|
N?^.--., "
N|
•
Anatoly N YAMSKOV
Involuntary Ethnic Migrations and Resulting Social Problems in the Stavropol
Province (The Northern Caucasus, Russia)
According to official estimates, in the early 1994 in Russia there were 530 thousands of
refugees, more than 1000 thousands of involuntary migrants, and about 500 thousands of
other (so called "economic") migrants [I ], However, these and the following figures on
migrations should not be taken as certain estimates of actual population flows; for
instance, local specialists in the Stavropol province have noted that the actual amount of
immigrants has been at least some 5 times larger than the figures, shown in the official
statistics of that province [2]. Another example is the bordering North Ossetian Republic,
where in January 1992 Ossetian refugees from Georgia were the priority problem for both
the public and the Government, but their numbers were officially estimated at 48.5
thousands (according to the Committee on Inter-Ethnic Relations, Government of North
Ossetia), or at 66.6 thousands (according to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Government
of North Ossetia) [3].
All the major population migrations of the early 1990's in
Russia have been recorded in the Stavropol province:
1) resettlement of military personnel, including retired officers, and their families (510
retired officers, some with their families, arrived into the Stavropol province in 1991 [4]);
2) migrations from the North, Siberia , and the Far East (certain figures are not available,
but it can be supposed that many hundreds were arriving into the province annually in the
late 1980's);
3) migrations from the areas of ecological disaster (like Chemobyl zone, that during
1986-91 provided 775 migrants to the Stavropol province [5]);
4) ethnic migrations from the C.I.S. and Baltic states and from politically unstable
republics of Russian Federation (like Chechen Republic) into "Russian " provinces (in the
Stavropol province this flow reached thousands of persons in - the early 1990's - for details
see below).
It has been estimated that during the period of 1979-1989 (before the dramatic
increase of "ethnic" migrations in the late 1980's - early 1990's) immigration was making
up ' 18% of the total population growth in Russian Federation , and 44% - in its Stavropol
province [6].
303820029R
1. Population and Migration Statistics in Stravropol
The latter (i.e "ethnic") migrations, resulting from ethno-nationalist policies or
ethno-civil wars in areas of emigration and being reviewed below, were becoming more and
more important o
fr
the Stavropol province since the late 1980's. Positive balance of
migrations was making up from 47% to 76%-85% of the total population growth in the
Province during 1985-86 and 1990-91 correspondingly [7]. In 1993 the population increased
by 34.1 thousands due to immigration alone ( 1/3 of migrants coming from the Chechen
Republic), while natural growth has become negative and reached -5.9 thousands
[8]. In the early 1994 there were 28.6 thousands of officially registered refugees (in addition
to other categories of migrants) in the Province, 17.5 thousands of them being from the
Chechen Republic
[9]. Migrants of the late 1980's - early 1990's were making up 3.3% of the total population
in the Stavropol province at the start of 1994 [10].
Refugees, involuntary and other migrants were coming to the Stavropol province
mainly from:
-• Azerbaijan (8.8 thousands annually in 1988-89, 7.4 thousands annually in 1990-91; in 1991
ethnic Russians made up 2.4 thousands and Armenians - 2.1 thousands of migrants);
Georgia ( 1.3 thousands annually in 1988-89, 3.0 thousands annually in 1990-91; in 1991
Russians made up 2.0 thousands, Greeks - 0.8 thousands, Ossetians - 0.5 thousands of
migrants);
Armenia (1.1 thousands in 1988-89, 1.1 thousands in 1990-91; in 1991 Russians made up
0.6 thousands of migrants);
Central Asia ( 1.8 thousands annually in 1988-89, 3.3 thousands annually in 1990-91; in 1991
ethnic Russians made up 1.7 thousands of migrants);
Chechen Republic of Russian Federation (3.3 thousands annually in 1988-89, 6.0 thousands
annually in 1990-91; they were predominantly ethnic Russians) [11].
In 1993-94 the major portion of migrants were coming from the adjacent Chechen
Republic (even before the December 1994 war) and Dagestan Republic, and some - from
Kazakhstan (starting from 1994), while an influx from Tadjikistan (particularly strong in
1992-9^) nearly stopped (author 's supposition). During 1989-93 more than 100 thousands of
officially registered migrants arrived into the Stavropol province [12], and some 82% of them
were ethnic Russians, mainly from Chechen and Dagestan Republics of Russian Federation
or from the Transcaucasian states [13]. According to another estimation , in the early 1994
about 1.5- 1.7 thousands of involuntary migrants and refugees were arriving every month into
the province, ethnic Russians comprising 82.5% of them, Armenians - 7.7%, and ethnic
Ukrainians - 2.6%; Chechen Republic was providing 61.2% of immigrants, Azerbaijan 19.4%, and Georgia - 10.8% [14].
In 1992 population of the province (totally 2,024.1 thousands) was 84% Russian, 3%
Ukrainian, 2.6% Armenian, 1.3% Darginian (ethnic group from Dagestan), 1% Greek [15].
In the balance of migrations for 1991 Russians were comprising 77%, Armenians - 10.4%,
Ukrainians - 4.6%, Greeks - 2.4%, Darginians - 2% [16]. On January 1, 1994 the total
population of the Stavropol province was 2,615 thousands (46 .3% rural), and in 1993 birth
rate was 11 per mille, infant mortality - 20.9 per mille, natural growth -2.3 per mille; for
comparison , in the bordering Ingush and Chechen Republics, taken together, total population
was 1,290 thousands (57.1% rural), and in 1992 birth rate was 22.1 per mille, infant mortality
30.7 per mille, natural growth +13.9 per mille [17].
2. Social and Ethnic Problems, caused by Immigration
Combination of the growing numbers of immigrants, some of them being ethnically
non-Russians, with the deepening economic crisis (widespread part-time employment and fears
of total unemployment) and growing ethno-nationalist sentiments among local ethnic Russians
and Russian Cossacks - all these factors have been leading to tensions and open conflicts
(mass demonstrations in favour of deporting non- Russian migrants; riots and violent clashes)
between the locals and the newcomers.
For instance, only in February-March 1994 local press reported violent actions or
peaceful demands of deportation of immigrants in Georgievsk town (where Cossacks
demanded eviction of local Chechens), Krutoyarskoye village (where Cossacks also demanded
eviction of Chechens), and Arkhipovskoye village (where Russians and Cossacks attempted
to evict local Dagestanians) [18]. Previously there were many actions of the same kind against
Armenian migrants.
Ethnic groups of North
Caucasian origins (Chechens, Darginians and other
Dagestanians) are for the most part recent "economic" migrants, often coming from the same
territories as ethnic Russian refugees or involuntary migrants. The latter bring with them
strong ethno-nationalist sentiments and outright resentment of the former - so called
"Caucasians"; local Russians and especially Cossacks are also sharing ethno-nationalistic and
anti-"Caucasian" views. Openly hostile attitude of the local Russian majority in the Stavropol
province has caused Chechens, Avars, Karachays and Cherkesians (all are North Caucasian
Muslim ethnic groups) to migrate away, their balance of migrations becoming negative from
1991 [19].
Armenians (basically from Azerbaijan) and Greeks are refugees or at least involuntary
migrants; in addition to recent migrants, there are old, affluent and influential "local "
communities of both Armenians and Greeks in the Stavropol province. In spite of this and of
being Christians , both Armenians and Greeks are also viewed as "Caucasians" and often face
hostile attitudes. Numerous Armenian refugees from Azerbaijan were the main target of public
protests, demands of deportations or violence in the late 1980' s, at the time of arrival and for
some 2 - 3 years; after many had left for other regions of Russia and the remaining part had
more or less adapted to the situation, and when Russian refugees from Chechen and Dagestan
republics had become far more numerous than Russian migrants from Armenia, social position
of Armenians improved substantially. Currently they, like Greeks, have to cope with
occasional hostile words and prevailing negative attitude, but not with violence or threat of
violence.
Nevertheless , it should be stressed that currently ethnic Russians in most parts of the
country, and especially so in the Northern Caucasus, have developed strong anti-"Caucasian"
feelings; this phenomenon is both ethno-nationalistic and racist in its nature. Some 10 - 15
years ago. on the contrary, such views were virtually unknown (Jews, Central Asians or
aboriginal Siberians
being targets of most ethno-nationalistic expressions). These
anti-"Caucasian" stereotypes were formed mainly due to immigration of both ethnic Russians,
fleeing from the Caucasian republics, and of ethnic Armenians, Azerbaijanians, Chechens and
Dagestanians.
Economic and social problems, seriously aggravated by the immigrants, are mainly
housing and jobs , and to a lesser extent - various social (including medical) services. Influx
of immigrants caused the Stavropol Government to spend more than $ 22,000 on construction
works (building of new houses, hospitals, schools, etc.) and more than $ 7,000 on medical
services during the year 1993, because during 1990-93 immigration increased the amount of
children by 41.3 thousands, including the rise in a number children of the school age by 22
thousands (the costs were calculated on the basis of November 1993 exchange rate) [20].
Among the most resented negative results of mass immigration are rising prices of consumer
goods (because of enlarged demand, combined with lowering production ) and growing costs
of renting, buying or building a house in the Province.
3. "Push " and "Pull" Factors
Causes of emigration (often presented in combination) for most ethnic groups are the
following :
a) threat to life and property in areas of civil or ethnic wars, or ethnic violence and pogroms;
b) total destruction or greatly reduced level of social services (medical services, schooling,
payments of pensions, etc.) in some republics or states;
c) widespread unemployment and/or extremely low salaries (compared to those in Russia;
previously standards of living in the Transcaucasian or North Caucasian republics were
generally higher than in Russia);
d) radically changed cultural and linguistic situation in the new states and some republics of
Russian Federation, that makes it difficult to live for those (including many ethnically
non-Russians, like Armenians from Azerbaijan or Greeks from Georgia) with Russian
language and Soviet (also strongly Russified) cultural background.
Factors, attracting the migrants to the Stavropol (and to the nearby Krasnodar)
province, are basically the following:
a) Historically ethnically Russian areas in the Northern Caucasus were attracting many
agricultural labourers from Ukraine and Central Russia as most productive and "capitalistic "
before 1917; some of these landless labourers eventually moved to the Transcaucasus or
Central Asia, leaving relatives in the region. During the Soviet period repressions against
"rural capitalists" were most severe in these regions too, causing many
o t escape to the
Transcaucasus or Central Asia (or to be deported to Central Asia or Kazakhstan). Thus many
inhabitants of the Stavropol province have distant relatives in the Transcaucasian or Central
Asian states, and when the latter decide to emigrate to Russia, they try to come here.
b) For non-Russian migrants the Stavropol province is attractive for having long and well
established local communities of ethnic compatriots (Armenians, Greeks) or o
fr being the
nearest ^one to areas of emigration (for Transcaucasian states or Chechen and Dagestan
republics).
c) For all migrants from the South (Transcaucasus, Central Asia, non-Russian areas of the
Northern Caucasus) Stavropol and Krasnodar provinces are most attractive due to ecological
reason - warm and familiar climate, that gives an opportunity to retain the same life style
(clothing , housing, recreational activities) and the same agricultural occupations.
d) In Russian Federation these two provinces had been well known for generally much higher
standards of living (thus attracting retired Army officers or persons, finishing their work in
the North ); currently even more important is the highest in Russia agricultural potential of the
region, giving an opportunity to get good incomes from a small land plot in the country side.
4. Problems of Migrants' Adaptation and Immigration Policies
Non-Russian migrants, belonging to the "Caucasian" group, face open prejudice and
hostility, even from the low-level officials . Russian Molokans from the Transcaucasus, being
religious group that once had split away from the Orthodox Church, are also at best
tolerated in the province, since in the ethno-nationalist context they can not be considered
"true Russians"; Russian Cossacks are openly demanding to stop immigration of Molokans,
because they are sectarians and so can not unite with or sincerely back the Cossacks in their
political actions (the latter can be only Orthodox Christians, actively participating in religious
activities).
Cossacks, being well organised and rather influential in the province, have started the
programme of resettling fellow Terek Cossacks from Ingush and Chechen republics into the
Stavropol province. In a situation when the local Government is trying to stop or at least to
reduce the immigration, migrating Cossacks enjoy special favourable status. In 1992 there
were about 70 thousands of adults, actively participating in the various Cossack organisations
in the Province [21].
Basically all immigrants face the same problems - how and where to find a job ; to
rent, buy or build a house; to get access to medical and other social services and to send their
children to a local school. But they are in a very different situations when trying to resolve
these problems: Cossacks can rely on the help of local Cossack organisations and, to some
extent, of local administrations; other Russians or Ukrainians have to rely more on their own
efforts or financial resources, though finding if not actual help but at least sympathy from
local officials and population ; religiously distinct Russians like Molokans have to overcome
some prejudice of both local officials and majority population (especially in Cossack areas),
but they can also find some help from already established (since 1930's) local Molokan
communities ; finally, non-Russian migrants have to rely only on themselves, paying for
everything and even giving large bribes to get the benefits they officially have a right o
fr ,
while local Armenian or Greek communities, being afraid of jeopardising their own position,
help very few (usually relatives) and at best are trying to make the officials to stop public
protests or threats of violence against their newly arrived ethnic compatriots.
Thus only most affluent non-Russian migrants can finally gain an official status of
local residents, but this makes the majority population to view them not as refugees, needing
help and sympathy, but as corrupt and corrupting newcomers, causing prices to rise and
making the life of the locals far more difficult . At the same time those migrants and refugees
who had actually lost all the property after fleeing from civil wars or pogroms, have either
to move to less favourable regions of Russia or to live without permanent job and residence
and, consequently, without any help from the state they as refugees being entitled to.
Corruption, accompanying some rich "Caucasian" migrants, has become one of major sources
of anti-"Caucasian" and anti-immigrant feelings in the Stavropol province.
In 1992, for instance, in the large Essentukskaya village of Cossacks where local
Greeks were comprising 24% among local 16.5 thousands of permanent and officially
registered inhabitants, many Greek migrants of 1991-92 were finally denied registration and
not allowed to settle down. Nevertheless they continued to live in the village, renting houses
or living with relatives, but having no official status and thus being not able to use local social
services (except for schooling for their children and emergency medical help) [22]. In the
Gomaya village, where 25 local Molokan families reside since the building of this settlement
in the early 1960's, Molokan community asked the local administration and slate-farm
officials to accommodate several Molokan families from Armenia, but the migrants were not
allowed
o t settle here though there were jobs o
fr them [23].
Official policies on immigration in the Stavropol province had undergone serious
transformation in the early 1990's. After 1991 break -up of the USSR and radical political
changes in Russia, two local dissidents (professionals in biology and mathematics), having sad
experience of being jailed (though for a few days only) after mass demonstrations against
communist suppression of human rights, joined the provincial Administration and headed
departments of inter-ethnic relations and of ethnic and cultural organisations. Both started to
advocate human rights of all migrants irrespective of their ethnic origins, and they have done
lot to prevent or stop violence against non-Russian immigrants. Nevertheless , in the late
1992 both thought it was inevitable and desirable to reduce immigration (except for that of
Cossacks, who otherwise could create serious social troubles), introducing the official status
of "local resident" and visa system for those arriving to the province. In other words, some
sort of local "citizenship" was to be created in order to stop immigration, not authorised by
local administration.
Since 1992 the new and democratically elected provincial Parliament has worked out
two projects (still awaiting their approval in Moscow) of local laws on migration and on the
status of local resident. In short, in case of their approval in Moscow and if they are
confirmed by the Stavropol's Parliament majority, the province is to be declared closed o
fr
immigration; people, officially registered as local residents, are to get special status
(something like local citizenship); those wanting to come to the Province would have to apply
for admission visa and, if they are allowed inside, get a status of a temporal resident; those
applying for permanent residence in the Province would have to provide an invitation from
aclose relative or organisation, stating that the would-be resident has a place to live in and
ajob, reserved to him (organisations would have a right to invite workers from the outside
only in cases of "clear necessity"); those having no status of local/permanent resident are to
be found by police and deported from the Province [24].
Currently the Stavropol province is divided into 3 zones:
( 1) areas, totally closed for settlement of migrants (territories of several rural districts, towns
and cities around famous mineral water resorts ofMineralnie Vody; territory of the Stavropol
city itself);
(2) areas, where settlement of migrants is not recommended (territories in the central and
southern parts of the Province);
(3) areas, reserved for "organised settlement of refugees and involuntary migrants" by the
special Decree of the Head of Administration of the Stavropol province, issued on March 17,
1992 [25].
Out of the totally 26 rural districts, making up the Province, only 10 districts were
declared open for the settlement by refugees; among those 10 districts only 3 are situated in
the central part of the Province along or near to its border with politically highly unstable
Karachay-Cherkes Republic, while other 7 districts, open to migrants, are the north-eastern
or eastern ones, situated along the borders with Kalmyck and Chechen Republics and covered
by dry steppes or semi-deserts with moving sand dunes. Clearly, they do not have an
attraction of either good climate and high economic development (like central districts in the
wooded steppe or forest landscape zones), or of political stability and safety (areas, close to
Chechen borders, have become notoriously known for frequent armed robberies by groups,
arriving from the Republic and going back there).
To sum up, the Stavropol province, due to many objective reasons being one of the
most attractive areas for Russian and non-Russian migrants, has experienced a large and
uncontrolled influx of people that caused many social and ethnic problems. As a result, local
authorities are moving away from previous position of helping all migrants. Now they are
restricting the flow of migrants by bureaucratic procedures and by reserving for settlement
those areas that are not likely to attract people .
REFERENCES
1.
T.Regent - in: "Stavropolskie Gubernskie Vedomosti", April 9, 1994.
2.
"Stavropolskie Gubernskie Vedomosti", May 26, 1994.
3.
The author 's field materials - interview with Ms N.Golubeva, Head, Population
Section , Statistical Department of North Ossetian Republic (October 16, 1992).
4.
Report on the Work with Refugees and Involuntary Migrants in the Province /titles of
all sources of information, originally in Russian, are presented in English translation,
except for the newspapers/. Stavropol, March 1992 (An official Report , prepared by
the provincial Administration).
5.
See ref. [4].
6.
See ref. [4].
7.
Migrations of the Province' Population in 1991. Stavropol, August 1992. (An official
Report, prepared by the provincial Administration).
8.
Official information on migrations - "Stavropolskaya Pravda", February 15, 1994;
information on natural growth - computerised data of the State Committee on
Statistics, Government of the Russian Federation.
9.
Official information on migrations - "Stavropolskaya Pravda", February 15, 1994.
10.
M.Lebedeva - in: "Izvestia ", February 26, 1994.
11.
Figures were calculated by the author, and the original data was taken from the source,
cited in ref. [7].
12.
"Stavropolskie Gubernskie Vedomosti", May 26, 1994.
13.
T.Regent - in: "Stavropolskaya Pravda", April 23, 1994.
14.
N.Evtushenko - in: "Stavropolskie Gubernskie Vedomosti ", April 9, 1994.
15.
Ethnic Composition of the Provincial Population and Types of Families (Based on
Results of the All-Union Population Census of 1989). Stavropol: Publication of the
Provincial Department of Statistics, 1991.
16.
See ref. [7].
17.
Computerised data of the State Committee
Federation.
18.
Information from: "Stavropolskaya Pravda", April 5, 1994; "Stavropolskie Gubernskie
Vedomosti ", April 30, 1994; "Stavropolskaya Pravda", February 24, 1994.
19.
See ref. [7].
20.
"Stavropolskie Gubernskie Vedomosti ", May 26, 1994.
21.
The author 's field materials - an interview with Dr S.Popov, Head, Department of
Inter-Ethnic Relations, Administration of the Stavropol Province (October 22, 1992).
22.
The author 's field materials - an interview with Ms T.Linnik, Deputy Head,
Administration of the Predgomiy (rural) district.
23.
The author 's field materials - an interview with Mr I.Bakholdin, local Molokan
community leader ,
24.
"Stavropolskie Gubernskie Vedomosti ", May 26, 1994.
25.
See ref. [7].
on Statistics , Government of Russian