RUSSIA’S DIASPORA CAPITAL: KEY ACTORS AND CONDITIONS FOR ACCUMULATION
Eurasian Home Analytical Resource, Russia
Dec 10 2007
ELENA YATSENKO, President of the Eurasia Heritage Foundation, Moscow
It is not the first year that the Eurasia Heritage Foundation
specializing in economic and socio-political developments in the
Post-Soviet space has been systematically analyzing the situation
around the Russian World. From our point of view, what appears to be
quite relevant here is the accumulation of one of the main resources
of the Russian World’s development – that of the diaspora capital.
It is noteworthy that modern diasporas have a number of distinctive
features.
First of all, diaspora is a political phenomenon. And the key factor
for its development is not an ethnic entity but rather a nation-state.
Diaspora forms a specific image of life behaviour, which is influenced
not only by demographic or ethnic reality, but by other factors too.
Modern diasporas are characterized by the shrinking role of the ethnic
component and that of religious adherence, while the search for some
other models of embedding or forging referential links with certain
world historic systems and ideological and political currents seems
to be an increasingly important aspect thereof. What we are seeing
developing behind the usual facade of the diaspora is the emergence
of transnational communities.
Life has proven that monoethnicity, monoculturalism and
monoconfessionalism are desirable but not necessary conditions for the
existence of a consolidated diaspora. Moreover, the aforementioned
factors do not necessarily imply that Metropolia’s interaction with
the diaspora will be intensive, not to mention efficient.
For example, in Russia, Tajikistan, and Israel about 80 % of the
citizens claim to belong to the titular ethnic group. However, the Jews
alone have been able to come up with a genuinely efficient model of
interaction with the diaspora and have established a diaspora network
over the centuries.
The following are typical examples of the most ethnically homogeneous
countries: Greece (98 % of the citizens belong to the titular ethnic
group), Poland (97,5 %), Armenia (96 %), Albania (95 %), Finland
(93 %), China (92 %), Hungary and Azerbaijan (90 %). These countries
have different levels of socio-political and economic development,
their involvement in the global processes is dissimilar too, yet some
of them have already created state-sponsored models of interaction
with their diasporas and in so doing gained political and economic
success at the international level.
It is common international practice to harness the diaspora’s potential
in establishing a network of economic, socio-political, cultural and
other links. For example, a very short while ago we all witnessed
the success of the Armenian diaspora when the USA in fact recognized
the Genocide of the Armenians of 1915-1923 by Turkey. And "the bamboo
network" (colloquial for The Overseas Chinese business networks, OCBN)
is in itself a model of how diaspora business circles operate in the
interests of their country of origin, while independently obtaining a
financial, economic, and political autonomy. It is enough to remember
that 4 % of Indonesia’s Chinese control about 70 % of the country’s
economy.
Let us take a look at the state-of-the-art of accumulation of Russia’s
diaspora capital. Who might become its key donors and actors? What
are the necessary conditions for it to emerge?
There are two ways of creating financial basis for any diaspora:
through the state’s efforts (in our case – Russia’s) or through
raising the diaspora’s capital with its own efforts.
So far the Russian diaspora has been gaining financial support via
social organizations, in the circumstances of lack of transparency in
distributing the resources, which impeded the creation of a resource
base and caused a cohort of "compatriots by profession" to appear. As
a result, all ways of communication with Russian authorities in charge
of interacting with the compatriots abroad, were monopolized by such
structures. It is especially true about the Post-Soviet space. Thus,
we have to admit that the paternalistic model of co-operation with
the compatriots’ organizations abroad has proven unable to create
the necessary infrastructure for developing a diaspora. As one of
the compatriots, who is well integrated in the social and business
environment of the country of residence, points out, this model "gives
a freebie fish instead of a fishing rod and the skill to use it".
At the same time we have to admit, first, that Russia is "overfocused"
on the problems of the part of the diaspora that has failed to adapt
to the new environment, whereas other countries concentrate more on
the diaspora representatives who have become part of the political and
economic establishment of the country of residence. Second, today’s
Russia is only capable of rending support to the veterans, pensioners,
socially vulnerable groups, and of coordinating certain cultural
programs. But it is unable to implement such ambitious projects as
creation of a network structure. There is no technology, no consistent
policy, no infrastructure. This all has yet to be created.
Yet Russia is not a monopolist in interacting with the Russian
diaspora. American and European foundations are active players in this
field too. They are interested in the young Russian-speaking elite,
they get involved through different schools, scientific centres,
etc. The approach they have adopted is this: let Russia mess around
with the marginal groups in the Russian midst, and we will deal with
the elite that has adapted and bring it up in the spirit of Western
values. Titular countries are also actively involved. And it is
not uncommon when they have more resources than Russia does. The
relationship with the country is established by way of long and
lengthy contacts at all levels: expert, economic, cultural. Support
groups or "influence agents" are brought into play. These are people
or groups that are in charge of establishing contacts in the ethnic
environment. At present Russia has no such practice.
Despite the fact that from historical point of view it has not been
long since the Soviet Union collapsed, this period of time was
enough for representatives of all waves of emigration, including
"the cataclysm diasporas", to decide what country to live in and
what to do next. Many compatriots have now well integrated into the
socio-political and economic realities of their country of residence.
They got used to living and working in a competitive environment
with a foreign language and a foreign faith. Many of them think
of themselves as "other" Russians, which does little to inspire
them to take part in the life of Russian cultural, educational and
charity organizations. Yet another deterring factor is the lack of
due management. Investment of resources must be efficient. Today it
is the necessary condition for the formation of the diaspora capital,
which can become the inner source for the development and enhancement
of the Russian World.
Businesses both in Russia and in the country of compatriots’ residence
want to understand what they will gain from their investment. And
this means that there is a need to convert financial capital into
political capital, which in its turn should yield certain benefits
and preferences with Russian authorities supporting businesses’
efforts through the official structures.
By the way, benefits and preferences for businesses supporting the
diaspora as stipulated by Article 16 of the Federal Law "On Russian
Federation’s Policy in Regard to Compatriots Living Abroad" still have
not come into force. Businesses do not regard themselves as acting in
a legal field as genuine participants of this process. As a result,
business and intellectual elite of the Russian diaspora remains
virtually unrepresented in the coordinating councils of Russian
compatriots, and marginal individuals are all but fighting to take
seats in them.
Systematic accumulation of the diaspora capital will not happen unless
a mutually beneficial system of partnership between Russian businesses
abroad and Russia’s economic agents is set up. To fulfil this task
the government has to initiate this process, think over a system of
incentives and control over them. It is important to take into account
the fact that Russian business has long ago crossed the country’s
boundaries and become supranational. It is now capable of becoming a
partner in this niche. Especially in the project activities. In other
words, businessmen in Russia and abroad could finance the projects
that contribute to the preservation and development of the Russian
language, culture and education abroad.
But to do this they have to be sure to gain certain benefits from
Russia. It is precisely the question of supporting the projects rather
than compatriots’ organizations abroad. Accordingly, to implement
project activities there is a need for competent management, which
implies training personnel. And this is an extremely important issue
related to the resources of the Russian World.
Another potential source of the diaspora capital could become
economic circles who have close ties with Russia, regardless of their
ethnicity. If the so-called titular businesses become involved in the
economic communication "Russia – Russian World", this will naturally
lead on to strengthening of the Russian language (the main language
of economic communication in the "near abroad"), generating interest
in Russia and what is going on here.
However, for them to become partners of the Russian World they
have to establish relations with Russian state institutions. This
is the missing link in building the system, where the state is the
structure-forming element of the diaspora and the major designer of
the Russian World. It is precisely the state that adds legitimacy
to its network structures. And the Russian World networks in their
turn enhance the state’s effectiveness and help Russia become a
global power.
It is this pattern that the European, Armenian, and now Azerbaijan
diasporas follow. For example, All-Russia Azerbaijan Congress is
headed by Presidents of Russia and Azerbaijan. The Congress has
regional branches in 54 Russian regions and unites about 80 % of
social organizations, registered in Russia, which is about 1,5 million
people. The Union of Armenians in Russia is the largest Armenian
diaspora in the world – around 2,5 million people – which initiated the
creation of World Armenian Congress. The idea of uniting Armenians
world-wide was supported by 138 Armenian organizations from 52
countries in the world. World Jewish Congress, which was created with
the help of large bank structures and international Jewish capital,
has a powerful lobby practically in all countries of residence.
The Russian diaspora is a success story in Romania, where a community
of Russian Old Believers (Lipovans) has been living for three
centuries, since the Church Schism under Patriarch Nikon. Officially
the community comprises about 35 thousand people, but the unofficial
figure is around 100 thousand (which makes it the fifth national
minority in the country). Political activity of Russian Lipovans is
regulated by law, in particular by the Treaty on Friendly Relations
and Co-operation between the Russian Federation and Romania of 2004.
The research carried out by the Ministry of Foreign Affaires of the
Russian Federation [1] asked the community members what spheres of
activity Russian-speaking people living in Romania are most successful
in. In their opinion, Russian-speaking people are most successful
in trade, agriculture, industry, entrepreneurship, culture, art and
sport. Today the local authorities are interested in making sure
that the community of Russian Lipovans is as broadly represented
as possible. They think that this will help them attract Russian
investment. Lipovans are very keen on bringing their representatives to
power. Over the past 18 years they have managed to create a lobby at
different levels of the executive and legislative branches of power,
and today to a certain degree they are capable of influencing the
state’s policy and defending their interests.
Prominent politicians and public figures are joining the ranks of the
community. As a result, people in Romania have started to show great
respect for the Lipovans and learn more about their problems. Thus,
they could become a "connecting link" between Romania and Russia. The
situation around studying and preserving the Russian language and
culture has also improved.
When building up the Russian World it is expedient to bear in mind
these models. But to do this Russian government and business community
should have a real image of the state-of-the-art of modern Russian
diasporas abroad. And the business community of the Russian World
has to understand the situation developing in its homeland.
That is why it needs information support. But, unfortunately, we have
to admit that for Russian authorities, society and business circles
Russian compatriots remain "terra incognita". At present there
is no comprehensive "geographical" map of the Russian diaspora,
no large-scale program of carrying out research or elaborating
recommendations. If we are to develop the Russian World, then the
information gap needs to be filled in a systematic way, and the
expert community that examines this complex and multi-faceted issue
professionally, needs to be involved more actively in addressing the
aforementioned objectives.
ert.xml?lang=en&nic=expert&pid=1361&qm onth=0&qyear=0