CEU eTD Collection

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master for of the ofdegree of partialfulfilment the In requirements

E T A THN HE CASEHE OF LTE IC Department of RNATIVE Supervisors: I DENTIFICATIONIN THE B Central European Central European

ELARUSIANS ACQUIRING

S

Sociology and SocialAnthropology and Sociology Budapest, Hungary Budapest, TATE Volha Biziukova Volha

Submitted to P OLAKA 20 prof prof By M

13

essor EMBERSHIP essor

University

Ayşe Ayşe Dan Rabinowitz Dan

C Çağlar

ONTEXT ANONTEXT OF R

EGIME

K

.

ARTA Arts :

CEU eTD Collection and inclusive tendencies T by tropes.differentusing themselves an to attribution the for criteria strict the not are traits thr dramatically changed practices cultural to due categories ethnic the to ancestors the and themselves assign applicants the way the affects Polaka Karta the of narrative The identificationcontextualized is inabroader andhistor structural of basis con the and identification of trajectories the stories, family and practices cultural the with connection in identification identification. Poland Pole’ (The Polaka Karta for applied who citizens Belarusian of identification ethnic the with deals thesis This

he identification and identification he h cmo srcua ad itrcl otx aog ih niiul igahcl stories. biographical individual with along context historical and structural common the . the h mmesi i to countries two in membership The

ih eea cmuiissmlaeul u dsrb his ways theirs describe but simultaneously communities several with

in

- In et itriw wt te plcns o te at Polaka. Karta the for applicants the with interviews depth the

The applicants follow multiple routesmultiple follow applicants The the status the present research I consider the biographic dynamics of ethnic ethnic of dynamics biographic the consider I research present . s Card), s struction of the categories of categories the of struction

of the Karta Polaka Karta the of a

type of alternative of type Abstract ough generations ough the 2

introduction of bureaucratic discourse. The The discourse. bureaucratic of introduction conditions

holders

state membership state ethnic category. category. ethnic affiliation

in their identificationtheir in seii stain o ethnic for situation specific a

are n t rsn mmn cultural moment present at and ic

. characterized with exclu with characterized al The analysis is made on the on made is analysis The

context. The applicants affiliate applicants The

regime

The process of of process The

introduced by introduced of belonging belonging of conditioned sive the ir

CEU eTD Collection References Conclusion their and analysisfindings III. Chapter Empirical II. Chapter Methodology review I. Chapter Literature Introduction Abstract Content 3.2. Applicants’ experience of personal identification ofpersonal experience Applicants’ 3.2. chosen and given background: personal Applicants’ 3.1.

......

......

......

......

...... 3

......

......

......

......

55 51 25 22 13 39 25

4 2

CEU eTD Collection regard case Each consequences. and homogenous a not is regime citizenship alternative The population thaninpower declines (Ong, 1999). 2013). soli tendencies ethnitization discourse citizenship list inclusive fields transnational of examples immigrants Initially example ofthe the affect affiliation state single a of model classic the challenging regimes citizenship alternative the way the with deals research present multi with associated are regimes alternative provided with individual of groups different for regimes citizenship Many Introduction , movement a

proved that proved and

nation to h ntoa sae n hs iuto rte re rather situation this in state national The ,

u sanguinis jus regimes within the from h atraie eie wr ascae with associated were regimes alternative the y efr sae i rsos to response in states welfare by

states states involved, states

alterna

Germany, France, Britain, USA USA Britain, France, Germany,

the

the the

to for

(Soysal 1998). However, the However, 1998). (Soysal wards re in Europe and worldwide have been recently introducing the alternative the introducing recently been have worldwide and Europe in tts or/and status oiat citizenship dominant , - tive state tive ex

ethnitization tendency ethnitization . This duality is conditioned byconditioned dualityis This . vn ihn n stat one within even rnils o ctznhp transfer citizenship for principles - citizens and emigrants and citizens

de -

should be be should tntszd post ethnitisized the - membership

relation the the tahd e o rgt ta ae ifrn fo those from different are that rights of set attached considered s

eie Jpk 20, p.429 2003, (Joppke regime between them between the

introduced by Poland is not less influential less not is e,

4

individual - ple population. population.

, often by often , national forms of citizenship citizenship of forms national and other countries seem to support the idea idea the support to seem countries other and world r sae b bt ehiiain n de and ethnitization both by shaped are the -

tt mmesi o te individual. the of membership state in its unique context unique its in - ofgrs h canl o cnrl over control of channels the configures rwn imgain flows immigration growing - the wide

practice with regard to regard with practice ,

ethnic identification following the the following identification ethnic the ( persistency and convergence of convergence and persistency the T ope 200 Joppke he alternative regime endows an an endows regime alternative he examples of examples

rnig usata rights substantial granting states target . .

Hence, Hence,

from population , ik n Baubock and Vink 3,

- (Baubock

430) introducing the new new the introducing the current . aforementioned n ot cases most In embedded in in embedded group, its its

. 2010 changes in changes M premises anifold

) with ) scale,

The The

jus jus to -

CEU eTD Collection to affiliation their alternative the Poland by issued document identification the I research this In facilitat and involved agents diverse affiliation, multiple influence from Apart person. scratch from T individual take to him the categories. individual and position political economic, of acquisition The identification. m The dramaticallyendowing rights. fromimmigrantssubstantial with T the he he

origin political broader belonging to the Polish nation but does not grant the citizenship, creating the case of an an of case the creating citizenship, the grant not does but nation Polish the to belonging change to ae f rnig lentv ctznhp o odr ioiy m minority border to citizenship alternative granting of case ultiple

a e hs tpwt beneficial with step this ccept s

the way a person perceives him/herself perceives person a way the s inaccepting multiple routes formultiple principle state membership state T

a t ngtae the negotiate to has in

he alternative membership alternative he but is but

tt membership state and The affiliation to more than one than more to affiliation The the

deal with deal identification process,by identification imposed actualize ethnic actualize the this

introduced in introduced and appeal and

and economic and the the

Polish and Belarusian state Belarusian and Polish new status often is caused or accompanied by the change in change the by accompanied or caused is often status new multiple tt ohr gns uh s hrh or church as such agents other state

the ethnic identification of the Belarusian citizens citizens Belarusian the of identification ethnic the

identification. regime. The people who accepted this status have to negotiate to have status this accepted who people The regime. s

directly to the the to directly

-

status among fellow among status eie rae dsicie icmtne fr the for circumstances distinctive creates regime the previous biographical background and identification of a of identification and background biographical previous the membership maybe complex more rights attached to the status the to attached rights -

based affiliation. affiliation. based self context and the and context -

ecpin n te a o aflain o different to affiliation of way the and perception regime

, 5

state , when targeted when , named Karta Polaka. This document confirms document This Polaka. Karta named ethnic ethnic

.

s The situation of uncertainty determined by determined uncertainty of situation The

. the place is fixed in the official status of individual.of status officialthe in fixed is

The To comprehend the s the comprehend To a - members i members

background of the candidate the of background new membershipnew status, nqees f igahcl situation biographical of uniqueness

granting in historical consequence historical in

but at the at

n different n

state informal informal the .

co

actual encourages candidates encourages - ethnics, ethnics, mes a differ may embers ituation created by by created ituation

co associations

motives driving motives mmunities

does o not who acquired who is granted on on granted is

, expecting ,

individual of events of his or her or his .

ccur may The .

CEU eTD Collection 2012). Korys of integration th was circumstance important The the the over policies be should Law Polaka Karta The of that is justification official The H citizenship. targets law The beshould supported by b may Polaka Karta cases the Polish, grandparents), acceptabletwo grand knowledgeof the is document the granting for basis The proclamation official funds. certain reduction healthcare, following confirming Polaka Karta introduced Poland introduction of thedocument. individual the for Polaka Karta

the

political forces at at forces political oihnto,koldeadpatcn oihtaiin n utm. In customs. and traditions Polish practicing and knowledge nation, Polish

state

of that period that of compliance set of rights: free long free rights: of set

territo the affiliation of an of affiliation the owever, the law does not address not does law the owever, legislative norms in norms legislative h fc that fact The t h sm tm, t time, same the At

ry in the

s of the project the of s power resulted in the failure of the the of failure the in resulted power . . The document also document The . citizens

consequence Firstly o pbi tasot ot, re iiig f uem a museums of visiting free costs, transport public for the gatd o niiul for individuals to granted e confirmation from

at Plk de nt rvd ctznhp s underlined is citizenship provide not does Polaka Karta ,

of the Karta Polaka Karta the

the

individual to the Polish nation Polish the to individual identification

- h 1 cutis of countries 15 the term national visa, unrestricted work, education, work, unrestricted visa, national term

viewed

with

Polish state is under duty to compatriots that appeared out appeared that compatriots to duty under is state Polish the Pl’ cr i translation) in card (Pole’s of moving of expected e he repatriation process toward deportees and their their and deportees toward process repatriation he

EU system EU the

in the general course of Polish migration/diaspora Polish of course general the in does not make the acquisition acquisition the make not does evidence international law and the absence of support from support of absence the and law international , an 6

borders or borders we need to look to need we

project

a considerable Polish minority in minority Polish considerable a accredit acceptance (Fox and Vermeersch 2010, Vermeersch and (Fox

of Polish ancestry (at least, one grand or grand one least, (at ancestry Polish of

was initiated was the the initiative ed

other involuntary displacement.other involuntary a

signed declaration of affiliation to ofaffiliation signed declaration Polish omr SR ht rhbt dual prohibit that USSR former rmto o Pls clue that culture Polish of promotion

f Poland of ,

at endows the grantee the endows

(Kicinger and Korys 2011 Korys and (Kicinger

n 2008 in cultural the general context context general the

in 1999. T 1999.

of citizenship citizenship of o h E and EU the to

organization. Ti document This . he discussion he the Kicinger and and Kicinger nd

Germany. exclusive exclusive receiving access to access with

easier. of the of

n all in

the the ). s ,

CEU eTD Collection rzeczywistości polskiej do 1 citizens resembles It community. citizens’ the to belong not does but state the to belongs who member national non a of status fixed officially an creates state The rights. of set and status both in o regime membership The “citizen”. “co and “compatriots” as people these to kin the tradition cultural preserve and (Polonia) diaspora involuntary present narratives official specific a constructed Polaka Karta of introduction The less. Poland in immigrants labor A citizens. Belarusian Polaka, Karta received people thousand 100 than more 2008. in force in came co typical a is politicians power right the and countries European to population of outflow The significant scale the under initiated Asia Central in descendants

Fundacja Instytut Spraw Publicznych, Strategie przetrwania: Adaptacja ukraińskich migrantów zarobkowych zarobkowych migrantów ukraińskich Adaptacja przetrwania: Strategie Instytut SprawPublicznych, Fundacja - ethnics

su o Kra Polaka Karta of issue .

-

state becomes the overcoming of historical injustice. The official proclamations refer refer proclamations official The injustice. historical of overcoming the becomes state h spot of support The (Joppke 2003, p. 432). p. 2003, (Joppke

than the Repatriation A Repatriation the than h clna mdl f tt mmesi ta distingu that membership state of model colonial the , mostly the residents of border regions border of residents the mostly ,

(Kicinger and Korys(Kicinger 2011

nother major group was the Ukrainians the was group major nother instytucjonalnej Warszawa 2009 Warszawa instytucjonalnej case By the end of 2012 of end the By

h projects the the 1

(Joppke 2003). (Joppke . In . re

people targeted as targeted people - The activity of Polish state in state Polish of activity The mre i 20 atr oad faced Poland after 2005 in emerged

other countries the number of the c the of number the countries other ct

ffered by Karta Polaka differs from the Polish citizenship Polish the from differs Polaka Karta by ffered . The bill was accepted by the Parliament in 2007 and 2007 in Parliament the by accepted was bill The . rnig tt mmesi t co to membership state granting , ).

The law was targeted at targeted was law The according to the estimation the to according -

nationals” while avoiding names derived from from derived names avoiding while nationals” 7

“Repatriation A “Repatriation s

Poles

that . They are claimed to compose the Polish the compose to claimed are They .

is often not often is who moved out of out moved who -

wing pro wing including aeoy f tt members state of category a who form the largest group of group largest the form who broader context can be seen as as seen be can context broader ct” ( ct”

the case. The joining with joining The case. the 2000 - se nationals ished ard holders was an order an was holders ard a nationalist party nationalist

much broader group of of group broader much bu 4 tosn of thousand 42 about - a of tnc b right by ethnics

) ae f emigration of wave

the Polish officials, Polish the any acquire not did the Polish borders Polish

n full and came to came - citizen - The . wing

CEU eTD Collection at available census2009, national results of The Belarus, 3 failed. Polaka Karta hold to forbiddeputies to project the legislative However, principle. national the following inpositions unequal people Lithuanian lawthe puts 2 at country homogeneous 80% than more Belarus In economic partner the European and 1994, by shaped is Belarus in situation The the relation of course general members amendments norms legislation Polaka states different of context the fr general The membership regime them. for from people of category 1999), (Ong Ong by suggested sovereignty” “graduated of model the the of introduction in entering in processes globalizing to reaction a

Here and all other statistical data in the se in the data statistical other all and Here unequivocal in an initiativeofPoland met the Lithuania and Belarus

internaleconomic politicaland situation. countries as

o hold to countries an an the maintain

ee cetd that accepted were ame created by the Karta Polaka Karta the by created ame nefrne n h itra affairs internal the in interference administrati U oe Pln fcd with faced Poland zone. EU .

the n discr and Karta Polaka the state attempts to expand the sphere of control of sphere the expand to attempts state the Polaka Karta icuig Poland, including ,

at Polaka. Karta a

visa regime. visa this respect this s

ey otold cnm sse. T system. economy controlled vely

between two countries in countries two between the mnts ifrn gop o citizens of groups different iminates of population of

ht ece i dvre ways diverse in reacted that iies f te state other of citizens

ction are taken from National statistical committee of the Republic of ofthe Republic committee statistical fromNational taken are ction prohibit

. h aue ecin of reaction acute The

Belarus forms forms Belarus However,

the the the the r dwhl bcue f political of because downhill are

dniytesle s Belarusian as themselves identify authoritative governmental regime, establish regime, governmental authoritative cnm, ht ee aiiae i the in facilitated were that economy,

oenetl mlye and employees governmental 8

acquired a different sound when introduced in introduced when sound different a acquired http://census.belstat.gov.by/intro.aspx

a in the sphere of cultural and national policy national and cultural of sphere the in

asv otlw f epe Through people. of outflow massive ht os o comply not does that a

the last decade and was conditioned by conditioned was and decade last the political alliance political by s ly

negative way. Lithuania claimed that the the that way.Lithuaniaclaimed negative

the

. raig a creating 2 .

e relation he eauin tt flos the follows state Belarusian eau qualified Belarus . At

h bgnig f 2012 of beginning the -

with Russia with it incorporates a new new a incorporates it

oe of zone ofottos and confrontations s ih international with

3 f Belarus of , bei , h Parliament the

g ahr a rather ng , following , by locality , the main the , the a

special special Karta ed in ed with the

CEU eTD Collection and Russia Soviet between the Commonwealth common A fact relevant research. theapproach alsomakes ofdiasporapresent studiesnot for the associations local of number people of activity the and perception Polish The scale. Belaru significant in a population achieve descendant may Polaka Karta the of release the Belarus In 2009). (Winnicki thousand 900 to amount mayorigin Polish claim can who people of number G in reside 000 230 000, 294 is Belarus in Poles be to themselves claiming people of number the statistics official the to According emigration outflow. candidates eligible potentially are intensions political or cultural while Polaka Karta are mobility geographical and considerations economic made well in reduction rapid The 2011. with coincided Polaka Karta of introduction The religion while people, of communication vague. have not does state the

considerable share of of share considerable oen eauin tt wr icroae in incorporated were state Belarusian modern migration plans migration usa lnug i dmntn bt in both dominating is language Russian denom history of Belarus and Poland. Their territories were united in united were territories Their Poland. and Belarus of history inations until its partition at partition its until

attractive

are Orthodox (about andare (about Orthodox Catholics 80%) 10%). an the

articulated course and the “ideal image” of a Belarusian citizen is citizen Belarusian a of image” “ideal the and course articulated the population with Polish origins in Belar in origins Polish with population , they do not embrace the major part of Poles’ descendants. This This descendants. Poles’ of part major the embrace not do they , te at Polaka Karta the , recently re recently

for many Belarusians many for

t - hrl frs dapr cmuiy n sne f self of sense a in community diaspora a forms hardly s he Belarusian language is used is language Belarusian he being and uncertainties in some segments of segments some in uncertainties and being

the end of the 18 the of end the

(Levitt and Glick Schiller 2004). Schiller Glick and (Levitt - rodno region in Western Belarus. Potentially the the Potentially Belarus. Western in region rodno established Polish state, the territories to the West West the to territories the state, Polish established 9

a

o the to rae te oeta for potential the creates eis f cnmc rss n 08 and 2008 in crises economic of series . According to the common common the to According . the th neglected

the the century. Afterward century.

fiil icus an discourse official

leading motives for people to get to people for motives leading usa Empire. Russian . marginally. marginally. Considering us is conditioned by conditioned is us

the Although there are a are there Although

s Polish Lithuanian Polish

the territories of territories the The

Afte the the number of of number the a d

the dominating job significant r the

the war war the - opinion market market

a

daily daily long - CEU eTD Collection wereused mothertongue the instead not presented, was ofnationality category the previously held Incensuses 13/05/2013. ofaccess date 4 e process the as Polaka Karta for applicants of by conditioned identification of trajectories the and affiliation of categories the constructing of ways the with condition research The aims. research specific following the includes gener The for Karta P identification policy, channels to alter the new sphe all of transformations rapid shaped changes historical dynamic The BSSR. t government Soviet c the in WWII After system. political and Belarus polanization resided Belarusians of to According Poland. in included were Minsk from

he fall of of fall he Polish 1921 Census Dem and 1921 Polish political system political

the to to s

l eerh su o ehi ietfcto o te applicants the of identification ethnic of issue research al

the olaka ancestors andconditioning their identity the way the

BSSR BSSR

influence the identification process included, among others, linguistic linguistic others, among processincluded, identification the influence

change n h cus of course the in documents Soviet Union Soviet the brought another dramatic change of incorporation in incorporation of change dramatic another brought

,

of people external forces and subjective agency subjective and forces external

the a

, economic ,

n fiil ea status legal official in considerable

n h trioy f Poland of territory the on applicants perceive t perceive applicants . These peripeties determined the biographies of today’s applicants today’s of biographies the determined peripeties These . ographic Data ographic ,

in Belarus became an independent state in 1991 in the borders of of borders the in 1991 in state independent an became Belarus

the the organization res of their lives their of res number course of realization of ownnationalrealization course of aain oeet I 13 the 1939 In movement. Sanation , available at available , the the ourse of the repatriation program approved by approved program repatriation the of ourse

moved from the Western Belarus to Poland. Poland. to Belarus Western the from moved biographies of people who went through went who people of biographies

hemselves and and hemselves and national and 10 mbedded in mbedded

http://www.kresy.co.uk/census_demographic.html of people accompanied by granting granting by accompanied people of

. the situation situation the The 4 . the

h triois were territories The establishment of a new a of establishment census results in 1921 in results census . - cultural I approach the ethnic identification ethnic the approach I a

their broader structural setting structural broader describes of

ethnic identification. family stories family

polic

religion affiliation and and affiliation religion

how y. nein of annexion - o the for building project. building The the

T ujce t active to subjected

he the oit economic soviet about 1 million 1 about state brought state state

. at Polaka Karta

Karta Polaka Karta It also deals deals also It and s

intended intended

Western

religion

and the the and s everal After new

, the a

CEU eTD Collection and categories the to turn I section second the In stories. family and background cultural chapter third an the The to devoted research. the in applied chapter methodology the second of The overview the identification. provides ethnic and regimes citizenship alternative of issues fi the work the of structure In community withsharedcollective activity of members community. the to affiliation the ethno term the text in purposes, conceptual the for only serves community political “ conceptualized ti of dimension reconsidered perspectiv 228). p. 2000, (Vila society” in positions and relationship social define that meanings the about 1994 1992, (Somers process the In issue that followingthe applicants background. biographical individual of context ecnat connection descendant

T

rm o te research the of frame he process cannot be reducedbe processcannot he that

has sufficient received not

e, experience of experience

The . the c the takes place in a gi a in place takes

united a example of example

e lclt ad eaiiy (So relativity and locality me, following Weberian definition as identity referring to the “origin” or or “origin” the to referring identity as definition Weberian following ategories of ethnic belonging ethnic of ategories alysis of empirical findings. In the first section I deal with the applicants’ the with deal I section first the In findings. empirical of alysis

identity the in incorporating allows approach narrative (Weber 1968, (Weber ) . ethnic group since since group ethnic Ethnic identity formation goes within “ongoing discursive struggle struggle discursive “ongoing within goes formation identity Ethnic ”

ethnic identification conditioned by the by conditioned identification ethnic

wie ainl dniy mle references implies identity national while , Belarusian young people in youngpeople Belarusian

the the rst chapter deals with the current debates in literature on the the on literature in debates current the with deals chapter rst ven cultural context within existing discourses and practices. practices. and discourses existing within context cultural ven The identification

Williams 1989, Williams

academic either to personal agency or to the externalthe forces. agencyto personal or to either applican

or specific cultural (Brubakeror 2004). patterns they 11

ts attention.

become the become es 94 p 6 p. 1994, mers s interpreted is o o itrc wt ec ohr comprising other each with interact not do for the Karta Polaka are not perceived not are Polaka Karta the for

h rsac poie an provides research The

Joppke 2005 Joppke

the local context of Belarus, which is an an is which Belarus,of context local the

narrative devices that are that devices narrative

- as as national is also used to denote to used also is national ) alternative 06) . a narrative representational representational narrative a As long as this distinction this as long As . h ehi iett is identity ethnic The o n institutionalized an to state membership state

insight into the the into insight

concept the the concept

always

I as n this n the the is

CEU eTD Collection applicants relation in their to statusandactivity intheeconomic broader political and context. identification. of trajectories In the general the In

discussion 12

I frame the ethnic identific ethnic the frame I ation of ation

the

CEU eTD Collection experience flexible global strategies She influence. states (199 Ong partly ( limits outsideofnation citizenship in of meaning of transformation tendencies current describes in transformation citizenship” “denationalized concept an “blood” of principles in coded particular citizenship national of principle egalitarian the to contrast in positions level transnational model R state national the in claims membership territory state the on residence continuous their of basis the on form state of form in migration major The debatesCurrent on Chapter I. eferring to the experience of guest of experience the to eferring denizenship

capital eie te individual the defines

o hnig oiia, cnmc n cultural and economic political, changing to

istic identities on diverse base diverse on identities istic 9) 9) for the capital accumulation capital the for . Literature review The transnational practices condition the new mode of identification identification of mode new the condition practices transnational The research eosdr te idea the reconsiders - . the membership The subjects driven by striving for for striving by driven subjects The ,

lblzn world globalizing after Ham the the

alternative multiple p 189). (p. trend underlines more adequate way. way. adequate more

for

mer, follo ’s

national itself in contrast to contrast in itself national migrants Sassen, 2002

This status

and associates it associates and ws t f post of e eest t approach to necessity he d “lineage” (p. 209 (p. “lineage” d . -

workers h eegne f n alternative an of emergence The the post

in the context of interplay between national states and states national between interplay of context the in - on

s and the decline of the universalistic national identity identity national universalistic the of decline the and s state citizenship regimes was analyzed by Brubaker (1989). Brubaker by analyzed was

- - hne n iiesi discourse citizenship in change ainl approach national national the discourse ). , She suggests that ‘denationalized’ denotes the the denotes ‘denationalized’ that suggests She

13

she she ai of basis

with suggests the oe establishes model capital accumulation are expected to be be to expected are accumulation capital a calne by challenged was -

granting partial civil rights to migrants tomigrants granting rights civil partial 211) nvra hmn rights human universal

‘ that the new the that odtos n hi cross their in conditions . post Sassen (2002) suggests that the that suggests (2002) Sassen h nw iiesi regimes citizenship new the bu te eln in decline the about (p. -

national 161) . .

to classic citizenship citizenship classic to multiple membership multiple ifrn right different Embededness of new of Embededness I ’ t lead t

that refer that . Soysal Y.

s He calls He

odtoe by conditioned s

to ie o fixed

as flexible as the rise of rise the the s

this new this to - (1998) border border -

nation status being being the n

as .

CEU eTD Collection research with Alongside simult ethnitization re and ethnitization both in result may tendencies globalizing that argues and membership” political latter. the trend opposite two with characterized (2003) Joppke Domini fields policy emigrant the of means the by sovereignty and boundaries attractiveness Such with associated is and rights economic Caglarthatc grantingintentions. despiteargues the state models regime t investigated Turkey in card” “pink of example policies. emigrants of cases the to turn scholars research immigrants’ To sovereignty (Ong 1999,p.7). th treating Following under making subjectivity complete the image of alternative membership regimes that initially relied mostly on the on mostly relied initially that regimes membership alternative of image the complete

“lightcitizenship”

a ivsiae b Levit by investigated was can Haiti Republic (2003) and by the state the by a fi t ofr sud lentv to alternative sound a offer to fail may forces division forces deals These imperatives impinge within one impingewithin imperatives These eir citizens in different zones. different in citizens eir the the

for for

requirement of flexibili of requirement ih ae of cases with

approaches considers the an in response to emigration flow emigration to response in eously 2003,p.454). (Joppke potential grantees potential

regime has (Joppke 2003) (Joppke the concern oh membership both

alternative citizenship regimes for for regimes citizenship alternative icpiig control disciplining t

ing a n Dhs o te xmls f eio Bai, the Brasil, Mexico, of examples the on Dehasa and

potential to marginalize the holders and, hence, marginalizeand, theholders potential to s

: de : ty the nation the ty

. the primarily (Caglar 2002) (Caglar He challenges the linear trajectory linear the challenges He

Ong conceptualizes Ong - ethnitization for the former and re and former the for ethnitization broad 14

models for immigrants and emigrants as as emigrants and immigrants for models he introduction of of introduction he

state a state

with set of ties with fellow with ties of set classic

states introduce states of (Caglar,

. migrant

nd often correspond to rightversus to correspond often nd

ae oent situation modernity late The way sending state reconsiders its reconsiders state sending way The itizenship itizenship

citizenship

2002) this phenomenon this practices in the frame of transnational of frame the in odr minorities border cannot reduced tosocio be an .

differentiated regimes differentiated She concludes that s that concludes She o ptnil candidates potential for alternativ - , citizens and citizens

a

substantial A. Caglar on the the on Caglar A. to “post to - ethnitization for ethnitization e membership e

s graduated as (Ong . E the - loses national national body of of body

ssential 1999) state

uch uch left the of - - . . CEU eTD Collection facilitates ethnic as regimes of their borders state by regimes membership multiple which to borde scale general and groups targeted situation, regarding individually pragmatic Baubo national states(Flower 2004). alike legislation 2010). (Spiro affiliation. group self free for rights individual the of realization the toward steps liberating post countries, granting of case Hungarian the Analyzing state andminority the statuses of representativesare conceptualized. formation between commonalities

hleg te political the challenge - national framework. He sees overcoming the the overcoming sees He framework. national r minorities as a distinctive situation. As distinct from migrant cases, it has the potential the has it cases, migrant from distinct As situation. distinctive a as minorities r

ck sud D ad ad hn ul iiesi t bre mnrte, illustrate minorities, border to citizenship dual then and cards ID issued (Baubock 2010 (Baubock

- (2010

free ( free

ethnic preferentialism in citizenship in discoursesethnic preferentialism (Kovács P. J. Spiro (2010), among others, calls to approach to calls others, among(2010), Spiro J. P. and n cneune o mlil ctznhp eie sol b considered be should regimes citizenship multiple of consequences and Flower follows follows Flower members’ . It also . a Baubock )

are are

Spiro assumes that it allows coping with coping allows it that assumes Spiro calls for more cautious more for calls h sign the

raises b

the hs to groups two these 2010 ). statuses

border The author also denies the idea about modern citizenship regimes citizenship modern about idea the denies also author The

nqe otx o itrtt rlto and relation interstate of context unique s the question about the place of political theplace of the question about a,b

the f post of . ). s It affects the way the claim the waythe Itaffects

similar way suggesting tha suggesting way similar Kovács suggests that suggests Kovács ewe state between s -

modern development in relation between people and and people between relation in development modern in

and less generalizing estimations. He estimations. generalizing less and the juxtapose

ul iiesi t ehi Hnain i other in Hungarians ethnic to citizenship dual f phenomena of 15 attempt to expand the realm of realm the expand to attempt

s

(Baubo constrain

to

rca distinctions crucial grantin k 2010 ck

“imperfect territorial boundaries” territorial “imperfect .

- cases of border minorities in minorities border of cases He He t making basis, the role of nation of role the basis, making t of s the g membership to ex to membership g to citizenship granting sees 2010

a Hungarian status law and and law status Hungarian one nation bounded )

. ri

ghts in newghts citizenship Hungary, of case The ).

the - identification and identification

their n the in ne political inner argues that argues s

control out control the use of of use the - state - ways of of ways citizens s

t the he he as as CEU eTD Collection the (Wolnicz abroad and practices cultural Polish of suppression realization choice individual kin and relatives their from separated were who defends Polaka Karta the analyzing in lines different distinctively follow Polaka Karta and Poland policy minority research of number considerable While to and stateregime membership withdecoupled 2001). by admission non the and status legal their both by marginalized people of group a as minority” “trapped the Following and basis of themeThe and social new injustice towards members community national assumed the within revanchism aim case, Hungarian in minorities borders the the Developing

actualize their

official position of position official at the t h sm time same the At

the to reproduce the reproduce to

recovery of recovery . He points at the creation of different status group status different of creation the at points He . ZJ Wnik 2009) Winnicki (Z.J. introduction of Karta Polaka with references to references with Polaka Karta of introduction

an the

experience

criticism Seat 04 Fowler 2004, (Stewart alternative citizenship regime ascitizenship alternative - resistance to the state dominance (Rabinowitz 2010). resistance (Rabinowitz tothe state dominance

Pawłowska (Rabinowitz themselves affiliate they communities national the of members n accepting in

the the the

i , of possible possible of

is not so widely investigated widely so not is

unified nation unified

power dominance by the state was analyzed by Rabinowitz (2001). Rabinowitz by analyzed was state the by dominance power Belarusian state, that state, Belarusian f aetna mnrt i Ire h sgetd h cnet of concept the suggested he Israel in minority Palestinian of te ae f aetna rfge Rbnwt sos o the how shows Rabinowitz refugees Palestinian of case the n

2011) national .

I.Kabzińska . While While consequences of the multiple membership regimes for for regimes membership multiple the of consequences

. ebrhp n te right the and membership 04 Kvc 21, abc 2010 Baubock 2010, Kovács 2004,

image

It Stewart (2004) argues that argues (2004) Stewart n Europe in (Stewart 2004) (Stewart

Tsichomirov can become the source of econo of source the become can residence 16

the osdr Kra oaa n h cnet of context the in Polaka Karta considers and single and

the - a state. He state.

tool tool eii o poeto fr oih minority Polish for protection of deficit

introduction of the Karta Polaka violates Polaka Karta the of introduction el wt stain rud Hungarian around situation with deals

. may be used by the minority members minority by the members used may be to marginalize to

The P The . (2009 -

identity

emphasizes moral justice regarding the Poles the regarding justice moral s on formal and informal base informal and formal on s olish and Belarusian and olish )

suggests,

case in of the issuing count issuing the

the

the group on the ethnic ethnic the groupon the . an

the importance of importance the Z.J. Winnicki (2009) Winnicki Z.J. context of historical of context individual individual in agreement with agreement in mic exploitation mic a,b )

t e ae of case he literature for r y

self may may the an an s - -

CEU eTD Collection for constructivist principle the establishing fact, biological than rather construct, social a as ethnic belonging approaching suggests He (1968). Weber M. by articulated was activity, collective of mode a as ethnicity of issue The Approaches to ethnic identity. identification analysis obvious are meanings their if as eth t In Korys 2012). ethnics an as it see They 2012 (Gobert post of image idealized the over (2012 Gobert recognized also typical are regimes such as law, case. Polaka Karta researcher The different background national sovereignty, nicity and ethnic identity, however, they however, identity, ethnic and nicity he

eerh on research developed in developed a ic i handicaps it since quasi

discriminates ethnicity . ) argues )

) . In the on views different suggest debates, interstate of out themselves situating s, ethnicity and ethnic ethnicity -

citizenship Kic as

the element Leibich (2010) defines (2010) Leibich the ne ad oy define Korys and inger utpe citizenship multiple

ne the

for for studies sign of sign x for Eastern Europe Eastern for t response to emigration to response the prevalence of e of prevalence the

Belarusian part that provides that embedded

. s

An

th ( the I give I Tsichomirov . Such putative apparentness may apparentness putative Such . cmrhnie prah to approach comprehensive e - ainl cross national ethnic group ethnic

identification identification re - citizens citizens introd a in

general overview of of overview general eie scholars regimes benefits on benefits niiul’ self individuals’ the the

uction of nationalist discourse discourse nationalist of uction do not give the explicit definition of the concepts the of definition explicit the give not do

conomic an conomic states the 200 eea cus o te Polish the of course general 17 and Karta Polaka, along with along Polaka, Karta is

- 9 odrclua uiiainwt compatriots with unification cultural border

at Po Karta by right wing political forces political wing right by joined ). evoke (Leibich 2010, p. 24) p. 2010, (Leibich

an

d political interests of interests political d ethnic basis. F basis. ethnic s by the belief in belief the by

the alienation between citizens with citizens between alienation the

aa as laka - ee ams wtot xeto to exception without almost refer perception, connected with their their with connected perception, the approaches to approaches work against the against work the a semi rom his point of view, of point his rom complex

a . the - T shared iiesi regime citizenship he policy (Fox et al. 2010). al. et (Fox

Hungarian status Hungarian

Karta Polaka is Polaka Karta the ity (Kic ethnicity and and ethnicity ancestor and and ancestor

Polish state Polish

oad co toward validity of inger and inger

ethnic

of - .

CEU eTD Collection to interaction conceptualize the to rise people the gave conditions different interpretation. under instrumentalist ways different in belonging ethnic The exclusive in play in are criteria subjective self of categories subjective the by accompanied categories insiders’ from dramatically vary Cohen by questioned was membership group ethnic the for criteria shared commonly of idea The identity change. p 25) p. 1969, (Barth standards” value of set specific “culturally other persistent with overlaps (1969) Barth by developed further between boundaries cultural maintaining and generating of concept The and collective performs its activity issuesfor thebasic ethnic became studies. traits cultural certain of closure status and power the in emerges gain inability of cultural of inability -

(1978) n self and power emerges -

inclusive characterethnic identity of and can shift can and . (Cohen 1974 (Cohen . s .

and resources and He argues that the categori the that argues He an tnct a te ere f oat t the to loyalty of degree the as ethnicity

ore of course -

in srpin Brh 99 13) 1969, (Barth ascription

(Weber 1968). (Weber tnc group. ethnic the the . F . - neato wt ohr groups other with interaction differences focused approaches to explain why people actualize their actualize people why explain to approaches focused differences ).

ellow mobilization mobilization Ethnicity becomes Ethnicity

(Cohen 1974, p. 13). p. 1974, (Cohen A. Cohen (1974) Cohen A. - members share members (Weber 1968 (Weber h budre gnrtd by generated boundaries The An ethnic group sustains its boundaries by boundaries its sustains group ethnic An the . He ru acito (oe 17) Chn tess the stresses Cohen 1978). (Cohen ascription group of individuals in their collective activity for for activity collective their in individuals of es ascribed to the group member group the to ascribed es challenges .

The objective criteria of cult of criteria objective The

18 the , p. 388 p. ,

. (Cohen 19 (Cohen

the criteria of gr of criteria the argues that an that argues

at ascae ehi iett with identity ethnic associates Barth strategy manipulated by individuals in order in individuals by manipulated strategy

Developing instrumental approach Hechter approach instrumental Developing - eiiin s that so definition,

).

h cnet f one clue that culture bounded of concept the rmd y h rsuc struggle resource the by framed

The way the ethnic group is formed formed is group ethnic the way The 78) shared .

ethnic group as group ethnic oup inclusion oup a norms roviding the possibility for possibility the roviding gro p are up

n h cus of course the in b

ural differences are differences ural s tnc rus was groups ethnic t ojcie and objective oth

by

, performed via via performed , only a

a outside monopolistic monopolistic collective of of collective

relatively relatively gaining rs

He . may may this the R.

CEU eTD Collection Hybridity 1996). (Handler groups ethnic bounded of image personalized of relevance a group to inherent is that concept identity The understanding, interpretingframing and the frames interpretative to approached category” “ethnic interaction mutual implies that “group” studies ethnicity for categories relevant the as groups ethnic essentialized lack 1991). that (Anderson communities” members “imagined between as interaction them defined and nations of “reality” the challenged Anderson research. ethnicity in trend significant other the became approaches of criticism The homelandelements, and 1991,p.21). solidarity(Smith association with communities na the for precursors (Ge d The ethnic belonging situation inone approachinstrumentalist in motives instrumental of dominance analyses eaiey persistent relatively l lner criticism of ethnic group realism group ethnic of criticism istin

ethnic group mobilization in the in mobilization group ethnic 97 Sih 1991) Smith 1997, ctive

in processual terms (Brubaker 2004, 11). 2004, (Brubaker terms processual in is the modernist

self the

olcie dniy ocp hs been has concept identity collective (Bruba - tion and national and tion

name, name, ru raim rnil ihrn t bt cult both to inherent principle realism group

srpin o tnc ru was group ethnic to ascription displays how individuals, moved by different motives, actualize their actualizedisplays moved their by individuals, different motives, how e 20, 2006). 2004, ker Buae 20, . 174). p. 2004, (Brubaker prah o tnct ws eeoe wti ntoait studies nationalist within developed was ethnicity to approach . a

tnc ru ad tnc dniy r rgre as regarded are identity ethnic and group Ethnic hrd yh f nety n hsoia mmre, cultural memories, historical and ancestry of myth shared

and

keep it

finds a logical continuation in the criticism of collective of criticism the in continuation logical a finds identity. identity.

within members of community of members within - centered theori centered the frame

life silent

19 ethnic codn t Brubaker, to According

According to According experience

of rational action model action rational of in another

rbkr q Brubaker group Processes are recognized as ethnic due due ethnic as recognized are Processes es. The es. tnct i tetd as treated is Ethnicity

ytmtcly re systematically (Brubaker

questioned

affiliation (Hechter 1995). 1995). (Hechter affiliation Smi a uestioned the relevance of of relevance the uestioned pproach to ethnic identity ethnic to pproach th (1991) the traits of ethnic of traits the (1991) th

rl n instrumental and ural et al. et

,

ic i rle on relies it since

he suggests using using suggests he tnct sol be should ethnicity . Instead of the term the of Instead . and other “disjunct” “disjunct” other and

and argues and 2004 - considered. , p.52

pre a

- intimate intimate way of of way

modern ). for for

The The The The the

an an ist as a

CEU eTD Collection ethnicity the cases all in that (2005) Joppke ethnicity, of conceptualization (Williams reproduction community ethnic Keyes Ch. ancestor. originor common identification identification or ethnicity, of specificity the is identity that issue The alternativecharacter concept thedialogical expressing ofpersonhood hence, and, concept analytical identity 228). p. 2000, (Vila fixed provisionally making” own their of rarely narratives social in themselves locating or located being “by are they who narrativity through mediated (So emplotment” casual consti space, and time in embedded parts) (connected relationships of “constellations develops others, “identification” of process a as acts communicative identity. from departure The essentialist group bounded p. 1997, (Caglar identity ,

Hall (1996) suggests that i that suggests (1996) Hall ade (96 ad rbkr 20) usin h pwr f iett” as “identity” of power the question (2004) Brubaker and (1996) Handler (So underpinning s s es 94 p 66. ujciiy n uh otx apae t appeared context such in Subjectivity 606). p. 1994, mers . The few suggested interpretations mostly refer to Weberian idea of assumed of idea Weberian to refer mostly interpretations suggested few The s tnc n itnto fo rgoa, eiiu o other or religious regional, from distinction in ethnic as

s o gnrly iey discussed widely generally not is the fiito, were affiliation,

. this narrative a narrative The identity formation identity The

es 92 p 601). p. 1992, mers fixed identity image shifted the focus the shifted image identity fixed in

171) viewing

(So p

(Hall 1996) (Hall proach toward identity (So identity toward proach the approach es 92 p 606). p. 1992, mers

dentity is constantly is dentity lo rtczd for criticized also the eeac o i use it of relevance calls it the “aura of descent” that comprise that descent” of “aura the it calls culturea “whole” as nrato o such to reaction In es

never achieves its final aim and and aim final its achieves never . , 1989

in 20 Along with these these with Along h sget ta i that suggests She ugse a atraie o overcoming for alternative as suggested

other p 424 p. ,

in

the

od, ht allow what words, epe actua People negotiated and redefined in dialogical dialogical in redefined and negotiated h peevto of preservation the d

)

ieaue n tnct ad ethnic and ethnicity on literature . mers 1992, 1994). Narrativ 1994). 1992, mers n oil scie social in (

Providing the overview of the the of overview the Providing Caglar 1997, FriedmanCaglar 1997, 1999) an to the to

premises extremely flexible image of of image flexible extremely ett i cntutd a constructed is dentity ie hmevs become themselves, lize

has not beenhas suggested not

processual character of of character processual

M. nce s

is

labeling So

However, . the conceptualize

socio mers, among mers, refers s o be only only be o

the core of of core the p oliticized oliticized - tuted by tuted

cultural cultural

certain to es are es

the the the . nd nd an an .

d

CEU eTD Collection localized way the of insight comprehensive achieve to them integrating studies, ethnicity and citizenship alternative both from approaches the with engage I work The in definingvaries “descendant” dramatically depending ontheperspective “descendant” reviewed and conditioned by

or literature forms literature “ orig in ”

However, the ratio between the kin ancestry and cultural affiliation affiliation cultural and ancestry kin the between ratio the However, a

broader structural context. structural context. broader a

comparative framework for the current research. In present present In research. current the for framework comparative 21

personal

ethnic .

identification is identification CEU eTD Collection structure conceptual intrinsic a Belarus. of resident as issue the with acquaintance personal my and applicants with conversations informal relations and Polaka Karta religion (domains) themes explanatory model about suggestions participant active an as act to respondent the In utterance conseq the setting, (the situation conversational the linkages or relations what constructed, were meanings way seem that offer to and researcher the by proposed themes the on reports or considerations participants The 149). p. 1999, agenda research of Specifically, personalhimself inhis suggestions, adding, specifyingand opening n for method outside. the from translated are that meanings to able are people way the with preoccupied for chosen approach theoretical general and questions research The Chapter

interview te ecpin f h cutiscmuiis f affilia of countries/communities the of perception the ,

II. ed (Holstein and Gubrium(Holstein 1997,113). and

myresearch

to them relevant to the point of the conversation.the of point the to relevant them to Methodology I used the semi the used I

guide s on the participants. s onthe cause –

T

hl peevn open preserving while family story and biography, cultural practices including language and and language including practices cultural biography, and story family he domains he I included the set the included I s aims - and

with state. with - . It . structured interview since it allowed it since interview structured - effects

provide were f niiul perception individual of were

were not included in the guide in order not to fas to not order in guide the in included not were The domains were formulated on the basis of preceding preceding of basis the on formulated were domains The encouraged to share exp share to encouraged

regarded The d of open of

the necessary freedom for the respondent to express to respondent the for freedom necessary the

- guide included guide ended questions for discussion discussion for questions ended

in 22

as theoretical tools but not but tools theoretical as h conversation the - actively ended themes for discussion discussion for themes ended chose I ec o qetos t. affected etc.) questions of uence

construct their identities identities their construct interviewing a

were set of questionson of set The interview The Shnu e a. 1999 al. et (Schensul anded and detailed subjective subjective detailed and anded in the tion, .

set between them, the way way the them, between set concentrat T ew themes. e question he the as the most most the as present inquiry are are inquiry present

rcs o getting of process ing as ing Shnu e al. et (Schensul

the the

to facilitate the facilitate to focused on the the on focused

the following on the issues the on containing s elements of elements the using relevant ) themes ten the the ten .

The the the the

CEU eTD Collection affect could that organizations administrative and institutions educational like organizations interview. the for devot typically could they time in limited were cases most in Respondents T great dynamics. participants. younger the respondents of majority we interviews 15 Minsk In residence. of locality b the provide regions different from people contacting while reside, Polaka Karta of holders of majority the where areas the are These ( inter I via familiar with the strangers reserved are onit applicants and ofBelarus the political context background.experienceand common to due appropriate most method This participants. of search the for used was “snowball” of technique The changed. was topics of consequence the discussion the for route different offered conversation actual getting of issues vulnerable cultural this for vulnerable less con the e interview he euneo h usin was questions the of sequence

aia) G capital), extent theeffectextent vie

wed 25 people 25 wed the conversation the

All participants had higher education or were in the process of the study that was to to that was study process ofthe were inthe educationor hadhigher All participants personfor increasedthechances s

on ad aaoih (both Baranovichi and rodno were since the number of applicants is not so big, but they often know each other other each know often they but big, so not is applicants of number the since

The consi The

of the of any odce at conducted mainly

were unde were

in total in

They were interviewed to get information on information get to interviewed were They took about one hour one about took “snowball”. de the the rable part of part rable . The interviews were interviews The . Karta Polaka and and Polaka Karta

setting setting

r 35 years old. The old. years 35 r built beginning from questions that are considered to be be to considered are that questions from beginning built

–

family and and family the applicants was applicants the The The home a 23 asis for making the comparison regarding the the regarding comparison the making for asis n . situated in the the in situated Mostly open conversation open

re conducted; re Karta Polaka is KartaPolaka

the state the f a of held in held I met met I elder

eiiu practices, religious participant

were put into the last part. part. last the into put were the participants participants the respondents were the parents of parents the were respondents

in

three cities of Belarus: M Belarus: of cities three western employed in the state the in employed

also

the .

r at or

regional cities regional a t te conversation the to e

vulnerable

the part of the country). country). the of part

i/e workplace. his/her

inter

for the first time time first the for whilst the most most the whilst - generation . Contacting . Contacting topic in the the in topic

-

was the was 10 - funded I . f the f insk The The al –

CEU eTD Collection appearIand whomto. talking was they conversation of part which in depending individually overcome were situations Such and questions the youpose that think specifications: ask questions. posed the answer to supposed are participant a as you when conversation “interview” Today participant. active During ineconomic,his/her biographical position social and political setting. moment, 2000) discourses dominating regarding contextualizing further with plots of byregistering discussed participant the that themes discus issues the of consequences the regarding considered was conversation of course content the and answers respondents’ the affect could that whole, analysi The of residence discloseduetheparticipants. isalsonot tothe wishof especially ( prison bodies state of reaction negative the fear their utterances. ed

. p Another the reflection on general setting of the interview interview the of setting general on reflection the the interviews the laughing ol t nrae n re manner free in narrate to eople

u of s rgent mentioned, events the “in this situation I cannot say which issues are important or not important, I important, not or important are issues which say cannot I situation this “in level

P the ” itriw ih Lilia) with (interview )” – articipants often expressed their oftenexpressed their articipants

in the report the in

neve included interview of contextualization contextualization of

one of the main challenges was to motivate the respondent to be an be to respondent the motivate to was challenges main the of one

all the names were changed and in and changed were names the all

the metaphors the metaphors

jointly. I answer them and that is all is that and them answer I has has n h frt tp prahn te ovrain s a as conversation the approaching step first the on approached

. js d nt el noe r wl b tkn o the to taken be will I or anyone tell not do “just nee del i pplr icus a a om of form a as discourse popular in deeply entered

sometimes T The narratives of the respondents were analyzed analyzed were respondents the of narratives The 24 he he

issue concerns about the used, ways of organization and the content andthe organization used, of ways

the

of privacy and anonymity becomes becomes anonymity and privacy of they were confused confused were they and the consequence of conversation of consequence the and current situation of the participant the of situation current (Briggs 1986, p. 104). 104). p. 1986, (Briggs …” (interview with (interview …”

som guarantee

e cases the exact city exact the cases e (So es 94 Vila 1994, mers n akd for asked and

anonymity General General Victor). Victor). W sed hen I hen

the for –

CEU eTD Collection are mixtures such that believes time same she origins. their about facts new learned P Tartar, thr of mixture a as herself describes She Belarusians. were grandfathers Both for settlement the in Belarus in anchored evidence 26 a Lilia, by told story The nationalities. different of representatives as relatives their see they exception, rare the For t about speak applicants the Card, Pole’s get to Intending not. parents the attribution: in clashes self informal of interweaving sufficient documents that Russians Belarusians, history requirements formal with accordance Poles. as since descendant, at look to expected is applicant each least, At way. certain a in stories family their see applicants the make Polaka Karta getting of conditions the and procedure The Being a 3.1. Chapter III.

knows little aboutknows little their A

pplicants’ personal pplicants’

and to be to and descendant . oli e fte’ m father’s Her en of Being sh and B and sh

Empirical findings and their analysisEmpiricalfindings

able to able i t is explicitly stated in the narrativ the in stated explicitly is t

elarusian. h Pls descendance Polish the or other or - year specialist in Belarusian language residing in Minsk, can serve as as serve can Minsk, in residing language Belarusian in specialist year other came from the famous kin of Polish Tatar. After WWII she she WWII After Tatar. Polish of kin famous the from came other identify their ancestors as ancestors their identify come the from

background: given and chosenbackground: ancestors. Describing the history of her family as unique she at the at unique the family she as historyofher ancestors. the Describing

- . During her life her image of the grandparents changed as she she as changed grandparents the of image her life her During identification and formal evidences of belonging creates the the creates belonging of evidences formal and identification Moreover are

Te plcns r spoe t tr t ter family their to turn to supposed are applicants The . Today she regrets that here grandparents are dead and and dead are grandparents here that regrets she Today officially recognized as recognized officially

family archive family , refugees

they need to need they typical for people from Belarus because of the the of because Belarus from people for typical 25

eoe te at ht a t b poe in proven be to has that fact the becomes

. Another members

es of the Polish state that apply to them to apply that state Polish the of es

or ordered in official institutions inofficial or ordered acquire official material official acquire he complexity of their background. their of complexity he

Lilia’s

of certain of Poles grandmother was a Pole. Pole. a was grandmother

while their children their while

nationalities nationalities

himself as a Polish Polish a as himself ee bloods bloods ee evidence –

Poles, . This

are

– –

CEU eTD Collection becomes identification. Olena his/her personal reason leading the cases some In religious ageatadult practiceher life: her of stages different from facts the with believe detail Catholic. a to synonymous was Pole a village their in that adds Anna Anna found oftheir intheir description parents, grandparent’sancestors. r other be could process this in followed they that routs The ancestors. their of belonging identify categories different of be to appeared territory applicant migration periodically, and, states changing border, shifting were themes central the formation family the about stories the In this conditioned uncertainty. that territory the of transformation historical the on stress puts also She the Belarusians? pure any are w history ere attribution of people to ethno to people of attribution

, a 26 born when there was a Poland and who knows how to sign them in?! them sign to how knows who and Poland a was there when born s are s in Polish was Polish Poles. were mother M –

in her adult years adult her in y grandmother was a Pole Pole a was grandmother y

“there are many Russians, some people who were born earlier are Belarusians are earlier born were who people some Russians, many are “there

. ant e eutd rm h crusacs f i lf: t life: his of circumstances the from deducted be cannot

- that year N

t regarding ot . She was a Catholic Zosia was an orphan and orphan an was Zosia governmental employee, territory. She finished 4 classes of Polish Polish finished 4classes of territory. She . ” She was born on the territory of Poland because Western Belarus Western because Poland of territory the on born was She

Anna . the

The question posed by Lilia reveals the ambiguous character of of character ambiguous the reveals Lilia by posed question The

opeiy n uncertainties and complexity . constructs the image of her grandmother as a Pole engaging Pole a as grandmother her of image the constructs

-

. for national categories both on the formal and inf and formal the on both categories national

- and church visited each Sunday”. The att The

it was written was it the the nationalities

grew in the family of her elder brother elder her of family the in grew speaks attribution of a person to person a of attribution ribution of a person to the ethnic category ethnic the to person a of ribution 26 describes

about her grandmother herabout einn with beginning while ,

in her birth certificate, birth her in her grandfatherher church migrants ,

h apiat wr al to able were applicants the school, the

a were marked with local local with marked were

he

A certain certain it certificate birth : dditional biographical dditional

the the -

aie o te same the of natives

she could write only could she

that her father and and father her that And whether whether And following way: ethnic

and came to to came and ormal basis. ormal category category , others others ,

by the the by t o the the o there -

CEU eTD Collection as sounds documents of presence Pole a was practices. cultural than important more narrations applicant’s the In since curious especially seemsdocuments official with engagement of theme The affiliation. ancestor their describe that participants emphases different with emerged language, of criteria The Polaka t to them attribute they why explain not did also Russians or Belarusians spo applicants when time same the At his for unequivocal descendant. is belonging ethnic his however, Polish; as canonized traits cultural about to belonging his of to belonged grandfather Olena’s daily about other grandparentsabout other me such have not do I way. this him remember I because and parents his of because ( Poland of territory time soviet of movie Polish tank “Four watching were we as remember I childhood From y rnfte i a aie oe His Pole. native a is grandfather My the could affect communication participation of her grandparents in election. election. in grandparents her of participation , in her documents it is written that she is a Pole” (interview with Karina) the the Karina) with (interview Pole” a is she that written is it documents her in ,

the

the way people tend to think about differentthe way tend about tothink people inthe lines oih ainadOeamd e ado h ai of basis the on Card her made Olena and nation Polish - hy oe tee in there moved they ,

religion only separate words. He He words. separate only they as a rule did not tend not did rule a as they .

the )

… h , the Orthodox Orthodox the

an objective and undeniable proving undeniable and objective an olding of official documents was no less important or even or important less no was documents official of olding the

n wt dfeet nepeain in interpretations different with and rmme a hs eaie cm t vst s rm the from us visit to came relatives his as remember I

place of birth, self birth, of place

In it is it e bu ohr hi ancestors, their other about ke

aet lvd n h trioy f etr Belarus. Western of territory the in lived parents s uch statements as statements uch 27 oit time soviet rarely discussed in relation to to relation in rarelydiscussed Church

hese categories. This fact suggests fact This categories. hese did

not preserve any documents confirming documents any preserve not to give such explicit description. They description. explicit such give to

The image of the gran the of imageThe and never used Polish as the language the as Polish used never and - )… I think that he is a native Pole Pole native a is he that think I )… identification and official documents official and identification “by my mother line everyone everyone line mother my “by - e ad dg ( dog” a and men

of the the the the ir

ethnic affiliation.ethnic dfather lacks any dfather lacks whom they call call they whom ancestry belonging to belonging stories of other other of stories the

that Karta that certificate .

mories mories cult a the the

CEU eTD Collection mobility their 5 bureaucratic the by valorized procedure was documents official of significance the Polaka Karta document generations. other to 2005) as objects material identification ethnic content. new it give to sometimes the Moreover, ancestors. O culture, with Polish sign be Belarusians passports get to began Union Soviet from employee of result in also occurred individual mother child the sign to went who on depended Everything Belarusian. middle the Belarusian, a as in signed was elder the daughters: three you said you if Jew, a as Soviet Jew said you if wanted: they in as people signed everyone time lived that At Union. parents my of generation “The generation. to generation from affiliation group.

Before the 1976 the members of kolkhozes in the USSR didn’t have write for personal documents to prevent to documents writepersonal for have didn’t the USSR in ofkolkhozes the members the1976 Before fficial documents fficial .

The twists and turns with turns and twists The ed The i The –

, hy int care didn’t they in as a Pole. Pole. a as in

a b can where they featurewhere approvalofbelonging they as themain

,

dentification documents dentification s ome people were people ome Western Belarus, Western cnetd no h ifra dsore of discourse informal the into converted e

, therefore, play a play therefore, , a managed tofindthe

T special type of mediators of type special hog te aeil objects material the through he official narrative of state that state of narrative official he Applicants manipulation (neve ih Lilia). with (interview ” are Belarusian are

not

the

describes how in 1979 w 1979 in how describes also

T

properly asked. Nina’ asked. properly document

he possibility to influence to possibility he almost can significant role significant mentioned mentioned s

documents toget documents

5

ih ouet cud affect could documents with fix, conform and translate translate and conform fix,

– n pol js si ta te ae usas or Russians are they that said just people and

accidental self accidental they signed Belarusian signed they 28 s

that can influence social reality (Bruno Latour (Bruno reality social influence can that

were

the people who did who people the

( h cags in changes The documents also used also in the way applicants recognized their their recognized applicants way the in label the card s father s - hen the residents of vi of residents the hen ascriptions. Nina ascriptions. s nationality of nationality s tnc belonging ethnic to explain the change of ethnic theethnic changeof explain to ) .

the bureaucratic discourse or or discourse bureaucratic the … and the generation of my my of generation the and …

accord . protested and protested

s the ethno . In my mother’s family family mother’s my In . –

not

a Pole, the youngest the Pole, a

the the

official belonging of of belonging official ih h concept the with

- have any affiliation affiliation any have national belonging national

identification and and identification the , a 53 a , – .

you are signed signed are you

In citizens citizens demanded

llage in the the in llage the university university case of of case in the in

of to –

CEU eTD Collection aside became language Belarusian of use A regime. political existing motif. on language Belarusian of position marginalized The a goal d who government the on situation this for nat no is there language nation Belarusian mature create to it. spreading in changeit to citizens between correspondence even Belarusian, language language the as Russian recognize applicants applicants’ In with the elements ofPolish Belar and Russian of comprised dialects local speak areas rural life daily in marginally spoken is it but schools some comm everyday in both dominant such makes Belarus in situation language The communities. different by practiced and shared are languages different The Speaking three languages

general approach to language as language to approach general

in public transport” ( transport” public in - seeking line of policy.seeking line of The B The

and not speaking the language the speaking not and . Only few p few Only elarusian language acquired a strong association with the with association strong a acquired language elarusian

stories revealed themselves in manifold unique variations. The majority The variations. unique manifold in themselves revealed stories

In the failure of the population to speak national languag national speak to population the of failure the In eople said that they do not accept not theydo that said eople ion too” (interview with Lilia) with (interview too” ion an

tt, ain n language and nation state,

interview with interview , whilethe

when person prah nplcbe Russian inapplicable. approach

not using it. it. using not

ncto ad on and unication speaking Belarusian is Belarusian speaking –

stigmatizing

“for me the language is the sign of nation, if there is no is there if nation, of sign the is language the me “for a marker of belonging to the the to belonging of marker a Polish language fromPolish excluded daily isalmost use. . They express They Lilia) o not speak the language. the speak not o 29 h a The

or or f is use. first of – “

“when you speak Belarusian people Belarusian speak you “when you pplicants It . an

the regrets of regrets . However, many people especially in in especially people many However, . . became not like other, a white craw” craw” white a other, like not became The applicants put the responsibility the put applicants The

fiil level official

Belarusian political basis became another core another became basis political make recognized oe f w state two of one ,

However many call the native native the call many However share s

this situation and would like would and situation this them usian ethnic group ethnic

Some Some and do not see not do and h wide the as an oppositionist an as .

eauin s sd in used is Belarusian

feel languages radical e they see the failure the see they e applicants

u neasy - spread

languages, oppositi assumes

sometimes sometimes

any of being being of

see in it in see idea of the the of on to on . point point

step step The that that

of is

CEU eTD Collection of active. most the of one be to considered is Baranovichy Poland. by supported organizations cultural the Poles, of Houses by promoted actively is language purposefully acquired parishioners studied believers and Polish in held were ceremonies all the spreading from it learn just they that said Others grandparent with communication their was source main is one first of practice and relation the regarding routs main two are there stories foreign Polish background Russian of favor in dialects them small region, the on depending proportions T spouse and periodically children or withfriends, niche Belarusian in language of basis the on stigmatized and excluded ( interview with interview he the

oa daet, opsd of composed dialects, local

with parents and parents with use by limited number of number people use by limited

towns. Polish language for children in a form of supplementary school. Visiting such schools such Visiting school. supplementary of form a in children for language Polish is also is

However the significance significance the However language a .

natural acquisition of language from from language of acquisition natural - –

For some applicants this was this applicants some For speaking schools give up using up give schools speaking Polish language in Belarus is played by played is Belarus in language Polish niche

they “just knew it”. knew “just they Grigoriy .

oe of None language the relatives , a 24 logistic manager living in Minsk in living manager logistic 24 a ,

ai lvl f Polish of level basic

because local dialects are stigmatized as the signs of signs the as stigmatized are dialects local because the . The use is even smaller that Belarusian that smaller even is use The . . a But when they move to a big city they abandon these local local these abandon they city big a to move they when But piat nmd oih o e hi frt language. first their be to Polish named pplicants of

Apart from the church on church the from Apart

eauin Pls, usa ad kan i different in Ukraine and Russian Polish, Belarusian, these organizations varies organizations these

– r sil eotd o e sd ciey n ilgs and villages in actively used be to reported still are

it can be can it

media the language of the first use first the of language the 30 the language the

. while still using still in Russian while public.

spoken The applicants did not study the language language the study not did applicants The different channels. For some applicants the applicants some For channels. different

a use. d rne materials. printed nd

the

s As

all prayers all seldom. quite happened it however, , in interfamilywitha communication The organ The

Catholic Church Catholic

. the Belarusian an

result, locally. The House of Poles in Poles of House The locally. ). ). institutional level institutional People do not want to be be to want not do People ization also holds also ization in this language. Due to it to Due language. this in

e

ven those who studied who those ven and is recognized as a as recognized is and

became a language of language a became Polish language. The The language. Polish

and they still still they and – seil oe in role special A

until a

recent time recent “red

the

In their their In courses - Polish neck” speak

CEU eTD Collection spoke then class (4 education primary their got who grandparents by lang Polish of use The recognized asPoles. by descendants Polish of contribution mos spoke applicants of grandmothers generations. previous of tendencies the continues and from derives situation of traditions the about saying were di significantly is use language in situation described The literature orwatching cinema worker. conceived of discovery dialects local from b Polaka, M char this gives Olena Polish”. study to me encouraged always He excellently. Polish knew and TV Polish watched Poland, visited he childhood the from Russian, father and Belarusian was with l of part a just became language Polish of knowledge Belarus. Western repertoire the acquire children any applicants any acteristic of her father incontrast acteristic offather her to mother her

the

ascription to ascription efore the , Their use of the the of use Their to key a as Polish Polish the

they encountered this languageoccasionallyonly this encounteredthey use get acquainted get agae n mtvtd hm o frhr self further for them motivated and language only in limited circle of peers, rarely with children and grandchildren. The The grandchildren. and children with rarely peers, of circle limited in only . In this border region due to intensive contacts between countries the the countries between contacts intensive to due region border this In

f Polish of For some the some For

, Russian and Ukraine even when they considered themselves and were and themselves considered they when even Ukraine and Russian , years early from language national or ethnic category ethnic or national the the uage in daily communication was communication daily in uage Polish culture and to participating in social life as a student or as a as or student a as life social in participating to and culture Polish - language is also situational situational also is language .

s etitd o s to restricted is

with Polish language only in their preparation period to Ka to period preparation their in only language Polish with

preparation for Karta Polaka Karta for preparation language in their stories. A stories. their in language

l lcl ilcs f eauin with Belarusian of dialects local tly 31

prt sphere eparate . – However,

who has Polish roots who has Polish “my father, not regarding that his mother mother his that regarding not father, “my ife experience, not associated necessarily associated not experience, ife

an exception. Most often it was used was it often Most exception. an during es) in Polish speaking schools, but schools, speaking Polish in es) fferent from what the applicants applicants the what from fferent

being a part of their language language their of part a being

s

in the

t the same time same the t became by

- the study.

iis o Poland to visits participants participants

form of form .

the h language The Grandfathers and and Grandfathers

turning point of point turning separate a ,

residing in in residing the present the significant reading , words words was rta

CEU eTD Collection associated with it ethno who identification. ethnic for anchor an as perceived not is language Russian be to claimed Belarusian using not people or identifies or attributed coincide not does language the of use The their dailygrandparentsgrandparentsgrand from are different thosethattheir life or spoke. from pass linear the follow not within even how seen example these In better thanPolish her Polish. spoke she grandchildren was Polish grandmother Angelina’s For Polish, ForVict basic though language isRussian, she the grandmot Victor’s that speak g their that explain applicants oa dialect local

ei t suy h lnug ol fr etn te at Polaka, Karta the getting for only language the study to begin - ainl aeoy rcdd h aqiiin f h aiiy o pa te language the speak to ability the of acquisition the preceded category national but For Angelina For or first language is Russian. D Russian. is languagefirst or s the

he had totake additional courses for t differently. one life one language use changed significantl changed use language

s . Vco 3 ya od T pcait eiig n Minsk) in residing specialist IT old year 30 (Victor

her native language was Polish, b Polish, was language native her

that

story under under story

mother and the the

cannot cover the diversity o diversity the cover cannot of oneself of

a basic language is Russian but Russian is language basic

local dialect. Angelina’s mother spoke Russian but knew basics of of basics knew but Russian spoke mother Angelina’s dialect. local randparents could not practice the language in the environment environment the in language the practice not could randparents

a

different different

parent to to parent . People recognized as Poles can speak Polish quite poorly, quite Polish speak can Poles as recognized People . she

helped herhelped began speak ue to communication with grandmothercommunicationtowith ue circumstances. a the child. necessarily 32 aie agae bt ih e cide and children her with but language, native Belarusians he exam for exam Karta.he in f y ing

Often the languages the applicants speak in speak applicants the languages the Often f language use in family histories family in use language f the ro ut by the end of her life she switched to to switched she life her of end the by ut

firstly gnrto o eeain It generation. to generation m

preparation

with the ethnic category a person is person a category ethnic the with now, The translation of the language does does language the of translation The . in Polish in Polish t h sm tm, speaking time, same the At

due to the courses, she courses, the to due

for the exam. exam. for the

and knows it brilliantly.knows it and

. self For For -

trbto to attribution e duhe the daughter her he knows some knows he

the

applicants applicants

it can be can it change

knows knows

the the

s

CEU eTD Collection 2011 of sociology”, mirror the in Belarus of Republic Belarus “The 6 be to used sp for necessity The spouses. the of one of conversion situation. this with cope to ways different chose People representatives by formed often familyis intermarriagethe to Due family t members ascribe also applicants All Orthodox the to themselves assign 81% about denominations: Belarusian denote to used is Pole synonymous. became a as and, politicized strongly be 20 the before Belarus of territories the on person a of Religious Religion languages. life. daily their in languages still placed preservation language created the it of Belarus channel in Church Catholic the of case the In practice. language translating state of Apart interventions. results as seen be also can language titled the from identity ethnic decoupling of introducing through population s The

Informational and analytical center of the president’s administration of the presid the of administration center president’s ofthe analytical and Informational able to create and practice different variants of language use engaging with up to three three to up with engaging use language of variants different practice and create to able ae on tate

in the situat the in

practices

affiliation used to be probably the major criteria of social and cultural identification cultural and social of criteria major the probably be to used affiliation

a –

strong norm for grandparents sill preserves the influence for their descendants. their for influence the preserves sill grandparents for norm strong the l hsoia sae pae a played stages historical all

hey the have Orthodox. Orthodox.

ion conditioned by conditioned ion from the from

themselves to one of one to themselves

People create different niches in their lives for spea for lives their in niches different create People oa te rhdx n Ctoi cuce ae sti are churches Catholic and Orthodox the Today

state such state representatives of both representatives both of

the

result,

state language and language state

the the ht is that institute

h cat the state and other institutional agents, applicants are applicants agents, institutional other and state

eta rl i s in role central 33

eaiey needn fo the from independent relatively

s gre o ntoa ad religious and national of egories the

the churches the as the church can play can church the as confessions ahlc fiito, hl Rsin or Russian while affiliation, Catholic th ouses to belong to the same church that church same the to belong to ouses the

century. The intermarriage may result in the in result may intermarriage The system of education. The examples The education. of system haping the language use of of use language the haping Church and 10% and Church .

However, The religious The .

of different denominations. different of

ent of the Republic of of Republic of the ent

a among friends and friends among significant role in in role significant

sphere - king different different king

to Catholic to l h major the ll state

affiliation . used to used Being the the

6 a .

CEU eTD Collection temple Catholic the visiting religious family the in churches two of influence the to exposed Being tra withstanding religious parents In meaningful. still unbaptized occur still but rare are conflicts Sharp Minsk). in resides Lidanow and came from of possibility the important most the often are voices Grandparents’ make grandparents and parents both families mixed In possible. lik conflict, the for members havingcalendarstwo Or celebrate members Family life. many For andCatholic answer positive his madethemhappy. Grigoriy ditions of their of ditions grandparents the narrations the narrations the

nrdc him/her introduce

were not religious not were

rcie a afce by affected was practice recollects how his parents asked him whether his girlfriend is a Pole, meaning meaning Pole, a is girlfriend his whether him asked parents his how recollects - affiliation other

“grandmother’s Christmas”. “grandmother’s until

h stig Sm applicants Some setting. the

people now

their grandchildren to be baptized in Orthodox in baptized be to grandchildren their

e for for e

grand

. in Christmas I

n cases when cases n the coexistence of two traditions becomes the habitual part of family of part habitual the becomes traditions two of coexistence the

an o hi tradition. their to

Ilona parents o parents often

ambiguous and perceive the Catholic holidays as more genuine. more as holidays Catholic the perceive and .

. es who cannot explain explain cannot who Applicants

and Eastersand ften acted as the main breeders of religious feelings religious of breeders main the as acted ften the the

a child was baptized in different in baptized was child a

hdx n Ctoi hldy ta flo different follow that holidays Catholic and thodox –

oit eie Te cud follow could They regime. Soviet S ma on uch paradoxical combinations paradoxical uch e

nner

andcompromised tolerated Decision byis family. describe themselves as those who return to the the to return who those as themselves describe believe that their parents’ their that believe of ay ecie such perceive Many 34

per year per the applicants the B .

.

eing C

atholic grandmothers aregrandmothers atholic her daughter how two two how daughter her . Often holidays areholidaysOften rhdx Christians, Orthodox the

, told

some applicants describe their their describe applicants some eiin n hl baptizing. child on decision ,

said that her daughter remained remained daughter her that an

denominations

and even grandparents even and Andrei (27, IT sphere, IT (27, Andrei

still xeine s more as experience named

the contain Christmas concerned with concerned

people prefer prefer people tradition

C after family afterfamily onsidering

the cause the

relatives ,

es while while only

are ’

CEU eTD Collection between ethnicBelarusian groupsPolish and o appeared problematic highly line border a as affiliation religious the about assumption spread The traditions. religion both religi The mercantileunwelcomingand even contrast, In rituals. follow described arefollowerscontrastivelydifferent. their and churchesimagesTheof culturethe mutualinfluencePolish has throughthe that the way different in to affiliation the between linkage the perceive applicants The religiosity from moving When locality. and time Minsk). in resides now and Volkovysk from I but certain it do not do still they conversion of possibility the necessity to differentiate these things: “we are Belarusians are “we things: these differentiate to necessity

am confession becomes an important element in element important an becomes confession

used to underlie that I am I that underlie to used o – s etr raie ad amnos atvl wrig ih h believers the with working actively harmonious, and organized better as us practices of applicants follow different follow applicants of practices us

visiting church becomes when less important s . For some of them being a Catholic means being means Catholic a being them of some For . the Orthodox C Orthodox the

with followers whobelieve nominally. only with followers

a Catholic” a the hurch is represented is hurch native region native 35

Religiosity tends to metamorphose regarding regarding metamorphose to tends Religiosity

(Anastasia, 23, marketing consultant, comes consultant, marketing 23, (Anastasia, .

For other applicants their adherence to adherence their applicants other For their patterns

Catholic C Catholic ,

relatives arearoundrelatives anymore. not people identification ,

the often incorporating elements of elements incorporating often - as non as Cat notice Catholic Catholic hurch inBelarus. a Pole a holics”. holics”. The Catholic Church isChurch Catholic The - : “I do not know why, why, know not do “I : organized, organized, the reduction in reduction the . Whilst others stress others Whilst . Church n theground. Everyone admits Everyone

and Poland and sometimes

,

their

who

a

CEU eTD Collection whose people of generation that for people Poles”. “real were applicants of perception a ban. official Catholic Belarusian and th of people applicants with associated experi of multiplicity the to due nothing Describing me very different things”. fi and USSR to transferred was it than Poland, in born was she and parts two into divided was Belarus of territory The situation. unique a such had She … life. interesting and long lived dominant became organization of – changes the time Each territory.the on power at came state new environment in political Belarus in transformations and economic cultural, different radically in the applicants When imageThe

nally she lived in modern Belarus. Hence, the experiences were different in her life, she told told she life, her in different were experiences the Hence, Belarus. modern in lived she nally they were described as the breaking points breaking the as described were they uul oncinwt oadtruhmdaadvstn eaie. Grandparen relatives. visiting and media through Poland with connection mutual ir

narrations. The The narrations. ,

they often concentrated on the events of 1939 that they described as the catastrophe the as described they that 1939 of events the on concentrated often they s

’ the church attendance was an integral part of life, even when the church was under under was church the when even life, of part integral an was attendance church the

s stories the first generation is their grandparents that were born before 1939. 1939. before born were that grandparents their is generation first the stories the

at generation work in the agriculture was the main occupation. They occupation. main the was agriculture the in work generation at of three generations of After the borders were moved and relatives migrated to Poland to migrated relatives and moved were borders the After

generation and (dialects) living in living spoke about spoke . The . -

people changed their economic and social status social and economic their changed people people from different generations were generations different from people way Victor describes his grandmother’s biography illustrates it: “She it: illustrates biography grandmother’s his describes Victor way

the s in daily life as the languages received from their parents. their from received languages the as life daily in

is not an attempt to make a unified collage image collage unified a make to attempt an not is different

their family history family their the

20 entire th

t century. Several times the borders were moved and a and moved were borders the times Several century. ime and the way it affected personal identification. personal affected it way the and ime ences. The aim is to describe which tendencies were were tendencies which describe to is aim The ences.

life was changed an changed was life

When applicants spoke about this generation of generation this about spoke applicants When . 36 The n The

,

the theme of three generations three of theme the ew state introduced actively introduced state ew described as described d who lost the connection with connection the lost who d were non were . Other cultural prac cultural Other s -

those recurrent and sharp and recurrent y h historical the by ,

many preserve many

- who were put were who

a it will show will it use emerged in emerged new new s in ts d For the For

Polish Polish mode mode tices tices For For the the In d

CEU eTD Collection gives categories national and T leads thecreation to of from place took often gap. this overcome to grandparents their of generations consciousness erasedthe it becausebad was USSR manynarration. in sounds lives t The practicesand as identify Poles themselves loss the and identification generation” lost “the metaphor trend inthe Lilia expressed the main true a feel not does she but country, alien an not is her wa mother “my (Olena), father” her than less Poland self successful A the for condition the was them of people in role time Soviet there generation next The same event theirthemselves to grandparents relation (Abu in andto Belarusian territories about as themselves about speak not do and themselves on events these project not did applicants the However, motherland. their he pplicants

way applicants made the attribution of their parents and grandparents to different ethnic ethnic different to grandparents and parents their of attribution the made applicants way . T . in independent Belarus independent in hird hey spoke mostly Russian. Speaking Polish in daily life became an exception. In exception. an became life daily in Polish Speaking Russian. mostly spoke hey generation refer generation describe their parents their describe religion stoped religion ’s

self - description. of . grandparents

h apiat app applicants The new cultural embeddednew indifferent patterns

parents s They

to being the inali the being . f utrl practices cultural of The theme of the search and recovery of ethno of recovery and search the of theme The the

the

was born in born was rethink the rethink

The departure from the traditional cultur traditional the from departure The often example of how a person can construct his or her ancestry. her or his construct can person a how of example

applicants themselves. themselves. applicants

to their grandchildren their to

people

in contrast in ,

enable part of daily life and did and life daily of part enable y ifrn mtnraie rms o ecie the describe to frames metanarrative different ly it becameit an exception soviet period as a period of loss loss of period a as period soviet

the separated from the kin the from separated 37

USSR and spent and USSR . to in people” in Although Although s born and grew in the USSR. USSR. the in grew and born s the -

elzto i te oils society. socialist the in realization grandparents - . born Pole” born patterns cultural of translation The T The reconsideration of the heritage the of reconsideration The hey spend spend hey . some people preserve cultural cultural preserve people some

Applicants build bridgesto build Applicants .

the major part of their life their of part major the

- local contexts. contexts. local Baker, Rabinowitz 2005). Baker,Rabinowitz in in -

state (interview with Victor) with (interview – the the major part of their their of part major the

“my mother relates to relates mother “my al patterns for many many for patterns al

sense of weakening of sense and consider these these consider and

not play not – -

national identity identity national “I think that the that think “I

Poland for Poland

a

crucial the the the .

CEU eTD Collection duration and communication length ofinterpersonal from apart choice, the cases many in making demonstrate Polaka Karta recognize their that show applicants of cases The p.6). 2005, (Joppke choice” to subject not is that life in thing one the constitute surely origin to relation In representatives of different groups different of representatives

the

individual’s origin the widely shared position is that “one’s descent and and descent “one’s that is position shared widely the origin individual’s an

instrumental s

oih lmns on, whil sound, elements Polish o pol cn culz cran ie i lines certain actualize can people how

aim to be of be to aim descendance for them is not “one thing” bec thing” “one not is them for descendance 38 among their ancestors. The situation created by by created situation The ancestors. their among

a “right” origin, is strongly affected by the the by affected strongly is origin, “right” with different family members. e te origin other s silent. The personal personal The silent. s n their descendance descendance their n

ause they they ause CEU eTD Collection usually T adapt pragma the shop they community tend applicants Pole The were categories narrations identification their in engage applicants with this it by negotiate achieved to they identification and identity of model imposed this face to have applicants The content. descendant, claim community. attribution Poles. call narrative official the in state Polish The The 3.2. he Poles he ir

construction ofthe categories belonging of A

set between them set assistants first to

pplicants the state imposes state the

t ugss ht hs people these that suggests It tic or generous, however, they they however, generous, or tic . in contrast to Belarusians. Poles Poles Belarusians. to contrast in

s -

ad experience hand shifts also around these categories, incorporating them in different plots. The content of the of content The plots. different in them incorporating categories, these around emerge unalterably

to attribute oneself to the to oneself attribute to This affiliation is fed by fed is affiliation This

refer to refer or professors or ’

to

depending on how they how on depending experience personal identification of affiliate

distinguish the Poles, as the citizens of today’s Poland, and Poles, as the as Poles, and Poland, today’s of citizens the as Poles, the distinguish n h narrations the in .

a

uig hi lives their during a certain identity certain a

collective with .

n hs css oe ae ecie a argn o supportive, or arrogant as described are Poles cases these In -

. in

The Poles Poles The manifold stereotypical ,

moment. category of Poles that Poles of category referring to to referring en te iies f te state other of citizens the being the c a alien as act

are on the applicants the on

assumed preservation of cultural practices. cultural of preservation assumed r displayed are may n share and personified images that applicants described from described applicants that images personified

n aflae themselves affiliate and s pl

the people the 39 aced aced

h Pls eae n o te categories the of one became Poles The

ap image. The applicants The image. rather pear regarding s

or strangers that the applicants have to to have applicants the that strangers or

it

n h sois s h cso of custom the as stories the in

who are eligible for eligible are who mostly ih te mmes f h Polish the of members other with ifrn ctgre o people of categories different – the state intends to intends state the

it makes the makes it other in

categories, categories, positive positive

with describe this describe s ,

individual, a Polish a individual, . preserve

They the characteristics whose whose

fill in with the with in fill

Karta Polaka Karta

built

hs self this category linkage In this this In ficers,

. their The The the the the

– s -

CEU eTD Collection city ( subconscious” the or genes of level the on or Minsk) people” in residing manager, old year’s Polish 24 (Andrei the to oriented or something did I because not but Poles, the are relatives my because belong, “I “kinship”: and “genes” of metaphors use often they connection their ex people” “Polish attribution this share officially is category this to outside and inside Poles all all The years oldprofessor residing inMinsk homogeneous researcher biologist “ conditions: situati this resolve Poles. themselves proclaiming from applicants some creating Poles, Polish from different self their Poles contemporary the to referring “we” a The state Polish the to attributed traits as constructed are organized, traditions, to adherent religious, ) Te eeec to reference The . pplicants - embracing - perception with these image these with perception

through the it was too long ago when we were together in one state” (Evgeniy state” one in together were we when ago long too was it :

“t affiliate hey also have division on true and not true Poles” true not and true on division have also hey

a category of the “Polish people”, proclaimed by proclaimed people”, “Polish the of category plicitly they tend to speak about about speak to tend they plicitly

n explicitly. on positive rsdn i Minsk in residing ,

latter ih h poio o h wy hy affiliate they way the to proviso the with

preoperat themselves to neither of these images of Poles. of images these of neither to themselves the . This .

the confirmed alter ago alter lo te cn e nepee as interpreted be can ties blood borders,

ional information for theexamional information positive tews they Otherwise ) . s nte atiuin aeoy Ti slt os not does split This category. attribution another of Belarusians, as an as Belarusians, of

by the Karta Polaka. All Polaka. Karta the by of Poles, applicants suggest applicants Poles, of seems as all as seems

- image is also fed by the narrative the by fed also is image

only “they”. Admitting the non the Admitting “they”. only proud ) or suggest that Poles themselves are not not are themselves Poles that suggest or ) 40 jbv 5 er nvriy mlye regional employee, university year 55 Ljubov

, active, polite active, ,

find the explanation explanation the find - them even encompa n ay cases many In

as a historical entity. historical a as vague

attempt to overcome the negative the overcome to attempt ssing as vague. vague. as ssing

. To . .

a

r confirm applicants

with

the ttmn of statement “there is something inside, something is “there

a that Belarusian Poles are Poles Belarusian that ( interview Konstantin 50 Konstantin interview

certain extent, the Poles the extent, certain , Karta Polaka to include to Polaka Karta .

h apiat d not do applicants the Without defining the the defining Without

None of None - correspondence of of correspondence s translated by translated s n h historical the in The belonging The

an

To describe To 32 year old old year 32 them

objective that

keep used they

the the

CEU eTD Collection locality and follow constructed are countries to referring categories Belarusians way The narrations refer Belarusians” uncompleted just repeated exclamation the about speakingpossibilityof thi of participants nation. a form Belarusians, the of submissiveness The differences onthe dwellers explicitly. of existence The preserve the hard but Poles, to negativ passive, Belarusians the about Speaking cannotthe loss bealienated with of character

negative failure s e pole e

genial, even in the narrations of the applicants the of narrations the in even h applicants the

)

This fixedness refer to t to refer characteristics . In the applicant the In . the the follow The s –

nugn, oeat Otn applicants Often tolerant. indulgent, almost exclusively to

- connection ult is duality eeyhn w cud sav could we “everything a compared organized and working Belarusian history Belarusian

s rgesv vco fo Es (usas t Ws (Poland) West to (Russians) East from vector progressive

he loss of loss he of the the the culture tothe territory many times. times. many

idea

of – dniy hmevs with themselves identify

,

the rjce on projected arrogant, impolite and negligible. and impolite arrogant, Western and Eastern Western and Eastern which . But regarding regarding But . s , ’ cultural distinctiveness and distinctiveness cultural

about

in comparison with the Poles the with comparison in of cultural Belarusians narrations the Belarusians a Belarusians the narrations

does becomes the history of being“under” history the of becomes the mme ad i/ e ihrn caatrsis The characteristics. inherent her his/ and member a Olena suggested her suggested Olena according to according

Belarusians. o depe not traits and eventraits identification the w hv aray lost” already have we e is 41 the

questioned questioned

eauin themselves Belarusians who name Russians among their ancestors. their among Russians name who general . Belarus.

d on nd

to Russians. Russians. to the narrations, conditions conditions narrations, the s te aeoy f the of category the use

h collective the ing discontent –

the the

forgetting the history as the signs the as history the forgetting

answer to this question this to answer “Who are “Who h ie o blnig o certai to belonging of idea the re lazy and inaccurate compared inaccurate and lazy re ,

the applicants describe applicants the

These individual’s will and, hence, hence, and, will individual’s The latter are endowed are latter The ,

the pronoun “we” pronoun the

negative characteristic negative the the says aeois Pls or (Poles categories .

Belarusians?!” wasBelarusians?!”

y irrn the mirroring by other nations other

Anna. the usas as Russians is ir

The very very The - failure to to failure admitted

“we are “we them as them

in . with The

the n a s

CEU eTD Collection association withthe dualityciv ofwild natureand administration. Polish the by composed Polish translated Belarus. nature betweenposition European and non th of synonym the becomes theapplicantssituation of see theKarta thereason Polaka. introduction for outflo end work plots metaphors of repertoire links relative childhood the firstly contact of experience F r all or . Poland is Poland Poland with country the is Poland odr regions border

I . But . they use n comparison with the countries of Western Europe Western of countries the with comparison n

w of people. of w

. The applicants rare applicants The . to theplace to utr ad itr i te core the is history and culture applicants I

i wrh etoig ht h iae o ntr ae mn te ot widely most the among are nature of images the that mentioning worth is t by the Belarusian state media state Belarusian the by

all this is this all –

is . Other applicants have been there only there been have applicants Other . h fos between flows the to describe Poland and Poland Belarus. to describe a a country of high culture and gr and culture high of country

uoen country European

of birth of their ancestors that ancestors oftheir that of birth Belarusians, in their turn, want to leave for Poland. In this disadvantageous Inthis Poland. leavefor to want turn, their in Belarusians, Belarus ,

valid only valid the s

with Poland varies. Poland with

to construct the images of two countries two of images the construct to intensive contact with Poland is a customary part of life since since life of part customary a is Poland with contact intensive

ly s h cuty hr te spent they where country the is e developed in the narrations. the in developed e

associate Poland with the sites of nature, while it is typical in typical is it while nature, of sites the with Poland associate a

until compared until higher level of life of level higher the the - European, but alwaysEuropean, Russia. but European than more bt es uoen than European less but , border f h peaainl program preparational the of images of Belarus. At the the At Belarus. of images However this difference in metaphors provokes the the provokes metaphors in difference this However s In the narrations of the applicants the of narrations the In

42 are

eat history eat

with Belarus with is is

ilized culture.ilized tmltd by stimulated today ,

with the with a few times. times. few a Poland is Poland

. part of Belarus. Belarus. of part Belarus occupies the intermediate intermediate the occupies Belarus Belarus is a country of bea of country a is Belarus

opportunities to consume to opportunities that has that a

major part of their life. The The life. their of part major

etr Erp. European Europe. Western n cnmc xhne and exchange economic an . The applicants The

Below I mention the main the mention I Below same time same

poor and suffers from the the from suffers and poor often often

for the Karta Polaka Polaka Karta the for For the dwellers of For thedwellers a label of label a , the ,

Poland Poland

use

richness of richness a similar a

a and to and

refers utiful d ead ead

CEU eTD Collection no way the of summary generalizing This suggested“ grandfather pragmatic a with inapplicable contestable. very the and freedom violence isanother political of limitation the of issue The country. the of images emblematic the of one of personality The silent. stays sphere this for Poland while Belarus, of description the in only emerges situation political the of theme The statement strikingly different ancestors. through connection referred the of the Belarus, to adherence strong that share participants all not While it”. to comparing states participant systematically traditions. dsly l idvda varieties individual all display t grandparents, but not for the applicants. the for not but grandparents, Poland Belarus is Poland uniqueness of of uniqueness Gregoriy .

h cneto wt Blrs through Belarus with connection The s However,

Poland began it began it Poland –

. describing their relation to Belarus to relation their describing –

-

where the roots are roots the where T a

.

“ he image of image he h motherland the , who considers himself a Pole, continuing “all other countries are alien alien are countries other “all continuing Pole, a himself considers who , country religious o wl see will You

oe applicants Some agent

the h ascain wt rlgoiy o o apa rfrig o Belarus to referring appear not do religiosity with associations the s , relation with the locality where locality the with relation - eig o lbr force. labor for eeking just just related theme. the -

Ioa Pln wl nt ogt s ( us” forget not will Poland Ilona, , “I have this passport” is probably the most spread first reaction. spreadfirst most the probably is passport” this have “I

T Te ocp o “ohrad bcms eta for central becomes “motherland” of concept The . because Polish state combine state Polish . . expre o For Poland becomes the country of ancestors, the motherla the ancestors, countryof becomesthe Poland

ugs ti mtpo fr oad other Poland, for metaphor this suggest of the s

the people arethe people running from there the applica the s h rlto wt te eauin state Belarusian the with relation the ss

the applicants religiosity is connected with morality and connectedreligiosityapplicantswith is

T strategies 43 he concept he –

“motherland can be only one only be can “motherland a nts fill in the categories with content does content with categories the in fill nts th Ilona retold her conversation with her her with conversation her retold Ilona pe s e Belarusian president Belarusian e

a benevolent grantor of Karta Polaka Karta of grantor benevolent a snl ie xeine surpasses experience life rsonal that

“the second motherland” emerges motherland” second “the one

plcns s t cntut the construct to use applicants

were

born and and born h cried she ” .

is mentioned is raised is raised , but ),

–

s it is Belarus is it ,

lie it claimed they use a a use they then w theme nd of nd idely

she the the

as as ”

CEU eTD Collection traits T Trajectories identification of their views for disjoint have. they benefits the of because envied s document the holding to due traitors potential the assigns them the provide could they that fact the and Poles with common in anything have not do who and practices) got who group the distinguish people to them allow not does that the hold who I wasnarratives also by affected the of with engagement antip just not used applicants the categories activel categories t is also interesting to look at the category that does not does that category the at look to interesting also is t ls h mteln” ie te S the cites motherland” the ells he current he

outsiders eyes of the applicants the of eyes : they hold or apply or hold they :

cntutd through constructed y who get who of affiliation of .

the

biographical situations where the where situations biographical ,

oneself Karta Polaka. All the participants the All Polaka. Karta they all comprise the group of grantees.group of the comprise theyall ds Te cont The odes.

insiders and insiders the the Karta Polaka do it for very different motives. Among motives. different very for it do Polaka Karta

to this group. At the same time, the applicants believe that in the eyes of eyes the in that believe applicants the time, same the At group. this to countries countries . Howeve .

. for Karta for They integrated for the for integrated

contradistinction, but in certain cases to describe one of the the of one describe to cases certain in but contradistinction, approach n is ent unique tropes. Belarus and Poland, Belarusians and Poles are Poles and Belarusians Poland, and Belarus tropes. unique and the

believe that these people comprise the majority, but none of of none but majority, the comprise people these that believe r t for it , ve tm syn Gregoriy. saying time oviet

it reveals some common tendencies. The categories were categories The tendencies. common some reveals it Polaka, spend the major part of their lives in Belarus and Belarus in lives their of part major the spend Polaka, needed documents do not do documents needed the the

the Belarusian and Polish states. the Belarusianand Polish ihr due richer

people hs category this an The category of the Karta Polak Karta the of category The

xrml uiiain ups (h bre trade border (the purpose utilitarian extremely 44 applicants find themselves sharing themselves find applicants outsiders . The way of way The . without exception underline exception without –

“today he plays he “today o h dfeecs n h experiences the in differences the to

On s “whole a as (Cohen 197 (Cohen

the one hand, they are recognized are theyhand, one the emerge in t in emerge the the

make the make construction On

8 the . Acc ”.

) h ohr ad te are they hand, other the

due to the differences in in differences the to due

the

Jazz and tomorrow he tomorrow and Jazz m authentic enough authentic m he narrations he

Polish culture. Even culture. Polish rig o hm the them to ording a holders remains remains holders a

the grantees the the of

the categories the heterogeneity

some crucial some -

people people

they they

as of in

CEU eTD Collection between other applicants s dramatically: varied traditions religious and cultural language, Polish the to access The practices. ethno different to attributed the where families, The personhood. a of achievement the for situation different a offered state Belarusian independent the and with (interview abeen Pole” participants: the for evident of importance The their participate life their circumstances iden different under life their during how describe applicants The dimensionandlocality.time 18) of characteristics the from deducted be cannot that practices signifying their in The activity. practical their by affected is and affects identification their ways different the on report also of variants own their can but points some at concordant others many

- stories and in the context of context the in and stories tification changed tification s identification of dynamic the grasps prolonged consequences

not.

the

have been have in

l who All

locality and the intensiveness of Polish cultural practices cultural Polish of intensiveness the and locality . . concept of trajectory ( trajectory of concept oee, hi nrain aot hi self their about narrations their However, Identification is also affected by affected also is Identification a

in touc in historical moment for the self the for moment historical self . The process of this change was change this of process The . ee invo were - definition and engagem and definition “If I have lived in lived I have “If h with Poland and Polish cultural practices cultural Polish and Poland with h

Gregoriy – -

natio like visiting the lved Certeau never broa a ctgre ad preserved and categories nal

). However, the time of the collapse of thecollapse S the thetime of However, ). participants ee ra were der processesder . be reduced to reduced be The t The

1984) 1984) a foreign country or gettinga foreigncountrya or 45

sd in ised the

rajectory also stresses the importance of importance the stresses also rajectory the events as discreet happenings that have have that happenings discreet as events the

1930s ent with the categories the with ent were born were as the unique rout unique the as - definition in ethno in definition on the state and transnational level they leveltransnational and state the on etr Blrs bt h connection the but Belarus, Western rooted

one under Poles, of course, I would have have Iwould course, of Poles, under - ecpin n self and perception

were other

in the event of their personal their of event the in . often

The applicants The e iie Pls cultural Polish limited

s the individuals follow individuals the s is not not is

- since their childhood, their since national categories is is categories national composed of peo of composed

document of belonging. of a

cast - fiito are affiliation the oviet Union oviet Union - iron rule iron . suggested system

ethnic They They ome

the ple (p. (p. –

CEU eTD Collection significance to such re to possibility the and The Pole a myself feel to wanted econo and political ideas. Belarus of history “ as teens her describes of image The her belonging. Polish disregard Poland and family peers. her as Poles the with communicate to able that realized she when was point turning The Polish. not but languages foreign ther going refused she years 2 after However, traditions. songs. and prayers Pole a Angelina identity. with connection in patterns cultural certain to attitude the change could person a Angelina or religionrejected could also be deliberately. teenstheir in only BelarusWestern left who Anna and Olena

the ethnic identification identification ethnic a

h turned She . retrospective choice cannot be reduced to them. to reduced be cannot choice

but did not attach any importance to this. this. to importance any attach not did but gt dl ad nesod ht t s pr o me of part a is it that understood and adult got I ’s story (27 year old woma yearold (27 story ’s ing was

then then

of the of the of

identification as a as identification born in in born

her Polish background and associated cultural practices cultural associated and background Polish her she found found she

different ancestraldifferent lines. o h aflain ih oad n ecin o h dsaifcin ih the with dissatisfaction the to reaction in Poland with affiliation the to and began began and H i stain in situation mic

eosdrto o te background, the of reconsideration er mother sent her to the Polish after Polish the to her sent mother er

Western Belarus Western the the - position oneself position b ecomes a ecomes time when I began to think, w think, to began I when time out , especially after I visited the country the visited I after especially , to speak Belarusian. After she After Belarusian. speak to

way way about n on maternity leave, regional city) regional leave, maternity on n

h country; the with different turns different with conscious choice conscious

. From her childhood she knew that her grandmother is is grandmother her that knew she childhood her From . h Kra Polaka Karta the .

The trajectory of identification may be applied also applied be may identification of trajectory The Alt

hough the instrumental motives may be crucial, crucial, be may motives instrumental the hough

46

So she bega she So she t h church the At i not did as a reaction to certain circumstance certain to reaction a as .

is hn h ap the when S - ho I am” I ho

e school club school he concludes: concludes: he the core of many narrations. Anna narrations. many of core the . . neia ae h wy from way the made Angelina ”. were such exceptions such were n to lear to n A

moved at o eog to belong to want t

nvriy neia studied Angelina university

. she she ” She

n about the roots of her of roots the about n to Minsk she left these left she Minsk to (interview with Anna) with (interview lcns reconsider plicants

gives to study to to

learned some some learned got interested in interested got

“ the p rl I eog to belong I artly an

actualization

example how how example language and and language

she was not was she eau: “ Belarus: .

Language Polish Polish

the the the of s I .

CEU eTD Collection how hethe outsiders. isrecognized by Belarus locality the changing with individual way The to it stabilize certain exte to and identification anchor to allows case this in document official The dimensio Pole”. a am I that written is there acquires object physical a as Karta The changed. approach and motives The visa a just bit a affiliate I now it, about them made studying history, Polish the and language The etc.). shopping that report Karta all They the change. significant affiliation, articulated an have not did who applicants the For with Karolina kin ori their of confirmation a as Polaka Karta the about spoke years early applicants the way the on effect themselves. perceived different a had Polaka Karta the getting of event The - state or just as a useful option. useful a as just or state ian .

n in the sphere the in n The fact of receiving the Karta Polaka became the acquisition of acquisition the became Polaka Karta the receiving of fact The

” ( ”

nt. but something spiritual” something but re interview with interview - ) was sometimes thetobegin motif process.) wassometimes this consider their consider

s

rcs o peaain u te i tou in them put preparation of process identify themselve identify Those ,

where . “Whoever you feel here, when you cross the border you become a a become you border the cross you when here, feel you “Whoever . Grigoriy). This change occurs in both how an individual feelindividualan how both occursin changeGrigoriy). This . When I received it I began to understand why I have I why understand to began I it received I When . o at Polaka Karta to self

for whom their belonging to Poland was accentuated from accentuated was Poland to belonging their whom for

before was a was before -

perception: “If before “If perception: The sometimes sometimes

“I deserve it more than the majority who g who majority the than more it deserve “I

Aeada 8 er l, pcait eiigi Minsk). in residing specialist, old, years 28 (Alexandra acquisition

s may vary not only with the time time the with only not vary may s

their a

special significance special

47 evoking sincere interest and provoking further further provoking and interest sincere evoking zone of their mostly subjective self subjective mostly their of zone transformed nta mot initial

of

the the Karta Polaka I have never thought thought never have I Polaka Karta the

Karta Polaka introduce Polaka Karta vswr ueyisrmna (visa, instrumental purely were ives while , h ih h re the with ch

–

“I look at it and I like I and it at look “I ohn es i ter lives their in else nothing gin dimension

recognition by the the by recognition

latively unknown unknown latively a new status that that status new a ot it” (interview (interview it” ot often s

the objective objective the - definitions.

it. It is not is It it. , but als but , caused a a caused

, s

their

that and

o a

CEU eTD Collection them perceive Poles native. not but kindred, even and close something as Poland about narrations the in motif core the is ambiguousness The integral whole,butnot salad or cake a like is it yourself, in distinguish narrations. their that affiliation ambiguous the probably, discrepancies, Such Poland. and Belarus to equally belongs she that suggested end the by but minor as Poland Anastasia Polish”. superficial that suggested conversation further in affiliation.describetheir to tropes changeapplicantsthe Belarusian” a are youryourfamily, “after themselves:for it narrow their recognize They cultures. and communities self The The experience named ident the way the predetermine to ability exclusive the has that in the for contestable highly remains affiliation the negotiating at rout the of analysis The rbto i not is tribution .

- ecpin of perception down to down

of estrangement

Grigoriy described himself using the using himself described Grigoriy

(interview with Andrei) with (interview h mte o cmlac with compliance of matter the coherent definitions. Their belonging preserves the element of uncertainty of element the preserves belonging Their definitions. coherent “ab I ol lk t fe a home at feel to like would I “Maybe :

a

applicants relies on the the on relies applicants combination of parts”. e te plcns foll applicants the s ne te hnig circumstances changing the under This feeling also comes from the way the applicants the way the from comes also feeling This

at not just a bias of the interview situation, but the but situation, interview the of bias a just not the applicants do not try to “brush” and to make coherent in coherent make to and “brush” to try not do applicants the

-

the beginning of of beginning the “at home among strangers” home“at among terested institutional agents, institutional terested

religion you are a Pole, but Pole, youarea religion . The uncertainty The . te eauin oe ean wt something with remains core Belarusian “the 48 w n the in ow

affiliation

idea an - the there interview

eahro “ of metaphor

a f the of Karolina who statedthat Karolinawho

dniiain rev identification are f rtra but criteria, of

as extremely complex and do not do and complex extremely as also

– ifrn cmoet. a an am I components. different ir they do not accept you. They They you. accept not do they .

describe lhuh h iett field identity the Although reveals its reveals oncens wt se with connectedness

fcto follows ification the

if to look in generalin look to if a salad a major major d

her h poes f re of process the as ht the that eals elf in the way the the way the in elf ” influential

affiliation with affiliation – expression of expression

“you do not not do “you she is she see

ant be cannot

how the how

aPole –

force force veral self

you - - CEU eTD Collection state the of ethnic their of basis the on not of because but background Belarus from alienated feel applicants cases many in Polak Karta the holding of ground the on conflicts the about reported applicants Some activity the restricts state Belarusian applicants The jeered was she how church ma are there because differently others by treated are they that feel not do mostly and home at feel participants Belarus In Polaka handing. co of glorification their and citizens Polish the between to contributes Polaka Karta the that suggests rights equal better Ev and Grigoriy used applicants Poles Polish admit applicants The dramatic relatives them. Polish stories who refuse about intouch with their tokeep Belarusian” a to Pole a from you turns play here context, Belarusian Belarusian Karolina) with on it declare

th . But this picture is not complete without without complete not is picture this But . an other Belarusians. The emphasis The Belarusians. other an or even or I pooe te eie o eah rm h cuty and country the from detach to desire the provokes It . - the

only being a being only

Ee i yu ae h Kra oaa n sek pro speak and Polaka Karta the have you if Even .

who a geniy). But some applicants said applicants some But geniy).

the different level different new member of member new

a at school at are eahr f h “epe f h second the of “people the of metaphor

Russian Russian ht vn f hy eie hmevs s oe te cno b eul to equal be cannot they Poles as themselves define they if even that oa actively today their citizen and residing on the territory could give this feeling. Some Some feeling. this give could territory the on residing and citizen

as a sign of distinction distinction of sign a as for them. The matter The them. for s by classmates for being signed being for classmates by , give options but the society does not accept you” accept not does society the but options give , dissatisfaction with dissatisfaction ny people with Polish roots and belonging to the Catholic Catholic the to belonging and roots Polish with people ny

the Polish nation Polish the

f uh raiain using organizations such of engaged in engaged (interview with Andrei). with (interview

that the applicants the that - 49 nationals.

that the Poles treat the Karta Polaka holders Polaka Karta the treat Poles the that the discordant the

during the solemn ceremony of the Karta the of ceremony solemn the during Polish cultural projects reported that the the that reported projects cultural Polish the of cultural differences, negotiable in negotiable differences, cultural of –

current political and political current “any minor mistake in mistake minor “any hs iuto disag situation This h fxto o te iiig line dividing the of fixation the

ls pol” itriw with (interview people” class put in the class journal as a Pole a as journal class the in

stories.

The applicants often report often applicants The

on citizenship and still not still and citizenship on per Polish, you remain remain you Polish, per

diitaie pressure. administrative rvns rm feeling from prevents Karolina remembers Karolina

economic policy economic ree the s

( interview interview ih the with language a. But the the a . CEU eTD Collection co conflicting withthe multiplicity ofa personal experience. of image the of smoothness putative the by hand, on created, are exclusion communities state Polish and Belarusian both in participate to possibility the applicants the gives that Polaka Karta inadeq T everywhereIa everywhere and stranger am athome”. pop one of metaphor the used Karolina feeling her describe To comfortable. he vrmhss on overemphasis uately one uately - sided way but it also should not should also it but way sided

the

the one hand, by hand, one the a tr it the into turn may xeine f the of experience

the

estrangement 50 xlso i bt cmuiis The communities. both in exclusion

legal

be disregarded. The inclusiveness of the of inclusiveness The disregarded. be

status of semi of status -

nationals proclaimed by the state state the by proclaimed nationals

ol display would - citizenship, on citizenship, the

iuto n an in situation - song: “I am am “I song:

bases bases the other the for CEU eTD Collection for ground the as identification re citizenship of discourse formal country descendants the for origin idea the and ties cultural informal the in converted be can ancestors of status civil The toethniccategories.attribution the and traits cultural between discrepancy the in resulting generations, through practices negotiated be can categories discourse bureaucratic the in t making by descendant the demonstrate to necessity The Polaka has image identity of image implacable the for basis individual an of sphere private the to level, formal the on least ethnic of sphere applica the of identification The Conclusion - tntzto o ctznhp reveals citizenship of ethnitization

hnmnn of phenomenon .

in the non the in of kin and cultural ties cultural and kin of

claiming :

very an makes the applicants approach applicants the makes

he Polish line especially sound especially line Polish he

official document becomes the most credible most the becomes document official

little in common with common in little group belonging group . This situation is also conditioned also is situation This . - a amicable surroundings amicable

state membership. The official narrative of the of narrative official The membership. state

at Polaka Karta an .

The nts. The Polish state introduces state Polish The nts. ethn ,

the affects produces but membership in the in membership ic Pole who preserves who Pole ic claiming . The question of question The .

not n Belarus in ossec wt te rcamd image proclaimed the with consistency

the personal experience personal the

the restoration of the lost citizenship lost the of restoration the

itself in in itself ethnicity. of discourse informal the .

T trbto o oeef n the and oneself of attribution h Pls sae membership. state Polish the background ancestral their .

he results results he The The 51

rae a distinctive a creates idea idea the

Pol ethnic ethnic of a Polish Polish a of by the dramatic change in the cultural the in change dramatic the by of the present research suggest that suggest research present the of ish

constru the

state affiliation that affiliation

the bureaucratic discourse to the the to discourse bureaucratic the national culture and culture national sign

tn and cting becomes the becomes of

, while , (Joppke 2005) (Joppke d escendant an Polish Polish

iuto fr h ethnic the for situation selectively a pplicant the cultural practices practices cultural the

h sae discourse state The

ancestors state operates with operates state at before, left was aiiaig ethnic facilitating

. , The joining with the the with joining

In this case this In ope

for beco Polish a of and rationalized a tendency to tendency

one the o ethnic to me shape it shape

- of Karta sided s

this this the the t the he he

CEU eTD Collection perceive affiliation to affiliation of metaphors T “motherland”Belarusfor the compared T constructed The life experience EU, the into Poland historical the by conditioned of any with along process The states nation cont ethno of categories the of construction The recognized as ofcitizenship a type effectively and loyally a citizen the converts he a he are Poland and Poles he ata state partial ested ifrne in differences aeois f affiliation of categories pplicants use pplicants them

Poland as Poland

. setting to Belarus and Belarusians. and Belarus to

, They other

. the community acquires an objective and objective unalienable quality. an acquires community the to engages

follow origin, genetic and culture and genetic origin, h wy they way The : membership a cross te plcns r epsd o h nraie o te Belarusian the of narratives the to exposed are applicants the :

establish ntttoa narratives. institutional eti extent certain

an different ship of ancestors of ship ing

life economic crises in Belarus and others. and Belarus in crises economic - border activities,border r also advanced country and are proud of proud are and country advanced ,

their their making . experiences,

typically with . h mta connecti mutual the

The descendant The tropes

own nation own el with deal ,

context , the metanarrative of metanarrative the such

ones olwn the following -

to describe the way of affiliation with the categories the with affiliation of way the describe to

described as more advanced, cultural, cultural, advanced, more as described it isdescribedit gift, as a notaright. but

to the ethnic ethnic the to

best best s oad n Blrs Pls n Belarusians and Poles Belarus, and Poland as

H h apiat as ue distinctive use also applicants the including eligious practices, and education

owever - the refer to Poland Poland to refer building strategies building However, the applicants’ stories stories applicants’ the However, to meet to aeois n fill and categories s apo osn s norgdt participate to encouraged is cousin” poor “a as 52 - ainl fiito tks lc i a highly a in place takes affiliation national ,

n ewe clue n bod s that so blood, and culture between on principle

the categories the the belonging

the Europe nesae relations, interstate expectations. s that

the f contradistinction of

and instrumental political goals political instrumental and of descendants of ir by affected also is It as can be conceptualized be can

affiliation with it. it. with affiliation

are not just antipodes just not are a superior center of progress of center superior a them The Karta Polaka is Polaka Karta The in

locality

ih h cnet is content the with

The applicants active h acpac of acceptance the

r irreducible are to offer to tropes, such as as such tropes,

n relativity and . , Referring

‘ applicants’ and Polish Polish and E

the latter latter the as uropean .

D ethnic . , ue to ue

the also also T not not are are

he he to to to ir ’ . .

CEU eTD Collection member Recognizing personhood. becomes often Poland with identification and country attitudes. complex more is and purposes instrumental purely to reduced be cannot motivation to Poland to affiliation the of Actualization befo didnot who people identification of significant onthe effect Polaka Karta the of acquisition The consequences. beco events diverse affected are political and economic trajectories different follow identification their in applicants The biographic dynamics. conversation the during even affiliation their Poland, and Belarus towards tropes different describe applicants The social belongingBelarusian tothe the with familiarity the and birth of surrounding place the on put is emphasis the Belarus access the access re .

s

of the Polish national community national Polish the of

the the that y biographical by Schengen ma

coherent and smooth and coherent affiliations detach y are

e h trig poi turning the me

odtoe by conditioned

context

zone In particular, In hi ethno their

themselves state to both states, the applicants do applicants the states, both to , to study and work in a European country. But the applicants’ the But country. European a in work and study to , . The applicants recognize the fluidity of their affiliation in affiliation their of fluidity the recognize applicants The , situation

and is

often neglected. - the exposure the of intensity the and categories of content the : ainl dniiain as identification national

t he applicants feel proud of belonging to an advanc an to belonging of proud feel applicants he

rm h ustsatr stain n eau. The Belarus. in situation unsatisfactory the from h proa exper personal the and personal motivation. motivation. personal and is driven to a considerable extent by the the by extent considerable a to driven is a t, hl te ae vns can events same the while nts,

as it it as matter of personal choice in the achievement of achievement the in choice personal of matter 53 they

is

to

claimed in the official state narrative state official the in claimed do not try to make their their make to try not do

similar state narratives state similar as ,

affilia an an ience not perceive themselves as equal equal as themselves perceive not event, a . te expressively te withPoland utpe belonging. multiple oee, t However, regardless In

tend different opeetd with complemented s .

narration The trajectories The to make more more make to

of he theme of of theme he have diverse diverse have

biographies biographies the possibility ties shift ties s shared

U about . sing The The

the ed

CEU eTD Collection of context t citizenship, granting the of construction suggest also results presented The matching personaland themwiththeir self life plans “core”members such nation to response in itself position co for regime membership alternative introducing By thecommunitywithin co of into turn may people Polish the fellow as them treat to citizens full the of unwillingness to in r may Polaka Karta the through immigration labour mobilize to Poland of intention The people, ratherof historicalPolish theto actual entity than of state community. not are they status this accept willingly they However, force. labor loyal the applicants The community. state Polish ‘ t recognize applicants real the creation of creation the the example of colonial states (Joppke 2003). The marginalization can be fostered by the the by fostered be can marginalization The 2003). (Joppke states colonial of example the ’ a

- Poles. regime project building Karta Polaka recognized by Poles as co as Poles by recognized The has .

T Karta Polaka hol Polaka Karta

a a dual effect of facilitating affiliation and assigning the dif the assigning and affiliation facilitating of effect dual a he applicants in their identification their in applicants he

marginalized group marginalized ethnicity through the selecting mechanisms in the procedure of the the of procedure the in mechanisms selecting the through ethnicity he difference he erl fietfcto ouet in documents identification of role he .

as well asas ntelvl of level the On - nationals economic

the

the migration experience ofthe holders. Karta Polaka ders become ders in their status from the citizens the from status their in eea tee fr ute rsac. mn them Among research. further for themes several . appearance of a of appearance

- challenge

nationals describe the Polish state as pragmatic and seeking for for seeking and pragmatic as state Polish the describe composed composed a personal experience of experience personal 54

simultaneously excluded and included in the the in included and excluded simultaneously s .

This and to introduce nationalist discourse in thein discourse nationalist introduce to and of co of - perception.

tryto

tapdmnrt” (R minority” “trapped re - - - ethnics members. - nationals directs the directs

accommodate these accommodate the ,

h Pls state Polish the Te applicants The . identity construction in the the in construction identity

The proclaimed r proclaimed The rights in restricted the the

ir who

affiliation to the image the to affiliation holders m

they ference from the the from ference abinowitz 2001) abinowitz ’

controversies controversies iden

consider

aims di that admit eunion of of eunion tification tification ,

similar similar

o re to

, esult

the the the - CEU eTD Collection Re pr, Peter. Spiro, critique». a Barth,Fredrik. communities“: „ethnic on Weber «Max Michael. Banton, O’G. R. Benedict Anderson, alr Ayse. Caglar, ——— ——— Rogers. Brubaker, L. Charles Briggs, Kum Bhavnani W. Douglas Blum, Kovács Leibich, Rainer. Baubock, ferences ferences p. 5 Baubock an (still) There http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/13587 Europe Europe 37 for Mi Transborder for Citizenship p. 7 Tit Hungarian the to Respond to How Minorities? Transborder for Citizenship Dual Nationalism nationalism and Werber, P. community and identity racism, Europe : new the in multiculturalism doi:10.1080/01419870.2011.579137. states». Soviet Noncitizens (1989 language Cambridge 1.Cambridge [Cambridgeshire]: Universit research science social in interview racisms: afeminism &reader psychology Soviet Eurasia , «ainlzn sae rvstd poet ad rcse o ntoaiain n post in nationalization of processes and projects revisited: states «Nationalizing . . - - - 43 tat Ethnicity WithoutEthnicity Groups - - for 2010 André 7 9

. -

? ? tat eds.

, 2010 , R ,

Maria.

. in 1997. . Introduction,

- eds. eds.

2010 . Rev. and extendedLondon: ed., Verso, 2nded. 1991. u, hei Ann, Phoenix Kum, .

Baubock, R. R. Baubock, 2010 13, № 1( s hr (tl) n East an (still) There Is and Liebich A Liebich and

Mmesi wtot iiesi: h Eooi ad Soci and Economic The Citizenship: without “Membership . New Cambridge York: Press, 2007. University cetn ad rtcig ul iiesi fr rnbre minorities transborder for citizenship dual protecting and Accepting

London:ZedBooks Learning how to ask: a sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the the of role the of appraisal sociolinguistic a ask: to how Learning ainl dniy and identity National Baubock, R. Baubock,

TNC N RCA STUDIES RACIAL AND ETHNIC West and East states: Union European in preferentialism Ethnic yhntd dniis n te iis f “cul of limits the and identities Hyphenated East Is there (still) an East an (still) there Is

Baubock ): 145 Dual Citizenship for Transborder Minorities? A Rejoinder A Minorities? Transborder for Citizenship Dual - et iie n h Cneto o Ctznhp n Europe? in Citizenship of Conception the in Divide West January 2007 Ethnic GroupsandBoundaries – Imagined Communities: reflections on the origin and spread of of spread and origin the on reflections Communities: Imagined 162. Working Paper, Working R , . .

. HarvardUniversity Press, 2004.

Wor Working Paper, Working . norities? How to Respond to the to Respond to How norities?

king Paper, king 1994. n Leih A Liebich and . ): 19

- p. 169 tde i tesca n utrl onain of foundations cultural and social the in Studies .

et iie n h Cneto o Ctznhp in Citizenship of Conception the in Divide West lblzto: ot, tt ad oit i post in society and state youth, globalization: 55 . - –

West divide in the conception of citizenship in citizenship of conception the in divide West p. 1 35. doi:10.1111/j.1469 . Introducti

London: Sage - . 185 http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/14625 - 5 .

http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/14625 http://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/13587

on,

. Waveland PrInc, 1998. 4 № 1 (2011 11 № 34, . n hfig dniis shifting identities, Shifting in

Publications okn Ppr 21 . 2010 Paper, Working

ture y 1986. Press, - 8129.2007.00271.x. Hungarian

, in ”, .

. p. 5

e h pltc of politics The ds : 1785 ): - ain and Nations . Modood, T Modood, . 18 l ihs of Rights al - Slovak Tit Slovak

, in ,

p. 9 - Slovak Slovak –

. 1814.

Dual in - eds. .

37

in p. Is - - -

. .

CEU eTD Collection

lc, w, rs vn Kardoff, von Ernst Uwe, Flick, «Ethnicity:Focus inAnthropology». andCohen, R. Problem Cohen, Abner. de. Michel Certeau, ——— De between «Citizenship Christian. Joppke, A., Holstein, James Violence». Nationalist «Explaining Michael. Hechter, Saskia Sassen, Hall, Stuart, Handler Gellner, Ernest. Friedman Jon, Fox, F owler pcs f utr: iy Nto, World SAGE Nation, City, Culture: of Spaces Sociologie de doi:10.1017/S0003975610000159. Européennes Archives University protection Europe Eastern and Kin of Form New a Law’as ‘Status Hungarian the Interpreting SAGE, 2004. 7, № 1(1978 1984. Frankfurt Card" "Pink ——— University 2005. Press, Sociologie de Européennes doi:10.1017/S0003975603001346. Archives / Sociology Thousand 1995. Oaks: Sage Publications, (1995 studies of citizenship R. Gilles, John , .

Brigit. 2004. Brigit. Selecting by origin: ethnic migration in the liberal state liberal the in migration ethnic origin: by Selecting R. , and

): 53 Jonathan , . 1996.

. и 230 P. 2002

, New York: Campus Verlag York:, New Campus Peter Vermeersch. «Backdoor Nationalism». «Backdoor Vermeersch. Peter Paul duGay. . 2002. . . Urban Ethnicity – .

Nationalism Slavic Eurasian Studies No. 4. Sapporo: Slavic Research C Research Slavic Sapporo: 4. No. Studies Eurasian Slavic 68. p. 177

Unravelling ties : from social cohesion to new practices of connectedness of practices new to cohesion social from ties : Unravelling

s iett" ueu cross useful a "identity" Is г The Discrete Charm of Dual Citizenship: Citizenship Ties, Trust Ties, Citizenship Citizenship: Dual of Charm Discrete The -

.): 379 255 . 1999. 1999. . Jaber F. Gubrium. F. Jaber doi:10.1111/j.1354 Princeton University Press The practice of everyday life everyday of practice The

Fuzzing Citizenship, Nationalising Political Space: A Framework for Framework A Space: Political Nationalising Citizenship, Fuzzing Towards Post Towards -

238 . in , –

London: SAGE 403. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.07.100178.002115. 403.

The Hybridization of Roots and the Abhorrence of the Bush the of Abhorrence the and Roots of Hybridization The

Questions Cultural of Identity . London:. and Nicolson, Weidenfeld 1997.

h Hnain tts a: ain ulig n/r minority and/or building nation law: status Hungarian The . Routledge, 2004. and - National and Denationalized Citizenship Denationalized and National

Ines Steinke. Steinke. Ines The activeinterviewThe -

5078.1995.00053.x. .

p. 277 56 -

- . n Re and

.

utrl concept? cultural P. 27 P. eds.

. Berkeley: University of California Press, Press, California of University Berkeley: . -

291 Cmain o ulttv Research Qualitative to Companion A - 1 № 2 (2010 02 № 51, 40 Lash, Scott, Scott, Lash, -

Ethnicization».

ain ad Nationalism and Nations . . Qualitative research methods 37. 37. researchmethods Qualitative . SAGE

European Journal of Sociology / Sociology of Journal European 4 № 3 20) 429 (2003): 03 № 44, Annual Review ofAnthropology Annual Review . Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Mass: Cambridge, .

Publications, 1996. Publications, In and - Commemorations state Policy in Central Central in Policy state

uoen ora of Journal European

ie Featherstone. Mike

enter, Hokkaido Hokkaido enter, , : 325 ):

in Handbook

1, № 1 1 № 1,

and the the and – . –

458. 357. e

ds in in . . .

CEU eTD Collection

oea, hn T «eor s efrac: taeis f yrd tnc Identity». Ethnic Hybrid of Strategies Performance: as «Memoir T. Shane Moreman, Peggy, Levitt, Peggy. Levitt, Korys and Kicinger Stewart ——— English Rethinking Action: Social and Identity, Narrative«Narrativity, R. Margaret Somers, AnthonyD. Smith, Soysal Supranational«CosmopolitanFortressPartisans ofSchlenker, Europeans Andrea. Europe? or L. Stephen Schensul, ——— ——— Abu and Dan Rabinowitz, Aihwa. Ong, questionnaires Inquiry Critical doi:10.1080/014198701750052505. anthropology».in transnationalismof ofIsrael Citizens Palestinian Duke University Press, 1999. Quarterly doi:10.1080/10462930903242855. Performance and г Society». on Perspective Field Social explanations Pe Present and Past in Contexts and Actors of Dynamics University C Research Slavic Sapporo: 4. No. Studies Eurasian Slavic protection. Politics? Transnational Theory andSociety doi:10.2307/1171314. Working Reno: Penguin 1991. Books ;Nevada UniversityPress, of Debates: AReader EU». the in doi:10.1080/13600826.2012.734281. Patterns Identity .): 1002 , . «The Narrative Constitution of Identity: A Relational and Network Approach». Approach». Network and Relational A Identity: of Constitution Narrative «The . Refugees». Palestinian of Return the and Theory Abject Refuse: to Right «The . «Thecitiz Palestinian . nninx, , Michael. 2004. 2004. Michael. , Yasemin

– Introduction, in Introduction,

- Maren Borkert ls Formation». Class 1039. . rnntoa mgain a migration Transnational and

p. 120 . , 2003. 1998.

. Ethnographer’s National identity National . ia lc Shle. Cnetaiig iutniy A Transnational A Simultaneity: «Conceptualizing Schiller. Glick Nina

doi:10.2307/27645424.

36, № 3(2010 h cs o Pln in Poland of case The - . 151

23, № 5(1994 23, Eds. oad Post a Toward seta ehorpi mtos osrain, interviews,and observations, methods: ethnographic Essential -

Backer, Khawla Backer,

The Hungarian Status Law: A New European Form of of Form European New A Law: Status Hungarian The

Amsterdam University Press, 2011. Shafir, G Flexible Citizenship: The Cul The Citizenship: Flexible ens of Israel, the concept of trapped minority and the discoursethe and Israel,trappedminority of conceptof ensthe h Hungar The . University CaliforniaPress, 2005. of

p. 1 oil cec History Science Social ): 494

. Ethnonationalism in comparative perspective.comparative in Ethnonationalism . toolkit 2. Walnut 2.Walnut toolkit Creek, Alta Calif: -

26 . Unive г

.): 605 – -

ainl oe o Membership of Model national 516. doi:10.1086/653409. 9 № ( 4 № 29, ian status law: nation building and/or minority minority and/or building nation law: status ian Ethnic and Racial Studies Racial and Ethnic d h rdfnto o te tt vrain and variations state : the of redefinition the nd lbl Society Global Coffins on Our Shoulders: The Experience of the the of Experience The Shoulders: Our on Coffins nentoa Mgain Review Migration International

57 . rsity of Minnesota Press of rsity

– Migration 649. doi:10.2307/658090. 649. in Policymaking in Europe: The The Europe: in Policymaking in

tural Logics of Transnationality of Logics tural 6 № (1992 4 № 16, . coe 2009 October 27,

ets.

P. 347 P.

Zincone, Giovana, Rinus Rinus Giovana, Zincone, 1 (2013 1 №

24, № 1 (2001 1 № 24, .

- p.189 Mira Press, 1999. Mira Press, 376

in ,

enter, Hokkaido Hokkaido enter, 8 № (2004 3 № 38, - : 346 ): 220 г ) 591 .): Citizenship : 25 ):

): 64 ): London : – – – 630. 366. – Text Text 85. 51.

. CEU eTD Collection

ia Pablo. Vila, Henri. Tajfel, Wilson BF. Williams, Max. Weber, Eva WolniczPawłowska, Winnicki Vink, Tsichomirov f oeg nationality. foreign of frontiers international at University 1998. Press, state and nation identities: Review A of Berkeley:California UniversityPress, of 1978. paper re Europe in regimes citizenship of purposes multiple U.S. Белоруского the University 2000. Texas Press, of on identities отношений narrative международных и политики внешней Факультет университетагосударственного jęz.pol (Минск), изучения Центр «Тесей» Русвкович), безопастности, 2009, А. Минск (ред. сотрудничества»Издательство перспективы и история [ Александр Cambridge: (ActaBaltico issue:2011,pages: Slavica), 35/ 271 systemowejtransformacjiokresie Ukrainiew i BiałorusinaLitwie, transformation of period Baltico the Slavica in Ukraine and Belarus naLitwie, Poles отношенийreality. международных и политики внешней Факультет университетагосударственного (Минск) изучения Центр «Тесей» безопастности, 2009, Минск Издательство перспективы и история : obywatelstwa w

:] are Ptr and Peter Maarten .. Dna H Donnan T.M.,

,

Zdzisław Julian Zdzisław «Пробл ,

- submitted for external review, forexternal submitted January 2013] tnc group Ethnic rsig odr, enocn bres sca ctgre,eahr, and categories,metaphors, social borders: reinforcing borders, Crossing A Alexandr

ua gop ad oil aeois suis n oil psychology social in studies categories: social and groups Human nthropology class act class Cambridge University 1981. Cambridge Press, отяи белорусско Состояние . м венй оиии безопасн и политики внешней емы «Пробле

Kabzińska, Między pragnieniem ideału a rzeczywistością. Polacy Polacy rzeczywistością. a ideału pragnieniem Między Kabzińska, .

. . h cniin f Belarusian of condition The - , .

eiw f I. of: Review A ,

Karta Polaka as an expression of expression an as Polaka Karta borders international at identity and state Nation,

мы внешней политики и безопас и политики внешней мы at Plk' ao ya sceóng sauu sb obcego osób statusu szczególnego wyraz jako Polaka' Karta in nthropology and the race the and nthropology Baubock 18

cnm ad oit: n uln of outline an society: and Economy (1989

сотрудничества

, Rainer. Rainer. , ): 401 -

eio frontier Mexico - azńk, ewe te eie o the for desire the between Kabzińska, оькг плтчсоо илг в 08 г 2008 в диалога политического польского – 58 444. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.18.1.401.

- 200 Citizenship configurations: analysing the the analysing configurations: Citizenship

( »

p. 385 p. 9

to nation across ethnic terrain ethnic across nation to - ред - oih oiia dialogue. political Polish ski, R. ski, R. 275, on . Manuscript under review [revised [revised review under Manuscript - Inter . .

398 ости ости

2013 Cmrde U: Cambridge UK: Cambridge, . . Русвкович), А. the particular status of persons of status particular the

p ности ности www.ceeol.com . 3

– - America series. Austin: Austin: series. America

- 9 Беларусь

nepeie sociology interpretive – .

Беларусь Acta Baltico Slav Baltico Acta p Белорусского p . – 17 . 1 . .

in ,

оьа : Польша – da and ideal Тихонов,

7 . Польша

Annual Annual Border Acta . – –

37. 37. ica . . .