Introduction Native claims in Canada, in words of Peter Usher in 1982 volume of this journal, are a chief means of reordering relationship between native northerners and rest of Canadian society; a chance to put an end to generations of injustice and to secure their future as a people (Usher 1982, 187). Since Usher penned these words, First Nations treaty negotiations have advanced throughout Canada. If geographers have paid relatively little attention to this process until recently (Peters and Wolfe-Keddie 1995; Peters 2000, 2001), media coverage has encouraged a general public awareness. Our knowledge of similar processes elsewhere in world is rather limited, though occasional article on Australia, New Zealand or Alaska graces pages or screens of mass media. Another process that rarely receives attention is that across Arctic Ocean in Russian Federation. Critical commonalties shared between Canada and Russia -- federalism, a dependence on northern resource development, persistence of distinct and robust aboriginal ways of life, especially in northern regions -- make Russian case especially interesting for geographers and others interested in comparative approaches to aboriginal re-territorialization. We use term `aboriginal' in this paper as shorthand for Russian phrase `indigenous numerically small peoples of North' [korennye malochislennye narodoy Severa], a legally distinct subset of indigenous [korennye] peoples. These peoples are defined as the peoples living in regions of North, Siberia and Far East on territory of traditional occupancy of their ancestors, maintaining traditional ways of life, economy and trades, numbering less than 50 thousand persons, and considering themselves distinct ethnic communities. (Ob obshchikh 2000, [section] 1). (1) In post-Soviet period of `transition' aboriginal leaders in Russia have seized on narratives of reform to demand a reformulation of their relationship with State in terms of legal codification of territorial rights. This effort is analogous to First Nations leaders in Canada appropriating `rights revolution' of 1970s and 1980s to advance treaty negotiations (Blomley and Pratt 2001). As in Canada, aboriginal leaders in Russia have underscored how re-territorialization is paramount to ensuring economic independence and cultural persistence -- and how resultant territories must be legally guaranteed. They have negotiated creation of law in order to legislate aboriginal spaces, and then have attempted to harness this law to produce material spaces enabled by law. Informed by cognate processes underway in Canada and elsewhere, Russian models of `land claims' nevertheless have taken distinct routes. The Russian Federation has not yet chosen to address aboriginal rights through a process of government-to-government treaty negotiations, as has Canada. Nor have court cases played a significant role in forwarding process, as a reformed court system itself is still in its infancy (Smith 1996). Yet aboriginal re-territorialization is proceeding, via processes shaped by a new body of legislation dedicated to aboriginal rights. A number of rationales underpin process in Russian Federation, some similar to, some distinct from, those animating land claims in Canada. First, massive social, economic and political transformations in post-Soviet Russia have spawned a rethinking of optimum land tenure organization across country's vast extent, as Russia moves toward some variant of a market economy. The resultant fabric of land tenure must include threads of aboriginal territoriality somewhere in its weave, at least in parts of country where aboriginal peoples constitute a significant share of population. This is mainly in rural North. Second, marked decreases in state subsidies to all areas of country, but especially discernible in North, demand design of new, ideally self-sufficient forms of economic organization that meet requisites of marketization. …
Read full abstract
Aug 4, 2011
Daniel Schwanen 
Open Access
