According to numerous pieces of research conducted in Europe and based on large-scale surveys, va... more According to numerous pieces of research conducted in Europe and based on large-scale surveys, various contacts between migrants and receiving population have served as strong predictors of lesser intolerance towards migrants (though to different extent). Quantitative research in Russia has brought similar results. The paper argues that these findings alone, with all their statistical reliability, do not fill marked gaps in our knowledge on how and why interaction itself creates more tolerant or, possibly, more negativistic perceptions of migrants in a given national/regional setting. The paper is an attempt to highlight these aspects of the theme through qualitative research taking Moscow as a case-study. Drawing on a series of semi-structured interviews with Muscovites collected in 2014-2015, we will approach the following research questions: who might, more likely, be prone to interact with migrants and, oppositely, what makes Muscovites more reluctant to set up contacts; what might be reasons behind their often unconscious anxiety about having migrants as neighbours in multistoried dwellings and what these contacts as neighbours might add to our understanding of specifics of "cultural racism" in a huge city; how views of Muscovites about various migrants (especially preferences related to social status) manifest itself in post-Soviet setting and, finally, what is the local specifics, in comparison with Europe, of collapse of "defended neighbourhoods" in the city of Moscow. Как показывают многочисленные количественные исследования в европейских странах, различные формы контактов принимающего населения с мигрантами делают восприятие последних хотя и в разной степени, но более толерантным. Описанная закономерность также фиксируется и российскими опросами. По мнению авторов, эти общие выводы, при всей их статистической надежности, оставляют значительные лакуны в наших знаниях о том, как происходит общение с мигрантами, в чем и почему оно помогает или, возможно, мешает снижению антимигрантских настроений в конкретной страновой/локальной ситуации. Статья является попыткой прояснить данные аспекты темы на примере крупного российского города — через анализ нарративов, собранных в ходе интервьюирования жителей Москвы в 2014-2015 гг. Будут затронуты следующие сюжеты: кто более склонен к контактам в российских/московских условиях, а что, напротив, отвращает москвичей от общения с мигрантами; в чем подводные камни соседства с последними в многоквартирных жилых домах и почему такое соседство заставляет размышлять об особенностях культурного расизма в большом городе; как в постсоветских условиях работает фактор перепадов социального статуса между "местными" и "приезжими" и, наконец, как проявляет себя в Москве, в сравнении с европейской ситуацией, слом "защищенных локальных пространств".
Резюме: В российском публичном и академическом дискурсе настоящее и будущее русского языка в пост... more Резюме: В российском публичном и академическом дискурсе настоящее и будущее русского языка в постсоветских странах неотделимо от усилий России, направленных на помощь «соотечествен-никам». В статье показано на примере Казахстана, что в силу особенностей имперско-советского освоения территорий, занимаемых сейчас странами Центральной Азии, важной чертой русскоязычного культурного пространства является здесь его надэтнический характер: кроме собственно рус-ских, оно массово охватывает представителей других этнических групп, прежде всего титульной. Основываясь на результатах полевых исследований в Алма-Ате, авторы предлагают корректировки российской политики «мягкой силы» с учетом специфики различных социально-демографических групп казахов. Ключевые слова: Казахстан, русскоязычное пространство-история становления, языковая по-литика после 1991 г., соотношение казахского и русского языков, лингвокультурные предпочтения студентов, «мягкая сила» России. Для цитирования: Космарская Н.П., Савин И.С. Судьба русского языка в Казахстане: возможности и барьеры использования российской «мягкой силы». Восток (Oriens). 2020. № 5. С. 119-130. Abstract: The article explores the present role and future of the Russian language in the Republic of Kazakhstan. It contrasts state language policies and the views of ordinary Kazakhstani citizens, recorded mainly in interviews (including expert ones) and focus-group discussions with students of various Almaty universities conducted in 2016 and 2017. Attention is focused on the views of Kazakh students, members of the so-called "Nazarbayev generation" because from their ranks future elites will be recruited. Suggesting that the Russian linguistic-cultural space in Central Asia is largely a historically rooted phenomenon and has not been genuinely dependent on Russia, the authors suggest that the Russian Federation needs to readjust its external language and culture promotion so far geared almost exclusively to the so-called “compatriots” and seriously take into consideration the needs of another, more numerous target-group. These are the titular (Kazakh) Russian-speakers of various age and social status ‒ now they comprise the larger part of those whose Russian language skills are on the native or near-to-native level. Drawing on the results of empirical research, authors suggest that Russia’s efforts geared at the preservation and development of the Russian linguistic and cultural space in Kazakhstan need to be restructured in order to overcome the “sedative” effect of the too familiar environment inherited from the Soviet past and acknowledge the potential of the local “mobilizing” factors making this restructuring a very topical task. Among these factors are the specifics of cultural globalization in Kazakhstan, and Russia’s competition with some other international players in Central Asia. Keywords: Kazakhstan, formation of Russian linguistic-cultural space, language policies after 1991, state language vs the Russian language, linguistic attitudes of students, “soft power” of Russia.
The goal of the paper is to reveal factors which make an impact on how popular perception of Russ... more The goal of the paper is to reveal factors which make an impact on how popular perception of Russia manifests itself in present-day Kazakhstan. Two dimensions of formation of the image of Russia are taken on board: perception of Russia as a "resource" (in the economic sense) and historical-cultural dimension. The article is based on empirical materials (semi-structured interviews) collected in June 2016 in the city of Petropavlovsk (Northern-Kazakhstan Region, Kazakhstan) and also on results of content-analysis of the two leading Kazakhstani newspapers (published in Kazakh and in Russian). Several thematic aspects of perception of Russia by various socio/ethno/cultural groups representing local community are analyzed: situation in the educational sphere; Russia as a sales market; transport accessibility; prevalent modes of language use; perception of the Soviet past, and other.
Scholars of International Relations have called for the creation of a post-Western IR that reflec... more Scholars of International Relations have called for the creation of a post-Western IR that reflects the global and local contexts of the declining power and legitimacy of the West. Recognising this discourse as indicative of the postcolonial condition, we deploy Homi Bhabha’s concept of mimicry and James C. Scott’s notion of mētis to assess whether international political dynamics of a hybrid kind are emerging. Based on interviews with Central Asian political, economic, and cultural elites, we explore the emergence of a new global politics of a post-Western type. We find that Russia substantively mimics the West as a post-Western power and that there are some suggestive examples of the role of mētis in its foreign policy. Among Central Asian states, the picture is more equivocal. Formal mimicry and mētis of a basic kind are observable, but these nascent forms suggest that the dialectical struggle between colonial clientelism and anti-colonial nationalism remains in its early stages. In this context, a post-Western international politics is emerging with a postcolonial aspect but without the emergence of the substantive mimicry and hybrid spaces characteristic of established postcolonial relations.
Книга подготовлена в рамках одноименного исследовательского проекта Института востоковедения РАН.... more Книга подготовлена в рамках одноименного исследовательского проекта Института востоковедения РАН. В нем, наряду с сотрудниками ИВ РАН, участвовали российские (из Санкт-Петербурга, Барнаула, Иркутска, Улан-Удэ) и зарубежные (из Украины, Монголии, Ирана, Италии) учёные. Книга состоит из предисловия и трёх частей. В предисловии обосновывается понимание трансграничности и как следствия процесса или действия, локализуемого за рубежом, и как общего качества или состояния, проявляющегося независимо от границ, и характеризуются некоторые вызовы национальному государству, не ставшие предметом исследования в книге. Первая часть посвящена семантическому, этимологическому и историографическому анализу понятий «граница», «вызов», «угроза», «национальное государство»; используются материалы русского, английского, итальянского и китайского языков, исследуется богатейший арсенал текстов о нации, национализме и национальном государстве. Авторы второй части анализируют восприятие указанных понятий политическим и обыденным сознанием, фокусируясь при этом на разных уровнях и социальных субъектах такого восприятия. В третьей части собраны исследовательские кейсы вызовов. Одни авторы сосредоточились на вызовах, предполагающих осознанное целеполагание и «акторское» действие – на борьбе вокруг путей транспортировки углеводородов, амбивалентном эффекте деятельности ТНК, исламской альтернативе национальному государству. Другие – на вызовах, либо потенциально содержащихся в трансграничных конфессиональных и этнокультурных ареалах, либо уже проявившихся с распространением новых информационно-коммуникационных технологий. Третьи же рассмотрели вызовы со стороны «общего качества»; сделано это на примере кризиса политических партий в Европе и посредством интерпретации принципа национального государства как вызова легитимности этого государства
Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia Assessing Migrants' and Community Needs and Managing Risks, 2017
The combination of economic downturn in Russia and Central Asia and the facilitation of condition... more The combination of economic downturn in Russia and Central Asia and the facilitation of conditions for entry, residence and employment of Central Asian migrants in Russia and Kazakhstan has had significant impact on the volume and directions of migration flows in the region. On the one hand, declining remittances and difficulties in securing sustainable income in their home countries have stimulated greater interest in new destinations, pressure for family reunification or women becoming the primary breadwinners taking up the migration route. On the other hand, while new legal opportunities (introduction of patents in Russia and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan’s accession to the Eurasian Economic Union) have helped regularize the status of many Central Asian migrants, certain categories of migrants remain particularly vulnerable in legal and socioeconomic terms – in particular, those who were unprepared for the imposition of a re-entry ban to Russia. The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and Rights regional field assessment “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Root Causes, Social and Economic Impact of Return Migration”, published in 2016, identified a range of vulnerabilities, to which migrant workers were subject prior to and following the imposition of re-entry bans: legal (inadequate rights awareness and exposure to exploitation), economic (reduced income and indebtedness) and socio-cultural (reliance on informal networks for support). The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and Rights in-depth regional field assessment, which followed in 2017 on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks”, is seeking to establish the precise needs of vulnerable migrants and capacities of state institutions and non-state entities to address these vulnerabilities and leveraging the potential for the vulnerable migrants’ successful re-integration into the local labour market. In addition, risk factors limiting chances for migrants’ re-integration and implications for their welfare were identified and weighted. The risk analysis considers the impact of state policies, measures aiming to reduce shock of re-entry bans, employment and integration services in the regions of migrants’ origin as well as the involvement of home and diaspora communities. The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and Rights (DAR) Regional Field Assessment 2017 (Phase II) on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks” is based on the available official data and has covered the current volume and composition of return migration of Central Asian workers and assessed the overall change in the flows of remittances. It has also tracked the long-term dynamics of various migrant flows and indicated changes in migration balance of Central Asian countries. The regional field assessment has analyzed the economic conditions determining chances of integration/reintegration of migrant workers returning to countries of origin or moving to Kazakhstan. It has reviewed recent changes in legal and administrative conditions for returnees’ re-integration and migrant workers’ integration and presented term grounds for radicalization, which have been noted by government officials and experts on the issue in the three countries under study. The sociological component of the regional field assessment identified various types of vulnerabilities, reported by Central Asian migrant workers while in migration and upon return. It has indicated most vulnerable groups among returning migrants and identified their immediate/integration/reintegration needs. Moreover, the assessment has provided a framework for understanding the possible link between re-entry banned migrants’ vulnerabilities (deterioration of socio-economic status, alienation from the state and community) and their long-term radicalization potential. It has also elaborated risk factors, which increase the potential for radicalization of various population segments in Central Asia and identified additional risk factors, which may affect migrant workers. It has emphasized the need for building trust between migrants, the state, migrant diasporas and local communities so as to build migrants’ long-term resilience to extremist messaging. The analysis serves to inform a wide variety of instrumental stakeholders (state institutions, international and non-governmental organizations, community and diaspora leaders) in raising the level of protection of migrants’ rights, especially the most vulnerable ones. It seeks to contribute to the effective identification of gaps and needs in elaborating the legal framework, developing operational measures and enhancing institutional cooperation that would help prevent, address and sustainably resolve migrant vulnerabilities. It is guided by the principles of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in line with the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda by referring to relevant international norms, principles and standards. A crucial element of the GCM is raising the level of effective protection to migrants, especially the most vulnerable ones. Several GCM themes are of direct significance in this context: ensuring human rights of all migrants, preventing all forms of discrimination, addressing drivers of migration as well as issues related to irregular migration, including provision of regular pathways, and enhancing protection and assistance rendered to vulnerable migrants, including victims of trafficking, exploitation and smuggling.
Монография представляет собой итог работы в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований Презид... more Монография представляет собой итог работы в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований Президиума РАН «Историческая память и российская идентичность», проведенной сотрудниками Центра изучения Центральной Азии, Кавказа и Урало-Поволжья ИВ РАН совместно с коллегами из других научных и учебных организаций в Северокавказском регионе. Помимо итогов полевых исследований в книге представлены также исторические работы, описывающие некоторые сюжеты, которые являются фоном происходящих в настоящее время общественных дискуссий. Предназначен для историков, социологов, антропологов, всех интересующихся формированием российской идентичности в регионе. The book contains as фrticles that summarized anthropological and sociological researches among modern youth in North Caucasus as also historical papers and one work on local history by the student of middle school.
According to numerous pieces of research conducted in Europe and based on large-scale surveys, va... more According to numerous pieces of research conducted in Europe and based on large-scale surveys, various contacts between migrants and receiving population have served as strong predictors of lesser intolerance towards migrants (though to different extent). Quantitative research in Russia has brought similar results. The paper argues that these findings alone, with all their statistical reliability, do not fill marked gaps in our knowledge on how and why interaction itself creates more tolerant or, possibly, more negativistic perceptions of migrants in a given national/regional setting. The paper is an attempt to highlight these aspects of the theme through qualitative research taking Moscow as a case-study. Drawing on a series of semi-structured interviews with Muscovites collected in 2014-2015, we will approach the following research questions: who might, more likely, be prone to interact with migrants and, oppositely, what makes Muscovites more reluctant to set up contacts; what might be reasons behind their often unconscious anxiety about having migrants as neighbours in multistoried dwellings and what these contacts as neighbours might add to our understanding of specifics of "cultural racism" in a huge city; how views of Muscovites about various migrants (especially preferences related to social status) manifest itself in post-Soviet setting and, finally, what is the local specifics, in comparison with Europe, of collapse of "defended neighbourhoods" in the city of Moscow. Как показывают многочисленные количественные исследования в европейских странах, различные формы контактов принимающего населения с мигрантами делают восприятие последних хотя и в разной степени, но более толерантным. Описанная закономерность также фиксируется и российскими опросами. По мнению авторов, эти общие выводы, при всей их статистической надежности, оставляют значительные лакуны в наших знаниях о том, как происходит общение с мигрантами, в чем и почему оно помогает или, возможно, мешает снижению антимигрантских настроений в конкретной страновой/локальной ситуации. Статья является попыткой прояснить данные аспекты темы на примере крупного российского города — через анализ нарративов, собранных в ходе интервьюирования жителей Москвы в 2014-2015 гг. Будут затронуты следующие сюжеты: кто более склонен к контактам в российских/московских условиях, а что, напротив, отвращает москвичей от общения с мигрантами; в чем подводные камни соседства с последними в многоквартирных жилых домах и почему такое соседство заставляет размышлять об особенностях культурного расизма в большом городе; как в постсоветских условиях работает фактор перепадов социального статуса между "местными" и "приезжими" и, наконец, как проявляет себя в Москве, в сравнении с европейской ситуацией, слом "защищенных локальных пространств".
Резюме: В российском публичном и академическом дискурсе настоящее и будущее русского языка в пост... more Резюме: В российском публичном и академическом дискурсе настоящее и будущее русского языка в постсоветских странах неотделимо от усилий России, направленных на помощь «соотечествен-никам». В статье показано на примере Казахстана, что в силу особенностей имперско-советского освоения территорий, занимаемых сейчас странами Центральной Азии, важной чертой русскоязычного культурного пространства является здесь его надэтнический характер: кроме собственно рус-ских, оно массово охватывает представителей других этнических групп, прежде всего титульной. Основываясь на результатах полевых исследований в Алма-Ате, авторы предлагают корректировки российской политики «мягкой силы» с учетом специфики различных социально-демографических групп казахов. Ключевые слова: Казахстан, русскоязычное пространство-история становления, языковая по-литика после 1991 г., соотношение казахского и русского языков, лингвокультурные предпочтения студентов, «мягкая сила» России. Для цитирования: Космарская Н.П., Савин И.С. Судьба русского языка в Казахстане: возможности и барьеры использования российской «мягкой силы». Восток (Oriens). 2020. № 5. С. 119-130. Abstract: The article explores the present role and future of the Russian language in the Republic of Kazakhstan. It contrasts state language policies and the views of ordinary Kazakhstani citizens, recorded mainly in interviews (including expert ones) and focus-group discussions with students of various Almaty universities conducted in 2016 and 2017. Attention is focused on the views of Kazakh students, members of the so-called "Nazarbayev generation" because from their ranks future elites will be recruited. Suggesting that the Russian linguistic-cultural space in Central Asia is largely a historically rooted phenomenon and has not been genuinely dependent on Russia, the authors suggest that the Russian Federation needs to readjust its external language and culture promotion so far geared almost exclusively to the so-called “compatriots” and seriously take into consideration the needs of another, more numerous target-group. These are the titular (Kazakh) Russian-speakers of various age and social status ‒ now they comprise the larger part of those whose Russian language skills are on the native or near-to-native level. Drawing on the results of empirical research, authors suggest that Russia’s efforts geared at the preservation and development of the Russian linguistic and cultural space in Kazakhstan need to be restructured in order to overcome the “sedative” effect of the too familiar environment inherited from the Soviet past and acknowledge the potential of the local “mobilizing” factors making this restructuring a very topical task. Among these factors are the specifics of cultural globalization in Kazakhstan, and Russia’s competition with some other international players in Central Asia. Keywords: Kazakhstan, formation of Russian linguistic-cultural space, language policies after 1991, state language vs the Russian language, linguistic attitudes of students, “soft power” of Russia.
The goal of the paper is to reveal factors which make an impact on how popular perception of Russ... more The goal of the paper is to reveal factors which make an impact on how popular perception of Russia manifests itself in present-day Kazakhstan. Two dimensions of formation of the image of Russia are taken on board: perception of Russia as a "resource" (in the economic sense) and historical-cultural dimension. The article is based on empirical materials (semi-structured interviews) collected in June 2016 in the city of Petropavlovsk (Northern-Kazakhstan Region, Kazakhstan) and also on results of content-analysis of the two leading Kazakhstani newspapers (published in Kazakh and in Russian). Several thematic aspects of perception of Russia by various socio/ethno/cultural groups representing local community are analyzed: situation in the educational sphere; Russia as a sales market; transport accessibility; prevalent modes of language use; perception of the Soviet past, and other.
Scholars of International Relations have called for the creation of a post-Western IR that reflec... more Scholars of International Relations have called for the creation of a post-Western IR that reflects the global and local contexts of the declining power and legitimacy of the West. Recognising this discourse as indicative of the postcolonial condition, we deploy Homi Bhabha’s concept of mimicry and James C. Scott’s notion of mētis to assess whether international political dynamics of a hybrid kind are emerging. Based on interviews with Central Asian political, economic, and cultural elites, we explore the emergence of a new global politics of a post-Western type. We find that Russia substantively mimics the West as a post-Western power and that there are some suggestive examples of the role of mētis in its foreign policy. Among Central Asian states, the picture is more equivocal. Formal mimicry and mētis of a basic kind are observable, but these nascent forms suggest that the dialectical struggle between colonial clientelism and anti-colonial nationalism remains in its early stages. In this context, a post-Western international politics is emerging with a postcolonial aspect but without the emergence of the substantive mimicry and hybrid spaces characteristic of established postcolonial relations.
Книга подготовлена в рамках одноименного исследовательского проекта Института востоковедения РАН.... more Книга подготовлена в рамках одноименного исследовательского проекта Института востоковедения РАН. В нем, наряду с сотрудниками ИВ РАН, участвовали российские (из Санкт-Петербурга, Барнаула, Иркутска, Улан-Удэ) и зарубежные (из Украины, Монголии, Ирана, Италии) учёные. Книга состоит из предисловия и трёх частей. В предисловии обосновывается понимание трансграничности и как следствия процесса или действия, локализуемого за рубежом, и как общего качества или состояния, проявляющегося независимо от границ, и характеризуются некоторые вызовы национальному государству, не ставшие предметом исследования в книге. Первая часть посвящена семантическому, этимологическому и историографическому анализу понятий «граница», «вызов», «угроза», «национальное государство»; используются материалы русского, английского, итальянского и китайского языков, исследуется богатейший арсенал текстов о нации, национализме и национальном государстве. Авторы второй части анализируют восприятие указанных понятий политическим и обыденным сознанием, фокусируясь при этом на разных уровнях и социальных субъектах такого восприятия. В третьей части собраны исследовательские кейсы вызовов. Одни авторы сосредоточились на вызовах, предполагающих осознанное целеполагание и «акторское» действие – на борьбе вокруг путей транспортировки углеводородов, амбивалентном эффекте деятельности ТНК, исламской альтернативе национальному государству. Другие – на вызовах, либо потенциально содержащихся в трансграничных конфессиональных и этнокультурных ареалах, либо уже проявившихся с распространением новых информационно-коммуникационных технологий. Третьи же рассмотрели вызовы со стороны «общего качества»; сделано это на примере кризиса политических партий в Европе и посредством интерпретации принципа национального государства как вызова легитимности этого государства
Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia Assessing Migrants' and Community Needs and Managing Risks, 2017
The combination of economic downturn in Russia and Central Asia and the facilitation of condition... more The combination of economic downturn in Russia and Central Asia and the facilitation of conditions for entry, residence and employment of Central Asian migrants in Russia and Kazakhstan has had significant impact on the volume and directions of migration flows in the region. On the one hand, declining remittances and difficulties in securing sustainable income in their home countries have stimulated greater interest in new destinations, pressure for family reunification or women becoming the primary breadwinners taking up the migration route. On the other hand, while new legal opportunities (introduction of patents in Russia and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan’s accession to the Eurasian Economic Union) have helped regularize the status of many Central Asian migrants, certain categories of migrants remain particularly vulnerable in legal and socioeconomic terms – in particular, those who were unprepared for the imposition of a re-entry ban to Russia. The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and Rights regional field assessment “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Root Causes, Social and Economic Impact of Return Migration”, published in 2016, identified a range of vulnerabilities, to which migrant workers were subject prior to and following the imposition of re-entry bans: legal (inadequate rights awareness and exposure to exploitation), economic (reduced income and indebtedness) and socio-cultural (reliance on informal networks for support). The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and Rights in-depth regional field assessment, which followed in 2017 on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks”, is seeking to establish the precise needs of vulnerable migrants and capacities of state institutions and non-state entities to address these vulnerabilities and leveraging the potential for the vulnerable migrants’ successful re-integration into the local labour market. In addition, risk factors limiting chances for migrants’ re-integration and implications for their welfare were identified and weighted. The risk analysis considers the impact of state policies, measures aiming to reduce shock of re-entry bans, employment and integration services in the regions of migrants’ origin as well as the involvement of home and diaspora communities. The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and Rights (DAR) Regional Field Assessment 2017 (Phase II) on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks” is based on the available official data and has covered the current volume and composition of return migration of Central Asian workers and assessed the overall change in the flows of remittances. It has also tracked the long-term dynamics of various migrant flows and indicated changes in migration balance of Central Asian countries. The regional field assessment has analyzed the economic conditions determining chances of integration/reintegration of migrant workers returning to countries of origin or moving to Kazakhstan. It has reviewed recent changes in legal and administrative conditions for returnees’ re-integration and migrant workers’ integration and presented term grounds for radicalization, which have been noted by government officials and experts on the issue in the three countries under study. The sociological component of the regional field assessment identified various types of vulnerabilities, reported by Central Asian migrant workers while in migration and upon return. It has indicated most vulnerable groups among returning migrants and identified their immediate/integration/reintegration needs. Moreover, the assessment has provided a framework for understanding the possible link between re-entry banned migrants’ vulnerabilities (deterioration of socio-economic status, alienation from the state and community) and their long-term radicalization potential. It has also elaborated risk factors, which increase the potential for radicalization of various population segments in Central Asia and identified additional risk factors, which may affect migrant workers. It has emphasized the need for building trust between migrants, the state, migrant diasporas and local communities so as to build migrants’ long-term resilience to extremist messaging. The analysis serves to inform a wide variety of instrumental stakeholders (state institutions, international and non-governmental organizations, community and diaspora leaders) in raising the level of protection of migrants’ rights, especially the most vulnerable ones. It seeks to contribute to the effective identification of gaps and needs in elaborating the legal framework, developing operational measures and enhancing institutional cooperation that would help prevent, address and sustainably resolve migrant vulnerabilities. It is guided by the principles of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in line with the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda by referring to relevant international norms, principles and standards. A crucial element of the GCM is raising the level of effective protection to migrants, especially the most vulnerable ones. Several GCM themes are of direct significance in this context: ensuring human rights of all migrants, preventing all forms of discrimination, addressing drivers of migration as well as issues related to irregular migration, including provision of regular pathways, and enhancing protection and assistance rendered to vulnerable migrants, including victims of trafficking, exploitation and smuggling.
Монография представляет собой итог работы в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований Презид... more Монография представляет собой итог работы в рамках Программы фундаментальных исследований Президиума РАН «Историческая память и российская идентичность», проведенной сотрудниками Центра изучения Центральной Азии, Кавказа и Урало-Поволжья ИВ РАН совместно с коллегами из других научных и учебных организаций в Северокавказском регионе. Помимо итогов полевых исследований в книге представлены также исторические работы, описывающие некоторые сюжеты, которые являются фоном происходящих в настоящее время общественных дискуссий. Предназначен для историков, социологов, антропологов, всех интересующихся формированием российской идентичности в регионе. The book contains as фrticles that summarized anthropological and sociological researches among modern youth in North Caucasus as also historical papers and one work on local history by the student of middle school.
Uploads
Papers by Igor Savin
Ключевые слова: Казахстан, русскоязычное пространство-история становления, языковая по-литика после 1991 г., соотношение казахского и русского языков, лингвокультурные предпочтения студентов, «мягкая сила» России.
Для цитирования: Космарская Н.П., Савин И.С. Судьба русского языка в Казахстане: возможности и барьеры использования российской «мягкой силы». Восток (Oriens). 2020. № 5. С. 119-130.
Abstract: The article explores the present role and future of the Russian language in the Republic of Kazakhstan. It contrasts state language policies and the views of ordinary Kazakhstani citizens, recorded mainly in interviews (including expert ones) and focus-group discussions with students of various Almaty universities conducted in 2016 and 2017. Attention is focused on the views of Kazakh students, members of the so-called "Nazarbayev generation" because from their ranks future elites will be recruited. Suggesting that the Russian linguistic-cultural space in Central Asia is largely a historically rooted phenomenon and has not been genuinely dependent on Russia, the authors suggest that the Russian Federation needs to readjust its external language and culture promotion so far geared almost exclusively to the so-called “compatriots” and seriously take into consideration the needs of another,
more numerous target-group. These are the titular (Kazakh) Russian-speakers of various age and social
status ‒ now they comprise the larger part of those whose Russian language skills are on the native or
near-to-native level.
Drawing on the results of empirical research, authors suggest that Russia’s efforts geared at the
preservation and development of the Russian linguistic and cultural space in Kazakhstan need to be
restructured in order to overcome the “sedative” effect of the too familiar environment inherited from the
Soviet past and acknowledge the potential of the local “mobilizing” factors making this restructuring a very
topical task. Among these factors are the specifics of cultural globalization in Kazakhstan, and Russia’s
competition with some other international players in Central Asia.
Keywords: Kazakhstan, formation of Russian linguistic-cultural space, language policies after 1991, state
language vs the Russian language, linguistic attitudes of students, “soft power” of Russia.
Books by Igor Savin
residence and employment of Central Asian migrants in Russia and Kazakhstan has had significant impact on
the volume and directions of migration flows in the region. On the one hand, declining remittances and difficulties
in securing sustainable income in their home countries have stimulated greater interest in new destinations,
pressure for family reunification or women becoming the primary breadwinners taking up the migration
route. On the other hand, while new legal opportunities (introduction of patents in Russia and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan’s
accession to the Eurasian Economic Union) have helped regularize the status of many Central Asian
migrants, certain categories of migrants remain particularly vulnerable in legal and socioeconomic terms – in
particular, those who were unprepared for the imposition of a re-entry ban to Russia.
The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and
Rights regional field assessment “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Root Causes,
Social and Economic Impact of Return Migration”, published in 2016, identified a range of vulnerabilities, to
which migrant workers were subject prior to and following the imposition of re-entry bans: legal (inadequate
rights awareness and exposure to exploitation), economic (reduced income and indebtedness) and socio-cultural
(reliance on informal networks for support).
The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and
Rights in-depth regional field assessment, which followed in 2017 on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration
Needs in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks”, is seeking to establish
the precise needs of vulnerable migrants and capacities of state institutions and non-state entities to address
these vulnerabilities and leveraging the potential for the vulnerable migrants’ successful re-integration into the
local labour market. In addition, risk factors limiting chances for migrants’ re-integration and implications for
their welfare were identified and weighted. The risk analysis considers the impact of state policies, measures
aiming to reduce shock of re-entry bans, employment and integration services in the regions of migrants’ origin
as well as the involvement of home and diaspora communities.
The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity
and Rights (DAR) Regional Field Assessment 2017 (Phase II) on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs
in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks” is based on the available official
data and has covered the current volume and composition of return migration of Central Asian workers and
assessed the overall change in the flows of remittances. It has also tracked the long-term dynamics of various
migrant flows and indicated changes in migration balance of Central Asian countries. The regional field assessment
has analyzed the economic conditions determining chances of integration/reintegration of migrant
workers returning to countries of origin or moving to Kazakhstan. It has reviewed recent changes in legal
and administrative conditions for returnees’ re-integration and migrant workers’ integration and presented term grounds for radicalization, which have been noted by government officials and experts on the issue
in the three countries under study.
The sociological component of the regional field assessment identified various types of vulnerabilities, reported
by Central Asian migrant workers while in migration and upon return. It has indicated most vulnerable
groups among returning migrants and identified their immediate/integration/reintegration needs. Moreover,
the assessment has provided a framework for understanding the possible link between re-entry banned migrants’
vulnerabilities (deterioration of socio-economic status, alienation from the state and community) and
their long-term radicalization potential. It has also elaborated risk factors, which increase the potential for radicalization
of various population segments in Central Asia and identified additional risk factors, which may affect
migrant workers. It has emphasized the need for building trust between migrants, the state, migrant diasporas
and local communities so as to build migrants’ long-term resilience to extremist messaging.
The analysis serves to inform a wide variety of instrumental stakeholders (state institutions, international and
non-governmental organizations, community and diaspora leaders) in raising the level of protection of migrants’
rights, especially the most vulnerable ones. It seeks to contribute to the effective identification of gaps
and needs in elaborating the legal framework, developing operational measures and enhancing institutional
cooperation that would help prevent, address and sustainably resolve migrant vulnerabilities. It is guided by
the principles of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in line with the 2030 Sustainable
Development Agenda by referring to relevant international norms, principles and standards. A crucial
element of the GCM is raising the level of effective protection to migrants, especially the most vulnerable ones.
Several GCM themes are of direct significance in this context: ensuring human rights of all migrants, preventing
all forms of discrimination, addressing drivers of migration as well as issues related to irregular migration,
including provision of regular pathways, and enhancing protection and assistance rendered to vulnerable migrants,
including victims of trafficking, exploitation and smuggling.
The book contains as фrticles that summarized anthropological and sociological researches among modern youth in North Caucasus as also historical papers and one work on local history by the student of middle school.
Ключевые слова: Казахстан, русскоязычное пространство-история становления, языковая по-литика после 1991 г., соотношение казахского и русского языков, лингвокультурные предпочтения студентов, «мягкая сила» России.
Для цитирования: Космарская Н.П., Савин И.С. Судьба русского языка в Казахстане: возможности и барьеры использования российской «мягкой силы». Восток (Oriens). 2020. № 5. С. 119-130.
Abstract: The article explores the present role and future of the Russian language in the Republic of Kazakhstan. It contrasts state language policies and the views of ordinary Kazakhstani citizens, recorded mainly in interviews (including expert ones) and focus-group discussions with students of various Almaty universities conducted in 2016 and 2017. Attention is focused on the views of Kazakh students, members of the so-called "Nazarbayev generation" because from their ranks future elites will be recruited. Suggesting that the Russian linguistic-cultural space in Central Asia is largely a historically rooted phenomenon and has not been genuinely dependent on Russia, the authors suggest that the Russian Federation needs to readjust its external language and culture promotion so far geared almost exclusively to the so-called “compatriots” and seriously take into consideration the needs of another,
more numerous target-group. These are the titular (Kazakh) Russian-speakers of various age and social
status ‒ now they comprise the larger part of those whose Russian language skills are on the native or
near-to-native level.
Drawing on the results of empirical research, authors suggest that Russia’s efforts geared at the
preservation and development of the Russian linguistic and cultural space in Kazakhstan need to be
restructured in order to overcome the “sedative” effect of the too familiar environment inherited from the
Soviet past and acknowledge the potential of the local “mobilizing” factors making this restructuring a very
topical task. Among these factors are the specifics of cultural globalization in Kazakhstan, and Russia’s
competition with some other international players in Central Asia.
Keywords: Kazakhstan, formation of Russian linguistic-cultural space, language policies after 1991, state
language vs the Russian language, linguistic attitudes of students, “soft power” of Russia.
residence and employment of Central Asian migrants in Russia and Kazakhstan has had significant impact on
the volume and directions of migration flows in the region. On the one hand, declining remittances and difficulties
in securing sustainable income in their home countries have stimulated greater interest in new destinations,
pressure for family reunification or women becoming the primary breadwinners taking up the migration
route. On the other hand, while new legal opportunities (introduction of patents in Russia and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan’s
accession to the Eurasian Economic Union) have helped regularize the status of many Central Asian
migrants, certain categories of migrants remain particularly vulnerable in legal and socioeconomic terms – in
particular, those who were unprepared for the imposition of a re-entry ban to Russia.
The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and
Rights regional field assessment “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs in Central Asia: Root Causes,
Social and Economic Impact of Return Migration”, published in 2016, identified a range of vulnerabilities, to
which migrant workers were subject prior to and following the imposition of re-entry bans: legal (inadequate
rights awareness and exposure to exploitation), economic (reduced income and indebtedness) and socio-cultural
(reliance on informal networks for support).
The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity and
Rights in-depth regional field assessment, which followed in 2017 on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration
Needs in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks”, is seeking to establish
the precise needs of vulnerable migrants and capacities of state institutions and non-state entities to address
these vulnerabilities and leveraging the potential for the vulnerable migrants’ successful re-integration into the
local labour market. In addition, risk factors limiting chances for migrants’ re-integration and implications for
their welfare were identified and weighted. The risk analysis considers the impact of state policies, measures
aiming to reduce shock of re-entry bans, employment and integration services in the regions of migrants’ origin
as well as the involvement of home and diaspora communities.
The IOM CA/Library of the First President of the Republic of Kazakhstan (Nazarbayev Center)/USAID Dignity
and Rights (DAR) Regional Field Assessment 2017 (Phase II) on “Migrant Vulnerabilities and Integration Needs
in Central Asia: Assessing migrants’ and community needs and managing risks” is based on the available official
data and has covered the current volume and composition of return migration of Central Asian workers and
assessed the overall change in the flows of remittances. It has also tracked the long-term dynamics of various
migrant flows and indicated changes in migration balance of Central Asian countries. The regional field assessment
has analyzed the economic conditions determining chances of integration/reintegration of migrant
workers returning to countries of origin or moving to Kazakhstan. It has reviewed recent changes in legal
and administrative conditions for returnees’ re-integration and migrant workers’ integration and presented term grounds for radicalization, which have been noted by government officials and experts on the issue
in the three countries under study.
The sociological component of the regional field assessment identified various types of vulnerabilities, reported
by Central Asian migrant workers while in migration and upon return. It has indicated most vulnerable
groups among returning migrants and identified their immediate/integration/reintegration needs. Moreover,
the assessment has provided a framework for understanding the possible link between re-entry banned migrants’
vulnerabilities (deterioration of socio-economic status, alienation from the state and community) and
their long-term radicalization potential. It has also elaborated risk factors, which increase the potential for radicalization
of various population segments in Central Asia and identified additional risk factors, which may affect
migrant workers. It has emphasized the need for building trust between migrants, the state, migrant diasporas
and local communities so as to build migrants’ long-term resilience to extremist messaging.
The analysis serves to inform a wide variety of instrumental stakeholders (state institutions, international and
non-governmental organizations, community and diaspora leaders) in raising the level of protection of migrants’
rights, especially the most vulnerable ones. It seeks to contribute to the effective identification of gaps
and needs in elaborating the legal framework, developing operational measures and enhancing institutional
cooperation that would help prevent, address and sustainably resolve migrant vulnerabilities. It is guided by
the principles of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration (GCM) in line with the 2030 Sustainable
Development Agenda by referring to relevant international norms, principles and standards. A crucial
element of the GCM is raising the level of effective protection to migrants, especially the most vulnerable ones.
Several GCM themes are of direct significance in this context: ensuring human rights of all migrants, preventing
all forms of discrimination, addressing drivers of migration as well as issues related to irregular migration,
including provision of regular pathways, and enhancing protection and assistance rendered to vulnerable migrants,
including victims of trafficking, exploitation and smuggling.
The book contains as фrticles that summarized anthropological and sociological researches among modern youth in North Caucasus as also historical papers and one work on local history by the student of middle school.