russians ethnic million 25 around were there Union, Soviet the of fall the shifts. After various undergone has abroad", "compatriots the i.e. Russia, outside living Russians ethnic towards policy Russia’s to up and independences Baltic the of declaration the Since account. an be hardly can minorities Russophone the and majorities titular Baltic the between dynamics suggest, Jenne and Brubaker by theories As 3 2. projects andcomply by it. Russian communities. integrated be to needs community Russophone the that assumption out Russian nationa the into culture Russophone of elements include to difficult extremely been has it other", "the as Russia framing as constructed are identities national Latvian and Estonian both Since

1994) (Eds.) Payin E. and Sendich M. V. Shlapentokh, in Dimension', Political The Minorities: 'Russian Abdulatipov,R. Russian Estonia', in Schools 'The (7/8/2013), Strnad V. example, for See, Russian

l identity narrative of the two countries. Moreover, some commentators have pointed have commentators some Moreover, countries. two the of narrative identity l o ocue al teps o nrae h chso o Bli sceis tr with start societies Baltic of cohesion the increase to attempts all conclude, To increase the cohesion of society. m important an also is It market. labour the in successful be and ensure thatthey have opportunities will equal obtain to higher education, participate society, in encourage toeducation secondaryisfor instruction languageof a asEstonian transitioning to ofgoal The Russian theand Russian abro state "compatriots

The new Russian diaspora: Russian minorities in th in minorities Russian diaspora: Russian new The - language schools' [...] schools' language - speakers' difficultycoming withtheira new of minority. status toterms as

all students practise to statethe language different in linguistic situations, helping to Cultural Rights &Diplomacy Human Rights Cultural

- speakers are expected at accept the Baltic monoethnic nation monoethnic Baltic the accept at expected are speakers

etween 1989 and 1995; in Latvia the corresponding drop was was drop corresponding the Latvia in 1995; and 1989 etween 61

d republics. d 21 adequately

- soin eae The Debate: Estonian

Online e former Soviet republics Soviet former e ad" 63

assessed without taking Russia into into Russia taking without assessed

Although some of them have sincehave them of some Although

eans of integration that can that integration of eans into into

agae f ntuto for Instruction of Language

the Estonian/Latvian the the present moment, present the (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, Sharpe, M.E. (Armonk: - building building 62

the the CEU eTD Collection 70 69 68 67 66 65 64 States Russian and Russians ethnic of treatment adequate that, said Having id own Russia's was it Zinger, to According sporadic. highly were diaspora Russian the with while keeping identity. uptheir Russian rema to compatriots advocated has Moscow Russians, ethnic 1990s. early the since policy Russian ethn the protecting of responsible is government Russian the that notion The from table 4). to WesternRussia emigrate of instead to Europe prefer speakers Baltic the 1990s, the of half ta has first "exit" Russophone the during peaked Russia to repatriation of figures 32%. to 34% from

niy rss hc md i dfiut o omlt a oe osset optit policy. compatriot consistent more a formulate to difficult it made which crisis entity C. Ziegler, 'The Russian Diaspora in Central Asia: Russian Compatriots and Moscow's Foreign Policy' Policy' Foreign Moscow's p. 119(2006), Muiznieks and Compatriots Russian Asia: Central inDemokrati Diaspora Russian 'The Ziegler, C. p. 119(2006), Muiznieks 2012. January as of1 Estonia of StatisticstheDepartment by Estimate Affairs Council, Post in 'Migration Karachurina, L. in cited Data Ireland', to the in exit of S. Aptekar,'Contextsexample, for See, p. 22 1997) MigrationProjects, Forced Institute, Society Open

has constituted a key sore point in the Baltic the in point sore keya constituted has During Boris Yeltsin's time in the office in the 1990s, the Kremlin's efforts to engage to efforts Kremlin's the 1990s, the in office the in Yeltsin's Boris time During - speakers) who live abroad has been coded in the guidelines of the Russian foreign Russian the of guidelines the in coded been has abroad live who speakers) zatsiya zatsiya Ethnicities Ethnicities

66 67 Migration in 2000 in Russia. Migration

(14(1), 2006) p. p. 117 2006) (14(1), 64

(9(4), 2009) 507 p. 2009) (9(4), al 4 rsns h mgain rns rm 99 o 07 Wie the While 2007. to 1989 from trends migration the presents 4 Table soi ad ava Ctznhp Lnug ad ofit Prevention Conflict and Language Citizenship, Latvia: and Estonia

e a ifrn drcin n h 20s epcal yug Russian young especially 2000s: the in direction different a ken

68

ahr hn norgn (oetal csl) earain of repatriation costly) (potentially encouraging than Rather

– 23

–

2013 2013 - (Moscow: Spetskniga, 2013) 141 p. 2013) Spetskniga, (Moscow: Soviet Countries', in I. Ivanov (Ed.), Russian International International Russian (Ed.), Ivanov I. in Countries', Soviet 22 migration of Russian speakers from the Baltic countries countries Baltic the from speakers Russian of migration

- Russian bilateral rela bilateral Russian in in their countries of residence of countries their in in Ibid. 65

(the trend is also noticeable also is trend (the - paesi te Baltic the in speakers tions since 1991. since tions

ic Russians (and Russians ic Nw York: (New 70

In 69 -

CEU eTD Collection 76 75 74 73 72 71 generous been has states. independent newly the of residents all for granted be to agreed was recognition Russia'sBalticcitizenshipin 1991thatpart were an of ofindependence, important Federation Russian the to return to residents notablymost vote. right to the Bal the for recommendations own their issued indeed, had, organisations international these of Many 2000s. and 1990s the (NATO)throughout Organisation Treaty Atlantic North the and Union Co and Security for Organisation the (UN), Nations United the like organisations international of arenas the at army Russian the of those and elites political domestic both from pressures nationalist the from stemmed the argued, convincingly have Simonsen continu nationality Russian of inhabitants against apartheid If weapons. to access have Latvia in personnel military Russia's that forget not should "One Latvia: with negotiator chief Russia's Zotov, by explicitly stated Russian the of rights Baltic three the in stationed troop Soviet the of withdrawal the postpone to decided Yeltsin1992,

Muiznieks (2006), p. 119 Muiznieks(2006), The Baltic StatesBaltic The in World Politics (Eds.) Heurlin B. and Hansen B. in Opportunities', and Challenges States: Baltic the and Pikayev,'Russia A. 775 p. Simonsen, Zotov,S. daily Latvian in originallycited in Cited Simonsen, respectively. 000, and 23 000 were40 771 Estoniap. Simonsen, mid By States tic policy tic It should also be noted that Russia at no stage explicitly encouraged the Baltic Russian Russian Baltic the explicitlyencouraged stage no at Russia that noted be also It should communities Russophone Baltic of plight the over concern voice to continued Russia - 1992, Lithuania still had 43 000 Russian troops, while the corresponding figures for Latvia and and Latvia for figures corresponding the while troops, Russian 000 43 had still Lithuania 1992, 71

rather than solelyrather ofthe thepoorminorities. than treatment

eas h ws poonl cnend vr ueos nrneet o the of infringements numerous over concerned "profoundly was he because - -

makers to improve the position of the Russian minorities whose civic rights, civic whose minorities Russian the of position the improve to makers o

eain n uoe OC) te oni o Erp (o) te European the (CoE), Europe of Council the (OSCE), Europe in peration in granting citizenship for those Baltic Russophone residents that apply for for apply that residents Russophone Baltic those for citizenship granting in p. 775 p.

- speakers."

75 es, conflict is unavoidable." is conflict es,

(Surrey: Curzon Press, 1998) p. 143 1998) Press, Curzon (Surrey: 72

h tra o militar of threat The Diena toughness

(14/10/1992), cited in Muiznieks (2006), 120 p. in Muiznieks (2006), cited (14/10/1992), . In the agreements signed with Tallinn and Riga Tallinnand with signed agreements the In . 23

of Yeltsin's stance on the diaspora issue diaspora the on stanceYeltsin's of – ato t poet optit was compatriots protect to action y 6

73

However, as commentators like commentators as However, 74

76

Although Russia Although

CEU eTD Collection 82 81 80 79 78 77 the of monitoring close example for repression, and control of forms nationalising implicit face state's policies the of criticism open voicing activists and organisations Federation, n exists there While day. present the has best at idiots" "useful and worst the complicated significantly at spies Russian unpatriotic as activists society society gains. own civil its for allegedly activists, and politicians certain funded directly has Kremlin the that claim countries policy Latvian and Estonian alarmed has institutions Russian for support material accepted, been students. Russophone support these of groups target Baltic individual the in organisations compatriot and compatriots for support that Yeltsincompatriots was. abro ”near the in influence Russian enhance to means a as abroad Russians the of protection the use to possibility recognisedthe Putin pragmatist, a as Zieglerarguesthat abroad. compatriots aspirations ofBalticRussian 1990s. the of years turbulent the than process naturalisation the relax to authorities Baltic the pushing towards tilted heavily remain actions policy its it,

Ib 126 p. (2006), Muiznieks Ziegler,118 p. notwas inreferendumNarva 1993 the of example,the result For Ibid., Ibid.,

d. e lo ugss ht ui i proal mr itrse i te efr o the of welfare the in interested more personally is Putin that suggests also He ad”. id one million Baltic Russia Baltic million one ., ui' acn t p to ascent Putin's p. 127 p. 157 p. p .

144

81 –

–

hl te udn o culture of funding the While 7 or, even better, get rid of it it of rid get better, even or,

residency in 2000 marked a shift in Russia's policy towards the the towards policy Russia's in shift a marked 2000 in residency - 80 speakers.

successful

- The 2000s have thus been characterised by characterised been thus have 2000s The speakers was a task that Russia was not willing to take on in on take to willing not was Russia that task a was speakers 78

82 secessionist supported openly ever Russia has Neither 79 "oeg aet lgsain ie ht f h Russian the of that like legislation agent" "foreign o

The perception and perception The

representation of Russian of representation - ae plce hv be W2 eeas and veterans WW2 been have policies based - 24 paes avcc gop ad ot and groups advocacy speakers'

- - altogether retd usa NO hs generally has NGOs Russian oriented aes h scrt ofcas n both in officials security The makers. ” picked up picked

portrayal of the Russophone civil Russophone the of portrayal . 77 ” -

speakers' interests up until up interests speakers' h edt r to need The by Russia at the time at Russia by States increasing The . e political her esettle more esettle

material biggest CEU eTD Collection 86 85 84 83 Russian t saw elites political new the of Asection 1990s. early the of perspective security the from capacities even todeter ifthey Russia engaged military inregional co military sufficient create not could they size small from their to Due them aggression. Russian possible protect reliably would community security Western the to return irreversible Li and Latvia state. the of perception Baltic shaped enmity" and insecurity grievances, by dominated Russia of assertiveness the independence. Baltic to threat primary a as state Russian the of notion the is remains what republics, Baltic narrated being annexation Soviet the with Instead, post the in threat German a about thoughts any evaporated occupation Soviet East the in Russia and West the in Germany with place hard a and policy re they Baltic the era, Soviet Latvianor i againstEstonia military not engagedin operations has Russia Although security services Perceived Russian threat in the Baltic inthe Perceived Russianthreat States 4 2.

Pikayev,151 p. 106 p. Spruds, States (Eds.), in WorldHeurlin Po B. and Hansen B. in states', Baltic the of vulnerabilities and 'Potentials Haab, M. 103 Rodgers, I. H.

85

-

makers conceived their geographical location to be unluck be to location geographical their conceived makers - The existence of large Russophone migrant communities also became problematic problematic became also communities migrant Russophone large of existence The does notEast,"If fromthetakenenemy a the detour": ithas come From the very beginning of the restoration of the independence all three all independence the of restoration the of beginning very the From - e speakers as a potential fifth column that could sabotage the Baltic state and nation and state Baltic the sabotage could that column fifth potential a as speakers m er ged as independent states. While in the beginning of the 20th century Baltic Baltic century 20th the of beginning the in While states. independent as ged thuania thuania 84

Search for security: a study in Baltic diplomacy,Baltic in study 1920 a Searchsecurity: for

As highlighted by Spruds, "historical experiences, geopolitical proximity and proximity geopolitical experiences, "historical Spruds, by highlighted As and verbal harassment antiand verbal from litics

–

(Surrey: Curzon, 1998) Curzon, (Surrey: States

have lead a vigorous campaign to join NATO. For them, only such only them, ForNATO. join to campaign vigorous a lead have s tne cnrbtd o h frain f ecpin largely perceptions of formation the to contributed stances 's

ae en xrml ssiiu o Russia of suspicious extremely been have

25

- Russian nationalists. Russian

as forced occupation of the independent the of occupation forced as - 1934

(Hamden: Archon Books, 1975) p. 1975) (Hamden: Books, Archon ily positioned between rock between positioned ily - 83 operation.

, the fresh memory of memory fresh the , n activity ever since since ever activity n - Cold War era.War Cold 86

n the post the n –

The Baltic The Estonia, Russian Russian he - CEU eTD Collection 89 88 87 LatviaNATO joined Russia's objections. despite integration at aimed policies real demographic current the accept to organisations Baltic the with icy despite and moderate remained had compatriots the towards support autonomy 1993 the from North (apart the in materialise referendum to failed had minorities Russophone the among secessionism for support about fears the that evident became it NATOmembership, prevalentthis thinking among thenationalist the limiting as well as processes, naturalisation Russian encouraging at within from building

p. 30 p. (Ed.) Muiznieks N. in Idea', an FailuresChallenges of and Society? An of Audit Achievements, Latvian History Brief A Integration: 'Social Muiznieks, N. 97 p. K. Wolczuk and (Eds.) Batt J. in Accommodation?', to Autonomism From Republic: Estonian the within region 'Narva Smith, J. D. 107 p. Spruds,

oee, hn oh soi ad ava a ebre o a t a on embarked had Latvia and Estonia both when However,

States

, no military conflict had ensued. Facing pressure from the international the from pressure Facing ensued. had conflict military no , – Region, State and Identity in Central and East and Central in State Identity Region, and

and even drive their reincorporation to Russia. to reincorporation their drive even and - paes o ev Etna n Lti b instat by Latvia and Estonia leave to speakers - atr Etna tw o Narva). of town Estonian Eastern –

not expulsion not - minded elites of theearly 1990s. 26 –

distribution of the ethnic Russians. ethnic the of

ities, both countries began to implement to began countries both ities,

of voting eligibility demonstrated demonstrated eligibility voting of (Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2010 Press, Latvia of University(Riga: ern Europe ern 88

t h sa the At (London: Frank Cass, 2002) 2002) Cass, Frank (London: 87 89 rack towards EU and and EU towards rack

The measures aimed measures The In 2004 Estonia and Estonia 2004 In n eteey rigid extremely ing e ie Russia's time, me bilateral

o Itgae is Integrated How

relations relations ) CEU eTD Collection 95 94 93 92 91 90 ”have Russia. non as remain to incentives biggest the of one fact states. in However, Latvian and Estonian the of disrespect and/or laziness their to due naturalisation Russian some even and Latvians Russia. to travel to visa a need not do they security, national to related directly posts occupy or service civil the in work elections, parliamentary in vote citiz Russian are 1.8% Latvia). of population total the around people, 000 Russia). which of (7% country foreign non as remained have 6.5% citizenship, Estonian have 84.3% Estonia, In Latvia. and Estonia of citizens naturalised are today Latvia status. sub in divided be can that individuals of group Today's diverse a is community BalticRussophone 1 3.

‘ 'Citizenship'(5/5/2015) 'Citizenship and Language Policy in Latvia' (14/1/2015). (14/1/2015). Latvia' in Policy Language and 'Citizenship I. I. See, for example, V. Karelova (10/3/2015) Елена Глебова не видит дискриминации русских в Эстонии Эстонии в русских дискриминации видит не Глебова Елена (10/3/2015) V. Karelova example, for See, Social Science, 2014) p. p. 80 2014) Science, Social http://argumenti.ru/world/2015/03/391361 from Estonia]. in against discriminated being are Russians believe not does Glebova [Elena ( 'Citizenship' Dimensions International and Domestic Naturalisation S -

ee, for example. A. Aasland 'Russians and the Economy', in N. Muiznieks, Muiznieks, N. in Economy', the and 'Russians Aasland A. example. for ee, rus codn t ter iiesi sau, ee o itgain o socio or integration, of level status, citizenship their to according groups Supule, I. Bebrisa and E. Kļave E. and Bebrisa I. Supule, - 90 os, hvs rsdn piaiy n h cptl ra n ”have and area capital the in primarily residing ”haves” nots”, 95 R Diversity and fragmentation and Diversity of minorities Russophone the

ussian n em o ctznhp tts te aoiy f uspoe lvn i Etna and Estonia in living Russophones of majority the status, citizenship of terms In Estonia.eu ’ (18/2/2015). ’(18/2/2015). - C paes a as b dvdd mn socio among divided be also can speakers HAPTER 22%

Estonian State Information portal portal StateInformation Estonian )

R

of the total Russophone population remains as non as remains population Russophone total the of

USSIAN Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia of Republic the Affairsof Foreign Ministryof 3

– , Analysis of Integration of Latvia’s Non Latvia’s of Integration of Analysis ,

B - speakers believe that non that believe speakers - ETWEEN AROCK AND A SPEAKERSTODAYIN

(Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2006) LatviaPress, of University (Riga: 91 -

citizens, while 9.2% have opted f opted have 9.2% while citizens, In Latvia, only 62% are Latvian citizens, while 260 while citizens, Latvian are 62% only Latvia, In

27

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of L of ForeignRepublic of the MinistryAffairs of 'Estonia.eu'. 'Estonia.eu'. ens. ' 92 S - - economic status to ”haves” and and ”haves” to status economic

citizens do not want to undergo to want not do citizens

Data from Data February. 1 HARDPLACE Non SOCIETIES 93 -

citizens is visa is citizens - ay tncEtnas and Estonians ethnic Many Citizens - citizens are not eligible to eligible not are citizens

. Data from Data 2015. . January Latvian -

os i te Eastern the in nots” (Riga: Baltic Institute of Institute Baltic (Riga:

or citizenship of a of citizenship or

AN - : – citizens (12% of of (12% citizens

usa Relations: Russian

- online. -

free travel to travel free - economic

Retrieved Retrieved atvia

94 .

CEU eTD Collection 99 98 97 96 socio wit encounters Russian capital While Latgale. and Narva of regions peripheral the in reside who those and city capital the in live a also is There Baltictitular (figure counterparts differences the 5demonstrates Latvia). in their to compared sector public in work to likelyless and occupations, elementary and manual Russian such, as segregated not Estonians. and Latvians ethnic than market labour the in off worse also were they regulations citizenship unemployment by hit worse Russian period, transition the during hardship faced companies industrial large countries. both of regions Eastern the in mainly located enterprises, industrial Russian era, Soviet the During peripheries.

Assessment Assessment P Ibid. 55 p. Aasland, . aas 'nmlyet n te anns tutr i Latvia', in Structure Earnings the and 'Unemployment Hazans, M. utd n aln. ore Wrd Bank, World Source: Aasland. in Quoted aper -

economic position and much less contact with representatives with the dominant ethnic dominant the with representatives with contact less much and position economic

(Number 3504, February 2005) 16 p. February 2005) 3504, (Number While Aasland argues that the contemporary Estonian and Latvian labour markets are markets labour Latvian and Estonian contemporary the that argues AaslandWhile

(2006) p. p. 55 (2006)

iieso h iua ainlt,prpea Russian peripheral nationality, titular the of citizens h noticeable

- speakers have a higher socio higher a have speakers

centre

–

- - periphery division line between those Russian those between line division periphery ted ht s tl vsbe today. visible still is that trend a paes r sti are speakers

Latvia: Sharing High Growth Dividend. A Living Standards Standards Living A Dividend. Growth High Sharing Latvia: - 28 paes sd o e over be to used speakers

l oe iey o ok n low in work to likely more ll - economic status and constant everyday everyday constant and status economic World Bank Policy Research Research Policy Bank World 97 -

speakers have a lower lower a have speakers D - ersne i la in represented e o agae and language to ue 98

99

- - speakers were speakers - speakers who who speakers kle, non skilled, 96

hn the When Working

rge - CEU eTD Collection 106 105 104 103 102 101 100 integration social and political linguistic, of terms in clusters five into divided is community cohesion. Russian successful of that alw not demonstrated are proficiency language and have citizenship Latvian and Estonian 2000s the in conducted Studies integration. societal of patterns off toengage thewillingness minority's inconte prospects economic better Russian motivated like just addition, In beginning. very the from dynamic been Russian of prospects material and status the advanced time that at citizenship Estonian obtaining since Moreover, Russian. for status language state and legislation citizenship universal demanded liners" rights, citizen improved for bargaining for arena the as politics institutional chose “ Estoni political. regulate that policies state by "outsiders" and "insiders" between split the weak. been has lines ethnic among mobilisation subgroup, economic nationality; instead.Russia friends visiting often and in relatives integrationist" and "hard and integrationist"

Duvold & Berglund, p. 360 p. &Berglund, Duvold Ibid. l and claims 'Ethnic Sikk, A. and Berg E. example, for See, 13 p. al, et Lauristin G. Smith and A. Wilson, 'Rethinking Russia's Post Russia's 'Rethinking Wilson, A. and Smith G. See, for example for See, . uzik, . oevls n I Bra 'tnct ad oil oein n h post the in cohesion social and 'Ethnicity Birka, I. and Rozenvalds J. Muiznieks, N. Patterns of Prejudice of Patterns (2014) North Ukraineand Estonia (Eds.), al. n ae fr xml, mt ad isn itnus bten h emergence the between distinguish Wilson and Smith example, for case, an

Russian even However, -

speakers have essentially failed to generate a sense of belonging and social social and belonging of sense a generate to failed essentially have speakers 106 (Saarijärvi: Kikimora, 2004), p. 182 2004), Kikimora, (Saarijärvi:

eod Post Beyond The Estonian Integration Monitoring 2011 fo 2011 Monitoring Integration Estonian The integration - paes a as b dvdd no eea sub several into divided be also can speakers , Estonian Integration Monitoring Integration Estonian , - - East Estonia', Estonia', East

speakers to stay in the Baltic the in stay to speakers

- (47(3), 2013) p. p. 289 2013) (47(3), speakers, the imagined borders of the ethno the of borders imagined the speakers, - Soviet Transition: Micro Perspectives on Challenge and Survival in Russia and and Russia in Survival and Challenge on Perspectives Micro Transition: Soviet n ein wee Russian where regions in .

105 - line" Russophone elites in the early 1990s. While "integrationists" While 1990s. early the in elites Russophone line"

State policies focusing on one on focusing policies State

Europe - Asia Studies Studies Asia

- Sov

29 (2011) and and (2011) ntious activity.ntious

(49(5), July 1997) p. p. 851 July (49(5), 1997) iet Diaspora: The Potential for Potential The Diaspora: iet States - paes om cery eial socio definable clearly a form speakers ocal politics in Northeast Estonia', in R. Alapuroet R. in Estonia', Northeast in politics ocal , they have also to some extent tailed tailed extent some to also have they , Analysis of Ingration Ingration of Analysis und that the Estonian Russophone Estonian the that und - way linguistic integration of the of integration linguistic way 104 100

- -

groups according to their their to according groups linguistic community have have community linguistic

101 ays reliable indicators indicators reliable ays

One of the reasons is reasons the of One Mobilisation of Latvian Non Latvian of - Soviet Baltic states', states', Baltic Soviet 102

in Eastern Eastern in

"hard - In the In citizen 103 of of - -

CEU eTD Collection 109 108 107 Russian Latvian (i.e. Latvians identity Russian Baltic new a of emergence the for argued convincingly have scholars some Although integration. and civic of sense low and skills language Estonian weak with Estonia in residing citizens Russian elderly of largely up made finally,is (22%), E proficiency. Cluster language "relative the (28%), D Cluster belonging. of sense weak but skills linguistic strong with people represents (13%) C Cluster skills. language weak averageor despite Estonia belongingto of strongsense Clust integrated". "successfully wise and language both were who respondents includes (21%) A Cluster 2). figure (see

Ibid. M. Lauristin et al. and the Estonian Ministry of Culture, Culture, of Ministry Estonian the and al. et Lauristin M. e, o eape D Lii, Iett i Frain Te Russian The Formation: in 'Identity Laitin, D. example, for See, Diaspora', Diaspora', Emor,2011) TNS (Tallinn:

109 a eet td b Dvl ad egud eosrts ht 1 o minority of 61% that demonstrates Berglund and Duvold by study recent a , 107 European Journal of Sociology Sociology Journal of European y nnertd, nlds oty hs wt useiid iiesi ad weak and citizenship unspecified with those mostly includes unintegrated", ly

108

p. p. 9

- speakers) and 66% Russop 66% and speakers) er B (16%) is comprised of Russian of comprised is (16%) B er (36(2), 1995) and works by A.worksChes by and 1995) (36(2), 30

Summary of Es of Summary hone Estonians continue to identify to continue Estonians hone - paig ainlt i te Post the in Nationality speaking tonian Integration Monitoring 2011 2011 Monitoring Integration tonian kin and T. Vihalemm T. kinand - speakers who have a a have who speakers identity political

- Soviet Soviet - CEU eTD Collection 111 110 of the member a with than border Russian the to near town small a in living teacher school primary common in less lot a has capital the in based businessman young Russian the among fragmentation socio analysing studies and 2011 Monitoring Integration Estonian the Both 111 campaigns. integration the of success limited the demonstrates This 3). figure (see 1993 after identifi indicating levels the Estonia identities. (state) Baltic andLatvia in 1991, in residents all for automaticallygranted was citizenship whereLithuania, rejecting while Ukraine or Belarus Russia, with

Cited in K. Duvold and S. Berglund, 'Democracy Between Ethnos and Democracy: Territorial Identification Identification Territorial Democracy: and Ethnos Between 'Democracy Berglund, S. and Duvold K. in Cited 2014) p. Only p. 368. those 2014) States', Baltic the in Support Political and Cultures and Societies States', Baltic the in Support Political and Identification Territorial Democracy: New Baltic Barometer (2004), cited in K. Duvold and S. Berglund, 'Democracy Between Ethnos and and Ethnos Between 'Democracy Berglund, S. and Duvold K. in cited (2004), Barometer Baltic New - economic diversity of the Russophone minority demonstrate the high level of of level high the demonstrate minority Russophone the of diversity economic titular

ethnic groupethnic working companyand lifestyle. intheleading same a similar

(28(2)

who identify with the country are included in the figure. in the included are country with the identify who , May 2014) p. 356 , May2014)

- speaking communities of Latvia and Estonia. Estonia. A naturalised and Latvia of communities speaking cation with one's country of residence have remained low low remained have residence of country one's with cation East European Politics and Societies and Cultures Cultures and Societies and Politics European East

31

with a retired, non retired, a with

East European Politics and and Politics European East

h rgoa and/or regional the 110

(28(2), May (28(2), nie in Unlike -

citizen citizen

CEU eTD Collection 115 114 113 112 elites. Russophone mainly of consist Russophone from support their of most party derive other they because by is parties representatives "Russian" as dubbed generally are parties Centre why reason the Ba non as themselves project to aim They position. European) community Russophone Union Party, Centre and Latvia in Centre (Harmony parties Centre the electorate: Russophone the from socio that rather economic cleavage. ethnic, among divided (still) are politics party the that agree generally sub minority within views prominent most the asso and parties some of popularity Russophone the while diversity, the of members the unites that community. Estonia/Latvia in live they that fact the self their language, Russian the only is it argue, convincingly sub various represe of the presence to the repercussions and cohesion group of lack The 2 3.

ltic votes and to be seen as a legitimate players by the majority political elites. However, elites. political majority the by players legitimate a as seen be to and votes ltic Russophone MPs in the Riigikogu. One of them is Jevgeni Ossinovski, Minister of Education and Science, Science, and of Russian the Education only number of Minister a Ossinovski, Jevgeni has is them party of Democratic One Riigikogu. Social the in The MPs Party. Russophone Democratic Social the into merged Estonia of Party Uni Russian Latvian the like Today'sminority party "radical" a lacks Estonia worsesocio section, previous the in Europe', in socio status a also is there Latvia's that said be must 'Confirming it However, Auers D. example, for See, States: self national the G. in (Ed.) Citizenship' Smith and Relations Ethnic G.'Statehood, Mole, R. Smith, and A. Aasland The „moderate” and „radical” claims will be discussed in detail in the following section 3.3. section following in the in detail discussed will be claims „radical” and „moderate” The

Keskerakond, Both Estonia and Estonia Both Issues of legitimacy: Who represents the oflegitimacy:Issues Who represents fit te description the s 112 - economic status which would logically also affect preferences. political their wouldalso logically which status economic

The plethora of "Russian" parties and civil society organisations reflects this reflects organisations society civil and parties "Russian" of plethora The - sp eaker in the current government. in eaker the 113

in Estonia) and "Russian" parties (at the moment, only Latvian Russian Russian Latvian only moment, the (at parties "Russian" and Estonia) in

- Russian determination of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania and Lithuania Latvia Estonia, of determination 115 Latvia feature two kinds of parties that draw most of their support support their of most draw that parties of kinds two feature Latvia

while advocating for a pro a advocatingfor while 114 -

speakers residing in the Eastern, less Eastern, the in residing speakers ntativeness . h to ete ate vie oeae lis f the of claims moderate voice parties Centre two The ).

o eape i 21 al 6 amn dpte were deputies Harmony 26 all 2010 in example, For

of the minority. As Smith, Aasland and Mole Mole and Aasland Smith, As minority. the of - economic dimension to the ethnic cleavage. As discussed discussed As cleavage. ethnic the to dimension economic 32

- groups. Yet at national level commentators commentators level national at Yet groups. - Russian and anti and Russian

ciations over others gives cues about about cues gives others over ciations Russian - developed regions occupy on average a a average on occupy regions developed - (London: Macm tnc ate t atat ethnic attract to parties ethnic - oiy ewr online Network Policy identif - on since 2012, when the Russian whenRussian the 2012, since on speakers? - ication as Russians and and Russians as ication significant has groups - austerity (but not antinot (but austerity illan, 1994) 202 p. 1994) illan,

oes and voters (29/5/2014). The Baltic The

- - CEU eTD Collection 118 117 116 supported bymajority. ethnic the parties the among partners coalition finding in succeeded not have they because government Harmony elections, general of rounds two Harmony(see Centre figure4). instead Russopho the with marginalised increasingly become non and citizens both us, support who those of rights the for fight"We with continues and country" our of people Russian the of interests the promotes Union Russian "Latvian statement: following the with (LRU) Union Russian Latvian the moment: the at left party such one only is there 1991, in countries both in emerged parties "Russian" explicitly Although community. Russian the represent claim who countries both in activists Russophone contentious Russian

Latvian Russian Union, Union, Russian Latvian http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2014/10/latvias with(6/10/2014) Harmony' deal 'Howto example,for See, Society? An o Audit (Ed.) Muiznieks in Representation', and Participation Kehris,'Citizenship, I. , However, despite gaining a large share of votes in both Estonia and Latvia in t in Latvia and Estonia both in votes of share large a gaining despite However, some also are there representatives, party Centre moderate the to addition In - previously called For Human Rights in Latv in Rights Human For called previously speakers. 116 f Failures Achievements, Challenges and

- Party Programme for the elections of the 12th Saema 12th the of elections the for Programme Party citizens".

117 118

h LU ocs aia cam. oee, h pry has party the However, claims. radical voices LRU The

33 and and

Keskerakond The Economist Online. Online. Economist The (Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2010) LatviaPress, of (Riga:University ia. The Union's party programme starts starts programme party Union's The ia. e oes uprig h Usakov the supporting voters ne - election

ae en et u o the of out left been have

How Integrated Is Latvian Latvian Is Integrated How

o e oe eiiae to legitimate more be to Retrieved Retrieved from

he last last he p. 113 p. s

’

CEU eTD Collection 122 (26/7/2013), itsplans' Lenta.ruabout told Parliament' citizens' 121 120 119 council. city Riga the for elections subsequent sign citizens non the represent to supposed 2013, July In community. Russophone Latvian the of representable as considered be cannot they day, this until active remained have organisations the Although reform. education planned Protectionthe for Headquarters 2012, in party Linderman's Vladimir include 119

Ibid Voting the native language!" "For for Russian Yazik", Rodnoy "Za of abbreviation isthe ZaRYa Latvia of Commission Electoral Central

atures for the Russian language referendum, only 774 people voted for Linderman in the the in Linderman for voted people 774 only referendum, language Russian the for atures .

Non n Latvia, In –

was organised both online and in major towns. A. Lysenkov, 'Yes, it was provocation provocation was 'Yes,it A. Lysenkov, towns. major in and online both organised was

participated by voting by participated - Citize Non s Congress ns'

ii scey organi society civil

- iies Congress Citizens'

- ZaRYa 121 raie eetos of elections organised citize

of Russian Schools Russian of . Moreover,. while . Data retrieved from retrieved Data http://web.cvk.lv . ns of Latvia, but only 15 000 000 15 only but Latvia, of ns 120 ain ta die aia cam smlr o h LRU the to similar claims radical drive that sations , salse i 20 ad re and 2009 in established ht a be atv sne mid since active been has that 34

122

There have been no signs of wide of signs no been have There

Lenta.ru Online Lenta.ru ZaRYa that emerged in 2004 as a response to the to response a as 2004 emergedin that

Non - was able to collect collect to able was iies Parliament, Citizens'

– - raie a a political a as organised rud % f l non all of 5% around

- 1990s and the the and 1990s nearly –

Latvian 'Non Latvian hc was which

200 000 200 - spread - - CEU eTD Collection 124 123 regarding "frustration expressed who interviewee one quotes she example, For accordingly. Russ of status difficult the on reflected respondents Latvia, in MPs Russophone among conducted study Russian of representation adequate the to Facebook. on them "liking" members 64 only has the itself and Alliance websites official no have it with affiliated organisations the of majority Latvia: in organisations "radical" similar than Estonia the of representative less even be to seems the However,Alliance Estonian of question the on community.Russophone For example,stated it that position radical a voice to began Alliance the annexation, Estonia of Alliance Russian called organisation umbrella re policies state Russian of supportive were who Those not. did who "pro and justified) was annexation the that believed who those speaking "pro between split was community Russophone Estonian the however, 2014, in annexation Crimean active. the still After are sphere public in Russian of use the and civi However, exist. to ceased then since have 1990s, the in emerged that minority Russophone well less been traditionally have speakers Latvia mobilisationRussophone in after 2012referendum. the

Facebook, data from data 30/5/2015 Facebook, Estonia. of community Russian the of Declaration l society organisations that promote Russian language education, rights of the non the of rights education, language Russian promote that organisationssociety l The large share of non of share large The where massthe discrimination of the Russian population been has continuing for 23 years". theof residents of the [Crimean] peninsula, just like they not could do so thein Baltic Unfortunately EU the and USA guarantee cannot the protection basicof rights and freedoms parties Estonia, In 124

ophone representatives and the the and representatives ophone

and civil society organisations promoting the rights of the Russian the of rights the promoting organisations society civil and

- citi zens and citizens of other countries continues to be an issue an be to continues countries other of citizens and zens - - speakers in the political arena. In Kehris' recent recent Kehris' In arena. political the in speakers organised. All parties explicitly representing the the representing explicitly parties All organised. Available onlin Available 35

inability e at http://baltija.eu/news/read/36972 at e

.

o ersn te community the represent to I n addition to endorsing the the endorsing to addition n

Russophone community of of community Russophone - - Ru organised under the the under organised - uoen" those Europeans", ssians" (generally ssians" - States citizens

123 ,

-

CEU eTD Collection 126 125 majority. the from opposition of outcry cla an "Moderate" trigger to bound and controversial bold, are They 1990s. early the since ongoing been have that processes building state and nation "moderate" or "radical" as classified be can they whether indicate as well as this claims prominent most In the list I state. section "nationalising" a of policies restrictive of number a from suffer to continue Russi the Two, Chapter in demonstrated As 3 3. fragmentation thathas thesis my of chapter last Effectively,the arguein shall I as whole. a as communities the of representative be to perceived be would that élites political or leaders legitimate lack countries both in communities Russophone the Moreover, parties. in exist still grievances Russian although that shows parties Centre two the for support growing voi parties Russian Latvian to represent the Russian co and collaboration of lack anti all at decisions any influence to able being not and opposition constant in being of situation the

, including decisions that are primarily of concern to minorities themselves" and perceived perceived and themselves" minorities to concern of primarily are that decisions including , Ibid., Ibid., 113 Kehris,p. -

usa topeeo h ava oiia arena. political Latvian the of atmosphere Russian While there is no specific data available about the voting patterns of Estonian and and Estonian of patterns voting the about available data specific no is there While p. 114 p. The claims thatremain:claims The Today's ofthe Russophone aspirations communities - speakers' minds, they are not being translated into support for explicitly for support into translated being not are they minds, speakers' cing radical ethnic claims to the periphery of the political arena coupled with the with coupled arena political the of periphery the to claims ethnic radical cing

m, n h ohr ad d nt usin h mnehi nto ad state and nation monoethnic the question not do hand, other the on ims, - speakers, the marginalisation (and, in the Estonian case, disappearance) of of disappearance) case, Estonian the in (and, marginalisation the speakers,

contributed - . In the Baltic context, "radical" claims challenge the monoethnic monoethnic the challenge claims "radical" context, Baltic the In . speakingcommunity. - operation of Russophone representatives inf representatives Russophone of operation

to the lack ofsuccessful claim 126 36 an

- speaking population of Estonia and Latvia Latvia and Estonia of population speaking 125 , it is this high level of disunity and and disunity of levelhigh this is it ,

The respondents also felt that the that felt also respondents The - making inthe Baltic luenced their ability ability their luenced "Russian" States .

CEU eTD Collection Russian the for language struggle the hand, other the on Estonia, In on. further detail in discussed be will which referendum, 2012 the in community Russophone the of largeshare a mobilised majori the where regions in least at Estonian/Latvian, with par a on language Russian the for status official an guarantee further concessions. there conditionality, NATO and EU to due 1990s the throughout relaxed significantly were Latvia and Estonia both of laws naturalisation the While nationals. not do laws the moment the non for process naturalisation simplified a example, for legislation, current the of relaxation for asking include hand, other the on issue, citizenship the on claims Moderate Ru Russian Estonian and Latvian Union as such parties, and organisations Russophone of of country number their A of residence). citizenship the for citizenship Russian their swap to want who those the regarding fo claim demand to radicalis issue citizenship most The citizenship. from barred are people of categories loyalty. oath and of includes examinations an culture language, historyand In addition, certain c gain to order in naturalisationundergo to 1991 to 1940 Latvia of intheperiod Estonia and territoryof the whomigrated legislationrequires those that the curre of nature monoethnic the of legitimacy the recognising while minorities Russophone projects building nt set of policies. nt setof As for the arena of language of arena the for As Russian foremost, and First n em o Russian of terms In has been voiced by Russians. autonomycultural has thosefightingethnic voiced for been of per se per

, but seek to find a compromise between improving the status of the of status the improving between compromise a find to seek but , ssian Alliance have voiced such demands, albeit with little success. little with albeit demands, such voiced have Alliance ssian - ty of population speaks Russian. In the Latvian case, this claim claim this case, Latvian the In Russian. speaks population of ty agae dcto, hr i a ubr f cie Gs n both in NGOs active of number a is there education, language differentiate uoai iiesi o l eann non remaining all for citizenship automatic r - related legislation, the most prominent radical claim is to is claim radical prominent most the legislation, related - paes a vie lis eadn te citizenship the regarding claims voice can speakers

between long term resident non resident term long between 37

itizenship. The naturalisation process naturalisation The itizenship. are no signs of making making of signs no are - citizens and foreign and citizens - citizens, f citizens, - iies (and citizens

or at at or CEU eTD Collection 130 129 128 127 of discourse protec the in operations military recent its of both masked has Russia that fact The As KarlisLatvian Neretnieks, a NATO'sof strength the question in Tallinnto elites famousbegan political Riga and 5. Article develo Donbass. the fightingin separatistsof result a As re intervention influence. of sphere legitimate perceived its in behaviour aggressive soo would Russia that assume to right been had they that proved 2008 post the sovereignty.Baltic state the Estonian Indeed, and Latvian of challenger likely most the as perceived be to continued is Russia era, 2004 Baltic the meet NATOAlthough to perceived generally was 4 3. to endure the either to wish activists moderate more while education, language state to transition the undo quotas 60:40 t implemented Estonia and Latvia both 1990s, the in institutes education higher 1991. inpublic tertiary stateWhile discontinued language was alreadyeducation inRussian in Russian provide Bo continue education. to government the push to struggle which countries

K. Neretnieks, quoted in Braw, quoted Neretnieks, K. 36 p. Braw, E. Provocations', Kremlin's The Baltics: in the 'Bully p. Spruds, minoritylanguages. in delivered still be could while40% organisedthe language state be to had in tuition of the60% laws, to According

ting ethnic Russian minorities has raised further fears in the Baltic Baltic the in fears further raised has minorities Russian ethnic ting treaty. do you need proveto thatthey connected are Russia?to That is weaknessthe of the NATO Where is the red line? When th Support for restrictive state policies state Support for after 25 restrictive years - enlargement era as expected. as era enlargement

101 127 130 status quo status th countries introduced policy plans to manage gradual transition into tuition in tuition into transition gradual manage to plans policy introduced countries th

- in secondary schools. The most radical Russophone activists wish to halt and halt to wish activists Russophone radical most The schools. secondary in mre i 21 atr usas neain f rma n spot for support and Crimea of annexation Russia's after 2014 in emerged

or prolong

- Swedishadvisor, military words putthese byasking: fears in

the transition period s the ere are a hundred green men Narva? in When there one?is And 128

For the leaders of Baltic Baltic of leaders the For - Russian relations have not been "normalised" in in "normalised" been not have relations Russian 38

World Affairs pment of the new ambiguous warfare, ambiguouswarfare, new the of pment ignific States ant (March/April 2015), 34 p. 2015), (March/April States ly. ' security needs in the post the in needs security '

129 ner or later engage in engage later or ner , the Georgian war of war Georgian the ,

The fear of Russian of fear The States he infamous he

- ht their that language

- CEU eTD Collection 131 generallyperceptions, thelatter with perc significant a is There Russian threat. a of possibility the to agreeing somewhat or agreeing respondents of figure total c below chart the In "Russia independence". statement the with disagreed or agreed they extent similar,whata to respondents evaluateaskedslightly has to but differentquestion: state" Russian "the "Refugees", republics", by posed threat the evaluate to asked were country? this in security and peace to threat a are following the of any think Rose's Richard 2000, Until Reliable independence might threatened"expansionist behaviour". by be contemporary Russia's

Sources: R. Rose, New Baltic Barometer II (Glasgow: Centre for the Study of Public Policy, 1995), III (1997 III 1995), Policy, Public of Study the for Centre (Glasgow: II Barometer Baltic New Rose, R. Sources: Dynamics Since Latvia’s Accession to the EU and NATO and EU the Accessionto Latvia’s Since Dynamics (2002 SKDS by conducted Polls (2000); IV and

data regarding Latvian threat perceptions of Russia are available from 1994 from areavailable Russia of perceptionsthreat Latvian regardingdata 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 0%

1994 1995

1997 et cetera et 2000

2002 Barometer Baltic

2003 discrep . From 2002 on, the Latvian survey research company SKDS SKDS company research surveyLatvian the on, 2002 From .

2004 5) (figure Year

2005 ancy

2006 lessthreatening.eiving Russia

–

2007 threat Russophone and Latvian ethnic between 2014) quoted in N. Muiznieks, Muiznieks, N. in quoted 2014)

I have combined these two studies by creating a a creating by studies two these combined have I 39

2008 you "Do question the asked regularly surveys

2009 (Riga: University of Latvia Press, 2011) p. 20 2011) LatviaPress, of University (Riga: 2010

2011 Latvia’s to threat a as seen be an 2012 2013 2014 “ , Latvian

131 Other former Soviet Soviet former Other

speakers Russian-Estonian Ethnic Estonians Latvian Russian-speakers Ethnic Latvians

- Russian Relations: Relations: Russian

”

Respondents

onwards.

) CEU eTD Collection 133 Blog Toom's 132 tha changes such no literally been have there Baltic the In structure. bargaining the in openings signal alliances elite and alignments – the in veiled attack military even or intervention Baltic the in people EU, the and NATO by provided speakers Russian of loyalty of level the to attention local in surge a been also has There channels. TV incr Russian and state Russian co the hamper to attempts spawned has realisation This minorities. in that elites political Latvian and Estonian ethnic the among doubt is There important. hugelyminority, is aggressive the constructed, minorityBaltic relations inthe conflict Russia. with non of 8% and Estonians ethnic of % 39 which Yanaa Toom,MEP Estonian the by organised poll 2014 a was data SKDS's and Rose's to comparable was that found I data only The problematic. increasingly becomes data applicable accessing however, onwards, 2000 the From Rose). from data survey same very (from 2000 until available equally is threat Russian perceived the about data Estonia, For

and thatRussian

For example opinion polls, integration reports, public statements from politicians, etc. frompoliticians, statements public reports, integration polls, example opinion For thatpeop say MEP anby Estonian 'Surveyorganised eased supervision over pro over supervision eased codn t Tro' mdl n oiia opruiy tutr, hfs n political in shifts structure, opportunity political on model Tarrow's to According majority of dynamics the regarding significant threat Russian high perceived is How vis . Retrieved from www.yanatoom.ee. from Retrieved . - à the light of recent events, Russia presents a natural ally of the Russophone Russophone the of ally natural a presents Russia events, recent of light the - vis - their states of residence. of states their speakers would act as a " speakersas would a act 132

- behaviour speakers in both countries. Such "safety measures" included included measures" "safety Such countries. both in speakers

- States Russian civil society activists and temporary bans on Russian on bans temporary and activists society civil Russian ? Du ?

of Russia, 'the Other', which is also the patron of the of patron the also is which Other', 'the Russia, of

e to the way how Latvian and Estonian identitieswayLatvian are e and how tothe Estonian 133 Trojan t could be useful for the Russophone community.Russophone the for useful be could t 40 le

- Despite the hard and soft and hard the Despite Estonians believe in the possibility of an open an possibilityof the in believe Estonians

skeptical rhetoric

h orse",goingalongwith it.

States about a war with Russia' (25/2/2015), (25/2/2015), warwithRussia' a about

about protecting compatriots abroad compatriots protecting about

worry about potential Russian Russian potential about worry - operation between the the between operation

euiy guarantees security

ccording to to ccording States Yana Yana the - - , CEU eTD Collection 137 136 135 policies ethnic than rather economic on vision verydifferent 134 5 3. quo. status t sustain to wish and legislation minority current the behind united being, time the for least majority the suicide, political considered is issue salient this represen minority of status the improving about concern their voiced also have programmes integration the of success concerns". and anxieties, grievances, aspirations, under to order in minority a to out reach to [...] effort sustained and meaningful, genuine, a "making by minds and hearts minority's the over winning i.e. "properly", minority Russian the with engaging for support their voiced the minority, Russophone the consequently, and, Russia of suspicious deeply are services security While integration. societal of scholars some as well as employees, service security certain are elites majority the policies. nationalist current more some the anything, change to reason no is legis there naturalisation that planned, as proceed should education language titular to transition current the that minority: Russophone the to related questions in disagree might Latvians partner. coalition a find to and Centre Harmony success, electoral their Despite

See, for example, works by Muiznieks, one of Latvia'sleading ofone Muiznieks, byworks example,for See, 3 p. inKivirähk, 'Foreword', Jermalavicius, T. Russian parties Central the that shutting noted be it should However,

Perhaps surprisingly, among potential allies of the Russian the of allies potential among surprisingly, Perhaps When the lobby actor is notenough: actorWhenlobby theFraming is Opportunityin Estonia and 135 - language schools' [...] schools' language

lation, and that Russian should not be granted official language status. If status. language official granted be not should Russian that and lation,

loyalty 134 tatives.

em o sca ad cnmc usin, hy r uie on united are they questions, economic and social of terms

lhuhpris upre rmrl b tncEtnas and Estonians ethnic by primarily supported parties Although -

minded MPs have called for the introduction of stricter stricter of introduction the for called have MPs minded 137 of which they have continued have they which of

However, since signalling readiness for concessions in concessions for readiness signalling since However,

stand it, sympathize with it, and address its needs, needs, its address and it, with sympathize it, stand 41

136 out of the government can also stem from their stemtheir from also can government outthe of Keskerakond

sociologists hs woe ak s vlaig the evaluating is task whose Those - backed political elites are, at at are, elites political backed

to question, they have also have they question, to have so far never managed never far so have - paig ciit w activists speaking ithin he CEU eTD Collection (11/4/2014) 138 the proposing is Linderman streets", the "take to people encouraging of Instead most the of one Linderman, outspoken radicals, in wrote Vladimir April 2015: activists. Russophone radical most the by even potential succes Russian the for 2012 in referendum language Russian Latvian m mass of waves recent centre the with align to likely more be to proved has grievances, its despite which, public general the from them alienated has position Russian those and officials Centre Harmony and Party Centre the of representatives Unlike deficit. credibility serious a from suffer claimthe chancesuccesstheir through about communities of convince to failed have activists Russophone radical more the why reasons various are There

V. Linderman, 'If tomorrow was war. If Latvia wants war. If Russia needs victory.' needs war.If Russia wants war.If Latvia was 'If tomorrow Linderman, V. separate problems, one but and the sam not are abroad living people Russian of rights and interests national its that clear: thing one better future.in I believe wantto really will. it Thanks Ukrainian the to crisis, Russia madehas compat Russian of work the whether know not do I them. of few only but course, of kamikazes, be always be will success.There of chance no is there Russia, from support no is there if conclusion: justifiable a drawn have people experience Donbassian and is them.Moscow with Fromexperience the gained in Balticthe struggle from and Crime the that understand clearly not do they if fight and up step to going are Russia with sympathise B Neither be to perceived not still is Finally, Russia Latvia

s of contentious claims of - li Rsin eiet nr hs Ltin, ihain ad soin who Estonians and Lithuanians Latvians, those nor residents Russian altic paes mjrt o te omnt poal fes esmsi about pessimistic feels probably community the of majority speakers,

n ava te hv be uwlig o co to unwilling been have they Latvia, in obilisation obilisation - paes h collab who speakers

– - making.

the Estonian Bronze Soldier crisis in 2007 and the the and 2007 in crisis Soldier Bronze Estonian the

e. - et ig oiia eie. hrl, ic te two the since Thirdly, elites. political wing left 138 42

–

orate with the state. Secondly, their radical radical their Secondly, state. the with orate completely did not lead to any significant concessions significant any to lead not did

- reliable as an external supporter, external an as reliable making - . First and foremost, they First they andforemost, . prt bt wt state with both operate Politikus Online Online Politikus riot agencies will be will agencies riot establishment

in Estonia Estonia in an

CEU eTD Collection for theminority. States organisa international since model: bargaining ethnic the with non of

- to grant greater rights for Russian for rights greater grant to profit organisations with Russian support. His logic of reasoning is, however, in lines in however, is, reasoning of logic His support. Russian with organisations profit

- speakers, Russia is the only the is Russia speakers, 43

tions no longer push the Baltic the push longer no tions plausible

external ally external CEU eTD Collection Studies Baltic 140 139 establishment of thelaw the since times three rejected been has minority Russian the for made application an while minorities a well as life, government establish to "long with but religion or language culture, la The 1993. in Minorities National international To 1 4. consider alternative thefailures. to explanations ofsuccessof unityethn in eventually theminority within tolack lead lack the how demonstrate and community Russophone the mobilise to attempts four analyse shall I chapter this In activists. and NGOs parties, Russophone radical for support reduced witne also have years ten last the However, 2000s. wide the throughout and reforms language,education Russian of status the 2012 the on crisis, Referendum soldier Latvian Bronze 2007 the onwards), (2006 Estonia in autonomy cultural post the in mobilisation of instances major day. The present the until days early the from status their improve to order in bargaining and minori Russophone The

M. Lagerspetz, Cultural Autonomy of National Minor AutonomyofNational Cultural Lagerspetz, M. (1993) Republic Estonian ofthe Act Autonomy Cultural Minorities National

hl mn apcs f h lw tl ne t b caiid o clua atnme to autonomies cultural for clarified be to need still law the of aspects many While Attempts to establish cultural Attemptsinto cultural autonomy establish Estonia – (45(4), 2014) p.458 2014) (45(4),

the Igrian Finns and the Swedes Swedes the and Finns Igrian the C sca wlae o ntoa mnrte. aaoial, ny w national two only Paradoxically, minorities. national of welfare, social s YCLES CONTENTIOUSOF observers’

- ties in both countries have engaged in contentious collective activity collective contentious in engaged have countries both in ties C – affiliated bodies with the task of organising cultural and educational and cultural organising of task the with bodies affiliated

in 1998, 2006 and most recentlyin 1998,2006andmost in2009. HAPTER ' delight, Estonia passed the Law on Cultural Autonomy for for Autonomy Cultural on Law the passed Estonia delight, '

4 eals soin iies ih dsic ethnicity, distinct a with citizens Estonian enables w

–

D ISABLEDMINORITIES - - 2004 era include the following: attempts to ga to attempts following: the include era 2004

term, sound and permanent ties with Estonia" with ties permanent and sound term, COLLECTIVE ACTION AF 44 ities in Estonia: The Erosion of a Promise, ofa Erosion The Estonia: itiesin

–

have been established cultural minorities, minorities, cultural established been have

? 140 ic bargaining.I also shall

- TER ped eitne to resistance spread 2004 Journal of of Journal

ssed ssed 139 in in

CEU eTD Collection 145 144 143 142 141 authorities accepted the inthe future. application the of out left be would Estonia in residing citizens Russian or Estonian future. near the in Russians for established be will autonomy cultural interest community's the in is NCA establishing not or whether to question the on (also fragmentation community's Russian the with combined Russians, community.The passiveness political and social Russians' policy specifi of representation the further [...]politically orderto population in the Russian uniting of meansa as explicitlycouchedwas community. Russian orga society civil given a of to representativeness difficult the be manifest would it Secondly, culture. and language Estonian the of status dominant thecharacter minority, Russian of andthe size thespecial NCA Russian challenge the could to First reasons: various forcommunity Russian bythe utilised be to autonomy cultural policy the that agree generally Commentators Estonia. struggl has community Russian the that coincidence a considered be hardly can it accordingly, function

Aidarov & Drechsler, p. 55 p. &Drechsler, Aidarov 41 p. Smith(2013), For example, Smith and Hide and Smith example, For a proal vr setcl f uh ocuin beca conclusions such of sceptical very personally am I Routledge, 2012) p. 112 p. 2012) Routledge, Hiden, J. & Smith Russian of reluctance the have behind factor that policies state of result the as seen be also might manyRussian alienated passiveness" political and "social Russians' necessary. whenever claims group invalidate wayto persuasive and common a organsis in Issues Europe', Eastern and Central Na Contemporary in Community Russian Political of and Minorities Halduskultuur National for Autonomy Cultural See, for example, Lagerspetz; A. Aidarov and W. Drechsler, 'The Law & Economics of the Estonian Law on on Law Estonian the of Economics & Law 'The Drechsler, W. and Aidarov A. Lagerspetz; example, for See, - aes ol nt tolerate. not could makers citizens Europe Europe ed to establish non establish to ed – y conclude that given the state's unwillingness to grant cultural autonomy for for autonomy cultural grant to unwillingness state's the given that conclude y

(12(1), 2013). However, it should should it However, 2013). (12(1), non either are who Russians autonomy,those cultural for apply can diitaie Culture Administrative Ethnic Diversity and the Nation State: National cul National State: Nation the and Diversity Ethnic

141

-

speakers due to their exclusive ethnic character. ethnic theirexclusive to due speakers Thirdly, Smith points out that at least in the first application, "NCA application, first the in least at that out points Smith Thirdly,

n point out that "a reluctance to put at risk what is already in place is a major major a is place in already is what risk at put to reluctance "a that out point n

- territorial cultural autonomy (NCA) in the newly independent independent newly the in (NCA) autonomy cultural territorial 142 c Russian minority interests within state structures", which structures", state within interestsminority Russian c

- iao ad rcse hv as pitd u Estonian out pointed also have Drechsler and Aidarov minority leaders to take up the option of cultural autonomy". D. D. autonomy". cultural of option the up take to leaders minority

1() 21) ad . mt, 'Non Smith, D. and 2011); (12(1), 143

and the lack of representative leadership of the of leadership representative of lack the and 45 be

noted that questioning the representativeness of such such of representativeness the questioning that noted use they have primordial connotations; however, however, connotations; primordial have they use - makers never truly wanted the law on on law the wanted truly never makers tional Cultural Autonomy in Estonia', Estonia', in Autonomy Cultural tional Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Minority and Ethnopolitics on Journal tural autonomy revisited revisited autonomy tural

nisation of the the of nisation 144 NCA structures even if the the if even structures NCA ) , there is little chance t chance little is there , 145 - Territorial Autonomy and and Autonomy Territorial

Moreover, since only Moreover,since

heterogeneous (Oxfordshire: (Oxfordshire: ly, to due - citizens citizens hat

CEU eTD Collection 148 147 146 Soviet the to annexed illegally was Estonia which to according narrative, history Estonian Russian of mobilisation spontaneous Russian the by Moscow in Embassy leaders, fierce which was opposition, from alsowithjudgemental echoedinRussia statements political a nearby the in property vandalising and them at bottles empty throwing and "Fascists" and "shame" shouting by the responded by they leave police, to forced were protesters the When it. protect to statue the around gathered suburbs. city's the in it relocate and city the of centre the in location its from Soldier', 'Bronze the as to World referred War,Second generally the of victims the for monument Soviet the remove to Estonia, In 2 4. to achieve. strive even should NCAthey whether that of something question is the on aresplit citizenship sub the even Meanwhile, attempts. such opposing in united thus Russian are and state, Estonian the with bond those their demonstrated and citizenship obtained (even) for necessary not is NCA that understanding Belarusians and Ukrainians groups, ethnic Slav Eastern other for NCA establish to attempts Russians, tha policy the that clear thus is it structures state within representation

Ibid. p. 139 2009) in Estonia', Maintenance and Identity Soldier: Threat Bronze 'The Ehala, M. Ibid. spot Russian support n

, 143 , p. ept te xsig ea faeok f C, ie a facilitating at aimed NCA, of framework legal existing the Despite Estonian Bronze Soldier Bronze Estonian of2007 Crisis 147 cyber 146

an , have failed in a similar manner. Ethnic Estonians are united in in united are Estonians Ethnic manner. similar a in failed have , Just before the planned relocation, a large c large a relocation, planned the before Just

inter - attacks - societal relations became tense in 2007, when Tallinn2007, in councilcity tense became relations societal

-

paes o sals non establish to speakers n soin ests n a week a and websites Estonian on

- paes a i fc a otr aant h current the against outcry an fact in was speakers pro - salsmn yuh organisation youth establishment 46 rea. The government had not expected such a such expected not had government The rea.

- ertra clua atnm. n diin to addition In autonomy. cultural territorial

- group of ethnic Russia ethnic of group rowd of mostly young Russophones young mostly of rowd - og lcae f h Estonian the of blockade long Journal of BalticStudies of Journal - makers discourage rather discourage makers - speakers who have have who speakers ns with Estonian with ns Nashi minority

. decided 148

(40(1), (40(1),

their their The

CEU eTD Collection 152 151 150 149 go Estonian the injustice, of act humiliating a as relocation the perceived which community Russophone the pacify to attempt an as Perhaps decision. the on down back to reason enough good a not was plans relocation the to opposition relative winning the of campaign electoral the of part important an was monument time. the at undecided 18% another with statue, the moving of idea the to opposed were Estonians ethnic of 29% that found 2006 May in pol Opinion Estonians. ethnic by unanimously supported not was Soldier Bronze riots. ac state, the penalties reinforce to legislation passed government Estonian the however,Later, acquitted. later were responsible were that activists Russophone post the in made achievement education were at notvoiced the protests. langua citizenship, to related claims historical: strictly remained crisis Soldier Bronze Russian other from them alienated and protests becaus perhaps Russian mobilise to capacity the Balticthe in continuing"memory Indeed,war" the h Army Red the that and Union

theBr ' V.Mölder, M. and Pettai 'Estonia', 342 & p. Berglund, Duvold exam for See, Eestlased ei poolda pronkssoduri omaalgatuslikku korvaldamist' ['Estonians do not support the relocation of therelocation not support do ['Estonians korvaldamist' omaalgatuslikku pronkssoduri poolda ei Eestlased 151 For the purpose of this analysis it is important to note that the decision to relocate the the relocate to decision the that note to important is it analysis this of purpose the For the undercut dramatically riots the that argue convincingly Berglund and Duvold

onze Soldier], Soldier], onze ,

and refine and in f rmtn aant h sae and state the against promoting of tion ple, works by M. Mälksoo M. byworks ple, e aggressive e Postimees d

the laws relating to the distribution of national secrets, action against action secrets, national of distribution the to relating laws the

behaviour

(23/5/2006)

Nations in in TransitNations ad not represented liberators, but occupants and colonisers. colonisers. and occupants but liberators, represented not ad - - 92 r t fse go inter good foster to era 1992 speakers.

and looting discredited those who were involved in the the in involved were who those discredited looting and

for organising protests faced criminal charges, but charges, criminal faced protests organising for 149 47

(Freedom House: 2010) p. 204 p. House:2010) (Freedom oee, h poet id u wti weeks, within out died protest the However,

- paes Mroe, h rpror o the of repertoire the Moreover, speakers. States 152

cin encouraging action oee, ic te eoain f the of relocation the since However,

shows that non that shows vernment and members of the the of members and vernment - tnc relations. ethnic -

material claims haveclaims material

r parti or

eom party, Reform ls conducted ls cipating 150

ge or or ge Four

in CEU eTD Collection 155 154 153 pronounced the1990s. since 2000s. the in Russian those "have and Russian "haves"class lower the of grievances Russophone between gap growing the (i.e. ethno the of fragmentation The growth. Russian all not chapter, previous the in discussed been has however,as fact, If possible. exit" "European made has membership EU addition, In b an manifestation impromptu ofdisgruntlement the state's about official narrative. historical mark not did Night were 11% remaining undecided. the and it against were 73% relocation, of idea the supported 16% Bro the whether on doubt Russian Soldier. of fraction a only Although Bronze the of issue the on held community Russophone the position united the by explained in fell who those for WW2. wreath a laying monument, the to homage paid officials Estonian time first the was This 8. May on location new the at ceremony a organised corps diplomatic argaining

See, for example, Muiznieks (2010), p. 36 (2010), example,Muiznieks for See, [...]' poolda ei 'Eestlased 143 p. Ehola, 153 t a be age ta Etna Russian Estonian that argued been has It s offer to officials the of willingness The

154 can be explained explained be can 155

-

oee, h lc o mblsto atr h rlcto mat ht h Bronze the that meant relocation the after mobilisation of lack the However, speakers who have found themselves in an improving socio improving an in themselves found have who speakers

The in The

the beginning of long beginningof the

-

group cohesion and, as a result, in result, a as and,cohesion group nze Soldier should remain untouched already in 2006: while only only while 2006: in already untouched remain should Soldier nze

by the impressive economic growth and rising living standards. standards. living rising and growth economic impressive the by

-

speakers are no longer shared longer no are speakers - - lasting contentious ethnic bargaining, but rather just just ratherbargaining, but ethnic contentious lasting igitc omnt aog socio among community linguistic - speakers took part in the protests, there was little little was there protests, the in part took speakers 48

uch a (minor) concession could, in fact, be be fact, in could, concession (minor) a uch - - paes reluctance speakers’ paeshv gie fr gained have speakers - group solidarity has become far less becomefar has groupsolidarity – - and the that means nots")

o nae n ethnic in engage to

thus not voiced not thus - economic position position economic om the economic the om - cnmc lines economic –

by CEU eTD Collection 160 159 158 157 political ethnic strengthened only 156 fact in referendum the equally, them treat to need Russian the of presence the highlight to simply was referendum Ac statehood". Latvian against war of "declaration a referendum the further,calling even went Latvia" in statehood of foundation Dombr Valdis suggested the to opposition their voiced parties Russian stop to referendum Na Freedom/Latvian right Latvian referendum. of disapproval his show to minute last the in it for support his voicing only petition, the against originally was Usakovs, Party,Nils Centre Harmony the of leader the example For motion. the behind united not was community yes most Although change, the for voting 24.9% and against voting 74.8% with rejected was referendum The petition. a organise to enough was which 2011, autumn state second Russian making Russian about language. held was referendum constitutional a when February 2012, in Latvia in contested openly was language Russian the of status dominant The 3 4.

cording to Lublin's analysis, while referendum advocates argued the point of the the of point the argued advocates referendum while analysis, Lublin's to cording Dzintars, quoted in quoted Dzintars, 386 referendum', Latvialanguage 2012 'The Lublin, D. in quoted Dombrovskis, Hanley, M. 'The Voice People', ofthe from varied turnout where elections, o from (in2011)Data website the (inSaeima 59.45% 63.12% 2010). to recent the of any in than figure higher considerably was This elig thebeen had non legislation, Latvia's to Due

The 2012 Russian Russian 2012 The 158 - wing national conservative political alliance, All for Latvia! alliance, for political conservativeAll national wing

ovskis from the Unity party stated that "the Latvian language is at the the at is language Latvian "the that stated party Unity the from ovskis ehp usrrsnl, h rfrnu sakd a sparked referendum the unsurprisingly, Perhaps ible to vote and had voted yes, the final results would not have changed considerably. changed not have would yes,final results the voted had and vote to ible

- Lublin, p. 386 p. Lublin, - agae ciit cletd vr 8 0 187 over collected activists language oe cm rm the from came votes

inl needne oeet wih ntae a aall rv fr a for drive parallel a initiated which Movement, Independence tional language in referendum Latvia - -

citizens were not allowed to vote. However, analysts calculated that even if if even that calculated analysts However, vote. to allowed not were citizens language tuition altogether. Also more moderate "majority" "majority" moderate more Also altogether. tuition language

The Baltic Baltic The Times Online 159 . The All for Latvia! for All The . Latvian nationalists that were campaigning against the the against campaigning were that nationalists Latvian easternmost 49

amendments

(15/2/2012) provin f the Central Electoral Commission of Latvia of Commission fElectoral the Central – TB/LNNK leader, Raivis Dzintars Raivis leader, TB/LNNK 156 0 intrs o a eiin in petition a for signatures 00 ces of Latgale, the Russophone Russophone the Latgale, of ces Fr xml, rm Minister Prime example, For .

ih trot f 70. of turnout a with

Electoral Studies Electoral - speaking minority and the the and minority speaking response – For Fatherland and Fatherland For

rm h ethnic the from

(32(2), 2013) p. 2013) (32(2), 9%

157 160

.

CEU eTD Collection 164 163 162 formation 161 the allies, potential of availability the threat, or opportunity of attribution the include window opportunity the of opening signal that mechanisms Tarrow,Following 4 4. lobby does actor significantl not the and opposition its in united equally is majority the if concessions win necessarily not does it united, become to manages minority the if even that demonstrates referendum language referendums. future initiate to easy less it make to legislation decision The defeated. was referendum the after plummeted claims the r supporting the of in organisers fully engage not did Russia motion, the behind formally was Moscow Although beginning. very the from opposition its in unyielding was majority Latvian ethnic initiall not claim radical a on moment last very the until motion the behind united not was minority Russophone The issue. salient more a over autonomy, albeit cultural community place taken not t well such Estonia, in arena society civil or political in activism greater into translate failed referendum the after even language Russian divisions.

Ibid. for. voted 96% for.only and 2.3% against voted 387 Lublin,97.7% p. Latvians, ethnic Among ethnicity,votes by non of estimates of the 4% to only According Hanley 387 Lublin,p.

h cs wt te usa lnug ref language Russian the with case The an asset? an Rus

161 .

sian Although campaign activists originally said they would continue to fight for the for fight to continue would they said originally activists campaign Although

, possibly because of the weaker organisational structures of the Russophone the of structures organisational weaker the of because possibly , - speakers Russia theCrisis:Is ongoingUkrainian and or threat a -

eferendum. As a result, popular support for organisations voicing radical radical voicing organisations for support popular result, a As eferendum. coordinated attempts to challenge the status of the Russian language have have language Russian the of status the challenge to attempts coordinated

spotd y h Hroy at elites. party Harmony the by supported y yprocess. intervene inthe 163 50 ; primarily because the referendum was based was referendum the because primarily ;

erendum is similar to that of the Estonian Estonian the of that to similar is erendum 162 , the support for the referendum did not did referendum the for support the , - Latvians voted against the referendum while while referendum the against voted Latvians

164

The case of the 2012 Russia 2012 the of case The - makers also changed the changed also makers e post he Simultaneously - 02 r. In era. 2012

, the the ,

of n CEU eTD Collection 167 166 165 LatvianUkrainian on crisis domestic issues by thefollowing: noting reflecte 2013 March in Centre, Harmony Latvian the of their voicing instead loyalty assertiveness, Russia's of advantage take to refuse and minimal be opportunity political current the perceive they behaviour, recent their by community. Russophone trustworthy ofrepresentatives and the be legitimate themost Judging Th of Crimea: Russian before communityeven forRussia's the the support community Russophone Estonian Russian the of that like community fragmented a of attribute key a is frames different of emergence Russia's see others leverage bargaining their improving asset, an as abroad compatriots have some While represen to claiming actors major all by undertaken task a been has speakers contention. of episodes entire of framing the and polity) the within and margins the on (both coalitions

Korhonen, p. 199 p. Korhonen, in 2000 wereconducted thefor study interviews The e Centre party MPs who voice moderate claims are perceived by the majority politicians to to politicians majority the by perceived are claims moderate voice who MPs party Centre e Russian Tarrow,163 p.

in thein cultural sphere, but due to its owndifficulties it nothas been able do to so. engagedshowedanother,interviewees,Russia help,morebenevolentshouldespecially face:it Russ the attitudes the towards in echoed be would turn in who Estonians, among response negative a evoke welcomed.anticipatedRussia'sinvolvement intervieweeswouldnot Somestatements that was i because minority the of status the on impact negative a had had Russia that believed interviewees] [the them of Some to the Latvian and Estonian states and the EU. For example, Nils Usakovs, the leader the Usakovs, Nils example, For EU. the and states Estonian and Latvian the to - speakers. A study by Korhonen conducted among the most prominent activists of the of activists prominent most the among conducted Korhonen speakers. Aby study - speaking political landscape". Korhonen, p. 198 p. Korhonen, landscape". political speaking

165

xliig ht h ogig kana cii mas o Bli Russian Baltic for means crisis Ukrainian ongoing the what Explaining

interpreted

behaviour ia - paig ioiy [.] oee, o oe oiial ad culturally and politically some to However, [...] minority. speaking

Russia's increased interest in promoting the rights of its its of rights the promoting in interest increased Russia's hd en ue n idfeet o h Etna cnet its context; Estonian the to indifferent and rude been had t s fco udriig their undermining factor a as 166

on ta te act the that found 51 – 2002 and included "most of the leading figures in the figuresthe in leading "most the of included 2002and

vss a mxd elns regarding feelings mixed had ivists – d on the possible effects of the the of effects possible the on d Georgianannexation and the war bargaining capacity. The The capacity. bargaining

vis

for claim for - à - t the community.the t vis

167 h majority, the -

making to to making - CEU eTD Collection 169 168 socio certain background. of set a individuals represent they asse rather community, Russophone the represent they argue to reluctant are MPs party community. Centre However, Russian the of representatives "genuine" more be to seen Russian of repres majority vast the by recognised for government been central not the has push concessions to Alliance the by promoted frame the claims, radical of AllianceHowever Estonia. Russian organisation, umbrella new the with affiliated are that organisations target their among suppor resonate to fail claims their that means This elections. parliamentary anti their voice to channel 2 the in seat one of that and Donetsk of Lugansk. Republic People's of aspirations separatist the and annexation and Usakovs to (compared claims radical more for channel a as position its buttressed Union Russian Latvian opposite. pro more annexation, the condemned Harmony While

Official website of the website of Official in must stay Crimea The 'Usakovs: in quoted Usakovs, N. entatives voicing moderate claims that enjoy wide enjoy that claims moderate voicing entatives ters, the Russian minorityters, theRussian n soi, usas setvns ws ikd p y ny hs cvl society civil those only by up picked was assertiveness Russia's Estonia, In things, we share our country friends, neighbours and colleagues, they must explain that while we disagree about many clear that Russia is linked to the events Ukraine.in Ethnic Russians must calm down their Latvia there were instances foreignof countries marching in The majority Latvian of society is worried. It understandable is given that thein history of usas growing Russia's 169

oee,te aldt ean h upr fteeetrt,ol guaranteeing only electorate, the of support the regain to failed they However, 014 elections for the European Parliament (which they also actively use as a a as use actively also they (which Parliament European the for elections 014 , since only a handful of Russian of handful a only since ,

Latvian Russian Union Russian Latvian assertiveness

amn) y pny xrsig t spot o te peninsula's the for support its expressing openly by Harmony)

- salsmn aed) n giig o et i te 2014 the in seats no gaining and agenda) establishment – –

at least those who haveatright least those the vote. to

Latvia.

in the international arena and its demonstrated demonstrated its and arena international the in Nobody wants the Ukrainian scenario to repeat here. 52

- Ukraine', Ukraine', speakers support the organisationsvoicing the support speakers - economic values rather than ethnic ethnic than rather values economic - usa ognstos i te exact the did organisations Russian - spread support of the electorate are are electorate the of support spread Delfi News Online News Delfi

with with their armies. It is absolutely

- (12/3/2014)

paes Instead, speakers. tn that rting

168

CEU eTD Collection (27/2/2012), Nothing!' Estonia? in Russians for done Putin has Vladimir What 'Estonian residents: Russians". worseEstonian for for situation " had that Putin believed while% 26 "nothing", the% choseanswer which to 64 in Estonia?" Russians for done Putin has Vladimir Russian 170 throug filtered when potency lobbyactora of perceivedthe support In essence, unsuccessful. be to likely is claims radical on based activity contentious place, in policies restrictive current ma unified a with met are and divided remain they as long as that contestation of cycles recent from learned have Latvia and Estonia of communities Russian interpre been not thus has abroad compatriots up back to willingness

In fact, an informal opinion poll conducted in Estonia in 2012 suggests that a significant share of Estonian ofEstonian share significant suggests that a in 2012 in Estonia conducted poll opinion Infact,an informal - speakers do not believe Russia to have any influ any have to Russia not believe do speakers - paes s nrae brann leverage bargaining increased as speakers strengthened

Postimees Online. Online. Postimees

Russians' authority" while only 2,3 % stated that he had "mad had he that % stated 2,3 while only authority" Russians' te rs o mnrt sub minority of prism the h Accessed 30/5/2015. Accessed 53 ence in their lives. The respondents were asked "What were"What asked respondents inThe theirlives. ence

170 Ised h famne Russophone fragmented the Instead .

oiy eemnd o ep the keep to determined jority – in this case,Russia this in - rus interpretations. groups' ted by the most Baltic Baltic most the by ted e thee –

loses itsloses CEU eTD Collection of emergence the to contributed indirectly thus has issue compatriot the in assertiveness translated has which centre given has sovereignty Baltic to threat Russian high perceived The membership. NATO and EU populati Baltic ethnic the made have double Russian the against Latvians and Estonians ethnic beli representatives "moderate" the bargaining position, their improving asset an as force) of use by (even abroad compatriots its protecting in interest Russian see claims "radical" voice who those While state. Russian the of role the is leaders of in Russian of minority the within unity of lack the to contributed have the into integration of patterns trajector varying as well as societies Latvian and Different Estonian majority. the of resistance united by met is it Russi the as fragmented inherently Latvia Estonia, claim ofcommunities and as is minority the If representatives. claim of significantly effectiveness can the minority the influence and majority the both within cohesion group that argued its of rights the supporting in interest apparent Russia's and quo ha chapters post the in minorities Russophone sizeable countries' the by Latvia claim ethnic unsuccessful of puzzle the solve to out set thesis This

have been sporadic and unsuccessfuland have sporadic been - group solidarity, forclaim ethnic crucial - n o te ao ise ta dvds pnos mn vros sub various among opinions divides that issues major the of One edged sword. Indeed, Russia's intervention in ethnic disputes in Georgia and Ukraine and Georgia in disputes ethnic in intervention Russia's Indeed, sword. edged e eosrtd te uspoe omnt' atmt t calne the challenge to attempts community's Russophone the demonstrated, ve - right and right and right

into a consolidated support for the existing restrictive policies. Russia's policies. restrictive existing the for support consolidated a into - wing parties the incentive to play the "ethnic card" at elections at card" "ethnic the play to incentive the parties wing ons extremely anxious despite the security guarantees of of guarantees security the despite anxious extremely ons C - making and the repertoires chosen by minority minority by chosen repertoires the and making

ONCLUSION despite the the despite - making becomes increasingly difficult,making becomes especially if - 54 making.

persistence -

paig ioiis tu atn a a as acting thus minorities, speaking

eve Russia's assertiveness can turn the the turn can assertiveness Russia's eve ies of socio of ies ” compatriots abroad compatriots

of restrictive policy measuresof - speakers and the waning waning the and speakers - - - making in Estonia and and Estonia in making economic development economic 2004 era. As the four four the As era. 2004 - groups ” . an

It has been been has It - and their their and speaking speaking

status status CEU eTD Collection accuracy the model, of difficultquestion thatis understanding value toassess stage. and atthis thepotential For changes ofsuccess differently. it for opting non of form the in accommodation than rather Radicalisation, bargaining. ethnic of picture the blurs further which threat a and asset an both as perceived be can actor lobby external addition, In motion. given a behind unite to managed it if even limited remain can success making m the if Moreover, behaviour. bargaining impeding issue serious a becomes fragmentation group, the of leaders legitimate define to mechanism no exists there since Moreover, other. each with common fact in can example) for patterns, voting distinct their to (due actors unitary as seem that minorities demonstrates, minority Russophone Baltic the of analysis close the However, voice. single a with authorities central unifor as conceptualised are minorities often Too politics. engage to motivation campaigns innew targeting treatment unequal dropped. has marginalised parties Russian explicitly have only not situations: such in peers "moderate" more their by defeated ones the been have claims radical voicing claim via success of chances the about frames competing interpret of plurality a generates communities Russophone the of heterogeneity the Russophoneminorities essential is stability for peace and Baltic inthe control increase even or quo status the maintaining that believe that majorities "united" - action, is a big leap to the unknown. This is why minority members think twice before before twice think members minority why is This unknown. the to leap big a is action, How minority and mobilisation ethnic of field the to implications theoretical has thesis The inherent the exist, activity bargaining contentious of cases between nuances Although generalizable –

seily f hy r peetd ismlr conflic dissimilar, presented are they if especially inority is unable to identify allies within the majority elites, their claim their elites, majority the within allies identify to unable is inority

one should look ataaround should varietyone cases the ethnicof mobilisation of

is themodelofand group cohesionethnic bargaining? This a is

consist of various sub various of consist 55

- groups whose members have little in little have members whose groups m actors that are able to challenge to able are that actors m - aig ioiy representatives Minority making. n h pltcl rn, but arena, political the in ting frames that portray portray that frames ting States .

tos and ations

over -

CEU eTD Collection havetheoreticallimitations generated.empirical and the Baltic Imeant my that have tolimit whichfrom had has todata outside accessible discussion been Moreover,the framework ofthisthesis. Latvia primary and of thelack data Estonia has from world. Time have made a in andapplication limitations broad scope impossible of themodel States . Further research focusFurthergaps onfilling that could these inthe. field 56

CEU eTD Collection in Maintenance and IdentityThreat Soldier: Bronze The (2009) M. Ehala, at online Available omaalgatuslikk pronkssoduri poolda ei 'Eestlased Estonia'. of community Russian D the of 'Declaration is Con version language English official The (1992). Estonia of Republic the of Constitution (2010). M. Commercio, LawCitizenship theLatvia Republic of of (1996). R. Brubaker, Assimila Competitive (2008) S. Bloom, Aasland, and theEconomy.(2006). Russians A. (Ed.).In N.Muiznieks loc and claims Ethnic (2004). A Sikk, and E. Berg, Europe' in status Latvia's Confirming 29). May (2014, D. Auers, Baltic the from speakers Russian of migration the in exit of Contexts (2009). S. Aptekar, Braw, E. (2015, March/April). Bully in the Baltics: The Kremlin's Provocations', Provocations', Kremlin's The Baltics: the in Bully March/April). (2015, E. Braw, on Law Estonian the of Economics & Law The (2011). W. Drechsler, and A. Aidarov, I Dimension. Political The Minorities: Russian (1994). R. Abdulatipov, vl, . Brln, . 21) Dmcay ewe Eho ad eo: Territorial Demos: and Ethnos between Democracy (2014). S. Berglund, & K. uvold, ttto o te eulc f ava 19) Te fiil nls lnug vrin is version language English official The (1998). Latvia of Republic the of stitution

the Relocation of the Bronze Soldier] (2006, May 23). May (2006, Soldier] Bronze the of Relocation the Societies andCultures, 28 States. Baltic the in Support Political and Identification http://baltija.eu/news/read/36972 accessible onlineat www.saeima.lv/en/legislation/constitution accessible onlineat www.president.ee/en/republic Press Transfo New Europe. Affairs Latvia.Economy School Choice in of Kikimora Estonia and Russia in Survival and Challenge on Perspectives Lonkila.I.Alapuro,LiikanenM. and (Eds.). http://www.policy Latvias from Ireland.countries to Baltic Studies, 40 www.postimees.ee/270506/esileht/siseuudised/ 202804.php Relations:International Dimensions. Domestic and Autonomy inEstonia. fo Autonomy Cultural former Soviet republics (Eds.). Payin E. and Sendich

- rmative Power of Informal Networks. Informal of Power rmative status

Cambridge: CambridgeCambridge: University Press - in Nationa - Europe (1), 139 Russian Minority Politics in Post in Politics Minority Russian Ethnicities, 9 Ethnicities, Halduskultuur Halduskultuur im ermd Ntoho ad h ntoa qeto i the in question national the and Nationhood Reframed: lism (37

Ntoa Mnrte ad f usa Ntoa Cultural National Russian of and Minorities National r – (2), 316 158 – - network.net/pno_detail.aspx?ID=4665&title=Confirming 44).

B h nw usa dapr: usa mnrte i the in minorities Russian diaspora: Russian new The IBLIOGRAPHY

Armonk: M.E.Sharpe (4), 507 –

347 (1998) in r taei Nnsiiain Te Political The Nonassimilation? Strategic or tion – Comparative Political Studies, Political Comparative 41 57

Administrative Culture,

–

526 kradms' Etnas o o Support not do [Estonians korvaldamist' u Beyond Post

Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania of University Philadelphia:

al politics in Northeast Estonia. In R. R. In Estonia. Northeast in politics al

- of - Riga:Latvia Press University of Soviet Latvia and Kyrgystan: The Kyrgystan: and Latvia Soviet - estonia/the

Postimees. -

at uoen oiis and Politics European East oit rniin Micro Transition: Soviet

Policy Network Policy

12(1), 43 Latvian - (165 constitution/ n V. Shlapentokh, M.V. n Shlapentokh,

Estonia. Available online at Availableonline – 187) – (7), 947 Russian – 61 . . Retrieved . Saarijärvi: Saarijärvi: Journal of Journal

–

World 970

- CEU eTD Collection 1). December (2011, speakers. Russian on tough gets Estonia inquisition: Language Language ofEstonia (2011)Act Republic ofthe Union Russian Latvian Russian The Formation: in Identity (1995). D. Laitin, E The Estonia: Culturalin (2014) Minorities National Lagerspetz,M. Autonomyof Russian the of Position the in Dimensions International (2004). A. Korhonen, (2014). J. Kivirähk, ( M. Kirch, G.Kelley, J. (2004). (Ed.). Muiznieks In Representation. and Participation Citizenship, (2010). I. Kehris, р дискриминации видит не Глебова Елена 10). March (2015, V. Karelova, Post in Migration (2013). L. Karachurina, (2007). K. E. Jenne, to 'How Latvia. in Structure Earnings the and Unemployment (2005). M. Hazans, Hanley,(2012, February 15). M. The B. VoicePeople. ofthe and Hansen B. In states'. Baltic the of vulnerabilities and Potentials (1998). M. Haab, 'Estonia.eu'. portal Information State Estonian Nothing!' Estonia? in Russians for done Putin Vladimir has What residents: 'Estonian Cities. American in Behaviour Elster, (1989). J. Protest of Conditions The March). (1973, P. Eisinger, Diaspora. Promise. and Russia in Survival and Challenge Estonia on Perspectives Micro Transition: Soviet A R. In Estonia. in Minority Defense OpinionSurveys. Estonia, UkraineMichigan.Uzbekistan',University and of Identity. Princeton University Press Challenges. and Riga:Latvia University ofPress Failures Achievements, of Audit An Society? Latvian Is Integrated Estonia]. in against discriminated being are Russians believe not does Glebova [Elena Эстонии Spetskniga Council, Affairs International Cornell University P http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2014/10/latvias Research Working Paper, Heurlin (Eds.). Baltic The about 752538/zhiteli 27), February (2012, American Science Political Review,

el ih amn? (04 Otbr 6) October (2014, Harmony?' with deal 1996). - estonia/society/citizenship.html

(188 Paper presented at a workshop titled 'Identity Formation and Social Issues in Issues Social and Formation 'Identity titled workshop a at presented Paper Journal ofBaltic Studies, 45 AN Nuts andNuts Social Sciences. for Bolts European Sociology, of Journal

oil rbes n soi ad omto o Nw tnc n National and Ethnic New of Formation and Estonia in Problems Social - – Integrating online. Ethnic Politics in Europe: the power of norms and incentives. and norms of power Europe:the in Politics Ethnic 207) - jestonii tnc agiig Te aao o Mnrt Empowerment. Minority of Paradox The Bargaining: Ethnic . The party's i website . Saarijärvi: Kikimora Saarijärvi: ress Accessible at http://argumenti.ru/world/2015/03/391361 - chto

otme Online. Postimees Estonia’sRussian Number 3504

Tallinn:International CentreDefense for and Security States in World Politics (1

- putin lapuro, I. Liikanen and M. Lonkila. (Eds.). (Eds.). Lonkila. M. and Liikanen I. lapuro, irto i Rsi. 2000 Russia. in Migration

- sdelal 67, 11 s accessible at www.pctvl.lv - (4), 1

Soviet Countries. In I. Ivanov (Ed.), Russian Russian (Ed.), Ivanov I. In Countries. Soviet 58

-

dlja Citizenship. Citizenship. – 36(2), 281 - – 28 Speaking Population: Findings of National of Findings Population: Speaking 19 - Cambridge: Cambrid mestnyh eree fo http://rus.postimees.ee/ from Retrieved

-

h Eooit Online. Economist The speaking Nationality in the Post the in Nationality speaking The Baltic Times. – – 23). Surrey: Curzon - 316 russkih cesbe t http://estonia.eu/ at Accessible

–

2013 - da -

(125 nich geUniversity Press World Bank Policy World Bank

- election – ego 148) cesbe at Accessible Beyond Post Beyond

. rosion of a a of rosion Princeton: -

скх в усских

Moscow: Moscow: Speaking

- Ithaca: Russia Russia

Soviet Soviet

How

- CEU eTD Collection and J. D. Smith to Autonomism From Republic: Estonian the within region Narva (2002). J. D. Smith, G. S. Simonsen, (2001). CompatriotGames: ExplainingLinkage theDiaspora in Russian (2000)Rose, R. NewBaltic BarometerIV. Centre Glasgow: for theStudy Policy Public of (1997)Rose, R. NewBaltic BarometerIII. Centre Glasgow: for theStudy Policy Public of (1995)Rose, R. NewBaltic BarometerII. Centre Glasgow: for theStudy Pub of (1975). I. H. Rodgers, B. In Opportunities. and Challenges States: Baltic the and Russia (1998). A. A. Pikayev, Pettai, V. and Mölder, (2010). Estonia. M. (1997). Institute. Society Open Norgaard, O. (1996). National Cultural Minorities Autonomy Estonian Republic (1993) ofthe Act post the in cohesion social and Ethnicity (2013). I. Birka, and J. Rozenvalds, N.; Muiznieks, Muizn N. In Latvia. in "Compatriots" Towards Policy Foreign Russian (2006). N. Muiznieks, non The (2005). M. H. Morris, (2015). Latvia of Republic the of Affairs Foreign of Ministry Lysenkov, 26). July (2013, A. Yes,provocationwas it Lublin, D.(2013). Latvia The 2012 referendum. language needs Russia If war. wants Latvia If war. was tomorrow If 11) April V.(2014, Linderman, e M. Lauristin, ieks, N. (2011). N. ieks, Military Withdrawal the Baltic States. from 31). January (2013, 'Estonia.eu'. why? and happening ArchonBooks PressCurzon (Ed Heurlin B. and Hansen Prevention. BalticSoviet states. EU andNATO. (119 (Ed.). Muiznieks www.mfa.gov.lv/en/policy/society their region :new Europe at of lat online history sensitive some and Latvia of policy language and Lenta.ru about plans. its victory. 2011.Integration Monitoring Today. Central andEasternEuropeCentral (Eds.). Wolczuk K. and Batt J. In Accommodation?. - agae col’ rniin o ata Estonian partial to transition schools’ language - via/citizenship latvia – 130) Retrieved http://rt.com/news/estonia from Politikus Online. Online. Politikus - a. n te soin iity f utr (2011). Culture of Ministry Estonian the and al. t

and ie, . (2012). J. Hiden, . Riga: University of Latvia UniversityRiga: of Press New New York: Forced Migration Projects

-

some The BalticStatesThe After Independence.

Search for security: a study in Baltic diplomacy,1920 Baltic in study a security: for Search Riga:Latvia University of Press Latvian - policy Latvian - sensitive Patterns - - - Russian Relations: Dynamics Since Latvia’s Accession to the to Latvia’sAccession Since Dynamics Relations: Russian citizens of the EU. In D. J. Smith (Ed.). Smith J. D. In EU. the of citizens Lenta.ru onl Lenta.ru in - Retrieved from www.r

or old? Russian Relations: Domestic and International Dimensions Dimensions International and Domestic Relations: Russian soi ad ava Ctznhp Languag Citizenship, Latvia: and Estonia - latvia/basic s.) - tnc iest ad h Nto Sae Ntoa cultural National State: Nation the and Diversity Ethnic

(89 history of Prejudice, 47 Tallinn: TNS Emor The Baltic States in World Politics in States Baltic The – 110).London:Frank Cass

(251 Nations in in Nations Transit. - ine related 59 – - facts 274). Rodopi. Amsterdam:

- Europe - issues (3), 288 (3), about –

egnum.ru/news/polit/1913882.html Latvian'Non - Estonian State Information Portal Portal Information State Estonian

russian

Electoral Studies, 32 - - citizenship Asia Stud - ElgarCheltenham: E. agae in language – Freedom House 308 ein Sae n Iett in Identity and State Region, - ai fcs bu citizenship about facts Basic language

- - related issues. issues. related integration/citizenship ies, 53 - citizens' Parliament' told told Parliament'citizens' - and Summary of Estonian Estonian of Summary The Baltic Statesand Baltic The struction -

- ban (133 language (3), 771

- - ad Conflict and e 1934. (2), 385 635/ – lic Policy 169) Russia's

– – Accessible

-

791 policy Hamden: . ht is What – Surrey: Surrey: 7

-

- in - - CEU eTD Collection and Compatriots Russian Asia: Central in Diaspora Russian The (2006). E. C. Ziegler, 12). March (2014, Ukraine in stay must Crimea The Usakovs: (1994 G. Tarrow, S. Russian The 7). August V.(2013, Strnad, StateLanguageLaw Latvia Republic of of (1999) the Latvian Danger? of Discourse the Spruds, in Entrapment (2009). A. Russia with war a about sceptical people that say MEP Estonian an by organised Survey Bebris I.; Supule, Allworth, and A Bohr, A.; Wilson, V.; Law, G.; Smith, Post G.Russia's Smith, Rethinking Wilson,(1997).and A. In Citizenship. and Relations Ethnic Statehood, (1994). R. Mole, and G.;A. Smith, Aasland, Non (2013). J. D. Smith, Moscow'sForeign Policy. ukrainy.d?id=44292053 http://rus.delfi.lv/news/daily/latvia/ushakov (Rev. & ed.)Cambridge:University updated 3rd Press Cambridge https://cul Estonia. in Schools Policy: Baltic (Eds.), P.Ehin and Berg E. In Integration. European of Context (2015, February 25). CambridgeUniversity Press. post In States. Baltic the in politics identity of discourses political 845 North and Ukraine Eastern in Mobilisation and Lithuania (Ed.). Smith G. 12 Europe. Eastern and Central autonomy revisited. Riga:Institute Baltic ofSocial Science (1), 27 – - Soviet borderlands: the politics of national identities identities national of politics the borderlands: Soviet 864

– turaldiplomacyandhumanrights.wordpress.com/ 55 a, I. and Klave, E (2014). E Klave, and I. a,

– - 2011) Russian Relations and Foreign and Relations Russian Policy (181 h atcSae:tentoa self national the States: Baltic The - – ertra uooy n Pltcl omnt i Contemporary in Community Political and Autonomy Territorial Oxfordshire: Routledge Oxfordshire: 205). Lo205). oe i mvmn: oil oeet ad otniu politics contentious and movements social movement: in Power Yana Toom's Blog. utrl ihs Hmn ilmc Online. Diplomacy Human & Rights Cultural

Demokratizatsiya

ndon: Macmillan Journal on Ethnopolit on Journal - Estonian Debate: The Language of Instruction for for Instruction of Language The Debate: Estonian

Analysis of Integration of Latvia’sNon of Integration of Analysis 60

Accessible a

-

- , 14 krym East Estonia. East

(1), 103 (1), - dolzhen

- . 19) Nto re Nation (1998). E. ics and Minority Issues in Europe in Issues Minority and ics Soviet Diaspora: The Potential for for Potential The Diaspora: Soviet - t www.yanatoom.ee. (101 determination of Estonia, Latvia Latvia Estonia, of determination – 126

– - De Europe 116). Aldershot: Ashgate ostavatsya -

Russian Interaction in the Interactionin Russian f News. lfi (93 Nation Foreign and Identity - Asia Studies, 49 Studies, Asia – 118). - v - eree from Retrieved - building in the in building sostave Accessible at at Accessible -

building and and building Cambridge: - Citizens - (5), (5),

, .