Struggling for Citizenship: Civic participation and the State in Russia

Abstract

Abstract: This paper discusses shifting relationships between civic organizations and state in contemporary Russia. Drawing on a case study of provincial city of Tver, paper explores how local activists and authorities interpret citizenship and draw state-society boundaries at juncture between Socialist past and capitalism of today. The paper argues that authorities advocate a statist model of citizenship that conceives of civic organizations as an auxiliary of state, taking over formerly state-provided services and activating citizens to assist state in governance. Organizations founded during Soviet era attempt to retain Soviet citizenship model and paternalist social contract underpinning it, while organizations founded during post-Soviet period call for more participatory notions of citizenship. Keywords: citizenship, civic organizations, Russia, state ********** I think these notions are somewhat strange to us, that there should be an agreement, public decision, some joint symposia, congresses, compacts, deals. People power. Today, we need strict power--I may be wrong though--but it should be a strict vertical power arrangement, to establish some kind of order in our country. This quotation from an official of regional government in Tver, contemplating whether citizens and their organizations should have more say about local issues, captures prevailing ethos in state-society relations in contemporary Russia. While during Yeltsin era political landscape was characterized by dispersion of power from federal to regional and municipal levels and mushrooming of independent civic organizations, Vladimir Putin's and Dmitry Medvedev's terms in office have been marked by a recentralization of power and a more active and interventionist role of state in steering social development in spirit of sovereign democracy. In terms of civic activism, this process has been riddled with contradictions. On one hand, civic organizations and governmental structures have started collaborating with one another more than before, and various mechanisms of cooperation have been established. For example, two federal-level civic forums were organized in Moscow in 2001 and 2008, followed by a number of similar regional forums, and a system of federal and regional public chambers (obshchestvennye palaty) has been created that seeks to foster dialogue between state and society. (1) The authorities have also begun distributing funding to civic organizations, prioritizing in particular youth and social-welfare initiatives. (2) The political elite also actively circulate concept of civil society in public discourse and emphasize its importance--implying that concept has certain symbolic value in their own concept of political development. (3) On other hand, state has also placed several new restrictions on activism and increased its bureaucratic control, most importantly via amendments made to law on civic associations in 2006. (4) This law gives authorities considerable powers to investigate, and ultimately close down, any organization suspected of threatening the sovereignty, political independence, territorial integrity, national unity, unique character, cultural heritage, and national interests of Russian Federation. (5) According to Russia-based Center for Development of Democracy and Human Rights, law has created massive bureaucracy, complicated registration of organizations, and increasingly marginalized independent civic activism. (6) Moreover, at same time that organizations enjoying Western funding have been frequently labeled in public as unpatriotic and stooges of foreign intelligence agencies, and public protests organized by political opposition have been forcefully suppressed, Russian public sphere has witnessed a mushrooming of youth organizations, such as Nashi, which are closely connected with and enjoy considerable financial support from government. …