Who will live in Kazakhstan in 15 years?
An exceptional people in a multinational state.
Released in the year before the ADAM edition of the interview of the well-known Kazakhstani political scientist Aidos Sarym caused an ambiguous reaction among representatives of non-title nations. Recall, as the expert assures, in 15 years in Kazakhstan everything will become Kazakh. This worsened the Slavic public even more. Further, read the opinion of Kazakhstani and Russian experts on this topic.
Do Russians want to leave Kazakhstan?
& ndash; People are worried about the future of their children. They are afraid that the younger generation will not be able to preserve Russian culture and language. Today many Russian-speaking citizens have difficulties in applying for a job: knowledge of the state language (Kazakh) is required, & ndash; said the head of the Temporary Working Group on the implementation of the state program to facilitate the voluntary resettlement of compatriots at the consular department of the Russian Embassy in Kazakhstan Marina Pusteko.
According to her, in 2013 the number of people wishing to leave Kazakhstan to Russia under the state program of voluntary resettlement of compatriots has doubled. Only in Astana since the beginning of the state program, 22,600 compatriots appealed, 4,350 settlers already received evidence.
As noted by Pusteko, basically very literate, educated people leave. Many young professionals with higher education, sometimes, and not one. They come to the Russian Federation with professionals who have extensive experience. They leave their families, as a rule, taking with them their parents, so that there is no reason to return.
How will the departure of Russians affect Kazakhstan? Will the Kazakh language benefit from this? Who will live in Kazakhstan in 15 years? With these and other questions, we turned to the chairman of the Republican Slavic movement, “Lad & raquo; Maxim Kramarenko.
ADAM: One of the reasons why Russians leave Kazakhstan is the language problem. Are Russians and other non-titular nations leaving the country because of their reluctance to learn Kazakh?
KAMARENKO: We can not consider this problem in only one plane. After gaining independence more than 20 years ago, Kazakhstan had a chance to become Central Asian Finland or Switzerland, that is, to choose such guidelines in state building, when, taking into account the interests of each large ethnic group and orienting on democratic values, high levels of competitiveness were achieved. As you know, in Finland there are two official languages, in Switzerland & ndash; four.
The leadership of Kazakhstan declares the same goal & ndash; enter the list of 50 competitive countries. But at the same time, the basis of state building laid the elements of ethnocracy, which is the antagonist of democracy. Starting with the fact that the question of the primordial nature of the land was raised.
In the Constitution, we are registered that Kazakhstan & ndash; the original Kazakh land. Roughly speaking, everyone else was indicated & ndash; Who is the head in this house. But in this case, then, in order to be fair to the end, maybe we recognize Kazakhstan as the original land of the Scythians, descendants of which are Ossetians, Iranians and Tajiks. After all, before the Turks in this territory, the Persian-speaking Scythian-Sarmatian tribes wandered.
Or such a thesis in the law on the Assembly of the People of Kazakhstan, which later found its continuation in the Doctrine of National Unity, that the Kazakh people play a consolidating role in the country. That is, a separate people in a multinational state is endowed with exclusivity. Something similar was already in 30 & ndash; 40-ies of the last century in Germany. I think everyone still remembers what this led to. Although usually not the people, but certain values recognized by all participants in public relations, contributed to consolidation into a separate civil identity.
Or let us recall the initial data in the national composition under which the Republic of Kazakhstan arose. Kazakhs and Russians in 1991 were practically equal in number. The difference was only 450 & ndash; 500 thousand people. But only Kazakh was proclaimed state language, Russian did not receive any official status. The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan stipulates that the Russian language is officially used, but such a status is not known by any legislative practice. A legal concept is used all over the world & ndash; official language, that is, one of the main languages of rule-making, record keeping and legal proceedings. At us the special status which has no binding to the international law is thought up.
On the whole, it turns out that Kazakhstan has created advantages for only one ethnic group, which allowed it to dominate the government. It is because of such steps in the state building that the Russian people began to leave Kazakhstan massively. But the nationalists present mass migration as a fact of disrespect to the Kazakh people, its language and traditions.
I do not want to blame the entire political elite for creating discriminatory conditions for non-titular ethnic groups. In many ways this situation arose because of national-oriented public figures who, using the thesis of caring for the Kazakh language, tried to get political dividends and deserve the title of national heroes, fighters for the independence of the people already in an independent state.
After all, some still call for fighting colonial oppression, although Kazakhstan has been a sovereign state for more than two decades.
Will Kazakhstan become the second Turkey?
ADAM: How do you think the policy towards Russians in Kazakhstan has changed?
KRAMARENKO: Practically no. And provided that now there is a natural renewal of the elite, then the policy towards Russians in Kazakhstan may worsen. Those who do not remember the Soviet past will soon come to state administration, but knows about this period from the pages of history textbooks, where the role of Russia and Russians in the life of the Kazakh people is presented in a negative and one-sided way: Russia & ndash; the people’s prison, Russia organized the genocide of the Kazakh people in the 30s of the 20th century, etc. Accordingly, Russians are perceived from the presentation of such myths as descendants of those who exploited the Kazakh people. And with such a historical upbringing, one should not expect an improvement in policy towards the Russians.
Some & laquo; growing up & raquo; national-oriented ideologists already say that Kazakhstan in 10 & ndash; 15 years will be completely Kazakh. Well, under this development scenario this will be a purely Kazakhstani problem. Apparently, these public figures want Kazakhstan to gain the glory of a complete ethnocratic state and entered the world history as a country from which millions of Russians and other European ethnic groups were squeezed out. ” With such an image, Kazakhstan will close its way to the all-European house, as well as Turkey, which destroyed most of the Armenian diaspora on its territory.
Who in Russia will live well.
ADAM: By the way, many Russian immigrants complain about Putin’s program of assistance to voluntary resettlement. Some openly declare: Russia does nothing. Nothing worthwhile is proposed. Neither for work, nor for social conditions, nor for housing. Moreover, the local population perceives the newcomers as hostile. How would you comment on this?
KRAMARENKO: Russia does not set a goal to resettle everyone. The program should only create administrative tools to facilitate the resettlement of those who took this decision by themselves, without coercion. Although many people, because of misinterpretation in the media, the opinion was expressed that this program & ndash; Putin’s call for the return of all Russian compatriots to their homeland. Secondly, the program is constantly updated, removing some of the existing difficulties that may arise during relocation. Thirdly, with regard to the local population, which perceives visitors to bayonets, such cases are rare. The positive experience of resettlement in Russia prevails. And given that now in Russia large-scale construction projects are being planned in the Far East direction, we can expect better conditions for resettlement in these regions. This means that new jobs will be created, lifts will be raised for those moving to these regions.
Nazarbayev’s request to Putin.
ADAM: What can the mass outflow of Russians from Kazakhstan lead to?
KRAMARENKO: Firstly, this is image loss. Mass exodus on ethnic grounds, which occurred in the 90s, created in the international community the image of Kazakhstan as a non-legal state where there is discrimination based on ethnicity. Therefore in the late 90’s & ndash; the beginning of the 2000s, the legislation on language was amended and a decision of the Constitutional Council on the Russian language was adopted, which equated it with the state language in certain areas. This led to a decrease in the intensity of migration processes. Secondly, a mass exodus will lead to economic losses. This is the withdrawal of capital, and a blow to the state’s pension system, and the loss of a certain number of taxpayers, and, of course, a decrease in consumption. I think it was the prospect of such losses that served as a pretext for raising the “Russian question” & raquo; in bilateral negotiations between Kazakhstan and Russia. At least in some media there was information that Nazarbayev in negotiations with Vladimir Putin and other Russian high-ranking officials “asked that Russians not be taken from Kazakhstan”. I do not know to what extent this corresponds to reality, but from the middle of last year in Kazakhstan the work on informing Russian compatriots about conditions of voluntary resettlement to Russia really decreased.
The Russians no longer believe the authorities of Kazakhstan.
What does the statistics of Russian experts on immigrants show? Expert of the Russian Institute for Strategic Studies (Moscow) Azhdar Kurtov:
& ndash; After being suddenly thrown by their own state in addition to their will (recall the results of the referendum on the preservation of the USSR in 1991), millions and millions of people were forced to live in conditions when their historical homeland (Russia) during the difficult period of the first president of the country & ndash; Boris Yeltsin did almost nothing to protect them.
And there was something to protect. In many former Soviet republics, including Kazakhstan, a colorful nationalism flourished. Russians, Tatars, Chuvashes and other representatives of the so-called non-title ethnic groups were openly discriminated against and forced to leave these states. They were ignored during the privatization of state property, they were obstructed in occupying prestigious positions, their children were forcibly forced to teach in schools historical nonsense that their homeland & ndash; Russia, carried and continues to bear only evil.
But Boris Yeltsin was not particularly worried about the fate of Russian citizens, and his compatriots in neighboring countries did not reach his hands at all. Fortunately, this shameful situation for our country slowly began to change with the coming to power in the Kremlin of the new president.
Those who remember Kazakhstan’s history not in a mythologized form, which is taught today in the schools and universities of the republic, do not need to explain the reasons for the migration of Russians. This official propaganda claims that the reasons for migration lie solely in the Russians’ desire to “find a better place”. Nothing like this! Science refutes this lie. In Russia, sociological surveys are regularly conducted among migrants who have migrated and among those Russian-speaking compatriots who live in Kazakhstan. Some of these studies are ordered by the Russian Foreign Ministry. By the way, it intentionally does not widely publicize their results, because they vividly testify to the element of ethnocracy in the modern power of Kazakhstan.
But I’m familiar with their work with them and therefore I will give some data. Such studies are conducted every two years. Here is the data of one of these studies, not the newest, but also the old one.
The data of sociologists showed that more than half of the & ndash; 51.8% of respondents (the survey was conducted among compatriots in Kazakhstan) encountered infringement of their rights because they did not belong to the title ethnic group when applying for a job. And this is in the country of & laquo; interethnic consent & raquo ;!
The Russian diaspora does not believe the authorities of Kazakhstan. Only 19% of respondents consider effective treatment of their rights to appeal to central or local authorities of Kazakhstan. 36.5% of respondents do not see in this country any effective protection measures.
The study showed that it is in Kazakhstan, along with Moldova, that there is the greatest resource potential for those wishing to move to Russia. Here & lt; / RTI & gt; are definitely ready & raquo; move to Russia on preferential terms 27.3% of respondents and another 33.7%, and perhaps, would go & raquo ;. That is a total of 61%. What are the stories after that that no one will go from Kazakhstan to Russia ?!
To the question: & laquo; What circumstances related to Kazakhstan, keep you from going to Russia? & Raquo; only 14.9% of the respondents chose the answer option “good attitude to the Russians in Kazakhstan”. Most of them chose variants of the type & laquo; here all my relatives live & raquo; (51.9%). That is, people keep the reasons, not related to the civilized policy of the authorities towards the Russian diaspora, but quite the contrary. The truth, as they say, can not be hidden in a bag.
Now, with regard to the thesis of “failure” & raquo; policy on the resettlement of compatriots. The thing is this: I myself participated as a consultant in the preparation of the law on repatriation & raquo ;. The law was never adopted. Do you know why? Because unlike Kazakhstan, we still observe the Constitution. This in Kazakhstan is a record of equality of citizens regardless of nationality. And in practice, Kazakhs represent preferences, including oralmans. And in the Russian Constitution there is a rule that no one can be forced to indicate their nationality. This rule has become an obstacle to the adoption of the law on repatriation. We could not, under the rules of this law, expose all nations, conditionally speaking, Tatars and Zalus. A list of indigenous peoples of Russia was not allowed by the indicated norm. Therefore, the program of resettlement of compatriots is implemented through presidential decrees. Yes, it is not being implemented to the extent that it was originally claimed. But, nevertheless, it works. Over a hundred thousand people moved. Of course, many of them have claims: not that housing, small amounts of assistance and so on. But we must understand that our state is not in a position to give more.
After all, having expelled millions of citizens, Kazakhstan got rid of part of the state’s social obligations to them. Moreover, he shifted this responsibility to the Russian authorities. Is this fair ?! Of course, there is arbitrariness and red tape of Russian officials. Not without this, yet statistics show: there is a migration from Kazakhstan to Russia. So, people do not believe the authorities of Kazakhstan, do not see their future in this country. And such decisions as the transition to the Latin alphabet, the rejection of political integration within the framework of the Eurasian economic union, the disputes over Baikonur, the deliberate exaltation in the Asian spirit of the leader of the nation & ndash; only add the determination of the Russians to move.
Who will live in Kazakhstan in 15 years?