Nationalism, interethnic relations and federalism: The case of the Sakha republic (Yakutia)

Abstract

THE WAR IN CHECHNYA has forced painful reassessments of the nature of the Russian Federation. Far from enhancing 'stability', it has increased the danger of polarisation that many in Russia's republics wish to avoid. Yet assumptions of an inherent contradiction between various nationalisms and federalism may be premature. When definitions of nationalism and federalism remain flexible, room for negotiation is still possible in the Russian Federation. Some analysts trying to learn lessons from the break-up of the former Soviet Union make analogies to the Russian Federation itself. Will it survive, or is it another large and unwieldy empire whose time has passed? Did the 'parade of sovereignty declarations' begun in 1990 among Russian republics presage the demise of the Russian (Rossiiskoe) state or was it a healthy striving for greater federal balance within Russia? The sovereignty declarations, in the views of many non-Russians, were part of a dynamic of interrelated republic politics. This dynamic occurred not because of conspiracies across republic lines against the Russian centre but rather out of the hunger of many different peoples of Russia for federal rights they felt they had been long denied under Soviet rule. And for some the appetite for greater sovereignty has grown at first taste. Despite similarities, due to legacies of Soviet nationality policies and hierarchical structuring of ethnically-based regions, each case within the Russian Federation requires description and analysis in its own historical and cultural context. Certain strategic cases, for example that of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) of Eastern Siberia (the Russian 'Far East'), can help to reveal the messiness and non-inevitability of secession movements. A social anthropological approach is taken here, to demonstrate why the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) case is particularly significant, how its internal interethnic relations have developed, and what this case demonstrates for larger issues of Russian federation survival. Rather than assuming that Russia is an analogue of the Soviet Union, or that Russia's recent nationality politics consistently resemble the imperial polarising style of past multi-ethnic empires, judgement is suspended.1 We argue that various national bids for sovereignty or even full independence have been