The topic I’d like to bring up today does not lie within my professional competence, yet it is of interest for me as both a pundit and a citizen. It is the issue of inter-ethnic relations, in Europe and in Russia. This issue is a key domestic challenge, as well as a growing threat to the entire Euro-Atlantic area.
The two major questions are: Why have multiculturalism policies been declared to have eventually failed in Europe? And what lessons should Russia learn from its experience?
The ideology of multiculturalism emerged from the post-war leftist movement in Europe as a response to Nazism and Fascism. It represents an opposite extreme. It was originally envisaged that the new European culture should completely discard conservatism, nationalism and Christian fervor, and would provide the kind of tolerant ambience in which old conflicts could be neutralized, and immigrants coming from the “south” could adapt to the “free world.” But what actually happened was exactly the opposite. Europe’s indigenous culture was dramatically undermined and had no appeal for immigrants, whereas what they wanted was social benefits and a quality of life. Newcomers, who arrived in Europe in vast numbers sought to preserve their identities and essentially separated themselves from the “watered-down” Europeans of today.
There is no conflict between Christianity and Islam in Europe right now, because Europe’s Christian civilization has been deliberately weakened, primarily by secular policies and the “cultural revolution” perpetrated by the Left. Europe’s Muslims are more committed to their religion and community compared to “indigenous” Europeans. They stick together, and they stick to their origins, forming entire ethnic enclaves in European cities. I happen to be currently stationed in Brussels, and I have found out that local police are often reluctant to so much as show up in the city’s Arab neighborhoods.
Tolerance and multiculturalism the European way do not serve to integrate immigrants into society, let alone encourage them to assimilate the way they would back in the old times. What they essentially lead to is the emergence of a “fifth column” in Europe: large immigrant communities that cheer for the “south” and for the notion of detonating what they see as “the godless West” from the inside. Integration mechanisms such as education, military service and professional socialization work quite well, but they only encompass a small share of immigrants.
This brings us to an important conclusion. People only tend to integrate into robust, dominant cultures – not into emasculated, “tolerant” societies. The demise of European multiculturalism, which was admitted by the leaders of almost any large European nation this year, had actually been predicted decades ago. And it was not only the rightwing, the conservatives and the nationalists who predicted it, but exactly the refined liberal types like Seyla Benhabib, who argues convincingly in her writings that granting specific privileges to any ethnic or racial group would be a violation of the liberal principles that constitute the foundation of Western democracy. She goes on to argue that such special treatment of any specific group is inconsistent with the basic ideas of liberty and equality.
That said, the Roman scenario, i.e. the collapse of a sophisticated civilization overrun by barbaric hordes, no longer comes across as far-flung speculation aimed at inciting xenophobia, but sounds like a rather realistic assessment of the current state of affairs in Western Europe.
Russia’s situation is similar to that of Europe in some regards, yet crucially different in others. Like the West, Russia is experiencing an unprecedented onslaught of immigrants these days. It is second to the United States globally in terms of total immigrant population. This immigration is not justifiable in economic terms, and it is highly hazardous from a social and political perspective. Its major downside is the fact that the absolute majority of migrants that flock to Russia in enormous numbers are an unskilled workforce. Their abundance in the Russian economy dramatically undermines its incentives to modernize, as well as reintroduces archaic relations into the Russian social fabric. Uncontrolled immigration serves to critically aggravate inter-community relations in Russia’s major cities, constitutes a growing social challenge, and threatens to undermine political stability of the entire country.
Some might ask, “What does this have to do with multiculturalism? Would anyone believe that immigrants are a privileged minority in Russia?” But if you take a close look at immigrant issues in this country, you cannot but realize that certain migrant communities actually do come out as evidently privileged. They form large and influential networks that unapologetically exercise preferential treatment for their own kind in business activities; they actively pursue backroom deals or even criminal practices to “patronize” businesses and even entire industries (especially in areas such as retail or services); and they exert well-orchestrated pressure on Russia’s government authorities and the judiciary.
Yet the major dividing line in Russia is not one between its citizens and immigrants from other countries. The truly flammable axis of confrontation splits Russia’s social fabric from the inside: it is the ever-aggravating tension between migrant groups from the North Caucasus and local communities all across Russia. A striking evidence of how strained these relations are can be found in the recent polls, which show that some 50 to 70 per cent of all Russians are in favor of separating the North Caucasus from the Russian Federation, either partially or entirely. What we see is a highly dangerous trend aimed at dismantling the country. Even more alarming is the fact that it is Russia’s most efficient and dynamic social groups – students, intellectuals and the business community – that embrace these disruptive appeals in the first place.
Any Russian expert with enough knowledge and respect for the truth will tell you where this enmity stems from. Starting from the late President Yeltsin’s time in office, Russia’s government has pursued a deliberate policy of appeasing certain non[-ethnic]-Russian republics within the federation, granting them de facto privileges as opposed to predominantly Russian regions. These republics enjoy extensive benefits with regard to taxation or budget policies. But the genuine source of tension is the attitude of some of the people from these republics, who have been migrating to mainland Russia en masse in recent years. It has been increasingly characteristic of them to deliberately demonstrate disrespect for the local communities, Russian culture, way of life, and codes of behavior. Large numbers of young migrants from the North Caucasus form criminal organizations who intimidate the locals and perpetrate some of the most violent and cynical crimes in Russia’s major cities. Such gangs often include former insurgents who have been pardoned and even sponsored by the government to start a new life.
This is multiculturalism twisted the Russian way: privileged ethnic minorities and territories with a blank cheque to assert themselves at the expense of the rest of the nation. To paraphrase George Orwell’s Animal Farm, some of Russia’s ethnic groups are “more equal” than others.
That is why Russians feel that they are discriminated against as an ethnic and social majority. They feel the discrimination acutely. This has led to a mobilization of the Russian ethnic group. The position of Russians, the Russian issue, if you will, is the most sensitive issue in Russian politics today. Regretfully, many people still do not understand that, while some are overly high-strung about it and even scared to discuss it. Meanwhile, the way this issue is resolved will have an effect not only on the stability and integrity of Russia, but – this is not an exaggeration – on the historical course Russia will follow in the future.
Relations between Russians and the newly-emerged “privileged minorities” are essentially relations between the modern center and the not-so-modern provinces. History tells us there are two ways things can develop: either the periphery subdues the center and barbarizes it, or the center modernizes the periphery.
Historically, Russians were always the engine, the core of Russia’s modernization. They bear the bulk of historical responsibility for consolidating the peoples of Russia.
Is there a way to untie the Russian knot, rather than sever it? As a Russian, a politician and a patriot, I firmly believe that such a way exists.
I will outline what I believe the three basic principles the solution should be based on without going into detail.
The first principle is equality for Russians. Let me stress that equality does not imply privilege, it implies justice. Equality for Russians and justice for all – this is what all Russian patriots want. Can justice offend anyone? Can justice diminish other ethnic groups or interfere with their interests?
Secondly, we should abandon any twisted visions of multiculturalism and pseudo-tolerance. These should be replaced with ethnic accord based on national solidarity and integration.
Privileging any minorities is unacceptable, whether the privilege is given to them on a territorial, ethnic, or clan basis. It disrupts the country’s integrity and goes against the basic principles of democracy.
Thirdly, before social reconstruction begins in the North Caucasus, the region has to return to the same legal and political framework as the rest of Russia. There will be no political or legal offshore zones in the Russian Federation. Russia needs to return to the Caucasus and the Caucasus has to return to Russia.
Point four: we do not have to be afraid of discussing ethnic issues. These discussions, however, should be conducted by competent and authoritative representatives of ethnic groups and Diasporas.
The most important task at hand is to “re-nationalize” the people of Russia, to restore their instinct of the centralized state, to turn Russians back into the ethnic group that ties the country together, to restore the people’s historical memory and will. Restore the great Russian culture that made the existence of the unique and multifaceted Russian civilization possible.
The earlier we start on this path, the quicker and less painful the road will be.


Author: ‘Russia Today’, 8 September, 2011
Tweet