Kalmykia in Russia's Past and Present National Policies and Administrative System

Introduction

INTRODUCTION The Russian Federation is one of the world’s largest multiethnic states, whose internal structure includes various entities. Its political division is based on territorial, ethnic, and territorial-ethnic principles. The Russian Federation is not a result of unionization of its members by virtue of agreement or treaty. It is rather a historically formed federal state, whose federal principles were established as constitutional with consent and approval of the federation’s constituent members. Therefore, Russia can be justifiably regarded as a historically established constitutional federation that has undergone several phases in its development. The Russian state was formed on a multiethnic basis, by consolidating multiple small ethnic groups (that lived on territory now belonging to Russia), by establishing mutually profitable and historically acceptable forms of relations and interaction with the groups in question, in its gradual development on the path to federalism. This is where the main difference between the principles of contemporary Russian federalism and those of the former Soviet Federation lies. The latter was formed from sovereign states that had united either based on a “voluntary” agreement or under coercion. With rare exceptions, the political entities of the Russian Federation took shape and developed in a unified process of ethnic formation within Russia’s geo-political and historical space. Today, however, some journals occasionally publish articles whose authors have sensed the moods of particular political forces that adhere to the principles of the “localization” of power and are following the conformist trend by prophesizing a lack of prospects and even disintegration of the Russian Federation. When doing that, they refer to what is in fact a mere terminological similarity between the attributes of political constituents of the Soviet Union and members of the Russian Federation, namely the ethno-territorial principle of political division. These authors are trying to convince their readers that the fact that the division of federation is viii Kalmykia in Russia’s Past and Present based on the principle in question is a potential source of separatism and is ultimately bound to bring about a collapse of the federation. The issue of federalism pertains to the academic, historical, and legal sphere, rather than to the realm of politics. It requires unbiased research, thorough examination, and comprehensive comparative analysis. It is only thereafter that conclusions and forecasts may be formulated. In our opinion, drawing comparisons between individual, and purely external, attributes characteristic of the Russian Federation’s state structure, on the one hand, and the political pattern of the Soviet Union (whose federal form of government was hardly more than a mere formality) on the other is ungrounded. Apparently, one should agree with those authors who believe that a transition from various types of political entities (implicitly historically) based on the territorial and ethnic principles within the Russian Federation to a unified territorial type is unfeasible any time soon. In contemporary conditions, both the specifics of the Russian federal structure and of Russia ’s socio-cultural civilization essence taken into account, a need for a closer link between the principles of federalism and nationalities issue arises. In this respect, it is vital for the Russian Federation to conduct a nationalities policy that would accommodate the issue of state integrity and unity preservation in the new nation-building conditions, ensure concurrence of the federal interests and those of all the peoples living in Russia , and address the need for their manifold cooperation and development of native languages and cultures. Russian federalism differs from all preceding types of federalism not only insofar as the principles of the political division are concerned, but also in (more developed) forms of interrelations between the federal authorities of various levels and authorities of the peoples constituting the Russian Federation. The Tsarist administration used a variety of forms of interaction between the center and ethnic borderlands. In order for the new peoples joining the Russian state to adapt, the Tsarist administration would initially allow these people to keep their historically established government and legislation, allowing them to control their own local affairs, while components of the centralized Russian government were gradually introduced. Under the Soviet-era decree “On Federal agencies of the Russian Republic ” and the RSFSR Constitution of 1918, the ethnic and state aspects in the life of Russia’s people, their social and political activities, administration and legislation were strictly unified. A new Soviet Party system of control, based on the principles of “democratic centralism,” was introduced . The ethnic-state entities were operating as micro-modules within the Soviet state...