#272 Structures of Russian Political Discourse on Nationality Problems: Anthropological Perspectives by Sergei Sokolovski

The idea for this research originated in 1996, when I was a Research Fellow at Olin's Harvard Russian Institute of International Affairs Moscow. The Institute's Director at the time, Amy Crutchfield, sustained a creative atmosphere and provided help as a consistently interested and supportive editor of my research Russian geopolitical discourse. I am grateful also to the staff of the J. and K. MacArthur Foundation in Moscow, who provided me with the opportunity to carry out research on the subject of "Violence and Minority Problems in Post-Totalitarian States." Earlier drafts of both papers included this publication were presented as reports at the Interna­ tional Studies Association Congress inToronto (April 1997), UNESCO MOST seminar in Dubrovnik (November 1997) and ASN Convention at the Harriman Institute in New York (April 1998). Finally, I wish to express my gratitude to the staff of the Kennan Institute in both Washington, D.C. and Moscow; particularly to Atiq Sarwari, who, through his ongoing support, made my research term at the Institute pass so smoothly and delightfully, as well as to my research assistant, Sarah Shields, for her relentless assistance in my roaming of D.C. libraries and for her infinite patience with my never-ending research demands. Research for this working paper was supported in part by a grant from the Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, with funds provided by the United States Information Agency and through the Regional Scholar Exchange Program. None of these organizations are responsible for the views expressed.

The Kennan In stitute for Advanced Russian Studies The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars

The Kennan Institute for Advanced Russian Studies is a division of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Through its programs of residential scholarships, meet­ ings, and publications, the Institute encourages scholarship on the former Soviet Union, embracing a broad range of fields in the social sciences and humanities. The Kennan Insti­ tute is supported by contributions from foundations, corporations, individuals, and the United States Government.

Kennan Institute Occasional Papers

The Kennan Institute makes Occasional Papers available to all those interested. Occa­ sional Papers are submitted by Kennan Institute scholars and visiting speakers. Copies of Occasional Papers and a list of papers currently available can be obtained free of charge by contacting:

Occasional Papers Kennan Institute One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20004-3027 (202) 691-4100

This Occasional Paper has been produced with support provided by the Russian, Eurasian, and East European Research and Training Program of the U.S. Department of State (funded by the Soviet and East European Research and Training Act of 1983, or Title VllI). We are most grateful to this sponsor.

The views expressed in Kennan Institute Occasional Papers are those of the authors.

© September 1999 Woodrow International Center for Scholars edited by KateMoore and Jodi Koehn Woodrow Wilson International Center The Kennan Institute for Scholars

The Center is the n ation's living memorial to Named in honor of Ambassador Kennan's Woodrow Wilson, presiden t of the United relative, George Kennan "the Elder," a States from 1913 to 1921. Created by law in nineteenth-century explorer of Russia and 1968, the Center is Washington, D.C's only Siberia, the Kennan Institute is commited to independent, wide-ranging institute for improving American expertise and knowl­ advanced study where vital curren t issues edge about the peoples and societies of the and their deep historical backgrolU1d are former Soviet Union. It is one of several area explored through research and d ialogue. studies programs of the Woodrow Wilson Center. Director Lee H. Hamilton Board o/Trustees Joseph A. Cari, Jr., Chair· Steven Alan Bennett, Vice Chair · Ex officio Kennan Institute Advisory Chair, trustees: Madeleine ht, Secretary of Herbert J. Ellison, University of Washington · State· James H. Billington, Librarian of Con­ Kathleen rthe, University of Rochester · gress · John W. Archivist of the United Oleksandr Pavliuk, Kyiv-Mohyla Academy ' States · Penn Kemble, Acting Director, U.S. Elizabeth Pond, Bonn, Germany · Linda Information Agency · William R. Ferris, Chair, Randall, University of Rhode Island· Jane National Endowment for the H umaniti s · 1. Sharp, University of Maryland, College Park · Michael Heyman, Secretary, Smithsonian Institution · Richard W. Riley, Secreta ry of Am bassador Thomas W. Simons, Jr., Education · Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of Stanford University· Mark von Hagen, Health and Human Services· Trustee designated Colwnbia University· Grace Kennan the president from n Warnecke, Women Economic Empower­ Samuel R. Berger, National Security Adviser· ment, Kyiv . Larissa G. Zakharova, Moscow Private citizen trustees: Carol Cartwright · Daniel State University L. Doctoroff . Jean L. Hennessey· Daniel L. Lamaute . Paul Hae Park· Thomas R. Reedy · Nancy M. Zirkin The Wilson Council Albert Abramson · Cyrus A. Ansary · J. Burchenal Ault . Charles F. Barber · Theodore C Barreaux · Joseph C Bell· John L. Bryant, Jr.. Conrad Cafritz . Nicola L. Caiola · Raoul L. Carroll · Albert V. Casey .Peter B. Clark' William T. Coleman, Jr. . Michael D. DiGiacomo · Frank P. Doyle · Donald G. Drapkin . F. Samuel Eberts ill .1. Steven Edelson ' John Foster · Barbara Hackman Franklin · Bruce Celb .Jerry P. Genova · Alma Gildenhom .Joseph B. Gildenhom · David F. Girard-diCarlo . Michael B. Goldberg ' Raymond A. Guenter . Robert R. Harlin . Verna R. Harrah· Eric Hotung . Frances Humphrey Howard ·John L Howard· Darrell E. Issa . Jerry Jasinowski . Brenda LaGrange Johnson· Dennis D. Jorgensen · heUy . Anastasia D. Kelly· Christopher Kennan · Steven Kotler ·William H. Kremer· Kathleen D. Lacey · Donald S.Lamm . Harold Levy . David Link . David S. Mandel· Edwin S. Marks . Robert McCarthy ' C. Peter McColough .James D. McDonald · Philip Merrill· Jeremiah L Murphy · T. Muse· Gerald L. Parsky . L. Richardson Preyer· Donald Robert Quartel, Jr. . Edward V. Regan · J. Steven Rhodes . Edwin Robbins · Philip E. Rollhaus, Jr. . George P. Shultz · Raja W. Sidawi . Ron Silver ' William A. Slaughter· Timothy E. Stapleford . Linda Bryant Valentine · Deborah Wince-Smith . Herbert S. Winokur, Jr. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Minority Rights Monitoring in the Russian Federation 1

History of Minority Research in Russia 3

Paradigms of Ethnicity Research 4

Numerical Inferiority Principle 9

Non-Dominant Position 12

Resource Scarcity in Russian Political Discourse and Legitimization of Ethnic Conflicts 16

Ethnicity and Territory 18

Ethnic Conflicts over Territory and Resources 20

Notes 26

Bibliography 27

STRUCTURES OF RUSSIAN POLITICAL DISCOURSE ON NATIONALITY PROBLEMS: ANTHROPOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES

Minority Rights Monitoring in the numerical size of a group does not Russian Federation constitute a political resource. What counts as a political resource is the It is not an easy task to review the group's access to power, wealth, arms, vast field of minority rights research in and similar things. In the case of Russia and sketch a state-of-the-art totalitarian societies, therefore, it is summary. There are several circum­ more appropriate to refer to ruling and stances that contribute to this diffi­ deprived groups or societal strata, of culty. The first is conceptual. The rel­ elites and disenfranchised masses, or evance of the concept of "minority" in of victimized populations. If used to the analysis of various groups' situa­ analyze the situation in these coun­ tions in contemporary Russia and ex­ tries, the concept "minority" would be Soviet states is a matter of debate. misapplied. As for contemporary Even ifit could be proved that such a Russia, it is still an open question concept is relevant, it is still not clear whether we can legitimately use the whether the relevance holds for differ­ term "minority." It should be used ent periods of Russian history. This, cautiously, since the numerical conceptual predicament has to do first strength of a group in any particular and foremost with Russia's and other case, or even its position within a S countries' claims to democracy. power hierarchy does ­ The gist of the matter is simple: if we cally imply the democratic dimenslOn. believe (or can prove) that Russia is a In many regions, local decision-making democratic country, then the term still bears a traditional autocratic "minority'" is applied appropriately. stamp that precludes the sociologically The underlying reasoning is straight­ correct usage of the minority-majority forward: the term implies the idea of type of analysis. distributional justice, according to which Secondly, even if we presume that a minority is deficient in only one the term "holds," at least generally and aspect of its ability to fully on the large-scale level of international and equally in political and sOCIal/ relations, given that Russia is a party cultural processes, namely, in its to many international treaties and numerical strength. Without this agreements, then we are confronted free individuals can protect with one more obstacle, which could their interests through voting and be named terminological. Incidentally, other democratic procedures. Minority this aspect has a wider, ifnot a univer­ groups, lacking such a powerful. sal character. In many countries the resource as the necessary numerIcal term "minority" is either unknown, or strength to guarantee the protection of not used, or, to make matters still more their interests through voting, need complicated, is used along with many special additional measures from e rival terms, with partially or substan­ state, which is controlled by the maJor­ tially overlapping meanings. It could ity. Hence "minority" is a term that also be used with many limiting and presupposes a democratic context.. In particularizing attributes, stretching the non-democracies (proto-democratic or signified concept far beyond its norma­ transitional societies, as well as autoc­ tive or internationally accepted scope. racies and totalitarian regimes) the 1 The last two cases- parallel usage of applied to contemporary Russia, I terms with overlapping meanings and chose to answer in the affirmative, usage of the term "minority" with with certain reservations. In essence many specifications- are typical for my argument is whether we academic and political discourse in speak of Russia in general, or of any of both Rus ia and most of the NlS. its territories and historical periods in A dilemma for someone attempting particular, there are a number of to review minority rights research is: situations and contexts which permit should he/ she include all the indig­ themselves be analyzed productively enous terms and related concepts, or in these terms. So we could speak pursue a limiting strategy and take meaningfully of minorities in Russia, into consideration only "focal" cases though not always and not for every with explicit usage of the term "minor­ place, and we must be cautious not to ity"? Of course, this choice does not over-generalize the analytical power of solve all the reviewers' problems. In approach. many cases the term "minority," when Secondly, on the level of terminol­ used by representatives of different ogy, I opt for being open towards disciplines, academic schools, and sub­ "native" or "indigenous" terminology fields, or by journalists and politicians, in minority discourse, as very often the or leaders of various nationalist move­ local (in this p articular case, the Rus­ ments and ethnic entrepreneurs, sian language) terms "fix" conceptual means different things. In this case I linkages or represent tropes which prefer to speak of different paradigms, become formative for and influence or world views, which could not be this discourse and, when ignored, can reduced to merely professional create misunderstandings in intercul­ "schisms" and which divide both tural communication. The latter prob­ academia and the general public and lem very often arises in diplomatic and further contribute to the babel of international politics, and international discourse on minority issues. law types of communication, when Making matters still worse is the partners in a dialogue presume that by huge variety ofminority groups/ which using the same terms they are guaran­ came into existence by a myriad of teeing the clarity and transparency of ways and which do not easily lend meaning. I will speak specifically on themselves to the classifying and this type of error, which could be typifying will of academics. In this provisionally labeled as terminological respect the whole history of Russian homonymyl, later, when I analyze the ethnography and anthropology could usage of the term "national minority" be described as a history of minority in the documents of the OSCE and the research, and all the conflicting views, Council of Europe and its interpreta­ theories, and conceptualizations of tions in Russia. ethnicity or "ethnic reality" have a Thirdly, I restrict myself here to a direct bearing on minority research brief overview of academic discourse and relevant discursive formations. with short excursions into the juridical Having in mind all these obstacles, and political spheres, thus leaving out I must clarify my own position and the important parts of discourse on mi­ choices I made when preparing norities such as mass media debates, review. In the case of the first problem, public usage, etc. This enables me to be that is, deciding whether an analysis in more inclusive in the analysis on the "minority-majority" terms could be "ontic plane," that is, to include in my 2 review various types of minorities, The Society published materials on minority peoples, migrant and settled different regions, including studies of groups, ethnographic groups, etc. ethnography and languages in Central My approach to the analysis of Asia, Siberia and the Far East academic discourse will be inclusive (M.Kastren, A.Middendorf, V.Radlov). also, as I attempt to cover the general This early association of ethnography trends in the history of minority with geography, typical not only for research, putting it into the context of Russia, but for many European coun­ ethnological research in general. I have tries as well, probably served as a chosen this strategy because I perceive contributing factor in the territorializa­ the particular field of minority research tion of ethnicity, which later became to be strongly influenced by predispo­ one of the essentials of the naturalistic sitions of a paradigmatic nature within paradigm in ethnicity research. the broader academic research of In the 1880- 90's a strong evolution­ ethnicity. ist school was formed, introducing methods of historical reconstruction on History of Minority Research in archaeolOgical, physical anthropologi­ Russia cal, and ethnographic materials (M. Rossian2 ethnography goes back Kovalevsky, D. Anuchin, L. Sternberg). to the seventeenth century- the of This was at a time when the first extensive colonization and formation of ethnographic journals had appeared, a centralized Rossian state. Early as well as many popular works on the descriptions and atlases of Siberia cultures of the world. With the estab­ included informati n on local tribal lishment of evolutionism in the field of groups. In those times ethnic differ­ ethnographical research, the later ences were not depicted as such, and reification of ethnicity and culture and the local (Russian language) terms for ethnic groups and the appropriation of non-Russian groups were yasachnye history by future nationalistic leaders (paying special tribute in furs), tuzemtsy became conceptually possible. Need­ (literally meaning "living in another less to say, both reifi cation and appro­ land"), inorodtsy (meaning, "being born priation of history became part-and­ into an alien, foreign, non-Russian, or parcel of the naturalistic interpretation non-Rossian group"), or inovertsy and of ethnic reality that was taking shape. yazychniki (meaning pagans, non­ Evolutionism helped to establish the Orthodox, non-Christian, or belonging concepts of "developed" and "less to another faith). The differentiating developed" peoples which are still features, thus, were fiscal status,land used in some normative texts in Russia (or region), and faith, but not the today.3 totalizing concept of culture, which had The Bolsheviks subsequently used not as yet been formed as a part of these established conceptual linkages nationalistic ideology. For this reason between ethnic groups and territories the terms plemya (tribe) and narod in organizing the Russian Federation (people), though used in respect to and, later, the USSR. The concepts of different groups, had different mean­ evolutionism were operative in estab­ ings from those implied in the current lishing a hierarchy of admini trative­ Russian ethnographical discourse. political units, from national sel'sovet In 1845 the Russian Geographical (ethnic minority village Soviet) to Society, with its Ethnographic Divi­ Union republics. The Bolshevik revolu­ sion, was founded in Saint Petersburg. tion (1917) and formation of the Soviet 3 state with territorial autonomies based ethnologists (N. Cheboksarov, V. on ethnic principles, as well as the rise Kozlov, P. Puchkov, S. Arutiunov) were of ethnic periphery movements, led to developing a theory of ethnos based very extensive studies among all on a primordial vision of ethnicity. groups, especially as a basis for design­ Along with this theory a distinct ing borders between ethno-territorial interpretation of ethnos as a "socio­ units. Ethnographers were also deeply biological organism" (1. Gumilev) involved in developing written alpha­ acquired a growing popularity. bets and school systems for many Political liberalization since the late small groups. 1980's and the rise of ethnic national­ In 1933 the Institute of Anthropol­ ism and conflict have brought radical ogy, Archaeology, and Ethnography changes to the field of Rossian was established in Leningrad, and in pology. The subjects of research and 1937- the Institute of Ethnography in debate shifted to identity studies, Moscow. This was at a time when ethnonationalism and ethnic conflicts, Marxist-Leninist doctrine (with its status and rights of minorities, focus on social evolution levels and ethnicity and power, and a number of class struggle as the major force in other issues. Ethnonationalistic en­ historical change) started to dominate gagement and the use of ethnic studies theoretical disciplinary knowledge in as a resource for political mobilization every field of social and humanitarian have become a serious challenge for sciences. Ethnology was proclaimed a the academic community. In response, "bourgeois science," many scholars anthropology is demonstrating a were persecuted and the department of growing interest in problems of "new ethnology at Moscow University had minorities" like Russians, Russian been closed (1931) [Slezkin 1991, 476­ nationalism, and identity. Along with 84]. In the 1950-70's the major priori­ the rest of society, Rossian anthropol­ ties were still the studies of ogy is going through a process of deep ethnogenesis, material cultures, ethnic transformation and crisis [Tishkov histories, and cartography, initiated 1997,494]. mainly by the central institutions in Parad igms of Ethnicity Research Moscow and Leningrad with active training and participation of scholars The basic ways of interpreting from regional and republican academic ethnic phenomena are usually grouped centers. This resulted in prestigious into three main approaches, w hich projects such as historical-ethno­ could be designated as primordial graphic atlases (Peoples of Siberia, 1961; (objectivist, p ositivist, or naturalistic), Russians, 1967- 70; Peoples ofthe World, instrumentalist, and constructivist 1964) and a multi-volume series (The (subjectivist or relativistic). The first of Peoples ofthe World) . In the 1970-80's these scholarly traditions is usually there was a strong shift of interest to traced to the ideas of nineteenth­ contemporary ethnic issues, together century German romanticism and to with a reorientation to the use of the positivist tradition of social sci­ sociological survey methods. Extensive ence. Its adherents view ethnicity as an research was carried out in Central objective given, a sort of primordial Asia, the Baltic republics, and the characteristic of humanity. For Volga-Ural region (Y. Arutunian, L. primordialists, there exist objective Drobizheva, V Pimenov, M. Guboglo). entities with inherent characteristics Academician Yu. Bromley and other such as territory, language, recognizable 4 membership, and a common mentality. In bined effect of cosmic energies and its extreme form, this approach con­ landscape [Gumilev 1989, 1990]. As the ceives of etlmicity in socio-biological works of Gumilev are still very popu­ terms as a II comprehensive form of lar in Russia and exert influence on the natural selection and kinship connec­ perception of ethnic reality, especially tions,lI a primordial instinctive at public and political levels, I will pulse [Van den Berghe 1981]. Some briefly mention the constitutive char­ primordialists even hypothesize that acteristics of his theory. For Gumilev, recognition of group affiliation is ethnos is analogous to an organism in genetically encoded and this code is the many respects, but one of the funda­ product of early human evolution, mentals is the similarity of its life cycle when the ability to recognize the to the life cycle of an organism. Like an members of one's family group was organism, ethnos is born, then experi­ essential for survival. ences periods of growth and Contemporary political discourse followed by inertia, breakdown, and on ethnicity and nationalism in Russia death. He has even given an estimate belongs conceptually to the of ethnic life cycle duration of about primordialist school and is influenced 1200-1500 years. Perhaps more impor­ to a substantial degree by anthropo­ tant, interethnic relations and their logical theories prevalent in the history coexistence are believed to depend of Russian ethnology and anthropol­ upon mutual compatibility of contact­ ogy since the disciplines' formation. ing ethnoses. According to Gumilev Explicit primordialism has played a there are three types of interethnic major role in both Russian and Soviet coexistence: symbiosis, xenia, and anthropology. Originating in Herder's chimera. In symbiosis ethnoses peace­ neo-romantic concept of Volk_as a unity fully coexist, using different ecological of blood and soil, it was developed into niches of the same landscape. Xenia is a positivist program for ethnographic also a harmless way of coexistence, research in the work of S.M. when one ethnos is living lIinsidell Shirokogorov, who defined ethnos as: another as an impregnated foreign particle. But when the isolation be­ II a group of people speaking one tween the guest and host ethnoses and the same language and admit­ breaks down, it may give rise to chi­ ting common origin, characterized mera, which is characterized by nega­ by a set of customs and a lifestyle, tive complementarity. Then bloody preserved and sanctified by tradi­ conflicts, leading to extermination of tion, which distinguishes it from one or of both of the contacting other [groups] of the same kind ethnoses, are inevitable. The danger of [Shirokogorov 1923, 122].11 such pseudo-theoretical constructions This approach was later developed becomes evident when they are em­ in the works ofYu. Bromley, who gave ployed to legitimize violence or to a very similar definition of ethnos view ethnic conflicts as inevitable (1981), and L. Gumilev. The latter consequences of ll naturallaws." believed in the existence of ethnos as a Skeptical of the bio-geographical IIbiosocial organism" and proposed a approach, Bromley and most Soviet framework for the study of social scientists adhered to historical­ ethnogenesis as a geographically deter­ primordial theories. For them, ethnos mined process, in which the formation and ethno-social organism, understood of an ethnos was depicted as a com­ as objective linguo-cultural entities, 5 were the basic categories [Bromley ity of their territory, economic ties, 1983]. As a director of the Institute of literary language, some specific Ethnography, USSR Academy of features of their culture and charac­ Sciences in the 1970's and 1980's, ter, which make up its constitutive Bromley published four theoretical attributes." monographs [Bromley 1973, 1981, 1983,1987], which formed the back­ Most Soviet and contemporary bone of academic discourse on Russian scholars basically share this understanding, with the addition of ethnicity theory in those years. one defining element- the so-called Bromley defined ethnos as: "national self-consciousness," that is, "a stable intergenerational commu­ self-awareness or a feeling of common nity of people, historically formed identity. This understanding of the on a certain territory; possessing nation has important implications for common relatively stable features the interpretation of the concept of of culture (including language) and national minority, about which I will psyche, as well as a consciousness speak further. The definition of a of their unity and of their differ­ nation in exclusively ethno-cultural ence from other similar entities terms (versus citizenship terms) is still (self-awareness), reflected in a self­ dominant, if not the only one in Rus­ name (ethnonym) [Bromley 1983, sian political and academic discourse. 57- 58]." Common history, culture, and lan­ guage, as well as "ethnic homeland" or This theory goes back to S. territory are mentioned or implied in Shirokogorov's writings of the 1920's every usage of the term. As men tioned and corresponds to the so-called Leninist theory of national question, above, the nation is understood as the defining "nation" as the highest type highest stage of development of an of ethnic community (ethnos), where ethnos in the Soviet theory of ethnos, ethnos is viewed as an archetype and the other stages being plemya (a tribe) major form of social grouping, legiti­ and narodnost' (a nationality, that is an mizing the state with its economy and ethnic group). The notions of political culture [Sokolovski, Tishkov 1997, 190­ or civil nations are virtually no longer 193]. used in contemporary political and The term "nation" itseU (natsiya) is p ublic discourses. This explains the understood and interpreted in Russian fact that nationalism in Russia is academic, political, and public realms understood exclusively as ethno­ exclusively as ethnic nation, or ethno­ nationalism and is usually perceived nation (though the latter two terms are as a sort of deviation, improper behav­ practically not used in Russia). The ior, or misdemeanor. It is very often concept still bears the stamp of Stalin's associated with separatism as well. As definition of a nation as a community ethnonationalism is an ideology based of people with objective characteristics on the theory that ethno-nations (common economy, language, constitute the basic human forms of and psychic organization). In its third "normal" collectivities, it becomes edition [1974, vo1.l7:375-76] the Great evident that it is based on a naturalistic Soviet Encyclopedia defines nation in approach to ethnic reality, on very similar terms as: primordialist versions of ethnicity "a historical community of people interpretation. Ethnonationalism is the created by the forming communal­ ruling ideology in most of the NlS,

6 including the Baltic states, and in dominant primordialist tradition in practically all the republics of the Soviet ethnology. Politicalliberaliza­ Russian Federation. tion since the late 1980's and the rise of The naturalistic explanations of ethnic nationalism and conflict have ethnicity and of nationalism in Russia brought radical changes for Russian are still deeply entrenched, institution­ anthropology. But even by the end of alized in state policy, scholarly the 1970's a number of approaches thought, education, and, most impor­ which could be viewed as different tant, in public opinion and the admin­ forms of instrumentalism had ap­ istrative-political structure of the peared. Some authors, influenced by federation. This is also true for all post­ system and informational approaches, Soviet states. The reasons for this tried to use the concept of information institutionalization are various; among in the analysis of ethnic phenomena, the most important being the disciplin­ combining primordialist views on ary tradition of Ru sian ethnography/ ethnos as an objective entity (ethno­ ethnology, close political control and social organism) with instrumentalist censure of academic research during perspectives on the intergenerational the Soviet period, popularization of transfer of ethnic culture [Arutiunov, academic discourse through the educa­ Cheboksarov 1977, Arutiunov 1989]. tion system and media, and, to a Others experimented with information certain extent, the "fusion" of political patterns or "models" of particular and academic elites in post-SOViet "ethnoses" [pimenov 1977]. Still others times. Another important reason that began suggesting that ethnic differentia­ needs to be mentioned is the basic tion could be adequately described as an similarity and convergence between information process, reducing behav­ popular views on ethnic phenomena ioral expectations in a multicultural and naturalistic treatments of ethnic environment to a set of typolOgically reality, which are sometimes so strik­ neat ethnic stereotypes [Susokolov 1990]. ing that I am inclined not only to speak Another instrumentalist approach of mutual reinforcement of lay and developed in the sub-discipline of scholarly opinions in this respect, but economic anthropology, where the also to suspect that the context of analysis of ethnic competition in labor naturalistic theories' formation was markets was based implicitly on ethnic formed, in the first place, under the mobilization theories [Shkaratan 1986; strong influence of nationalistic ideas. Perepiolkin, Shkaratan 1989]. Never­ Here the German romantic treatment theless, though these approaches, of ethnic reality should be mentioned which could be labeled as instrumen­ once again, as not only did Russian talist, were considered fresh and ethnology and anthropology exerted a certain influence, they were a many of its ideological biases, but even sort of side show at the time they the interdisciplinary boundaries and appeared and were not viewed as understanding of the discipline's significantly distinct from the pre­ subject in Russia was modeled in a dominant naturalistic approaches, way similar to the divide between particularly since their authors were Volkskunde and V'lkerkunde of the using the same terminology (ethnos, German academic tradition. ethno-social organism and similar It would be incorrect to argue that terms) and shared many presupposi­ there were no other strains of theoreti­ tions of the "naturalistic school." cal thought existing side by side the While the instrumentalist approach 7 to ethnic phenomena had been in use exploits an apparent legitimacy to since the end of the 1970's, the territorial claims on the side of "titu­ constructivist approach remained lar" ethnic groups4, or makes people outside domestic social science and think that this or that piece of land was never seriously tested until the "belongs to" a locally dominant ethnic start of the 1990's, that is, almost a group. generation later. With the emergence of Part of the difficulty in explaining a ethnic revival and the growth of subject like "territorialized ethnicity" separatism over the last decade in the is that it is often so deeply embedded post-Soviet area, scholars started to in, as to be indistinguishable from, the pay more attention to ethnicity con­ fundamental assumptions of national­ struction in both theoretical and istic discourse. As a tapas, moreover, it practical research. As a result ethnicity is inherent in many conceptual sys­ began to be seen as part of the reper­ tems and disciplinary lexicons. None­ toire that is "chosen" or "indoctri­ theless, we may approach this subject nated" by an individual or a group to through the available and much achieve certain interests and goals, or discussed topic of "national minori­ as a representation actively constructed ties," which potentially contains both by ethnic entrepreneurs. This approach the idea of place ("national") and of has never attained predominance, ethnos ("minority"). The notion of though some studies have been ­ "national minority" is a cornerstone of lished by sociologists [Filippov 1991, European policies in minority issues, 1992; Voronkov 1995], ethnologists and setting the terms for the current ap­ anthropologists [Tishkov 1989,1992; proaches of OSCE and the Council of Sokolovski 1993,1994 a-c; Sokolovski, Europe. Interestingly enough, though, Tishkov 1997; Ssorin-Chaikov 1991], even here neither the field of social and social psychologists [Soldatova science, nor the documentation of 1996]. Though post-communist societ­ intergovernmental organizations ies contain many examples of con­ contains a comprehensive and broadly structed and mobilized ethnicity, the agreed upon definition. I will discuss instrumentalist and constructivist two of the term's meanings, one approaches to ethnic phenomena have designated for convenience sake as not really been actively applied in the "broad," the other as "narrow." Both policy realm, remaining known princi­ meanings contain the tapas, or concep­ pally within academia, and even there tual linkage "ethnicity-territory," but being met with skepticism and opposi­ the respective interpretations of this tion. They have failed to become more linkage differ substantially. widely used due to their inherent Let us consider first the broad complexity and deviance from popu­ meaning, exemplified by the usage of larized versions of ethnic reality the term in such documents as the models. For obvious reasons, national­ "Framework Convention for the ist leaders oppose them as well and Protection of National Minorities and support primordialist views of ethnic Explanatory Report" of 1994 (Council reality. The ethno-territorial nature of of Europe) and the Copenhagen Soviet federalism as it was engineered Conference for Human Dimension and employed by the Bolsheviks, has document of 1990 (CSCE). Both docu­ greatly contributed to and still influ­ ments interpret the term "national" as ences the tailoring of various conflicts referring to "nation" in its technical as ethno-territorial, for such a tailoring and legal meaning of "citizenship­ 8 thus excluding such rialized ethnicity is manifested more potential beneficiaries as migrant vividly, as this concept implies the workers, stateless persons or apatrid , existence of a "host state" and a "state non-nationals, and refugees whose of "titular groups" (dominant protection is attended to by other ethnic majorities who gave their name international agreements. The phras­ to the polity) and kin groups "abroad," ing of the documents supports the and ethnic "homelands" and "other­ understanding that the notion "na­ lands." It is well documented that this tional minority" is extended to cover territorializing trend led to massive citizens who are members of ethnic, population exchanges immediately cultural, linguistic, and religious after World War I, followed by ethnic minorities. This breadth of categories is cleansing campaigns and deportations. the reason why I defined this usage of In most of the Soviet Union's the term as "broad." This interpreta­ successor states the criteria of minority tion of the term is also more liberal status are ambiguous at best and than the narrow understanding, which substantially deviate from the standard I will discuss below. Nevertheless, this usage of international law. I will try to understanding unequivocally links the clarify below the peculiarities of the concepts of "minority" and state/' minority concept understanding in and the documents explicitly mention political and academic discourse in such characteristics of the state as Russia and more generally in ex-Soviet sovereignty and territorial integrity, states. Though the disputes over the thus dividing nationalities into two definition of the term "minority" seem distinct categories: groups with "their never to come to an end, most experts own" states and stateless groups. The would agree that there are at least two linkage of ethnicity and territory is basic elements essential for this con­ mediated in this interpretation by an cept, namely, numerical inferiority of overarching state. the group and its non-dominant, or The second, "narrow" meaning of subordinate position within the power the term is more conservative. This structure of the country or region in understanding is standard and wide­ question. Both elements are retained in spread in Central and Eastern Euro­ the Russian lmderstanding of the pean literature, though not limited to concept, but the practices involved in these regions. "National" in this their interpretation and measurement second interpretation of the term differ significantly from their western implies "having its own state or pol­ analogues. ity" or "having a which is Numerical Inferiority Principle always different, as in the case of "national minorities/ ' from the country umerical inferiority of minori­ or region of residence. InRussia the ties, as has been argued earlier, serves term is applied to all minority groups as one of the distinctive features of the living "outside" their respective lands concept. It is named in both of the of origin, be it a state or a political widely cited UN working definitions, administrative unit within the Russian those of J. Deschenes and F. Capotorti Federation. Examples include Kazakhs ("a group ofcitizens ofa State, constitut­ and Ukrainians living in Russia, or ing ... a numerical minority in that State" Tatars and Mordvinians residing and "a group numerically inferior to the outside Tatarstan and Mordovia rest ofthe popula tion of a respec­ respectively. Here the idea of a territo­ tively). In the USSR and Russia this 9 feature was extended also to indig­ to the state population) are not in­ enous peoples, who during most of in federal and local minority Soviet history had been officially rIghts protection norms. Moreover, desIgnated as "minor" or "small" some political scientists and sociolo­ peopless. But in most of the ex-Soviet gists argue that Russians turn into states, especially those which are based min.orities in political, legal, on the principle of so-called and terms on the territo­ federalism, or which have ries of some republics (e.g., territorial autonomies, the numerical Bashkortostan, Chuvashia, and Tuva inferiority principle has taken on republics). further complications and ramifica­ Besides, some groups of Russians, tions which need to be mentioned. mainly Old Believers and former If applied to the Russian Federa­ religious dissenters, are considered by tion formally, the numerical inferiority anthropologists to be minorities on feature would mean that all non­ cultural, economic, and religious Russians belong to minorities, as grounds (Doukhobors, Molokans, and Russians constitute more than 80 various "old-settler" groups in Siberia percent of the country's population. As and the Far East). Most of the Siberian the Russian Federation is based on the groups in this list were recommended so-called ethno-territorial principle, for inclusion in the group of indig­ the relational aspect of numerical enous peoples, as they have a subsis­ inferiority of minorities "to the rest of tence economy similar to the neighbor­ the population" becomes dubious. The ing indigenous peoples [Table 1]. republics and autonomous regions The dilemma on what scale to within the Russian Federation with measure the group ratio in population territories comprising approximately (on state or regional scales) becomes 60 percent of the entire territory of the further aggravated when regional state and having various degrees of boundaries are challenged. As experts sovereignty and self-government, are pecializing in Eastern Europe and often viewed and portray themselves Russia are aware, much of the system as "ethnic homelands" for the minority of territorial-administrative division groups after which they are named lacks legitimacy in the opinion of the (Tatarstan ror the Tatars, Bashkortostan leaders of ethnic movements. Mutual for the Bashkir, etc.), thus dividing territorial claims of Tatars and their populations into "titular" and Bashkirs, Ingushes and Ossetians, "non-titular" groups. Their dominant Chechens, and Cossacks are well­ positions within the republics turn known cases. The overall number of them politically and sociologically into ethno-territorial claims in ex-Soviet national elites, rather than minorities states has been estimated as exceeding in the standard sense of the term. This four hundred [Kolossov e.a. 1992]. is one of the reasons that Russian When territorial boundaries become an legislators, politicians, and social element in the construction processes scientists often use two referential of ethnic status, and when, at least for planes at once while assessing the some groups, the administrative numerical strength of ethnic minori­ division seems to be crucial in their -territorial and state. Most claims to be either a minority or a of the o-called "titular groups" (often majority, that is a people with the right termed as "nations" or "peoples," to self-determination, the claims to though remaining numerically inferior

10 Table 1. Ethnic Rus ian Cultural and Religious Minorities"

No. Name of the group Location (regions) Number (thousands) l. Doukhobor Tambov, Rostov, Krasnodar 50 2. Indighirs Sakha (Yakutia) ? 3. Kamchadals Kamchatskaya 25-28 4. Kanin Pomors Arkhangelsk ? 5. Kolymchans Sakha (Yakutia) "* 6. Markovtsy Chukotka ? 7. Mezentsy Arkhangelsk 10-15 8. Molokans Orenburg, Tambov, North Cauca us 50 9. Lentsy (Yakutiane) Sakha (Yakutia) ? 10. Ob' old-settlers Khanty-Mansiisk ? 11. Seldiuks Krasnoyarsk 5-6 12. Zahmdrenye Taimyr ?

.. Compiled from: Narody Rossii [The Peoples of Russia]. En cyclopedia. (Moscow, 1994), 47-48; Indigenous Peoples and Conservation: WWF Statement of Principles, (Mo cow, 1997), 37- 38. .... Together with Indighirs and Markovtsy. territory and status become inevitably Karachai and the Circassians; the enmeshed in a power struggle. Kabardins and the Balkars; the The relational aspect of a minority Chechens and the Ingush). group's numerical strength in Primordialist conceptualizations of territorial f derations such as Russia ethnicity have also contributed to the brings into conflict two distinct classi­ complexity of assessing a minority fications closely controlled by the group's numerical strength. One of the state-an ethnic classification (an aspects of prirnordialist theories of officially approved and established list ethnicity in Russia is the belief in the of minority categories) and the "objective reality" of ethnic groups, istrative territorial classification (a list which usually means reification of the of regions with legitimate boundaries). group boundaries. "Ethnoses" in these In the long history of Russian expan­ conceptualizations (be it the sion both classificati ons have been biological version of Sergei Shiro­ contested from both sides- the state kogoroff, the bio-geographical version and the ethnonational movements­ of Lev or the cultural-histori­ many times with varying results. Often cal version of Yulian Bromley) were two or more distinct peoples and / or regarded as special sorts of "things," minority categories have been arbi­ "bodies," or "organisms," with the trarily "lumped" together for official purposes and considered one people result that most of the ethnographic with one official name (e.g., the Avars, community-based studies were not the Altai, and the Khakass) and one depicted as community-based, but as territor'al unit. At other times a single characterizing the ethnos under study people has been administratively as a whole. As the primordialist view divided into several units bearing its of ethnicity has been institutionalized name (e.g., the Buryats and the in many state practices (passport Nenets); or two and more "minor registration, ethno-territorial federal­ peoples" have been given one autono­ ism, the policy of korenizatsia, etc.), the mous ethno-territorial formation (the reality has begun to conform to theo­

11 retical expectations. For example, the numerical strength. It is much easier to primordialist theory, popularized and assess the numbers of an ethnic cat­ deeply entrenched in the public opin­ egory (say, Tatars in Russia, or Ger­ ion of the educated strata, has been mans in Omsk region) than to obtain operative in creating particular social reliable data at the local level, where practices, including census procedures, the group's size may and should playa political decision-making on national­ role in forming particular cultural, ity policy issues, particular brands of linguistic, or educational policy. ethnonationalism, etc. As a result, the My brief commentaries on the census and state population statistics, numerical aspect of minority definition incorporating the official list of minor­ with a focus on Russia's peculiar ity groups, have been and remain approach seem to support the view biased in favor of officially recognized that: groups, whose numbers are exagger­ Assessment of a group's numerical ated at the expense of partially recog­ strength in this country is a com­ nized or unprivileged groups. For plex affair, as the relevant statistical example, the Chulymtsy, who have and research procedures are situ­ been counted among the Siberian ated in a highly politicized milieu, Tatars even by experts in anthropologi­ involving the group's struggle for cal publications. Siberian Tatars, in official status and recognition; turn, have been arbitrarily included in the group of Tatars (that is, Volga Numerical strength of a group, Tatars) in census registration. Conse­ though important, is not a decisive quently the children of Siberian Tatars factor in determining the group's have to learn a "native language" at position in power relations and its school which they perceive as foreign, political influence. because the authorities in the educa­ tion system prepare teachers of the Non-Dominant Position Tatars only in the Volga Tatar idiom. The double-scale dilemma inherent Locally, that is within the republics, in the assessment of ethnic group there is a tendency to exaggerate the numerical strength is expressed also in number of a titular group at the ex­ the assessment of a group's situation in pense of all others residing in the the local system of power sharing. region, but especially at the expense of sociologically routine task was strictly those groups which are considered to excluded from the research agenda be a "threat." Well-known examples during Soviet times, with the result are the policies of Bashkir and Tatar that we have no relevant research authorities to reduce the numbers of tradition and statistical monitoring Tatars and Bashkirs respectively within tradition on to rely. The state the territories of their republics by statistics institutions measured a lot of registering them as belonging ethni­ economic and social parameters, but cally to the titular group [e.g., these were measured relative to the Korostelev 1994]. Both academic and economic sectors or regional popula­ public primordialism and local policies tions in general. For this reason, the in census campaigns have made task of reconstructing a particular community-based population statistics minority group's dynamics in terms of far less accessible than statistics on the its position within the local power regional and state levels, makes (in relation to other similar it challenging to assess a group's 12 groups) still appears Herculean. Due to context of debates between the lack of direct statistical data, primordialists and constructivists that measuring the position of a group in have gained momentum in Russian the local employment, housing, and anthropology, the definition of a educational spheres; its political minority as a situation is too vague to involvement; its representation in the locate its authors' position. Does it judiciary system; in local government; mean that the ethnic composition of a the militia; etc.; is a costly, time-con­ state or region is changing so fast suming, and sometimes dangerous (which is true for some of the constitu­ task. This is why many important ent "SUbjects" of the Russian Federa­ aspects of the minority situation in tion due to migration flows), that the terms of power relations have never present majorities may lose their been the object of research or system­ position? Or, alternatively, does it atic monitoring, either by state statis­ mean that the situation of a minority's tics bodies or in sociological and being at the bottom of the power anthropological surveys. The informa­ hierarchy might change overnight and tion on the position of "titular" and its present vulnerability, underprivilege, "non-titular" minority groups in the and lower position tum the next day most important p ublic spheres such as into privileged and elitist group status political representation, or its situation (which was true in several cases in housing and labor markets is scarce the demise of the Soviet and unsystematic, which Union)? Finally, is there a subjective aggravates the difficulties of minority feeling of being a minority group rights monitoring in Russia. To make which might evaporate, or be sud­ things worse, restrictions on access to denly considered irrelevant (as was the local archives that were standard in case with several of the "titular" Soviet times are once again being nations within Russia, whose leaders imposed, as more researchers report on rejected minority status, proclaiming their arrival from the field. 6 Ifwe the sovereignty of their republics)? acknowledge that even the collected I will agree that in all of these and published data, incomplete as they senses the minority position or status are, remain due to their political is a situation (after all, a situation and relevance either distorted or misrepre­ a position are synonymous in many sented, then we have to conclude that contexts). But this logic seems to be the official assessments of a group's better suited for times of rapid and situation within local systems of revolutionary change, which, sadly, are power relations in Russia remain times also of minority rights neglect. If tendentious at best. on the basis of supposed or expected Recently some Russian anthropolo­ changes the minority status of a group gists, challenging the primordialism is viewed as spurious or ephemeral, and essentialism of their opponents why should legislators and politicians and reification of minority groups, bother to take special measures of have proposed that minorities be protection for these groups? I think understood as a "situation" and have that the minority rights regulations rejected the idea of minority lists and protection mechanisms are de­ published in various directories, vised for structurally defined and encyclopedias, and dictionaries of stable situations, when no sudden minority groups. Although such a changes in demographic or power position could be justified in the distribution structures are expected. 13 The situation in which a minority gets categories exists in practically all ex­ to the top position and becomes an Soviet states; every such system is effective majority or elite, as I have unique and resists generalization. That argued earlier, is better analyzed is why an analysis couched in terms of within other conceptual frameworks "minority-majority" relations is always than the framework of "majority­ an over-simplification, suited for minority" relations (due to the non­ intemationallaw and types of democratic nature of the political and discourse. In Russia every constituent social environment where such republic has its own ethnic group changes are deemed possible). hierarchy, which finds its expression in I have discussed so far two basic local legislation. As is evident, with the elements of minority definition and growing number of ethnic groups the complications of their usage in the considered "local," "titular," or "indig­ context of ex-Soviet political regimes. enous," the hierarchy becomes more With these two elements of the minor­ complex and elaborate. Daghestan, ity conceptual definition (its numerical with its population divided into more strength and its position on the scale of than thirty "indigenous peoples," domination) being dubious, the official provides a good example. list of Russian national minority As in many other regions with group s becomes questionable as well. complex ethnic structures, some of the This explains why there is no single smaller local ethnic groups of officially recognized list of minority Daghestan have been arbitrarily united groups in Russia, and why legislators and registered together with numeri­ in the field of minority rights in this cally superior neighbors in Soviet country have to devise new criteria of censuses since 1926. Thus twelve or inclusion and exclusion to accommo­ more indigenous peoples of the Ando­ date the interests and needs of various Cesian linguistic group were arbi­ groups striving for the status. I shall trarily joined with the Avars, and the try to illustrate this thesis with several Kaitags and the Kubachins with the examples. second largest group of the republic, The concept of rninority proves to the Darghins. The rest of the peoples be very sensitive to minute ideological were unofficially sorted into "state­ and political changes in state and forming" or the "main" and "non­ regional policies. Speaking generally state-forming." In political analysis, and from a terminological point of the local experts often employ linguis­ view, the appearance of any new tic religious classifications, as well as concept in the conceptual field of such considerations as length of "majority-minority" relations analysis residence, often counted not in years produces a shift and changes all the or even generations, but in centuries, concepts in the field. Thus, the exist­ as in the case of the Nogai, who have ence of such terms as "nation," resided in Daghestan since the 15th­ "people," "titular people," or "indig­ 17th centuries. Implicitly all these enous nation" in the minority dis­ classifications serve as a basis for course in Russia not only entails the sorting the ethnic groups into "more" existence of a unique set of concepts, and "less native." "More native" are but makes one understand that all the the groups speaking in local (non­ concepts in this set acquire either new Turkic and non-Slavic) languages, who meanings or new shades of meaning. A are Sunni Muslims of Shafiit mashab complex and intricate system of ethnic (not Shiites, as are Azeris), and who 14 have resided on the territory of the between the concepts of national and republic "since time immemorial." ethnic groups, but unofficially the Since July 1994, according to the legislators explained that they desig­ Daghestan Constitution, sixty-five nated as "national" the groups with a constituencies with popu­ statehood beyond the boundaries of lation have been proportionally dis­ Latvia (such as Ukrainians), and as tributed among the "main" ethnic "ethnic" the groups that lacked such a groups: in 12 of them, only the Avars statehood (such as Gypsies) could be elected to the parliament; in Tsilevich 1997:26]. 12, the Kumyks; in 10, the Russians; in Along with their citizenship, the 7, the Darghins; in 5, the Tabasarans; in new passports of Latvian citizens another 5, the Azeris; the Lezghins and register an c origin or nationality. the Chechens had 4 electoral districts A child from an ethnically mixed each; the Laks, 3; the Tats, 2; and the marriage may choose an ethnic affilia­ Tsakhurs, 1. The State Council could be tion of one of his/ her parents. In all formed from the representatives of the fourteen "main peoples" (one repre­ other cases where a citizen wishes to sentative from each of the "state­ change a passport nationality entry, forming groups"). Though the groups helshe must prove ethnic affiliation by who were considered "state-forming" producing evidence of genealogical or were also the most numerous, as many blood relations with the group, but not ethnic groups were not officially self-identification evidence. considered "separate," the resulting In July 1994 the naturalization classification principles are not easily schedule was adopted as a part of the interpreted in terms of a group's citizenship law, and with it, a more numbers. sophisticated classification of popula­ An interesting case of conceptual tion categories. According to this struggles involving language and schedule, ethnic Letts and Livs could educational policies, nationalizing apply for citizenship immediately after states, and diaspora is presented by publication of the law. Among other Latvia. Besides the splitting of the privileged categories were "citizens' population into titular nation and spouses," who had lived in marriage minorities, there is a detailed classifica­ with Latvian citizens for ten years or tion of minorities into "an ancient more; persons of other ethnic groups indigenous group" (the Livs), tradi­ who had legally entered Latvia prior to tional or historical minorities (Ger­ 1940; former citizens of Lithuania and mans, Jews, Poles, and Gypsies), and Estonia, and schoolchildren finishing migrant minorities (Russians, Ukraini­ schools in which Lettish was a lan­ ans, etc.). In the law on cultural au­ guage of instruction. By 1996 another tonomy adopted by the Supreme category of residents, young people Council of the Latvian Republic in aged 16-20 of all ethnic origins who March 1991, the preamble enumerates had been born in Latvia were given the the ethnic population categories: right to apply for citizenship, provided "In the Latvian Republic there live they complied with the Lettish knowl­ the Lett nation, the ancient indig­ edge requirements. As these require­ enous group of the Livs, as well as ments were strict, only slightly more national and ethnic groups." than 400 out of a population of 28,000 eligible youngsters had applied by the There are no official explanations end of 1996. Though for Letts or commentaries on the difference naturalization procedures have been 15 replaced by a simplified registration hundreds of disputes over rights to procedure, about 17 thousand failed to resources that have arisen in post­ meet the deadline of March 1996 due Soviet states. It argues that this entire to various diificulties in collecting the question is best understood by consid­ evidence of their ethnic origin [Antane, ering two basic competing paradigms Tsilevich 1997:57-58]. By the end of by which natural resources are under­ February 1996,99 percent of the titular stood to be "available" and "con­ groups (Letts and Livs) had been sumed": the naturalistic paradigm and granted citizen status. Among the the instrumental/ functionalist para­ "traditional minority" groups the digm. Secondly, it analyzes how these percentage varied from 80 (Gypsies) to paradigms have figured in Russian 60 (Poles). The migrant "non-tradi­ academic discourse. Thirdly, it looks at tional" minorities constituted the bulk the concrete interactions between a of the population of non-citizens: only specific kind of natural resource 38 percent of Russians, 19 percent of (namely, territory) and a specific case of Belorusians, and 6 percent of Ukraini­ national interest (namely, the rights and ans were granted the status of a claims ofethnically distinct groups). Latvian citizen [Antane, Tsilevich Finally, it returns to the subject of 1997:58]. discourse, to consider how current streams of Russian political analytical Resource Scarcity in Russian Political argument treat resources and national Discourse and Legitimization of interest, and how a particular and Ethnic Conflicts somewhat arbitrary and malign per­ "Resource scarcity" rhetoric is spective about this linkage is becoming often employed in Russian domestic institutionalized in the public sphere. and foreign p olicy debates. The classic Introduction: Conceptual Issues texts of geopolitics of the early-twenti­ eth century placed resource and con­ Any kind of human activity (if not servation strategies solidly within the any activity in general) involves and notion of national interest. Similarly, demands resource" "consump­ contemporary Russian politicians, as tion," "waste," or "exploitation." It is a well as political elites of other newly truism, but one worth articulating, that independent states, are themselves diiferent types of activity demand working out notions of national inter­ different resources. Any development ests and in so doing often link the or security program turns to wishful notion of national interest to that of thinking without adequate material, natural resources. This is especially financial, human, and ideational true of right- and left-wing Russian resources. This straightforward way of nationalists, though so-called "neo­ thinking about resources belongs to Eurasian" ideologists employ this line the naturalistic paradigm, which at of argument as well. present dominates much of political What can be made of the natural and ecological theorizing. After all, it is resource-national interest discussion? self-evident to construe "natural What are the claims and how are they resources" as inherent in the natural justified? This paper analyzes, first of environment. Within this prevailing all, when and why this linkage has paradigm a resource is something proven compelling in the political objective; that exists "naturally," before sphere. That it is compelling is undeni­ and beyond the framework of able, and attested to by th fact of activity- something that should be 16 "involved in," or used in this activity to resources" becomes awkward, for maintain its ongoing operation, either human history documents many ca es in the form of "raw" materials, or as an of "useless" things being turned into essential component of human action. resources (for example, minerals which A naturalistic approach is widely were always at hand, but which could used by scientists, who apply the not be used as resources proper, such as concept of resources to cell and plant ore, oil, uranium, etc.). growth and other non-human types of An activity-oriented or functional activity and who build detailed classi­ approach to resources implies and fications of resources, basing them on demands the usage of typologies (not "natural" or naturalized foundations, a classifications, as in the naturalistic "natural order" of things, etc. Classifi­ approach), that is, it aims to consider catory characteristics are attributed to the variety of the means ofusage, not the objects of classification as "essential," variety of the objects used. A typology, as that is conceptually transformed into it is understood here, is always represen­ properties of the classified things. tational, that is, it attempts to sort and Attributions thus are often not differen­ order human representations of the tiated from the analytically isolated world, but not the objects represented. "parts." This fusion of properties and As people of different cultures and attributes enables proponents of the professions have different representa­ naturalistic approach to classify re­ tions of the world, they would under­ sources into general and species, for stand differently what a resource could example, into food and energy re­ be; what would be waste and garbage source , energy resources into oil, gas, for one, could be a resource for another, and coal resources; oil resources into what might be fantasies and shallow light and heavy oils; coal into brown ideas for one, could be used a a pre­ and black, etc. cious resource by another. Thus, the Alternative to the naturalistic functional approach to resources is not approach, is the nctio1Ull or activity only representational, but also relational, oriented paradigm, according to which or relativistic. re ources are not viewed as objects of As human action and its goals vary, some naturalized classification, but as one and the same "natural resource" functional units. Here, the concept of could be employed and understood re ources exists entirely within the differently in different action perspec­ framework of human activity, where tives. In the naturalistic approach a resources are understood as a compos­ resource (oil, money, labor) is consumed ite artificial-natural entity. In this "naturally," whereas in the functional approach, therefore, something is approach there is a variety of consump­ viewed as a resource only when and tion forms of one and the same "mate­ where there appear possibilities and the rial:" oil could be used as an energy means to use it in human activity. In resource, as raw material for the chemi­ this ontology, it makes no sense to cal industry, as a commodity, or as a employ the concept of resources with political resource (Le., means of political respect to natural proces e such a pressure). plant growth or volcano eruption. In All this is no news, but it is inter­ short, the functional paradigm chal­ esting to note here that within the lenges the naturalistic paradigm's ideology of stable development a assumption that resources are universal naturalistic approach which is being and primordial. Even the term "natural used there creates several paradoxes. 17 Proponents of stable development failed to resonate the public's imagi­ argue that several kinds of natural nation is that they do not assign any resources which are essential for a automatic significance to territory. In contemporary economy are both strains of primordialist thought in thin, becoming scarcer or exhausted; so Russian anthropology, territory is humanity, they claim, should, in the definitive. Landscape plays a crucial name of coming generations, econo­ role in the process of ethnogenesis as mize or use only renewable resources. described by Lev Gumilev, whose It is eviden t here that the stable devel­ books are as Widely read as they are opment theoreticians employ a natu­ well written (in a manner reminiscent ralistic concept of resources as they of historical novels, travel books, or link a particular resource to a particu­ adventure stories) and appeal to a lar type of its consumption (thus nationalistically oriented audience. linking contemporary economy con­ Yulian Bromley includes territory in sumption modes and particular re­ his definition of ethnos as well, listing it sources a rigid manner). As the among the most important ethnic succession of future generations could attribut s. be thought of as practically infinite, so ''Naturalistic'' ethnicity is often-if the prescribed "economy of natural not always-territorialized. Territory resources" is not a way to stability, but becomes an ethnic homeland, an an inadequate or purely ideological ethnos's inalienable property, way to a frozen state, stasis, in which Lebensraum for a living ethnic "organ­ all kinds of human activity are repro­ ism." Blut (which is camouflaged in duced and there is no production per se. some contemporary writings as "eth­ In the naturalistic perspective, re­ nic heritage," "primordial givens," or sources are always juxtaposed to some sort of "intergenerational repro­ activity and the usage of non-renew­ duction") this perspective is always able resources always creates one and intrinsically connected to Boden (that the same problem: either you stop is, territory, landscape, geographical activity to save resources, or you use locus). This ideational linkage of ethnos resources to run eventually into activ­ to territonj would seem to prime its ity bypass due to resource exhaustion. advocates for ethnoterritorial conflict. In the functional approach-which is And, indeed, there were ahnost 300 often unreflectively and intuitively territorial claims made on behalf of u ed by politicians and experienced ethnic groups or movements and businessmen- the diversification of parties in the CIS between 1988 and resources their practice is reached by 1996. Almost half of these are still manipulation of goals and activity active and ongoing. "Territorial means. claims," "contested territories" and "territorial interests" are the most Ethnicity and Territory frequent terms that are employed in A naturalistic paradigm in the the current neo-geopolitical discourse. treatment of resources is perfectly It is worth mentioning here that in tailored to a naturalistic understanding various ethnoterritorial conflicts there of ethnicity, which is common in all are different "objects" that are con­ post-Soviet states and probably all tested: very often the "object" is terri­ of Eastern and Central Europe. One of tory itself, that is land. In this case it the reasons, perhaps, why instrumen­ might be treated and is often actually talist-constructivist frameworks have treated as a resource. In other ca e , the 18 lf right of a particular ethnic group or historians as Ifhistorical Armenia ). category to live on the territory is This construction of a "rich and an­ contested. Sometimes only property cient" history of the Azeri people has rights or managerial aspects of terri­ as a necessary component a descrip­ tory usage on the side of one or an­ tion of the Karabakh territory as the other ethnic group are contested. "heart of Azerbaijan." Similarly, Geor­ Territorial claims on behalf of an gian intellectuals declare Shida Kartli ethnic group usually seek corrobora­ or Somachablo (Southern Ossetia) "the tive legitimization. Ethnic leaders and heartland of Georgia"; Ingush leaders politicians in ethnic mobilization consider the village of Angusht, campaigns often resort to what cated in a disputed area, as the "father­ be called appropriation ofhistory, by land of the Ingush"; and Ossetian which history itself becomes an impor­ intellectuals claim that the bones of the tant political resource. The appropria­ Alans, cultural predecessors of the tion of time, thus, is a strategy em­ Ossetians, If are scattered throughout ployed in the service of appropriating the Northern Caucasus." Many of the space. Here academic reconstructions so-called national histories, encyclope­ of an group's history play a dias, and cultural studies often bear crucial role. These reconstructions are little resemblance to the balanced, usually based on a certain conception unprejudiced, and historiographically­ of time, in which it is treated as a attentive accounts by which a people's homogenous flow, characterized by the actual history and ethnography might absence of any gap, rupture, schism, or be learned. fracture (or what Heidegger might While objectivist interpretations of have called der Riss). This conception ethnic group histories aim at linking of a homogenous, continuous, and archaeological artifacts and cranial uninterrupted flow of time enables measurements with contemporary them to lend their time concept a cultures, instrumentalists and quality of transparency, supported on a constructivists pay attention to the role linguistic level by optical metaphors of of cultural repertoires and language as looking at the past, viewing it, etc. symbols around which a perception of Russian historiography, archaeology, ethnic distinctiveness crystallizes. For and ethnography are very often based the latter, historical reconstructions are on this reduction of the past to the merely ideological means used to present, and represent a projection of justify the authenticity and the conti­ the modern state of things and a nuity of one or another ethnic identity. contemporary understanding of time, In addition to claims for an ethnic based on the concepts of continuity "Ur-homeland," I would mention here and homogeneity in the historical two additional types of cases in which process [Sokolovski 1994a: 6-7]. the inseparability of ethnos and terri­ Examples of an l use of tory in the public consciousness and in cultural history are numerous. One political discourse sets the stage for such example is the case of the Azeri conflict. The first is the case of territori­ historians whose nationalistic interpre­ ally constructed ethnoses such as Altai, tation of the history of Caucasian Shor, or Khakass in southwestern Albania claims the territory of ancient Siberia, where central authorities Albania as the "grand-fatherland of arbitrarily united diverse tribal groups the Azeris" (the same territories, into one nationality on a territorial incidentally, are viewed by Armenian basis. Though the constructed "na­ 19 tions" acquired arbitrary conceptual endemic only to the first and territorial borders (which are, Caucasus and Central Asia. Rural however, partially undermined by the overpop ulation and co-residence of attempts of some constitutive groups former nomads and settled farming to have their own identity, as with the groups also characterize these regi ns. Kumanda or Teleut, currently catego­ In pre-Soviet times, when the now rized as constituents of the"Altai prevalent naturalistic paradigm of nation"), this fact has not prevented ethnic reality was limited to academia the national elite from striving for and to some extent the political elite, higher status and sovereignty, includ­ there were no claims to symbolic rights ing control over regional resources. over territories as "ethnic homelands." The other type of case is the host of As long as the pastoralists maintained ethno-territorial conflicts arising their traditional way of life, it was not wherever pastoralist and farming feasible for them to settle down in the groups corne into close and prolonged areas of their seasonal pastures in contact. The classical example here is summer- as in the case of the Azeris the cohabitation of farmers and in the alpine meadows of Karabakh­ pastoralists in the Transcaucasus or winter (as in the case of the Avars (Azeri seminomads and Armenian and Laks in lowland dry steppe areas settled farmers in Karabakh) and among the Kumyks). It was not fea­ Northern Caucasus (transhumant sible for several reasons: the dietary Avars, Laks, or other "Highlanders" needs of their animals; their own and Kumyk farmers in Daghestan) cultural and psychological stereotypes [Yamskov 1993]. (e.g., the high prestige of nomadism or of settled life in ancient villages in the Ethnic Conflicts over Territory and upper mountain zone); or traditional Resources social and state regulations regarding As mentioned above, a naturalistic land use. For neighboring farming discourse on ethnicity is reinforced by communities in valleys, these alpine or a naturalistic treatment of resources. steppe pastures, not suited for cultiva­ The Soviet and post-Soviet "political tion, were lands used by certain unconscious" binds the notion of groups of pastoralists for centuries and ethnos with territory and its resources, so in some way belonging to them. thus creating a predisposition to see Both by local state authorities predat­ territorial claims by ethnic groups as ing Russian rule and by the Russian legitimate. Contemporary research on empire itself, these pastures were ethnic conflicts in post-Soviet space officially considered to be state-owned contains numerous examples of such lands, traditionally rented by certain claims. pastoral ethnic groups ("tribes" or Contemporary ethnoterritorial "clans") which normally- without conflicts could be grouped geographi­ open war--eould not be denied access cally into six large areas: the Caucasus to them [Yamskov 1993]. and Transcaucasus, Central Asia, the Soviet agrarian policies of the late Baltic states, Moldova and Ukraine, the 1920's-early 1930's were designed to Volga-Urals region, and southern reconstruct the life of "underdevel­ Siberia [Stepanov 1994]. AI though oped" ethnic groups, including ethno-territorial conflicts are character­ pastoralists. They aimed at the cultural istic of all the regions mentioned, modernization of all ethnic groups, conflicts over scarce resources are and attempted to make them all 20 equally "advanced" settled farming Daghestan) or potential (in the moun­ communities. The results can be seen tains of Karabakh) invaders of their in numerous conummities of Azeri hi torical homelands. All these con­ semi-nomads which were compulso­ flicting claims give little cause for rily settled in lowlands (winter pas­ optimism about peaceful solutions to tures) and in the mountains (summer these conflicts. War in Nagorno­ pastures) around the present-day Karabakh is ongoing and a tense Nagomo-Karabakh republic. The state situation is reported in Kumykia, policy of resettling "highlanders" from where there have been clashes between their ancient overpopulated villages in armed Kumyks, on the one side, and the mountains to the new villages on Laks and Avars, on the other [Yamskov winter pastures in Kumykia, irrigated 1993]. by newly-built canals, lasted wel1into The problem of ethnic conflicts the 1970's. All these former pastoral over territories, caused by the imposed communities, resettled in the "new" cultural modernization of one or more places, were to a large extent really of the claimant ethnic groups, is transformed into farmers, with the prominent not only in the Caucasus, State contributing considerable re­ but also in many Central Asian re­ sources to this project. From now on gions. A serious and prolonged inter­ only professional shepherds (and their ethnic conflict over scarce resources families, in cases of former nomads) (land and water) is found in the con­ were allowed to migrate all year round flict between Tajiks of the Isfara region between seasonal mountain and and Kyrgyz of the neighboring Batken' lowland pastures with state-owned region in 1989- 90. Conflicts over water animals. In this case, settlement pat­ and pastures have long been endemic terns were changed drastically and in the region; recent violent clashes deliberately by the State, but ethnic include those which occurred in the populations involved still clearly villages of Vorukh-Tangi in 1982, and remember the "traditional" situation in Matcha and Aktatyr in 1988. Previ­ prevailing in the early 1920's and ously, before the transition to settled before. Rising ethnonationalism has life, Kyrgyz semi-nomads of the Isfara aggravated the situation, and ideas of valley and Tajik farmers occupied "the land," traditionally used by and different ecological niches. A market thus belonging to "us," are widespread existed in Vorukh, based on natural in both conflicting ethnic populations. goods exchange between the groups. For example, there are still many In the 1930's a policy of compulsory Azeris, born in the alpine zone of settlement for Kyrgyz semi-nomads Nagomo-Karabakh in the 1920's who reached the Isfara valley. A shortage of now live in adjacent lowland areas of water and scarcity of arable lands in Azerbaijan. Many "highlanders" now the valley forced the new permanent reside in new villages, constructed on settlers to concentrate around winter the same pieces of land that they pastures and settle on the lands which personally used as winter lowland were considered by local Tajiks as their pastures for sheep in the 1920's, when property (they had been using the they were boys helping their fathers lands in summer). Re-orientation of [Yamskov 1991]. On the other hand, the settled Kyrgyz economy towards inhabitants of neighboring old farming husbandry and crop-growing agricul­ settlements (Armenians, Kumyks) look ture, which had been introduced to upon them as recent (in the stepp es of their villages in the 1950's, changed the 21 Kyrgyz from former (nomadic) neigh­ be. This helps explain why former bors into (farming) competitors. nomads feel the need for "surplus Growing demographic pressure (from measure " (e.g., the planned land the 1960's to the 1990's the population privatization) to further legitimize of the valley grew by 2.5 times and their rights to lands. reached 60 thousand inhabitants) Part of the difficulty in explaining a exacerbated the situation, and led to subject like "territorialized ethnicity" increasing claims on the part of the is that it is often so deeply embedded Tajiks to the lands occupied by Kyrgyz in- as to be indistinguishable from­ settlers. Though since 1989 several the fundamental assumptions of measures have been taken to alleviate nationalistic discourse. As a topos, the tension (land tenure, small busi­ moreover, it is inherent in many con­ ness support, melioration of some ceptual systems and diSciplinary undeveloped land plots, etc.), the lexicons. We may approach this sub­ coming land privatization campaign in ject, nonetheless, through the available Kyrgyzstan is feared by Tajiks as a and much discussed topic of "national possible conflict trigger. minorities," which potentially contains This interpretation of events is both the idea of place ("national") and widely held and shared in many of ethnos ("minority"). As has been details by both Tajik and Kyrgyz social argued above, the concept of "national scientists? It is interesting to note here minority" as it is employed in Russia how naturalistic concepts of ethnicity and most of the ex-Soviet states, and legitimization of land claims substantially deviates from the stan­ through constructed etlmic histories dard international understanding. The and nationalistic discourse operate. It theoretical issues concerning the is worth noting as well, that conceptu­ interrelationships of national minori­ ally the "moral" position of perma­ ties, nationalizing states, and external nently settled groups is considered to national homelands have been bril­ be more "legitimate" compared to the liantly analyzed in the works of Roger claims of groups who were using the Brubaker (see, for example, Brubaker land seasonally. This understanding 1994). He demonstrated the relational springs from the coupled notions of character and conceptual as well as ethnos and territonj in the naturalistic "essentialist" interdependence of paradigm of ethnic reality perception. ethnicity, state, and territory (with its Nomads evidently deviate from this resources) in the political discourses of standard concept of a people, for their modern European history. The hypoth­ links to territory are different. That is esis put forward above-that the why it was considered possible and naturalistic paradigm applied to both even just to claim the return of lands resources and ethnicity subtly contrib­ which are used by settled nomads utes to the production and reproduc­ (Kyrgyz in Batken', or Avars and Laks tion of conflictual relationships be­ in Kumykia), while the reverse (de­ tween territorialized ethnic groups- is mands to return pastures previously supported by the analysis of ethno­ u ed by pastoralists and turned later territorial conflicts. In Russia the tapas into crop-growing plantations) never (ethnicity- territory), or to be more happened. That is, claims by settled exact, ethnos- territory is further farmers seem to be automatically reinforced by a proliferation of geopo­ attributed more weight and legitimacy litical publications and the influence than those by nomadic groups would they exert on foreign and domestic 22 policies, especially on such an aspect "Russian-German Relations: Geo­ of these policies as the so-called "na­ strategic Aspects" on the pages of tionalities policy" Geopolitical jargon "Geopolitical N otebooks" in A. pervades official and semi-official Dugin's journal Elementy: Eurasian documents of various parties, political Review, is constantly comparing the speeches, and discourses on ethnic, economic, demographic, and military cultural, and security issues, etc. power (in terms of natural population The curren t geopolitical works in and financial resources) of the world Russia might be categorized into centers of power (U.s.A., Japan, and several "brands" or "streams," ranging Western Europe), linking it to the from conservative nationalism (some history of the"Arian ethnoses"­ communist theoreticians and Vladimir Germans and Slavs [Morozov 994:26­ Zhirinovsky), to mystical (A. Dugin) 27] . He explicitly mentions the work of and reali t (mostly academic discourse L. Gumilev and reasons about "restora­ in research centers for security and tion of bio-potentials of the Russian strategic studies, international rela­ and German ethnoses", which, accord­ tions, etc.). I mention geopolitics in the ing to his estimation, will demand not context of this discussion of ethnic a score, but hundreds of years. conflicts and scarce resources not only A. Dugin, in a series of articles because it is an essential element in "Metaphysics of Continents" in the reproduction of the naturalistic para­ same journal (later published as an digm in the treatment of ethnicity, but essay "The Great War of Continents" in also due to the fact that the notion of the book Conspirology) [Dugin 1994], resources so frequently invoked in describes the world system as a tripar­ contemporary geopolitical writings, tite structure: the Rich North, the Poor that "geopolitics" springs up as an South (Third World), and the Poor associate whenever "resources" are North (the former second world and mentioned. Russia). According to him, the Poor As for the treatment of resources, North should not strive to become rich various strains of geopolitical thought and support the "mondialistic" projects differ in their assessments of what of development, progress, and modern­ actually happens to the resources of ization of the Rich North. It should Russia and in Russia. Often one and evade as well the"archaization of its the author in one and the same own traditions and reducing them to book or article claims that a particular the folklore level of ethno-confessional kind of resource in Russia is "unlim­ reservation." It should be spiritual, "rich," "vast," etc., and, at the intellectual, active, and aggressive. The same time, "depleted," "becoming term "The Third World," coined by scarce," etc. Resource rhetoric is representatives of the Rich North, bears present in journalistic speculations on a pejorative sense of "nobody's terri­ Russia's future and academic rumina­ tory," "nobody's source of natural and tions on Russia's past and present. I human resources," which are meant to will illustrate the way geopolitics be subordinated, exploited, and used by influences and is influenced by nation­ the rich countries. alistic discourse by citing some current Zhirinovski and his party experts Russian geopolitical publications. have published prolifically on geopo­ The magazine Elementy represents litical topics, but Zhirinovski's main mystical, metaphysical, or esoteric geopolitical ideals are discussed in two geopolitics. E. Morozov, in his article books, A to the South and Spit to 23 the West. One of basic ideas is population, including its educational reorientation of Russia's partnership level, etc.), and even moral (ideologi­ ties from the West to the South, and a cal, confessional) and political (stabil­ degree of autarky for Russia, non­ ity of regime, societal solidarity, leader­ interference in Western politics, which ship etc.) resources. Their could save a lot of natural resources analyses closely resemble and [Zhirinovski 1995:9]. strategic and global processes model­ Like metaphysical or esoteric geo­ ing studies and are basically similar to strategists, he claims that the West their western analogues [Global Re­ ("the Rich North" of A. Dugin) is sources, 1986]. plundering the rest of the world. He Unlike the classical or traditional specifically mentions that Americans geopolitical struggle for "living space," very interested in Russia's re­ in current geopolitiCS the behavior of sources, and even more, in its territory three different types of agents is as a potential site for dangerous waste analyzed: states, polities of different inhumations (including radioactive levels (unrecognized and self-pro­ waste) and ecologically dangerous claimed states such as Nagorno­ industries [Zhirinovski 1995:28]. Karabakh, Transdnestria, Chechnya His second book contains pages on etc.; Russian Federation subjects, etc.), resource rhetoric, analysiS of resource and stateless ethnoses [Razuvaev depletion politics in the colonies 1993:12- 13]. The geopolitical analysis [Zhirinovski 1995:22- 30L discussion of of ethno-separatistic movements renewable resources consumption within Russia forms an important part strategies, etc. All these discussions are of s academic "brand" of geopolitics embedded in nationalistic reasoning [Razuvaev 1993:39-48]. and the analysis is permeated by the these cussions of names of ethnic groups and peoples. geopolitics, whether in political or Academic writings on geopolitics academic discourse essentially rein­ are more balanced and neutral in their force the linkage that this paper ana­ treatment of "ethnic/national adver­ lyzes and attempts to deconstruct- the saries," and some disclaim the nation­ linkage between ethnos and resources alistic discourse of neo-Slavophiles as formed along the lines of the naturalis­ outdated. In the analysis, they put tic paradigm. This paper has tried to stress on re ources, and usually in the demonstrate that the "ethnos-re­ apposition "national interest- state sources" topos primes its adherents for interest" opt for the state interest conflict, which may be based on [Sorokin 1996: 22- 30]. Natural re­ substantiated or on artificial/mythical sources and territory are viewed as "traditional geopolitical values," and claims and claimants. Furthermore, the "the main factors of Russia's geopoliti­ citations noted above represent just a cal might." small sample of what is in fact a They revise the classical geopoliti­ massive presence in the Russian cal thought of the early-twentieth intellectual arena. The "ethnos-re­ century and add new dimensions to sources" link has become, ominously, the geostrategic analysis of the post­ an assumption of influential public period. The concept of resources is figures and the mass public. It has treated broadly as a rule: they include become part of the conceptual or in their discussions economic, finan­ linguistic landscapes of the Russian cial, human (demography, quality of and other NIS contemporary reality 24 and begun to experience a degree of tween ethnos and resources could be institutionalization in the practices and viewed as a step towards reversing its planning strategies of analysts and incipient institutionalization- a pro­ policymakers. The critical analysis put phylactic vaccine against the onslaugh t forth by this paper and its attempt to of an unexamined, and conflict-en­ de-couple, or at least reexamine the hancing, idea. naturalistic version of a linkage be­

25 Notes 1. "Provisionally" because we speak here of the so-called international terms, such as "minority," which are present in the same graphic and very similar phonemic forms in many European languages, but may have different meanings; ifit were one and the same language, then it would be homonymy in the standard use of the term. 2. The difference between "Russian" and "Rossian" (rossiisky) remains largely ignored in the West; "Rossian" refers to the state and empire and applies to citizens of all nationalitie comprising the polity's population, whereas "Rus­ sian" is an ethnic category designation. Thus the term "Russian state" (russkoe gosudarstvo) would refer to Russian polity of the feudal period, while "Rossian state" (rossiiskoe gosudarstvo) means the multiethnic polity of the new and newest history, that is Russian empire (Rossiskaya imperia) and Russian Federation (Ross iskaya Federa tsia). 3. I will cite one recent example: a law project "On the Legal Status of Ethno­ cultural Associations, Representing Linguistic, Ethno-confessional, and Ethnic Minorities", discussed in the Committee of Public Associations and Religious Organizations of the State Duma on March 18, 1997, contains the following defini­ tion of "people, leading a traditional way oflife (minority indigenous, or aboriginal peoples); [these are] peoples (minorities) ofthe Russian Federation, at a less advanced phase ofsocio-economic development that of the majority, whose way of lifefully to a large degree depends on the natural environment oftheir place ofresidence and whose legal status partially or fully regulated by their own customs, traditions, or a special jurisdiction" [emphasis added - 5.5.]. 4. A "titular group" in the Soviet and post Soviet contexts means a group which has given its name to the respective administrative and political unit, or state, such as Kazakhs and Latvians in Kazakhstan and Latvia; Bashkirs, Karelians and Tatars in Bashkortostan, Karelia, and Tatarstan etc. A titular group, being often a numerical minority within the state--or, as in the case of some republics in the Russian Federation, even on the territory of a respective republic, could at the same time make use of its top positions in the regional power hierarchy and effectively be a majority (or power elite) with political behavior patterns appropri­ ate for a majority. 5. In Russian, the term malye narody was changed at the end of the 1980's for reasons of political correctness to malochislennye narody ("small-numbered"), as the word malyi can have the meaning not of "numerically small," but also that of "smallness" as opposed to "greatness." 6. See recent discussion in Current Anthropology, especially the remarks made by S. Arutiunov [1998 Vol. 39, No. I, p. 8]. 7. Unpublished reports from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan of the members of the Network of Ethnological Monitoring and Early Warning of Conilicts in Post­ Soviet States (Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Russian Academy of Sciences).

26 Bibliography Antane A., Tsilevich B. Latvia: A Modelfor Ethnological Mon itoring. (Moscow, 1997). Arutiunov S.A., Cheboksarov N N . "Peredacha informatsii kak mekhanism sushchestvovania etnosotsialnikh i biologicheskikh grupp chelovechestva" [Infor­ mation Transfer as a Survival Mechanism of Human groups]. In: Rasy i narody. (Moscow: Nauka, 1972). Arutiunov S.A. "Set' kommunikatsii kak osnova etnicheskogo bytia" [Communi­ cation Network as the Basis of Ethnic Existence]. In: Arutiunov S. A. Narody i Kultury: razvitie i vzaimodeistvie. (Moscow: Nauka, 1989). Bromley YuV. Etnos i etnografia.[Ethnos and Ethnography] (Moscow: Nauka, 1973). Bromley Yu.v. (ed.) Sovremennie etnicheskie protsessy v SSSR [Contemporary Ethnic Processes in the USSR]. (Moscow, 1977). Bromley YuV. (ed). Problemy tipologii v etnografii [Typological Problems in ­ raphy]. (Moscow: Nauka, 1979). Bromley Yu.v. Sovremennie problemy etnografii. [Modern Problems of Ethnography]. (Moscow: Nauka, 1981). Bromley Yu.V Ocherki teorii etnosa [Essays on the Theory of Ethnos]. (Moscow: Nauka, 1983). Bromley Yu.v. Etnosotsialnie protsessy: teoria, istoria, sovremennost'. [Ethnosocial Processes: Theory, History, Modernity]. (Moscow: Nauka, 1987). Bromley Yu.V Natsionaln ie protsessy v SSSR: v poiskakh novykh podkhodov. [National Processes in the USSR: In Search of ew Approaches]. (Moscow: Nauka, 1988). Brubaker R. National Minorities, Nationalizing States, and External National Home­ lands in the New Europe: Notes towards a Relational Analysis. A research paper within collaborative Research Planning Group. (UCLA, Department of Sociology, 1994). Dugin A. "Ot sakral'noi geografii k geopolitike" [From Esoteric Geography to Geopolitics]. In: Elementy, Nos.l, 3-5 (1994). Filippov A.F. "Sotsiologia i kosmos," [Sociology and the Cosmos] in SocioLogos. (Moscow: Progress, 1991), 241-273. Filippov A.F. "Nabliudatel' imperii," [The Observer of the Empire] Voprosy sotsiologii Vo!.l, No.1 (1992): 89-120. Gellner E. Sta te and Society in Soviet Thought. (London: Basil Blackwell, 1986). Global Resources and International Conflict. Environmental Factors in Strategic PoliC1j and Action. A UN-SIPRI Study. (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1986). Gumilev, L.N. Etnogenez i biosfera zemli [Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth] (Leningrad: Leningrad State University, 1989). Kolossov V, Glezer 0., Petrov N. -Territorial Conflicts and Boundaries in the Former Soviet Union. (Durham, North Carolina: University of Durham Press, 1992). 27 Korostelev A. "Dinamika etnicheskogo sostava selskikh poselenii Bashkortostana," [The Ethnic Composition Dynamics of Rural Settlements in Bashkortostan] in Konfliktnaya etnichnost' i etnicheskie konflikty. (Moscow, 1994), 67­ 92. Morozov E. "Rossiisko-germanskie otnoshenia: geostrategicheskii aspekt," [Rus­ sian-German Relations: a Geostrategic Aspect] Elementy 5 (1994):.26-30. Perepiolkin L.S., Shkaratan 0.1. "Ekonomicheskii suverenitet respublik i puti razvitia narodov," (Economic Sovereignty of the Republics and Ways of the Peoples' Development] Sovetskaya etnografia 4 (1989): . Pimenov VV Udm urty: opyt komponentnogo analiza etnosa [Udrnurty. An Attempt at Component Analysis of the Ethnos]' (Leningrad: Nauka, 1977). Razuvaev V. V Geopolitika postsovetskogo prostranstva [Geopolitics of Post-Soviet Space]. (Moscow, 1993). Regards l'anthropologie sovietique. (Cahier Monde Russe et Sovietique, Vol.XXXI, N.2-3) (Paris, 1990). Th. "Ethnicity in the Soviet Union: Analytical Perceptions and Political Strategies," Co mparative Studies in Society and History Vol. 31, No.3. (Oxford Uni­ versity Press, 1989). Shirokogoroff S. Etnos. lssledovanie osnovnykh printsipov etnicheskikh i etnograficheskikh yavlenii [Ethnos. Research of the Basic Principles of Ethnic and Ethnographic Phenomena]' (Shanghai, 1923). Shkaratan 0.1. (Ed.) Etnosotsialnie problemy goroda [Ethnosocial Problems of a City]. (Moscow, 1986). Slezkin Yu. "The Fall of Soviet Ethnography, 1928- 38", Current Anthropology 32 (1 991): 476-84. Sokolovski S.V. "Etnograiicheskoe issledovanie: ideal i real'nost,'" [Ethnographic Research: The Ideal and Reality] Etnographicheskoe obozrenie Nos. 2-3 (1993) . Sokolovski S.V. "Paradigmy etnologicheskogo znania," [paradigms of Ethnologi­ cal Knowledge] Etnograficheskoe obozrenie [Ethnographic Review] 2 (1994a): 17. Sokolovski S.v. "Etnichnost' kak pamiat'," [Ethnicity as Memory] in Ethnocognitology: Approaches towards Ethnic Identity Research. (Moscow, 1994b), 931. Sokolovski S.v. "The Third Way or an Attempt at Clarification in a Divided Soci­ ety (Self-Reflexivity in Anthropological Research of Ethnic Conflicts)," Mir Rossii [The World of Russia], Vol. Ill, No.2, j (1994c): 119- 148. Sokolovski S.Y. "On Autarky, Nationalism, and Post-Soviet Identity," Ethnomethodology: Problems, Approaches, Concepts. 2 (Moscow, 1995), pp.87- 1l4. Sokolovski .\l, Tishkov V "Ethnicity," Encyclopedia ofSocial and Cultural Anthropol­ (Routledge, 1997), 190- 193. Soldatova G.u. "Etnicheskaia identichnost' i etnopoliticheskaia mobilizatsia," [Ethnic Identity and Ethnopolitical Mobilization] in Drobizheva L.M., Aklaev 28 A.R., Koroteeva VV, Soldatova C.U. (eds.) Demokratizatsia i obrazy natsionalizma v Rossiiskoi Federatsii 90-kh godov [Democratization and Images of Nationalism in the Russian Federation of the 19905J. (Moscow, 1996). Sorokin K.E. Geopolitika sovremennosti i geostrategia Rossii [Geopolitics of Modernity and Geostrategy of Russia]. (Moscow, 1996). Ssorin-Chaikov NV. "Natsionalnie otno5henia i obraz 'drugikh' v kulture tsentralno-sibirskikh evenkov," Ethnic Relations and the Image of "Others" in the Culture of the Central Siberian Evenks] Osipov AG. (ed.) Etnicheskie konflikhJ v SSSR: Prichiny, osobennosti, problemy izuchenia [Ethnic Conflicts in the USSR: Causes, Peculiarities, Research problems]. (Moscow, 1991). Stepanov VV "Hotbeds of Inter-Ethnic Tension," Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vol. 64, No. 2 (1994): 98- 105. Susokolov A.A. "Strukturnie faktory samoorganizatsii etnosa" [Structural Factors in the Self-Organization of an Ethnos], Rasy i narody [Races and Peoples]. (Mos­ cow: auka, 1990). Tishkov VA "Glasnost' and the Nationalities within the Soviet nion/Third World Quarterly (October 1989). Tishkov V. A "The Crisis in Soviet Ethnography," Current Anthropology. Vol.33, No. 4 (1992): 371- 382. TIshkov VA. Ethnicity, Nationalism, and Conflict In and after the Soviet Union: The Mind Aflame. (London: Sage, 1997), 334. Tishkov VA "Russian and Soviet Anthropology," Encyclopedia of Social and Cul­ tural Anthropology. (Routledge, 1997),493-495. Van den Berghe P.L. The Ethnic Phenomenon. (New York: Elsevier, 1981). Voronkov V "Do 'Russians' Exist as an Ethnic Community?"in Segbers K. (ed.) Post-Soviet Puzzles: Mapping the Political Economy ofthe Former Soviet Union. (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verl.-Ges, 1995), VolA, 81-90. Yamskov A.N. "Causes of Ethnic Conflicts over Territories in the Former Nomadic and Pastoral Areas of the Caucasus," Regional'nie problemy mezhnatsional'nikh otnoshenii v Rossii. [Regional Problems of Interethnic Relations in Russia]. (Omsk, 1993),322- 326. Yamskov AN. Conflict in Transcaucasus: The Case of Nagomo­ Karabakh," Theory and Society, 20 (5) (1991): 631--660. Zhirinovski V V Plevok na Zapad [Spit to the West]. (Moscow, 1995).

29