Forging the nation: National identity and nation building in post‐communist Russia

Abstract

AFTER THE DOWNFALL OF THE USSR all the newly independent states had to embark on the road of nation building (defining 'who are we the people' and fostering the people's national identity, i.e. their sense of belonging to one distinct community) and state building (defining state boundaries which can be accepted by all major political players and creating new political institutions which can inspire the loyalty of the people). By now they have achieved varying degrees of success, depending on the demographic and ethnic composition of a country, its political culture, and its economic situation. In the case of the Russian Federation (RF) this set of issues is further complicated by the fact that Russia has traditionally been the centre of an empire, and therefore confusion over the 'just borders' of the new state is greater among politicians, intellectuals and even ordinary people than is the case in the non-Russian newly independent states. Thus more ideas about what is the Russian nation and what should be the geography of the new Russian state are currently to be found in the RF than is the case in the other 14 former Soviet republics. However, in both Russia and other newly independent states, the main problem of nation building is the same-namely, how to reconcile civic identities based on inclusive citizenship and exclusive ethnic identities based on such common characteristics as culture, religion, language and a common ancestor of a dominant nationality, on the one hand, and of ethnic minorities, on the other. Civic nations (communities of participating citizens) and ethnic nations (communities bound together by common language, culture and history) are only ideal types, which rarely exist in pure forms, and even civic nations are usually strongly connected with earlier ethnic communities.' In the countries of the former USSR the confusion between ethnic and civic identities is especially strong, as reflected in the newly adopted constitutions and legislation on citizenship and minority rights. Partly this confusion stems from the fact that political institutions, which are supposed to inspire the loyalty of members of a civic community, are still in the process of formation; partly, as elsewhere, accommodation of the interests of ethnic minorities poses problems which do not have immediate solutions. The aim of this article is to show that not only do these objective factors influence nation building, but the very structure of nationalist discourse, which is shaped through intellectual debates, has an impact on policy making in the RF. In other