NOTE TO USERS Page(s) not included in the original manuscript and are unavailable from the author or university. The manuscript was scanned as received. 286-292 This reproduction is the best copy available. ® UMI Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Subjects, Comrades, and Citizens: Imperial, Bolshevik, and Post-Soviet Foundings in the Russian Citizenship Tradition By Peter Waisberg, M. A. A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Political Science Carleton University Ottawa, Canada November 2006 © copyright Peter Waisberg 2006 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Library and Bibliotheque et Archives Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de I'edition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-27117-9 Our file Notre reference ISBN: 978-0-494-27117-9 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non­ L'auteur a accorde une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library permettant a la Bibliotheque et Archives and Archives Canada to reproduce,Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve,sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par telecommunication ou par I'lnternet, preter, telecommunication or on the Internet,distribuer et vendre des theses partout dans loan, distribute and sell theses le monde, a des fins commerciales ou autres, worldwide, for commercial or non­ sur support microforme, papier, electronique commercial purposes, in microform,et/ou autres formats. paper, electronic and/or any other formats. The author retains copyright L'auteur conserve la propriete du droit d'auteur ownership and moral rights in et des droits moraux qui protege cette these. this thesis. Neither the thesis Ni la these ni des extraits substantiels de nor substantial extracts from it celle-ci ne doivent etre imprimes ou autrement may be printed or otherwise reproduits sans son autorisation. reproduced without the author's permission. In compliance with the Canadian Conformement a la loi canadienne Privacy Act some supporting sur la protection de la vie privee, forms may have been removed quelques formulaires secondaires from this thesis. ont ete enleves de cette these. While these forms may be includedBien que ces formulaires in the document page count, aient inclus dans la pagination, their removal does not represent il n'y aura aucun contenu manquant. any loss of content from the thesis. i * i Canada Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Abstract This study examines the development of the Russian citizenship regime over time as an institution. It focuses on three historical moments, which constitute foundings in the otherwise incremental development of the citizenship regime. Each begins with a pivotal event, which serves as a departure point for the foundation of a new political order. Implicit in each is the restructuring of relations between the state and its population, the redefinition of membership and redrawing of borders. It is argued that the Great Reforms of the 1860s in Imperial Russia, the October Revolution of 1917, and the Collapse of Communism in 1991 each constitute the formation of a particular modem political order. Each is taken as both an individual case and a single iteration in a cumulative process. Each has its own dynamic configuration of recognized citizenship claims (rights) made by individuals on the state or its agents and a set of claims made by the state against its populace through its characteristic means of extracting resources, progressively understood as the fulfillment of citizenship duties. The shape of these borders, rights, and duties is arrived at through asymmetrical, informal bargaining between the state and mobilized groups within society. The investigation of this bargaining process considers the pressures on the state from the international system, capacity of the state to administer its territories and populations, and the participatory capacity of the public sphere. The goal of the research is to broaden the approach to citizenship issues, so as to bring the Russian case into the mainstream of citizenship studies. iii Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Andrea Chandler, for her guidance and support at every stage of this project. I would like to acknowledge the advice and suggestions of the other members of my committee, Waller Newell and Jeff Sahadeo. Thanks are also due to Geoffrey Kellow, Susan Decker, Craig Smillie and, Sarah Earl for their friendship and help over the course of this long process. I would also like to express my gratitude to my family and especially my mother for her enduring encouragement. Finally, my deepest debt of gratitude is owed to Rafal Kulczycki, for everything. iv Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Contents Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Introduction 1 Chapter 1. From Imperial Subject to Imperial Citizen? 47 Chapter 2. Revolutionary Citizenship 129 Chapter 3. Out of the Ashes: The Post Soviet Citizenship Regime 200 Conclusion 286 Bibliography 293 v Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reform, Revolution, and Collapse: Three Paths to Modern Citizenship in the Russian Experience Introduction ... the senseless dream o f participation by zemstvo representatives in affairs o f internal administration. Let all know that I ... shall safeguard the principles of autocracy as firmly and as unswervingly as my late, unforgettable father.” Tsar Nicholas II, January 1895. Democracy means equality. The great significance of the proletariat’s struggle for equality and o f equality as a slogan will be clear if we correctly interpret it as meaning the abolition of classes. Vladimir Lenin, State and Revolution A strong state should extend a hand to citizens where it is treacherous and frightening, where trouble looms, hi turn, the state also needs a great deal from society. Besides democratic guarantees and correct international policy, it needs decency and discipline form citizens. Boris Yeltsin, The Struggle for Russia These quotes capture three distinct moments in the development of modem citizenship in Russia. Each conveys the particular tensions internal to a distinct encounter with modem politics and the challenges it poses for state-citizens relations. The story of the Russian citizenship tradition is one punctuated by three great upheavals which reordered the relations between the state and its citizens. Tsar Nicholas II expressed his deeply held belief in an autocracy that could not admit the devolution of political right to its subjects, even in the midst of modernization. Vladimir Lenin asserts that democracy and equality will only be possible with the erasure of class distinctions. Boris Yeltsin groped for a new reciprocal understanding between state and citizen. The most recent reconfiguration of Russian citizenship following the collapse of the USSR, with its attendant impact on the rights, duties, and identities it confers, has received scant scholarly attention. This is both surprising and unfortunate because of what citizenship can tell us about the paths of development followed by Russia. This 1 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. absence could be explained by a failure to take Russian citizenship seriously, based on the assumption that throughout their history Russians have enjoyed few rights and have encountered great difficulties when they have attempted to exercise them and that this state of affairs has remained constant up to the present day. As this work will demonstrate, the citizenships resulting from Russia’s successive encounters with modem politics have been more formal than substantive. However, it does not necessarily follow that these institutions are without consequence. As I argue below, it would be more fruitful to treat this assumption as an empirical question, so that the meaning and content of Russian citizenship is not prejudged and its significance may be revealed. As I will elaborate below, I take modem citizenship to be that set of relations between the state and its citizens comprised of the legitimate claims made by a state upon its citizens, commonly understood as citizenship duties, and the reciprocal, legitimate claims that citizens make upon their states, commonly understood as citizenship rights. These rights and duties are formalized in laws and constitutions. Citizenship operates through a direct relationship between the state (and its agents) and individual citizens. It is distinct from subjecthood in that citizens are enjoined both to rale and be ruled. It is distinct from ancient citizenship by the existence of a civil society that is autonomous from the state and in the logic of equality that issues from it. The citizenry is understood as the limited and exclusive membership of the political community, equal