The next meeting of the World Congress of Russian Compatriots Living Abroad, scheduled to be held in Moscow on December 1-2, 2009, holds the promise of becoming a landmark event in the dynamically developing dialogue between the Russian authorities and Russian communities abroad.

The Congress should reaffirm the Russian government’s all-round support for Russian compatriots living abroad and give an impulse to activities that have been unfolding in this field recently. The upcoming forum will work towards the consolidation of the Russian diaspora and will increase its prestige in countries where fellow Russians live.

THE EVOLUTION OF RELATIONS WITH COMMUNITIES ABROAD

There has been considerable progress in the two and a half years since the previous Congress (in St. Petersburg in October 2006) in establishing a closer relationship between Moscow and Russian compatriots living abroad, ensuring their rights, maintaining the Russian ethno-cultural space, and consolidating the Russian community.

However, we are still at the very beginning of the long road towards narrowing the gap between Russia’s internal space and the Russian community abroad. It is important to have a clear understanding of where we are now and where we are moving.

In recent years Russia has reviewed its attitude towards compatriots living abroad, proceeding from the reality of the rapidly-changing world and the logic of its own development as a state adhering to democratic values and the upkeep of the global Russian ethno-cultural sphere. The pivotal factor is the recognition by Russia that Russians living abroad belong to the same cultural tradition, even though they have found themselves on the outskirts while Russia proper remains the center of the Russian language, culture and mentality. The 19th-century philosopher and poet Fyodor Tyutchev sounds very prophetic today, who wrote: “Although we’ve been split apart// By inimical fate,// We’re still one race, // The scions of a single mother!// That’s why they hate us!”

The presence of an influential and consolidated Russian community abroad meets Russia’s national interests. A community interwoven and integrated in the public and political life of the country where it lives – rather than an assimilated or marginalized one – could make up a full-fledged part of a global Russian world. A community of this kind that retains its ethnic identity, impulses for self-organization and connections with the historical motherland is able to wield fruitful influence on the outside world and act in the interests of raising Russia’s international status through the strengthening of ties with countries where ethnic Russians live.

Interaction with the Russian community living abroad is an important part of Russia’s foreign policy. The Russian Foreign Ministry chairs the Governmental Commission for the Affairs of Compatriots Living Abroad, the key state agency for coordinating Russian policy in the field of interaction with Russian communities in foreign countries.

A policy of declarations of support for the Russian community living in other countries gradually gives way to practical measures in this field that rely on three major principles:

•  assistance for the communities’ consolidation,
•  the maintenance of Russian ethno-cultural space,
•  the consolidation of ties with historical Russia on the principles of partnership and mutual assistance.

A COMMUNITY, NOT YET A DIASPORA

The Russian community living abroad cannot be called a diaspora yet if one uses the traditional meaning of the word, although a 30-million-strong ethno-cultural group is a large ethnic formation (second only to the 80-million-strong ethnic Chinese community). Standing next in line are the Hindus and the Poles with about 20 million people in each community.

The notion of “diaspora” implies an organized and structured community, but the Russian community is neither organized nor structured yet. One could describe Russians living abroad as a diaspora if one realizes, of course, that a “diaspora” is something more than just a group of people speaking the same language and having identical cultural and spiritual roots.

And what are the impediments to the formation of a full-fledged Russian diaspora?

First, government policies in some of the countries where ethnic Russians live. These governments try to assimilate or marginalize Russians. This approach can be seen both in the counties of the former Soviet Union and beyond, including in countries where ethnic Russians make up a sizable part of the population. More often than not, Russian communities are indigenous, autochthonous and have lived in those territories for centuries. The breakup of the Soviet Union provided grounds for analysts to describe Russians as a split nation – one that has found itself partially divided throughout various countries due to the cataclysms of history.

Second, anti-Russian propaganda and a desire to smear Russia’s image and its policies. This does not facilitate the shaping of a sense of Russianness among ethnic Russians. The deplorable role of some people from Russia, who have partly retained their Russophobic philosophy in contrast to members of other ethnic communities, is also noticeable. Evidence of this can be seen in many Russian-language media abroad, especially outside of the CIS.

Third, the historical waves of emigration from Russia and the extremely disparate make-up of the communities, from oligarchs to the very poor. These include both the Russian elite and those who had to leave the Soviet Union in a search for their daily bread. On the one hand, some ?migr?s are genuine friends of Russia but, on the other, some people benefit from fanning anti-Russian sentiments and criticizing the domestic and foreign policies of their former homeland.

The differences in the attitudes to Russia and its policies on the part of different categories of Russian ?migr?s or ethnic Russians stranded in other post-Soviet countries after the Soviet Union’s disintegration is a very specific feature that is not found in the majority of other ethnic groups in foreign countries. Although there is a general tendency today towards a more positive image of Russia, negative viewpoints still abound, and this could be seen in how the Russian-speaking media covered events in the Caucasus in August 2008, as well as in the comments they made about the Russian-Ukrainian conflict over the delivery of natural gas to European consumers in January 2009.

Add to this the multiethnic and multi-confessional nature of the global Russian community. Russians, Tatars, Circassians and people of Russia’s other ethnic groups have their own ethnic communities, and there are also millions of Russian-speaking ethnic repatriates from the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation.

This situation pushes to the forefront the task of ironing out the differences that divide the global Russian community, of supporting the processes of consolidation on the basis of general interests and fostering a positive attitude among Russians living abroad towards their historical homeland.

THE CONSOLIDATION OF COMMUNITIES ABROAD

Naturally any consolidation takes time. Like today’s Russia, the global Russian community living abroad is one of the youngest in the world, while intra-diasporal relations are formed over decades. Maturity comes over a span of many years, as experience is gained in smoothing out internal contradictions and the communities determine their place in the countries of permanent residence and formulate common platforms for defending their interests. It is important that the opportunities being opened now be used both by the Russian community itself and its historical motherland.

One important instrument for establishing ties and exchanging information is widening the Russian-language information sphere. Sporadic meetings of editors-in-chief of Russian-language publications, including the ones in the format of the World Association of the Russian Press (WARP) – the latest meeting was held in Lucerne, Switzerland in June 2009 – are unable to influence that sphere in any significant way in spite of their usefulness. Discussions of the problem of the structure of the Russian community living abroad and protecting the compatriots’ ethno-cultural interests are not very prominent on the pages of Russian-language publications in foreign countries, as their benchmarks lie some way off from the interests of both fellow Russians living abroad or their historical motherland.

The Governmental Commission for the Affairs of Compatriots Living Abroad has helped create some specialized publications, like Shire Krug (Broaden the Circle) in Vienna, Yedinstvo v Raznoobrazii (Unity in Diversity) in Almaty, and Baltiyskiy Mir (The Baltic World) in Tallinn, that offer space in their pages to compatriots discussing their problems. However, these publications have failed so far to win mass appeal and remain small. The same can be said about the Ruvek Internet portal, the Russkiy Vek (Russian Age) magazine published in Moscow, and the Golos Rodiny (The Voice of the Motherland) newspaper. Appropriate media support for contacts with compatriots living abroad requires special attention on the part of the Russian government.

Shoots of philanthropic support for ethnic Russian culture on the part of wealthy members of the Russian community have begun to sprout in recent years. The community will never grow into a diaspora without the self-sufficiency of economic foundations. What can be done to help Russian businesses based abroad to facilitate the development of Russian culture and education in the communities without fear of being persecuted by the local authorities? This problem demands a substantial and thorough scrutiny, including looking at the experience of the “old” successful diasporas.

The possibility of support for Russian communities on the part of Russian business operating in foreign countries is also high on the agenda. It might be worth expanding and intensifying sporadic sponsorship action undertaken by Gazprom, Lukoil and other large corporations. This activity should receive assistance from the Russian government and public opinion to become systemic and significant.

Next in line is the establishment of smooth relations between ethnic Russians and the authorities in the countries where they reside. Fellow Russians can become an important link in Russia’s relations with those countries. Being citizens of and taxpayers in one or another country, ethnic Russians have every right to count on their governments’ assistance in preserving their culture and language.

One more pressing problem is the leadership of Russian compatriots’ organizations. The leaders must be active and oriented not at complaining, but at protecting the interests of ethnic Russians in the territories where they live; bridging dialogue with the local authorities; gaining support for Russian business; and elaborating clear-cut positions in protecting the ethno-cultural environment.

Moreover, many of today’s leaders cannot always claim such authority. More often than not, the organizations are led by veterans or teachers in Russian-speaking schools whose interests are focused narrowly on resolving professional tasks and on the use of rather modest assistance coming from Russia.

There is a growing need for promising young leaders capable of strategic thinking and who are able to help resolve the problems of the global Russian community. It is important to make the maximum possible use of democratic principles while setting up coordination centers in different countries. These centers must acquire – to be frank – a lobbyist potential in what concerns the protection of ethnic Russians in the countries where they live. The task of maintaining the Russian world and preventing assimilation underlines the importance of the movement towards a self-organizing and viable diaspora; all the more so that other countries with sizable ethnic communities have gained some encouraging experience.

Serious efforts to consolidate the Russian communities abroad have been made with Russian assistance in recent years. The backbone of the organizational structure – coordination councils in more than 80 countries – has been set up. These councils try to elaborate a common platform reflecting the interests of communities, separate organizations and all compatriots. Special attention is given to preventing marginalization at all costs and to help integrate Russians into the societies of the countries where they live, along with maintaining their cultural and ethnic identity. Simultaneously, discussions – sometimes acute ones – and interaction between the communities are unfolding.

Regional conferences of Russian communities are organized annually in Central Asia, the South Caucasus, Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, the Baltic countries, Europe, the Americas, the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Australia. World conferences of Russian compatriots meet annually (the last one was held in Moscow in November 2008) and world congresses of Russian compatriots convene on a triennial basis. The Governmental Commission for the Affairs of Compatriots Living Abroad has helped streamline conferences and roundtable meetings of Russians living both in Russia and abroad, where people meet to discuss pressing problems of the Russian community abroad (the most recent such event, a roundtable meeting on Russian-speaking Ukraine that discussed the opportunities for and problems of consolidation, was held in Moscow in April 2009).

The World Coordination Council of Russian Compatriots was set up in 2006. It de facto took on the role of a central agency consolidating and representing their interests and ensuring permanent dialogue with the agencies of executive power in Russia, as well as Russian and foreign NGOs. It is the World Coordination Council that monitors contacts with coordination councils of individual countries.

PROTECTING ETHNO-CULTURAL SPACE AND THE RUSSIAN LANGUAGE

Some crucial elements of ensuring the viability of Russian communities abroad are the protection of ethnic/cultural identity, support for the Russian language and the languages of Russia’s other indigenous peoples, as well as culture and traditions. The Russian language remains an instrument of science, culture and inter-ethnic communication. Although elites in many former Soviet countries ostentatiously distance themselves from Moscow, they frequently continue to speak and think in Russian. It is obvious that maintaining the territory of the Russian language and Russian culture is a task of paramount importance. In this light, efforts by some countries to oust Russian from the sphere of education, culture, social life and everyday communication cannot but cause concern. The development of national languages should not lead to restrictions in the field of culture, education and everyday life for Russian compatriots. In the meantime such instances abound.

The Federal Agency for the Commonwealth of Independent States, Compatriots Living Abroad and International Humanitarian Cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo, known as Roszarubezhtsentr before 2008) has traditionally managed the preservation and promotion of the Russian language abroad. It has recently been actively expanding the network of its centers, although it is clear that this is not enough. Russia’s Education and Science Ministry continues practical steps under the federal program “The Russian Language in 2008-2010” that promotes the system of distance education and embraces Russians living abroad. Teaching aids, textbooks and multimedia programs on the Russian language have been produced, and a series of radio and TV programs have also been created.

The Russkiy Mir (Russian World) foundation began operating in June 2008 with substantial funding from the federal budget. The foundation’s objective is to support the Russian language and culture abroad through a system of grants and in other ways. The task of maintaining the Russian language now involves the efforts of federal law and executive bodies, regional organizations, the mass media, and actually the entire cultural and scientific potential of Russia.

The Russian Foreign Ministry has taken some crucial steps, as well. It has supplied complete sets of books and materials for libraries (more than 200 in 2008) and Russian language study rooms (over a hundred in 2008), and provides retraining for teachers in Russian schools abroad (more than 1,200 teachers in 2008). It has also organized sightseeing tours of Russia for over 1,500 children of Russian compatriots as prizes for winning various academic competitions.

The problem of maintaining and strengthening the positions of the Russian language interweaves with another pressing problem – that of providing education for compatriots in Russia. On August 25, 2008, the government passed a resolution On Cooperation with Foreign Countries in the Field of Education that provides for a further increase – with the help of federal funding – in the admittance of foreign citizens and compatriots residing abroad (up to 10,000 people annually) to Russian colleges and universities, as well as for sending up to 300 teachers to universities in foreign countries.

The Education and Science Ministry is working intensively to open branches of Russian schools of higher learning abroad. Right now 36 branches of 29 Russian universities operate on Russian licenses in Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Ukraine. The universities opened four branches abroad last year.

Another important document in effect now is the February 10, 2009 federal law On Changes in Separate Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation Related to the Activity of Federal Universities. It waives the requirement for compatriots in foreign countries to take Russia’s Unified State Examination, which is a mandatory requirement for getting a high school diploma and for applying to universities and vocational training colleges. This provision has laid out a new procedure for admitting foreigners to Russian educational institutions, and it currently is in the process of registration at the Russian Justice Ministry.

On the whole one cannot help but admit that the Russian government has made sizable efforts in the past three years to support Russian culture abroad. A realization of “what’s lying in the scales,” as the Russian poet Anna Akhmatova said, has appeared. Still, we have also realized that, considering the experience of other countries, this is just the beginning of the process that will require dynamic development. A crucial move in this sense could be the rapid opening of Russian cultural centers in foreign countries and branches of such centers in major foreign cities.

DEVELOPMENT OF THE DIALOGUE BETWEEN RUSSIA AND COMPATRIOTS

Work with Russians living abroad is gradually moving away from paternalism with modest financial support to interaction along the principles of partnership. As a result, Russian communities abroad will become Russia’s intellectual, economic, cultural and spiritual partners, while building up their ethnic/cultural identity.

However, this approach does not mean that Russia should relinquish its persistent support for the legitimate rights and freedoms of fellow Russians in any part of the globe where they may be encroached on. Support of this kind remains a key priority and this is clearly fixed in a new concept of Russia’s foreign policy, which Russian President Dmitry Medvedev endorsed in July 2008. Fellow Russians in other countries should have confidence that their historical homeland will not let them down for one minute and will not permit any encroachments on their ethnic/cultural rights.

An interdepartmental workgroup set up by the Governmental Commission for the Affairs of Compatriots Living Abroad is actively considering proposing amendments to the federal law On the Russian Federation’s State Policy Towards Fellow Countrymen Living Abroad, as the current law was adopted amid specific political conditions in May 1999 and contains a number of outdated provisions and unrealistic commitments.

The authors of the new draft put emphasis on a concrete definition for the notion of “compatriots living abroad,” specifying the roles of the World Congress and coordination councils, fixing the powers that enable Russia’s regions to work in the field of support for fellow countrymen living abroad on a solid legislative basis. The paternalist pathos must give way to the spirit of partnership now, as this is what the majority of fellow Russians living abroad advocate.

Along with this, the authors take account of the remarks and proposals that compatriots voiced at national and regional conferences and at the World Conference of Compatriots (held in Moscow from October 31-November 1, 2008). Information on progress in this activity was presented at meetings of the Government Commission on December 24, 2008 and March 30, 2009.

Finding a concrete definition for the notion of “compatriots living abroad” has special significance, as the current definition is rather declarative and embraces the list of people who have had Soviet and pre-Soviet citizenship. This legal concept actually includes millions of people, including those from the so-called titular nations in former Soviet republics and, in addition to them, in Poland, Finland, etc. This contradicts today’s reality and impedes targeted work with Russians living abroad.

A heated debate continues about the possible issue of a special document that would confirm a person’s affiliation with compatriots abroad. Although the effective law envisions “issuing documents” to fellow Russians, no such identification documents have been issued in the past decade.

This is not a simple matter and it requires serious consideration, since if Russia issues IDs this might cause a negative reaction from governments in the countries where ethnic Russian live. Moreover, the very printing of such documents will require funding significantly higher than all the current allocations for support to Russian communities abroad. Should this “documenting” become a substitute for compatriot self-identification? And should budgetary funds be spent on bureaucratic procedures instead of being used for real assistance to Russian veterans, organizations and cultural programs?

The endorsement of a system of moral motivation for compatriots living abroad in 2008 played a encouraging role in terms of strengthening relations between Russian communities and their historical homeland. A special ceremony by the Governmental Commission for the Affairs of Compatriots Living Abroad to award compatriots with honorary diplomas and signs of distinction took place as part of the World Conference of Compatriots. At the end of November 2008, Medvedev issued a decree to decorate a number of fellow Russians abroad with the Order of Friendship or the Pushkin Medal. This practice will continue in 2009.

The international experience of working with fellow countrymen abroad reveals three major models:

• Repatriation (resettlement to historical homeland);
• Paternalism (protecting the rights of compatriots and material aid);
• Pragmatism (employing the diasporas’ political, economic and lobbyist potential).

None of these models is ever used in its pure form in the world and the evolution of the approaches supported, for example, by Germany and Israel testifies to this.

The development of Russian policies towards Russian communities abroad has made it possible to combine these models. This became possible after the endorsement of a state program to assist the voluntary resettlement to Russia of compatriots living abroad. It was enacted by Decree No. 637, which the Russian president signed on June 22, 2006.

Time has shown that the program is popular, as more than 12,000 people have moved to Russia in the first 18 months since it was adopted. The majority of repatriates (about 80 percent of all those who applied for the program) come from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova and Ukraine. Small numbers of people have come from non-CIS countries: Germany (90 people), Israel, the U.S., and some other countries. A large group of Russian Old Believers living in South America are considering possible resettlement to Russia’s Primorsky Krai in the Far Eastern part of the country. Russian Old Believers from Georgia are moving in compact groups to live in the Tambov Region. Resettling Russians most frequently (in 83 percent of the cases) choose the Baltic exclave region of Kaliningrad, as well as the Kaluga, Lipetsk and Tambov regions.

Since the program does not emphasize statistics for resettlement, there is no reason to compare any “target figures” or results. Given all the complexities and subtle aspects of organizing people moving to new places of residence, which quite often implies breaking up the traditional lifestyle, a discussion of “planned targets” would be inappropriate. What really matters here is a concrete person and a concrete family. The main thing is to provide fellow Russians with the opportunity for a civilized government-sponsored resettlement to their historical homeland. The significant factor is that the program is turning into an encouraging element in relations between Russia and the communities abroad.

Naturally, practical actions under the program have revealed some shortcomings. The main problem appears to be the lack of attractiveness of regional programs (housing, decent jobs).

The experience gained has helped work out additional measures to raise the attractiveness and efficiency of the state program. Provisions have been made, for instance, to include more categories of people – businessmen, students, and people coming to live with their relatives (should the latter have housing for the people who are resettling) in regions not listed among the territories for resettlement. Also, participants in the program who have not been issued with Russian passports yet can now get the status of resident taxpayers.

As a response to proposals from compatriots, a discussion has begun on possibly giving regional divisions of the Federal Migration Service the authority to issue a license of participation in the state program to compatriots who have already arrived in Russia legally and who are willing to join the program.

Establishing partnership relations between Moscow and the compatriot communities abroad is a vital prerequisite for the gradual formation of a consolidated and viable diaspora that would be resistant to assimilation.

THE CONGRESS AS AN OPPORTUNITY

The upcoming World Congress of Russian Compatriots in December is expected to gather over 500 representatives of organizations of ethnic Russians from 89 countries, as well as Russian legislators, federal and regional government officials, public organization activists, and executives of foundations that interact with compatriots abroad.  Preparations for the Congress were discussed by the Governmental Commission for the Affairs of Compatriots Living Abroad in late March and by the World Coordination Council of Russian Compatriots.

Apart from the plenary sessions, the forum will have from ten to twelve theme sections where discussions will focus on the consolidation of compatriots’ organizations, maintaining the Russian-speaking community abroad, and the protection of the rights of compatriots abroad. The latter envisions, among other things, enacting the mechanisms of international institutions and NGOs, and providing opportunities for education in Russia and at branches of Russian universities abroad. This aspect presupposes a discussion of the role that constituent territories of the Russian Federation can play in providing assistance to Russians living abroad, the united spiritual community of the Russian world (in cooperation with the Russian Orthodox Church), Russia’s historical heritage and refuting the falsifications of history, mass media problems, implementation of the state program for resettlement, etc.

A number of important meetings, as well as national, regional and international forums will take place in the run-up to the Congress. The objective of discussions there is to tap ways to resolve the most pressing problems faced by Russian communities abroad.

Whatever the skeptics may say, the system that was set into motion in the past two years or so makes it possible to streamline discussions and interaction within the global Russian community on the one hand, and to maintain the compatriots’ regular dialogue with their historical homeland on the other.

It is quite obvious that Russia is just at the beginning of the road. Dialogue with compatriots should be imbued with new issues and it should take on a new scale over time. All of this will require substantial moral and material support on the part of Russia.