Federalism and Local Politics in Russia
Federalism and Local Politics in Russia
Federalism and Local Politics in Russia
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
32 Michael Burgess<strong>in</strong>tensive constitutional <strong>and</strong> legal change that elevated sixteen ethnicallydef<strong>in</strong>ed autonomous soviet socialist republics (ASSRs) <strong>and</strong> four autonomousoblasts (AOs) to the status of constituent republics of what itself was <strong>in</strong>composition a federation, br<strong>in</strong>g<strong>in</strong>g the total number of ‘ethnic republics’ <strong>in</strong><strong>Russia</strong> to twenty. The dom<strong>in</strong>o effect cont<strong>in</strong>ued up until the summer of 1992when the Checheno-Ingush Republic was split <strong>in</strong>to Chechen <strong>and</strong> IngushRepublics, thus ensur<strong>in</strong>g that, <strong>in</strong> Cameron Ross’s words, ‘the Soviet Union’shybrid ethno-territorial pr<strong>in</strong>ciple of federation was bequeathed to <strong>Russia</strong>’. 22Meanwhile Gorbachev had been mak<strong>in</strong>g last-ditch efforts to rescue theSoviet Union by cobbl<strong>in</strong>g together a new Union Treaty based upon asymmetricalrelations with the three Baltic Republics – Latvia, Lithuania <strong>and</strong>Estonia – Georgia, Moldova <strong>and</strong> Armenia <strong>and</strong> vary<strong>in</strong>g degrees of federalrelations with the rest of the imperial federation. The result<strong>in</strong>g nationwidereferendum <strong>in</strong> March 1991 ended not with a triumphant bang but with ahollow whimper as six of the fifteen constituent Soviet republics simplyrefused to participate. A subsequent deal between Gorbachev <strong>and</strong> Yelts<strong>in</strong>produced the so-called 9+1 agreement (referr<strong>in</strong>g to the leaders of the n<strong>in</strong>erepublics that did participate <strong>in</strong> the March 1991 referendum) <strong>in</strong> April butwork on its completion was brought to a dramatic halt by the abortive coupof August 1991 that presaged the term<strong>in</strong>ation of the USSR <strong>in</strong> December.The events <strong>and</strong> developments that occurred dur<strong>in</strong>g the period 1990-3 <strong>in</strong><strong>Russia</strong> <strong>and</strong> the USSR were apocalyptic. Together they represented twooverlapp<strong>in</strong>g but dist<strong>in</strong>ct historical processes that occurred simultaneously<strong>and</strong> were tantamount to the chaos of destruction <strong>and</strong> reconstruction. Withthe disappearance of the Soviet Union – the unravell<strong>in</strong>g of its empire <strong>in</strong>to<strong>in</strong>dependent sovereign states – a resurgent <strong>Russia</strong> stepped <strong>in</strong>to the vacuumcreated by imperial decentralization. Indeed, <strong>in</strong> many ways a large part ofwhat we call the Soviet legacy was the resurgence of <strong>Russia</strong>. And thesepeculiar circumstances had important implications both for the <strong>Russia</strong>n state<strong>and</strong> for the k<strong>in</strong>d of federation that it became. In the first place it was obviousthat what happened to the Soviet Union could just as conceivably happen to<strong>Russia</strong>. The collapse of communist party control allowed ethno-territorialityto become the driv<strong>in</strong>g force of Soviet imperial dis<strong>in</strong>tegration <strong>and</strong> this poseda similar threat to the territorial <strong>in</strong>tegrity of the new <strong>Russia</strong>n state, especially<strong>in</strong> view of the territorial distribution of its own nationalities. Yelts<strong>in</strong>, who <strong>in</strong>1990 had actively encouraged <strong>Russia</strong>’s autonomous republics to ‘take asmuch sovereignty as they could swallow’, found himself sign<strong>in</strong>g the FederalTreaty of March 1992, conced<strong>in</strong>g greater powers to the republics <strong>and</strong>regions, <strong>in</strong> an attempt to rescue <strong>Russia</strong> from the same Soviet fate. S<strong>in</strong>ce theseyears were also characterized by Yelts<strong>in</strong>’s power struggle with Gorbachevfollowed by his fierce battle with the <strong>Russia</strong>n parliament, it is easy toappreciate why it was also a period of weak central power that providedmany opportunities for the republics to reassert their dem<strong>and</strong>s for nationalautonomy. The so-called ‘parade of sovereignties’ led to ‘contract federalism’<strong>and</strong> ‘the war of laws <strong>and</strong> sovereignties’ that pushed the concept of