Nations, Nationalism and the Soviet Collapse

Question 1

Why did nationalism grow during Perestroika?

Answer 1

• Gorby’s reforms provided opening for grievances
• Essentialist approach
• Instrumental approach
• Alternative approaches

Question 2

Why did Gorby’s reforms open space for grievances?

Answer 2

• Glasnost and institutional reforms created opps

- Varied in motivation: some independence seeking and some empire saving

Question 3

Essentialist approach

Answer 3

• Ethnicity is fixed and singular
• Breakup was inevitable
• Evidence: nationalisation pre-dating Gorby, opposition to Russification, cultural rebirth
• Criticism: views USSR as ethnic empire, variety in intensity of nationalism during perestroika

Question 4

Instrumental approach

Answer 4

• Ethnic and national identities are fluid, manipulated by elites with ulterior motives
• Accounts for variation: nationalist mobilisation was greater where economic development was higher
• Nationalist mobilisation inversely related to political benefits available to national groups from status quo
• Criticism: most republican leaders stayed loyal, individuals took risks

Question 5

Alternative approaches

Answer 5

• Bandwagoning: elites and citizens behaved rationally in response to events elsewhere (Beissinger)
• Gorby’s nationalist blind spot
• International environment: West’s ambiguous support for the USSR’s territorial integrity

Question 6

How has ethnic division and nationalism manifested?

Answer 6

• Ethnic violence
• State ideology
• Nationalities policy

Question 7

Ethnic violence

Answer 7

• Initially less than expected
• Less controlled than Soviet period
• Abkhazia/South Ossetia (Georgia), Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan)

Question 8

State ideology

Answer 8

• Post Soviet states more nation in terms of values
• Appeal to order and security (Armenia, Azerbaijan)
• Ongoing struggle against Soviet power (Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine)
• Embrace Soviet heritage and historical evolution of state development (Russia)

Question 9

Nationalities policy

Answer 9

• Greater freedom to organise (national-cultural autonomies formed in Russia)
• Less descriptive representation of minority groups (Uzbeks in Kyrgyzstan government)
• Ethnic Russians not significantly overrepresented

Question 10

Soviet nationalities policy (Roeder, 1991)

Answer 10

• Indigenous cadre within every homeland assigned monopoly over mobilisation resources of the community
• Constrained behaviour by creating incentive structure that deterred expression of unsanctioned ethic agendas
• Responsibility for creating ethnically distinct stratification system within official institutions

Question 11

Essentialist approach (Sakwa, 1998)

Answer 11

• 22 ethnic groups, 126 nationalities, 170 languages
• Rights of republics always subordinated to wants of the Soviet states (democratic centralism)
• Nationalism operated vertically (counterposed to central authorities) and horizontally (where inter-ethnic rivalry/conflict)

Question 12

Essentialist approach (Smith, 2013)

Answer 12

• Variation across Soviet periphery e.g. strong in Armenia and Georgia but no sense of collective identity in Central Asia
• Variation in whether institutions or nationalist mobilisation came first

Question 13

Elites/instrumental approach (Laitin, 1991)

Answer 13

• Where elites receive MFL status (e.g. Ukraine), popular fronts mask conflict of interest between national elites who feel culturally Russian and those who don’t - former group advocate sovereignty and latter bring it to fruition
• Where elites do not have MFL status (Uzbek and Kazak), popular front obscures lack of interest by elites in freedom

Question 14

Laitin model of elite incorporation

Answer 14

• Role of elites at the time territory was incorporated into the state
• If they can join high society at political centre they enjoy MFL status
• Under these conditions strong incentives for elites to be coopted into power establishment
• Over generations mass education and conscription induce lower strata to assimilate with dominant culture

Question 15

Elites approach (Roeder, 1991)

Answer 15

• Those most likely to support ethnic political movements are disadvantaged ethnic groups draw by opportunity or promise of expanded resources
• Only happens in areas of high attainment (Armenia, Georgia, Estonia) rather than Central Asia