A Comparative Case Study of Karelia and Buriatia
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
A dissertation submitted to the Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy of Central European University in part fulfillment of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Articulations of Indigeneity in Two Mining Regions of Russia: A Comparative Case Study of Karelia and Buriatia CEU eTD Collection Anna VARFOLOMEEVA July, 2019 Budapest Notes on copyright and the ownership of intellectual property rights: (1) Copyright in text of this dissertation rests with the Author. Copies (by any process) either in full, or of extracts, may be made only in accordance with instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European University Library. Details may be obtained from the Librarian. This page must form part of any such copies made. Further copies (by any process) of copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the permission (in writing) of the Author. (2) The ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this dissertation is vested in the Central European University, subject to any prior agreement to the contrary, and may not be made available for use by third parties without the written permission of the University, which will prescribe the terms and conditions of any such agreement. (3) For bibliographic and reference purposes this dissertation should be referred to as: Varfolomeeva, A. 2019. Articulations of Indigeneity in Two Mining Regions of Russia: A Comparative Case Study of Karelia and Buriatia. Doctoral dissertation, Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy, Central European University, Budapest. Further information on the conditions under which disclosures and exploitation may take CEU eTD Collection place is available from the Head of the Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy, Central European University. i Author’s declaration No portion of the work referred to in this dissertation has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other institute of learning. Furthermore, this dissertation contains no materials previously written and/or published by another person, except where appropriate acknowledgment is made in the form of bibliographical reference, etc. Anna VARFOLOMEEVA CEU eTD Collection ii THE CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION submitted by: Anna VARFOLOMEEVA for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and entitled: Articulations of Indigeneity in Two Mining Regions of Russia: A Comparative Case Study of Karelia and Buriatia Month and Year of submission: July, 2019. The aim of this dissertation is to analyze the constructions of indigenous identity in relation to resource extraction in two regions of Russia. The research concentrates on two case studies: Veps in Karelia (Northwestern Russia) and Soiots in Buriatia (South-Central Siberia). Both indigenous minorities have historical ties with mining industry including diabase and quartzite in Karelia and graphite and jade in Buriatia. The changes of post- Soviet period such as the closure of state mining enterprises in Karelia and the boost of industrial development, including informal mining, in Buriatia had impact on the articulations of indigeneity in both case studies. The dissertation’s theoretical framework includes Michel Foucault’s works on power/knowledge and Tim Ingold’s notions of dwelling and lines’ entanglement. The research is based on ethnographic fieldwork in Karelia (Prionezhskii district and Petrozavodsk) and Buriatia (Okinskii district and Ulan-Ude) in 2015 - 2018. The main CEU eTD Collection research methods include participant observation and semi-structured interviews with local residents, indigenous activists, administration representatives and mining workers. Besides, the research involves document analysis of local and regional newspapers of Soviet and post-Soviet periods. iii The dissertation shows that indigenous status recognition in post-Soviet Karelia and Buriatia is closely connected to having larger control over land and resources. To retain this control, community members need to construct their indigenous identities in the firm terms defined by Russian law. At the same time, local connections to land and resources in Karelia and Buriatia influence the character of indigenous claims and question the established state narratives, e.g. through engagement in informal mining activities. Strong ties of Veps with the stoneworking industry, as well as the sacrality of landscape in Soiot and Oka Buriat culture influence the formation of resource identities which are based on local resources and become an additional resource themselves. The research demonstrates that the relations between indigenous communities and mining may go beyond the established dichotomies of “traditional” versus “industrial” or “indigenous person” versus “mining worker.” The dissertation produces a thorough analysis of the links between the construction of resource and the construction of indigenous subject. It contributes to the general scope of studies focusing on indigenous peoples and extractive businesses in the post-Soviet space. It is envisaged that the research will contribute to the practices of negotiations between indigenous residents and extractive industries in Russia. Keywords: indigeneity, subjectivity, resource symbolism, human – resource relations, stone extraction, rootedness, power, informality, Russia, Veps, Soiots, Karelia, Buriatia CEU eTD Collection iv Acknowledgements This dissertation results from many interactions and entanglements, travels and shared thoughts. Firstly, I am immensely grateful to my supervisor Tamara Steger for her guidance, understanding, inspiration and encouragement throughout my PhD journey. I will miss this experience! I extend profound thanks to Guntra Aistara and Peter Schweitzer for their comments and suggestions which helped to shape my data and my thoughts. The advice of Ruben Mnatsakanian and Alan Watt was vital at the early stages of this project. The idea of this research was formulated in Sweden with the support of Sverker Åström Foundation and Uppsala Centre for Russian and Eurasian Studies; I am especially grateful to Disa Håstad and Vladislava Vladimirova. My fieldwork in Buriatia became possible thanks to Vera Kuklina and Alex Oehler. This project also benefitted immensely from the support of David Anderson and Tatiana Argounova-Low (University of Aberdeen) as well as Frank Sejersen and Valeria Guerrieri (University of Copenhagen). I express sincere and warm gratitude to my interviewees in Karelia and Buriatia for their openness, hospitality, and for sharing their stories which are now a part of me. This research was enriched thanks to Paginklub, the Veps ethnographic museum, the Society of Vepsian Culture, the Association of Indigenous Small-Numbered Peoples of Buriatia, and the Library of Okinskii District in Orlik. Thank you to CEU for the opportunities it provided to me, and for all the beautiful memories. I extend my gratitude to Center for Teaching and Learning and Roma Graduate Preparation Program for their support of my teaching projects. It has always been a pleasure to interact with my PhD colleagues: I am especially thankful to Siobhan Doria, Miloš Miličević and Kyle Piispanen for providing comments on my chapter drafts and to Anastasia Kvasha for her help with maps and for being there for me. I am grateful to our Departmental Coordinator, Gyorgyi Puruczky, for her constant encouragement. CEU eTD Collection Finally, I am thankful to my family for their love and support, and especially to my mum who got me interested in the Veps language and culture at the age of seven. Thank you, Dimka, for our conversations, memories, and many more precious moments to come soon. I know my grandmother would have been happy for me, and this work is dedicated to her. v List of tables Table 1. Important periods of northern Veps’ history .......................................................... 68 Table 2. Important periods of Soiots and Oka Buriats’ history, Okinskii district ................ 89 Table 3. Summary of fieldwork activities .......................................................................... 110 CEU eTD Collection vi List of figures Figure 1. Karelia on the map of Russia (Adapted from: www.russianlessons.net/russia/karelia) .................................................................................. 5 Figure 2. Buriatia on the map of Russia (adapted from www.russianlessons.net/russia/Buriatia) ................................................................................ 6 Figure 3. Karelia and Buriatia on the map of Russia ............................................................ 47 Figure 4. Ethnic groups of Veps: (1) northern Veps, (2) middle Veps, (3) southern Veps. Adapted from: http://phonogr.krc.karelia.ru/section.php?id=25 .......................................... 49 Figure 5. Contemporary and historical Veps territory. Adapted from Mullonen (2012). ..... 50 Figure 6. Karelia and its neighboring regions. Adapted from: http://bio.krc.karelia.ru/conferences/Soil_Classification_04/kareliamap.jpg ....................... 53 Figure 7. Veps national district (volost’). Adapted from: http://library.karelia.ru/library/html/veps.htm ...................................................................... 55 Figure 8. Veps villages of Prionezhskii district and former Veps National District. ........... 57 Figure 9. A Vepsian-language page from Krasnoe Sheltozero (in Cyrillics), July 1, 1937 .. 62 Figure 10. The dynamics