AREA OF GLOBALIZATION, DEMOCRATIZATION, INTELLECTUALIZATION
THINK TANK "FALCOGROUP"
Scientific Advisory Center "Consciousness"
My Great Web page
2.2. National organizations.
Inter-ethnic differences and conflicts cannot be explained only by ethnic factors. Ethnicities do not act as independent subjects of historical or political action. As such actors perform certain elite groups, claiming to be part of the power and shape the content of national interest.
An important part of the state system of public organizations is not directly included in the state apparatus. This is a political party, ethnic, cultural, religious, charitable, and professional organizations. Through them, the state and competing with implanted force their worldview and their ideology, strengthen their influence, seeking support for its policy on the part of allies and weaken the influence of opposing social groups.
Ethnic socio-political groups ("national movement") have special influence on the life of the NC because they have serious material, organizational and intellectual resources. The specificity of the region is to confront these organizations to each other, which is on the general background is hardly noticeable to the Centre, but seriously affects the socio-political tensions. They, coming into conflict with each other for the division of spheres of influence, using the media and public events, contribute to the politicization and radicalization of the population, forming a confrontational potential. We should not forget about another type of self-organizing societies, which have in common is that they are not registered in accordance with the law, or are officially recognized as extremist (nationalist) organizations. But the lack of legal status does not mean that their activities are severely limited.
At first glance it may seem that the notion of "tolerance" towards other religions, peoples and cultures is something taken for granted, but the national organizations are trying to rethink this notion (Circassian Congress)1. Here's an example, some points:
- Being introduced in Russia plant tolerance is not nothing but a secular ideological paradigm. Imposing the same ideology of tolerance as a universally contradicts the Russian Constitution, which recognizes the ideological diversity. Any ideology cannot be established as a state or compulsory (RF Constitution Art. 13 Part 1, 2).
- International, state, public organizations and structures may not dictate the citizen opinion in relation to various secular and religious ideas and concepts, not the right to impose his vision of cultural and value characteristics, and more so call for respect and acceptance of their moral position and worldviews. This is contrary not only international law but the Constitution, where in particular (Article 9, Part 2) states that "the State guarantees the equality of rights and freedoms of man and citizen, regardless of his beliefs and religion," as well (Article 29, Part 30) that "no person shall be compelled to express their views or to reject them."
- Ideology of tolerance, ultimately, brings indifferent to immoral acts and ideas citizen, a
cosmopolitan and person divorced from their traditional roots.
Background2. The first stage of the formation of national movements in the republics of the RSFSR refers to 1988-1989. Even though a lot of pressure on the local range and low political activity of the general population, significant assimilation of North Caucasian peoples, the presence of large groups of Russian-speaking population, and so on, Moscow has become quite successful implant nationalist ideas. The first "informal" organization in the autonomous republics was no longer national, but general democratic nature. There were the Popular Front and the green movement of the Chechen-Ingush, Kalmyk People's Front, discussion and educational club "Perestroika" in Dagestan, clubs of voters in Karachay-Cherkessia and other organizations.
At the beginning the declared aims of these groups were supporting of the perestroika processes of democratization, transparency, economic and legal reforms, etc., as well as participation in social and political life of the region. General democratic organization opposed to the local party and Soviet authorities, organizing public events (rallies, demonstrations, pickets) with the requirements of the resignations of the local leadership, supported the "democratic" and independent candidates in elections, and expressed solidarity with the democratic movements in other regions of the USSR.
Then most of the first "informal" organizations, along with general democratic slogans demanded the national character (the problems of development of national culture, language, the revival of national traditions, etc.), and later part of the requirements to go beyond national and cultural programs. They have been actively developed an agenda for future national movements and the cadres of future national leaders and ideologues grew.
In 1990 natsorganizations did not yet raise the issue of establishing a sovereign nation state. Most maximum were demands of the Chechen National Democrats to provide the union republic status. While the desire to leave the RSFSR has not been a separatist, as a general unified state was the USSR and the Russian Federation was still, in fact, artificially created quasi-amorphous formation with a rather uncertain status and authority.
Formation of the national union of democratic movements and institutions in general democratic largely contributed the slogan of equalizing the rights of all national-territorial entities of the USSR, put forward by the Moscow Democrats - the leaders of the Interregional Deputy Group and the movement "Democratic Russia". With this slogan in the 1990 during elections, most national organizations in the autonomous regions of the RSFSR supported Democratic candidates, and all the 'informal people' (in fact - the national and democratic opposition to the Soviet-party government) formed a single unit. The new leadership of Russia, headed by Boris Yeltsin has received broad support from the national movements of Russian autonomies. But soon the logic of events led to the demarcation of the "non-formals", and above all on the attitude of the new federal center. Since the second half of 1990 in the depths of the national movement separatist currents are formed.
The August revolution (putch) 1991 coup briefly united the radical nationalists and democrats: in Nalchik was founded joint movement "Democratic Kabardino-Balkaria", which included leaders of the Kabardian "Adyghe Hase," Balkar "Tere", the Democratic Party of Kabardino-Balkaria, as well as deputy groups "Radical reform" and "Communists for Democracy." In Dagestan, the Coordinating Committee came the defense of democracy and law, in Karachay-Cherkessia - Coordinating Council of Democratic Forces, bringing together democratic and national organizations of these republics.
A common political platform of the new alliance of nationalists and democrats was discontent old nomenklatura leadership of the republics and a desire to change the political regime. This union was not altruistic: each party secretly wanted to use an ally in order to achieve a shift of the Republican leadership, and then hoped to seize power itself.
In August-September 1991, a number of capitals of the autonomous republics (Grozny, Makhachkala, Nalchik, etc.) started mass rallies of activists of the united opposition, who demanded the resignation of the republic and the Supreme Soviets of the new, democratic elections.
The end of 1991 marked a new radicalization of the nationalist movements in the Russian autonomous regions. This process is largely influenced by the victory of the "Chechen revolution", but the strengthening of separatist sentiment is likely to be a common trend in the development of the national movements of the period.
The radicalization of the nationalist movements, their claim to represent "the will of the people" and expressed the desire for power in the creation in 1990-1992 of nationwide representative bodies, which are a rare exception came under the control of radical nationalists. The radicalization of the nationalist movements led to the rise of ethnic conflicts, as well as a sharp conflict of radical nationalists with local authorities.
Strengthening of national movements of Russian autonomies and their claim to power have raised concerns from local leaders. If in 1988-1990 "national staff" of the Republican party nomenklatura to some extent supported national organizations and participated in organizing common nats-national forums (congresses, etc.), then in 1991 the authorities began to put pressure on nationalist radicals: ban rallies and demonstrations to bring to the administrative justice of the organizers for conducting "unauthorized activities" threaten prosecution for "incitement of ethnic hatred", etc.
In autumn 1991, during the general crisis of authority that swept the country after the coup failed putsch, tensions between local leaders and national opposition contributed to the emergence of extremist tendencies.
On the NC gain extremist tendencies in late 1991 due to the attempt of the Russian leadership to impose emergency rule in the breakaway Chechnya. In response, Kabardian, Balkar, Avar, Circassian, Karachai and other national organizations announced the formation of volunteer corps to help the new leadership of the Chechen Republic. Organizational center of the movement in support of the Chechen Republic became the Confederation of Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus (later - the Confederation of Peoples of the Caucasus), established in November 1991 on the basis occurred in 1989 Assembly of the Mountain Peoples of the Caucasus.
Since the beginning of 1993 Russian autonomous national movements were in a period of recession, which is primarily associated with a general tendency to reduce political activity in the post-Soviet space. A significant role in deepening crisis has played a national movement to strengthen the executive branch and to activate Russian policy in the region.
The outbreak of hostilities in Chechnya in November-December 1994, again caused the strengthening of extremist tendencies in the national movements in almost all the republics. The fighting in Chechnya in 1995-1996 contributed to the transformation of nationalist extremism in a powerful political force, which still plays an important role in the socio-political life of the NC.
With fundamental changes in the power structures of the Centre, with the advent of V.V. Putin has changed the activities of national organizations of the NC. Hard restore order in Chechnya clearly showed the national elites in the republics options impact the nomination of various national ideas.
USA/UK 2007-2012 © FALCOGROUP