More on “Divided Russia” Maps and Xenophobic Nationalist Views
[This post was originally published in May 2012]
As noted in my previous post, many Russian nationalists see the their country in the future breaking into its constituent parts rather than enlarging at the expense of neighboring states. In some instances, such as the ones discussed in my previous post, the xenophobic worries of such nationalists focus on religious minorities, especially Muslims, as being too “foreign” for a mostly Orthodox Christian Russia. One Muslim formation, called Idel-Ural, shows up on several xenophobic maps, one of which is reproduced on the left. This map also forecasts the splitting off of the southern Urals, Siberia, the Far East, East Prussia (currently, Kaliningrad oblast), Ingermanland (currently, Leningrad oblast), and northern European Russia, leaving the core of Medieval Russia under the label “Zalesie”. The label “Kazakia” on this map refers to the Cossacks, a social rather than ethnic group. While many Cossack formations are associated with southern Russian lands, Cossacks were also instrumental in Russia’s colonization of Siberia and the Far East; Lensky Cossacks, named after the Lena River in Central Siberia, are famous enough to have been referenced in the James Bond film GoldenEye.
The authors of the map posted on Tengry.org (see image on the left) also conjecture that Muslim states would arise in the Central Volga republics of Bashkortostan and Tatarstan, as well as in (part of) the North Caucasus (shown in bright green on the map). This map also shows “Independent Territories” (in brown) arising in parts of the Far East, in Karelia, and in Kalmykia. Most of the rest of Russia would be incorporated into other big geopolitical players: the southern parts of the Far East would go to China (in yellow); the Kuril Islands, Sakhalin, and neighboring mainland areas of the Far East would be joined to Japan (in red); and northern and central Siberia would be appended to the U.S. (in blue). Whatever is left—most of the European Russia, southern and southwestern Siberia—would remain as Russia.
A very different approach is evident in the map reposted on numerous websites and reproduced on the left. It divides the country into many more constituent parts. Most of them correspond to the current federal subjects of the Russian Federation, but the exceptions are worth considering. In the North Caucasus, a number of ethnic republics, as well as Stavropol and Krasnodar krais, would be joined into “Caucasian Confederation”. It is not clear what this proposed unit would have in common, as ethnic, linguistic, and religious schisms are rife in this region. Certain ethnic republics are enlarged at the expense of their neighbors: for example, the proposed “Kalmikia” would swallow up Astrakhan Oblast; the “Khanty-Mansi republic” would be extended to include Sverdlovsk, Tyumen, and Kurgan Oblasts; and the “Federal Republic of Buriatia” would contain Irkutsk Oblast and Zabaykalsk Krai. Certain ethnic groups currently without their own titular republics would receive sovereignty, in most cases by being promoted to the titular ethnic group of a former oblast or krai. Thus, Kamchatka Krai is renamed “Koryak republic”, Magadan oblast becomes “Even republic”, and the Chukotka becomes “Ligoravetlan” (the ethnonym that encompasses the two Chukchi groups, “Maritime Chukchi” and “Reindeer Chuckchi”). “Republic of Nanay” would unify Primorie and Khabarovsk krais. Curiously, in many cases the ethnic group thus promoted would not have a majority or even a plurality in the newly formed countries. In fact, in most cases the titular group would constitute a tiny minority: Koryaks make up only 2% of Kamchatka’s population, Evens constitute only 1% of the population in the Magadan oblast, and the Nanays constitute a meager 0.3% of the population in Primorie and Khabarovsk krais. Other ethnic groups that would gain national standing include the Dolgans and Nenets: in addition to the already existing Nenets Autonomous Okrug in northern European Russia, Nenets and Dolgan would form a “Taymyr Dolgano-Nenets Federation”, whose territory would be coinciding with the currently existing Krasnoyarsk Krai. The two ethnic groups together constitute merely 0.3% of the population in the krai. Among other interesting labels on this map is “Hazaria” in present-day Rostov oblast, which refers to Khazars, a group whose proper place is on the maps of the distant past and not of the future.
Another tongue-in-cheek division of Russia cuts it into just five major parts: European Russia, labeled “All that actually matters in Russia”; northern Siberia, slated to become “part of North Pole or under Santa’s influence”; Kamchatka and Chukotka peninsulas, which would “be part of Alaska or at least visible from Sarah Palin’s house”; southern and central Siberia that would be “under Mongolian influence”; and Novaya Zemlya, which would “go to either Canada or Iceland… or maybe Easter Island”.
Despite the silliness of these maps, a possible future division of the Russian Federation into several independent states is not a purely xenophobic nationalistic idea or a laughing matter. Much serious discussion among Russian economists, politicians, philosophers, culturologists, and writers revolves around the possibility of dividing the country. Economic, political, cultural and demographic factors are seen as driving Russian regions apart. Vladimir Bukovksy, Russia’s most famous dissident, now living in Britain, has long predicted that Russia will eventually fall apart into 7-8 independent states, which may later join together into a confederacy. Those states would correspond roughly to the present-day federal districts, as shown on the map on the left. According to Bukovsky, the only force currently keeping Russia whole is the authoritarian centralized government fed by the oil and natural gas revenues. If the prices of oil and gas fall, Moscow’s hold will weaken and the central government will no longer be able to keep its grip on the far-flung regions. Here is how Bukovsky describes the eventual dissolution of the Russian Federation (translation mine):
“Well, what does the Far East need Moscow for? So some evening the local governor will sit with the local military district commander, drinking whatever it is they drink there. Their conversation: Ivan Ivanovich, does Moscow give you anything? No, only taxes must be paid. And you? They don’t even send us boots for the troops. So why are we fooling around, let’s I be the government and you the head of the army.—What will Russia do? Send in the troops? They won’t have enough oil. Everything will fall apart when the center will weakened, and this will happen when the prices of oil will fall.”
Authoritarian government is also seen as the main factor for the dissolution of the Russian Federation by such pundits as the director of Institute for Globalization Problems Mikhail Delyagin, writer Mikhail Veller, and controversial psychic healer Anatoly Kashpirovsky. Economic factors, such as the uneven development of central Russia and the more far flung regions, the unfair funneling of profits from Siberia to European Russia, the technological backwardness of certain regions, and the disintegration of transportation and communications infrastructure, are seen as crucial by such varied people as Alexander Nemets of Science Applications International Corporation, futurologist Sergey Pereslegin, mathematician Georgy Malinetsky, and the head of the Singaporean company Rogers Holdings Jim Rogers. Many other respectable pundits, including culturologist Igor Yakovenko, publicist Sergey Kurginyan, writer and culturologist Andrei Burovsky, former presidential advisor on economic issues Andrei Illarionov, political commentator George Freidman, president of the Institute for Near East Studies Evgeny Satanovsky, and Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili, focus on cultural, religious, and ethnic divisions, much like the xenophobic nationalists discussed above.
Currently, Moscow’s hold on Russia is relatively strong, but should the price of oil and natural gas drop, a very different situation could quickly emerge.
Related Posts
Subscribe For Updates
We would love to have you back on Languages Of The World in the future. If you would like to receive updates of our newest posts, feel free to do so using any of your favorite methods below:
This website is a discussion forum dedicated by 