Stanizai.org

East is east, West is west.

Half a Millennium of Religious Intolerance:

The Legacy of Vostochniki - Russia's  Ostpolitik

By Zaman S. Stanizai

Political Editor, Asian Affairs – The Minaret

"As long as the Muslims of Soviet Central Asia clearly perceive themselves as the opposite of the Russians (even if not in opposition to them), the notion of a "Soviet people," promoted by Moscow as an acceptable identity-substitute for the USSR's non-Russian population, remains wishful thinking.           -- Michael Rywkin

Half a millennium of Russian-Muslim conflicts in Eurasia stem from deeply rooted religious intolerance that is engrained in the Russian political mind set.  The East is an outlet for Russia's frustrations emanating from cultural inferiority complex vis-à-vis the West and a milieu for its military aggrandizement to remedy its insecurity.  Russia's minorities within its borders and her neighbors are at the receiving end of the outpour of these frustrations that have often been manifested in human tragedies of the worst kind.  The only hope to end this vicious circle is through lasting fundamental reforms.           

This intolerance has survived the changing of the guards at Kremlin from Czarist to Soviet and back to the Russian state.  Czarist tyranny of forced assimilation continued under communist collectivization and forced migrations in order to create "the Soviet man."  The action of the new Russian leadership in power, (Yeltsin), as well as in opposition, (Zhironovski), through stated and implied threats is testimony to the belief that the worst is yet to come.  The brutal suppression of democratic oppositions in Central Asia and the ruthless Russian military campaigns in Chechnya with utter disregard for the rights of the innocent civilians are reminders of the calamities that had befallen the millions of Crimean Tartars, Bashkirs, Karakalpaks, Kazakhs, Nogays, and others.            

Empires are built with a sense of mission, military organization, and national pride.  The Russian empire is an aberration to this rule as its goals were defined by the action of others to ameliorate their perception.  The Russians didn't want to remain pagan, so they sought conversion to an established religion.  The West perceived of Russians as savage barbarians, so the Russians tried to imitate European ways by marrying European royalties, introducing French and German languages in the imperial court, reforming the calendar and alphabet, introducing European fashions and customs, and shaving off their beards, on the Czar's orders.            

Even in the area of political culture, for instance, the term, 'Russia, which comes from, 'Rus,' is a name given to these eastern Slavs by foreigners.  In state building, Kiev, the first Russian state was founded not by Russians, but by a Viking chief, St. Petersburg was built as Czar Peter the Great's victory over the Swedes, Moscow achieved its grandeur after Napoleon's failed invasion, and again after the defeat of the German armies. Even communism, which is closely identified with Russia, has always been foreign in origin and adherence to the average Russian.          

Thus, the existence of Russia, as a duchy, as an empire, and as the relatively modernized Soviet state was defined by the actions of its neighbors.  The epitome of Russia's political ideology has been an inferiority complex emanating from cultural alienation, geographic isolation, and historical frustrations coupled with tyrannical rulers that lead to political identity crisis.           

Take geographic isolation, for instance.  Russia's whole history has been marked by her efforts to get access to warm waters.  This urge to the sea was not so much as an effort for empire building, but a means of survival to overcome the limitations of its inhospitable terrain bordering on frozen seas constraining navigation for trade and military use. Among its targets were the Baltic Sea, the Bering Sea, the Gulf of Finland, the Black Sea, the Mediterranean, the Caspian Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Indian Ocean, the Pacific Ocean and the Sea of Japan.  For this reason Russia's colonial expansion was not only for the conquest and exploitation of natural resources, but also for settlement and laying claims to foreign lands.           

"From the North Caucasus to the Tatar Volga region, Siberia, and Kazakhstan, and to a lesser extent Central Asia, Russian military conquest was preceded, accompanied, or followed by settlements of Cossacks and, in the nineteenth century, Russian peasants.  The colonists provided armed militias who helped to expel the natives.  From the Russians' point of view, colonial settlement made conquest irreversible; the lands became part of 'Russia.'  Today this opinion still prevails and is related to the size of the Russian colonies in a given area.  Thus, for instance, it is difficult for even educated Russians to admit that Kazan, which has a majority Russian population was not a Russian city since time immemorial" (Benningsen Broxup 1994: 76).           

This contiguous expansion and the systematic settlement policy of Russia seem to have lasted longer than those of the other European colonial powers.  In Hauner's view, "this dual characteristic of Russian imperialism is particularly relevant for Central Asia where the Russians, unlike the British in India, appear as both intruders and settlers" (Hauner 1991: 190)           

Russian expansions brought miseries to the people of Asia, so they had to absolve their action in the name of religion, politics or both.  "In order to justify the policy of further expansion and annexation, Prince Gorchakov, the Russian Foreign Minister, sent out a circular dispatch to his ambassadors, in which he very skillfully defended his country's 'civilized mission' against barbarous raiders and plunderers, while promising to settle accounts with the sedentary and agricultural populations of Central Asia peacefully" (Hauner 1991: 197).           

The justification of Russia's occupation and colonization of the East in general and Central Asia in particular, is best manifested in the secretary of the Russian Geographical Society, Colonel M. I. Venyukov's memorandum in which he calls for "the re-establishment or extension of the sway of the Aryan race over countries which for a long period were subject to peoples of Turk and Mongol extraction."  Russia should proselytize "Christianity, while replacing the elements of Mohammedan fanaticism by humanizing elements… and consequently freeing man from the narrow bondage of Islam" (Venyukov 1877).          

Exhibition of such racial supremacy and religious hatred did not remain a mere expression of though rather they have become policies of the Russian/Soviet governments to this day.  It was precisely for the implementation of such policies that two radical language reforms were undertaken, the first changing from Arabic and other scripts to Latin, the other from Latin to Cyrillic scripts for each language, intensifying artificially local idiosyncrasies and more importantly hampering any large pan-movements, such as Pan-Islamism or Pan-Turanism (Caroe 1967: 144-5).           

This kind of concerted effort is an obvious example of the Russian onslaught on the Islamic culture of Central Asia.  Fyodor F. Martens, a proponent of Vostochniki, "Easterners," a radical extremist Slavophil group that preached a doctrine of Russia's "holy mission" among the people of the Orient believed that "international rights cannot be taken into account when dealing with semi barbarous peoples" (Malozemoff 1958: 42).           

In the eyes of racist elements in Europe, Russia claimed to be defending Europe against the "Yellow Peril," and as far as Vladimir S. Solovyov, the antecedent of German National Socialists is concerned, "inferior races must either submit to the superior ones or disappear" (Hauner 1991: 206).

Russia's "holy mission" in Central Asia and her efforts to "civilize the semi barbarous" people of Asia is an anomaly of the highest order.  Judging Russia's policies by deeds and not actions reminds us of Gandhi's remark when asked what he thought about the European civilization, "It's a good idea," Gandhi replied.

Russia has brought upon generations of Central Asians death and demise, bloodshed and butchery, strife and struggle not only in their homeland, but in Europe as well.  A case in point is he disappearance of hundreds of thousands of Muslims during World War II.  "The majority of Central Asian soldiers taken prisoner opted for the enemy - a fact still hidden from the Soviet public today - although systematic starvation and cruel treatment in German hands, which resulted in appalling losses, must have been one of the major inducements to change sides.  As Turkistanis they joined the so-called "Eastern Legions," which were part of the Wehmacht and later the Waffen S S, to fight the Red Army" (Hauner 1981: 339-57).  Thus, many Muslims died as they were forced to fight first against the Germans, and later when they were used as gun fodder by the Nazis against the Red Army.  Yet when the casualties of World War II are mentioned the estimated 250,000 - 400,000 which included the Kalmyks, the Tatars, and member of the Caucasian ethnic groups (Alexiev 1982: 33) are almost always left out.  Were they not from this world to fight in a "world war" one might ask?

History is witness to some of the darkest tragedies in Asia and the ever-lasting negative impacts of such tragedies are serious impediment to the long-term cultural assimilation.  Unlike the successful cultural assimilation in North America, which resulted from a great influx of immigrants with a substantially more sophisticated European culture replacing the indigenous population and creating a salad bowl, if not a melting pot, Russia deceptively tried to "civilize" an Asia that was the cradle of several civilizations long before Russia even had a state. 

In spite of pretense to the contrary, the Russian-Muslim cultural exchange has been a two-way street, minus the massacres, genocide, and other atrocities carried out as state policies by the Russians.

Contributions of Muslims to the Slavic culture in architecture, arts and crafts, clothing, costumes, cuisine, etc. have been tremendous.  The karakul sheepskin hats of Central Asia with fur coats are now an indistinguishable part of the typical Russian apparel.  The world-famous onion shaped dome of the Red square church is built in the 15th Century Timuride style of Herat and Samarkand.  The Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg is full of gemstones, gold, and silver objects looted by Russian invaders in Central Asia.  The Russian language has been enriched with vocabulary from Central Asia languages from household items such as chimadan and kilim to delicacies such as pilaf, shishlik, shishkebab etc. 

Russia's contributions exceeded those of the Muslims in raids, ravages, and Russification.  Islamic schools and mosques were closed, scholars persecuted, the celebration of religious holidays prohibited, language scripts changed to Latin and later Cyrillic to inhibit religious scholarship and make religious jurisprudence obsolete.  Muslim identity was crushed through imposition of the use of Russian suffixes at the end of every Muslim name.  This has been the result of Russia's efforts to "civilize" the Muslims of Asia.

The limited degree of modernization -- industrialization/ collectivization -- in Central Asia must have undeniably improved the life styles of some Muslims, but it certainly has devastated the environment as we have discussed earlier.  Be that as it may, these contributions are void of much cultural significance to justify Russia's claim to civilizing the Asians.

In terms of future prospects, even before the fall of the Soviet Union, Michael Rwykin described the Russian-Muslim dichotomy very bluntly and accurately:  "As long as the Muslims of Soviet Central Asia clearly perceive themselves as the opposite of the Russians (even if not in opposition to them), the notion of a "Soviet people," promoted by Moscow as an acceptable identity-substitute for the USSR's non-Russian population, remains wishful thinking.  This being the case, growing Muslim numbers, which represent an irreplaceable source of future Soviet manpower supply, at the same time endanger the traditional Russia-dominated Soviet power structure" (Rywkin 1982: 152).

If there is any hope for the derailment of the tumultuous train of tragedy to end its journey of demise in Asia, it would have to be along the lines of creating a modern Russian state divorced from layers upon layers of geographic security belts and liberated from cultural complexes.  Russia must feel content with its cultural identity and with a homogeneous population within manageable borders.  Russia has to think anew and think different to survive, but not just by the skin of its teeth.  Russia must no longer think totalitarianism, but pluralism.  And most of all Russia must think small, so there is room for others with rights to social equality, cultural individuality, and political self-determination.

To read other segments of ‘Half a Millennium of Religious Intolerance in Caucasia and Beyond’ (Click here)

Reference 

Alexiev, Alex 1982. Soviet Nationalities in German Wartime Strategy, 1941-1945. Special Rand report, R-2772-NA, August 1982. Santa Monica, CA: Rand

Caroe, O. 1967. Soviet Empire: The Turks of Central Asia and Stalinism. New York: St. Martin's Press

Hauner, Milan. 1981. India in Axis Strategy, Germany, Japan, and Indian Nationalists in the Second World War.  London, Stuttgart: Clett/Cotta 

Hauner, Milan. 1991. "Russia's Geopolitical and Ideological Dilemmas in Central Asia."  In Turko-Persia in Historical Perspective. 1991 Robert L. Canfield (Ed.) New York: Cambridge University Press

Malozemoff, Andrew. 1958. Russian Far Eastern Policy 1881-1904. With Special Emphasis on the Causes of the Russo-Japanese War. Berkeley: University of California Press 

Rywkin, Michael, 1982. Moscow's Muslim Challenge: Soviet Central Asia. Armonk, New York: M.E. Sharpe Inc.

Venyukov, M. J. 1877. The Progress of Russia in Central Asia (translation from Sbornik gosudarstvennyukh znaniey). St. Petersburg. 22 pp., India Office Records: L/P & S/18C 17 (Political and Secret Memoranda)