State policy in the national question. Modern national policy of Russia

20.09.2019

For thousands of years in relations between peoples, the ruling elite proclaimed a short and hard principle: "divide and rule." This rule was skillfully used by rulers ancient rome, colonial powers (England, France, Spain, Portugal, etc.) and empires (Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, etc.). In fact, the aims, principles and mechanisms of the policy applied in relations between peoples were reduced to this notorious formula.

As world experience (positive and negative) shows, the solution of the national question and the achievement of international peace and harmony is possible only on the basis of a consistently democratic national policy.

What is national politics in general and democratic politics in particular? What are its main tasks, principles and implementation mechanisms?

First of all, about terms. The term "national policy" as a policy in the sphere of ethno-national relations is traditionally used in Russia (it was also used in the USSR) in scientific, political, and legal literature. The same term in the meaning of policy towards national minorities and indigenous peoples is also used in other countries (China, Vietnam). However, in most countries of the world, the term "ethnic policy" (ethnopolitics) is more often used. In Western countries, the term "national policy" is synonymous with the concept of "state policy". Therefore, the meaning of the concept of "national policy" in Western countries different, not at all the same as he appears in Russia. Based on this, in this section, the term “national policy”, traditional for Russia, is used.

National policy is a system of legislative, organizational and ideological measures implemented by the state, aimed at taking into account, combining and realizing national interests, at resolving contradictions in the sphere of national relations.

National policy is a purposeful activity to regulate relations between nations, ethnic groups, enshrined in the relevant political documents and legal acts of the state.

An important task of a multinational, multiethnic state is the optimization of interethnic, interethnic relations, i.e. search and implementation of the most favorable options for the interaction of subjects of interethnic relations. The main thing in the content of national policy is the attitude towards national interests, taking into account their: a) commonality; b) discrepancies; c) collision.

The commonality of the fundamental interests of individual subjects of interethnic relations and national interests on a state scale has objective grounds. The divergence of interests is connected with the objectively existing specific conditions and needs for the development of national-ethnic communities. When national and political interests are intertwined, their divergence can develop into a clash, a conflict. Under these conditions, coordination of national interests is necessary as a prerequisite for their implementation, which is the essence of national policy. Its main purpose is to manage the interests of and through the interests of nationalities.

National policy differs in purpose, content, direction, forms and methods of implementation, results.

The goal of national policy can be national consolidation, interethnic integration, rapprochement of nations, national isolation, upholding ethnic "purity", protecting the national from the influence of other nationalities, national sovereignty, etc.

In terms of direction, one can speak of a democratic, peacemaking, constructive, progressive, totalitarian, destructive, reactionary national policy.

Violence, tolerance, respect, domination, suppression, repression, "divide and rule" can be noted among the forms and methods of implementing the national policy.

Consent, unity, cooperation, friendship, tension, confrontation, conflict, distrust, hostility can be the results of national policy.

A national policy, like any other, can structurally consist of different temporal and spatial elements, stages of implementation, and priorities. It should distinguish between strategic, long-term goals and tasks that require a conceptual approach, program planning, and tasks of an immediate nature. As for the policy designed for the near future, it is part of a long-term policy, follows from it, but regulates specific interethnic problems generated by life, arising in the course of current events.

When developing a national policy, certain principles and guidelines must be taken into account. The most important of them are the following.

National policy should be developed based on the characteristics of the country, the level of its socio-economic development. The policy in relation to nationalities should be associated with economic, social, cultural, educational, demographic and other types of public policy, in combination with which the national policy can be implemented.

A necessary condition for an effective, effective national policy is its scientific character, which implies strict consideration of the laws and trends in the development of nations and national relations, scientific and expert study of issues related to the regulation of national relations. Determination of the goals of national policy, the choice of ways, forms and methods of their achievement need to be based on genuine scientific analysis ongoing processes, qualified forecasts, assessments of available policy alternatives.

In the practical implementation of the national policy in the regions and republics, a differentiated approach is needed. At the same time, one should take into account the natural and climatic conditions, socio-historical features of the formation of ethnic groups, their statehood, demographic and migration processes, the ethnic composition of the population, the ratio of titular and non-titular nationalities, confessional characteristics, features of national psychology, the level of ethnic self-consciousness, national traditions, customs and etc.

National policy should cover all levels and forms of national relations, including interpersonal ones. It should be aimed at every person, every ethnic community, group, regardless of whether it has its own national-state formation, whether a person lives in "his" republic or national environment.

Finally, when forming a national policy, it is necessary to take into account the world experience in regulating interethnic relations and solving national problems. And you need to keep in mind both positive and negative experiences. At the same time, the principles of national policy must comply with international legal norms and acts.

National policy refers to the theoretical and actual practical problems of our time. This is complex phenomenon covering all spheres of society. It also has relative independence as a system of measures taken by the state aimed at taking into account and realizing national interests. State national policy includes strategic objectives the life of the state, it is a policy of realizing the interests of the entire nation. This is how it is understood all over the world.

The internal policy of the state in relation to ethnic communities and interethnic relations is usually called ethnic policy or policy towards ethnic minorities. National policy is also a purposeful activity to regulate ethno-political processes, containing at its core a theory, purpose, principles, main directions, a system of measures for implementation. The main task of the state national policy is to harmonize the interests of all peoples living in the country, providing a legal and material basis for their development on the basis of their voluntary, equal and mutually beneficial cooperation. Accounting for ethno-national characteristics in the life of society should be carried out within the boundaries of respect for human rights. The path to the harmonization of interethnic relations lies largely through culture.

The main achievement of the Russian national policy of the 90s of the XX century is the development of the “Concept of the state national policy Russian Federation”, which was approved by the Decree of the Government of Russia in May 1996 and approved by Decree of the President of Russia No. 909 of June 15, 1996. This concept highlights such key problems that need to be addressed:

1. development of federal relations that ensure a harmonious combination of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the integrity of the Russian state;

2. development national cultures and languages of the peoples of Russia, strengthening the spiritual community of Russians;

3. ensuring political and legal protection of small peoples and national minorities;

4. achievement and support of a stable, lasting interethnic peace and harmony in the North Caucasus;

5. support for compatriots living in the CIS and Baltic countries, promoting the development of ties with our compatriots from neighboring countries;

Ethnopolitical issues have risen in importance to the level of defense and foreign policy. In the second half of the 90s of the twentieth century. the federal government to some extent managed to prevent the growth of ethnic separatism, localize it and create conditions for the decline of ethnic extremism. But the concept of the state national policy of 1996 did not become an effective guide for the authorities state power in solving ethnopolitical problems. In the 1990s, in general, the state national policy was, on the one hand, reactive in nature, being late in responding to problems and conflicts that had already emerged; on the other hand, it was fragmented, aimed at solving only individual tasks taken out of the general political context. Given these circumstances, the state national policy of Russia early XXI century should be preventive, foreseeing the most dangerous ethno-political problems, and holistic, providing for the solution of these problems within the framework of a single program.

However, with all the shortcomings of this concept of national policy, it can be defined as more democratic than that implemented in previous decades. This is seen through ideologemes expressing the essence of national politics and national relations. For example, it lacks the previously widely used formula of “nations and nationalities” and proposes for use the concept of “Russian nation” or “multinational people of Russia”. Thus, she is given political sense(that is, we are talking about citizens of Russia), and not ethnic.

In most countries of the world, the term "nation" has a political, civil meaning. In our domestic tradition, the nation is understood as the highest type of development of an ethnos, that is, a socio-cultural community. Nowadays, among Russian researchers, the understanding of the nation as a political community is gradually being established. The ideologeme "Russian nation" with tactful, skillful application can become one of the values that promote integration Russian society.

Or another example. The former constitutions of the country declared the equality of all nations and nationalities. The new documents speak of the equality of rights and freedoms of citizens, regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, attitude to religion. It is envisaged that the state should create equal social and political conditions for peoples, allowing them to preserve and develop their culture. But the realization of the equality of peoples in life is unrealistic.

The position with regard to ethnic identification is also quite democratic: the right of every citizen "to determine and indicate his nationality without coercion from outside." As it turned out later, in some regions of Russia, citizens want to keep the usual “coercion”, that is, leave the fifth column in a personal document.

In general, the concept of state national policy is progressive, but it is also characterized by half-heartedness and uncertainty, which narrows its possibilities in terms of settling and solving various ethnic problems, and in some situations even exacerbates them. There is a tendency to replace national policy with the solution of conflict problems on interethnic grounds. But the national policy, in principle, cannot be aimed at solving the problems of today, be measures of a temporary nature, even if they are relevant for the country.

The concept of state national policy currently being implemented in Russia is theoretical basis state regulation of interethnic relations. However, as the results of expert surveys show, her rating among specialists is by no means high. Thus, the participants in the founding congress of the Assembly of the Peoples of Russia, held in July 1998, assessed it as follows: “The fact that the concept of state national policy provides all the grounds for a consistent political solution to the problems of interethnic relations was noted by only 5% of the respondents; 56% believe that it still remains a document declared, but not implemented in the practical activities of power structures various levels in the Center and locally” (1, p.7). Due to the unsatisfactory level of the 1996 concept, its theoretical development continues.

In order to create a legislative framework that comprehensively ensures the implementation of the state national policy of the Russian Federation in relation to all peoples, federal laws were developed and adopted “On National-Cultural Autonomy” (No. Peoples of the Russian Federation” (No. 82 - Federal Law of April 30, 1999), Unified List of Indigenous Peoples of the Russian Federation. Other laws are also being prepared and heard. For example, in February 2001, parliamentary hearings of the draft law “On the Fundamentals of the State National Policy of the Russian Federation” were held, and on May 25, 2001, the draft federal law “On the Russian People”. Taking into account the problems that have arisen in the practice of the activities of the national-cultural autonomies of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Federation of Russia has developed a draft "On the introduction of amendments and additions to Articles 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 20 federal law“On National-Cultural Autonomy”, which proposes to supplement the legal mechanisms for the implementation of rights and freedoms in the field of national-cultural development.

National policy must take into account not only the analysis of the dialectic of national interests in their specificity, but also take into account changing national sentiments. The draft federal law “On the Fundamentals of the State Ethnic Policy of the Russian Federation” highlights the following main principles of the state national policy:

Preservation of the state integrity and federal structure of the Russian Federation;

Equality of rights of citizens and peoples of the Russian Federation for national development;

Recognition of the unity of Russian society;

Free determination by each citizen of his nationality;

Compliance of laws and other regulations in the field of national policy, generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation;

The inevitability of punishment for inciting ethnic hatred, insulting honor and dignity on an ethnic basis;

Recognition of the unifying role of the Russian people, their language and culture;

Interaction between state authorities of the Russian Federation and state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, bodies local government with public associations, national-cultural autonomies of all levels, national ethno-cultural public organizations, communities.

The basic principle of modern state national policy is the equality of rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen, regardless of his race, nationality, language, attitude to religion, belonging to social groups and social movements. There are other principles that can be taken as the basis of the state national policy:

The principle of national parity and interethnic partnership - consists in recognizing all the peoples of Russia as state-forming ones and in asserting that no people can have a preemptive right to control the territory, institutions of power and natural resources;

The principle of national self-organization means the creation by the state of conditions that allow representatives different peoples independently determine and realize their national and cultural needs;

The principle of national paternalism - consists in the duty of authorities at all levels to protect human rights in national sphere and provide support to the least protected ethnic groups, categories of ethnic refugees, migrants.

Now stand out the following aspects national policy: territorial, demographic, economic, social, cultural, sociolinguistic, confessional, psychological. The draft federal law also identifies 5 main blocks of interrelated areas of state national policy. This is:

Promoting the national and cultural development of peoples;

Assistance in the formation of equal rights of citizens and peoples for national development;

Improvement of federal relations;

Prevention of inter-ethnic, including ethno-political and ethno-territorial, conflicts and crisis management of these conflicts;

Support for compatriots living outside the Russian Federation.

Theoretically, the equality of peoples means the rejection of the division into a titular and non-titular people, a national minority or a majority, and other oppositions. In a strictly terminological sense, the equality of peoples means the rejection of the practice of fixing in one form or another, including in a purely symbolic form, the different status of the national subjects of the Russian Federation.

National policy will only become a consolidating factor if it reflects the diversity of interests of the peoples of Russia, including the most important ones, perhaps ethno-cultural ones. When implementing a national policy in the spiritual sphere, it is necessary to implement the following tasks by society and the state:

Formation and dissemination of ideas of spiritual unity, friendship of peoples, interethnic harmony, cultivation of Russian patriotism;

Dissemination of knowledge about the history and culture of the peoples inhabiting the Russian Federation;

Preservation of historical heritage, development of national identity of the traditions of interaction between the Slavic, Turkic, Caucasian, Finno-Ugric and other peoples of Russia in the Russian Eurasian-national-cultural space, creation in society of an atmosphere of respect for their cultural values;

Providing optimal conditions for the preservation and development of the languages of all the peoples of Russia, the use of the Russian language as a national language;

Strengthening and improving the national general education school as a tool for preserving and developing the culture and language of each people, along with fostering respect for the culture, history, language of other peoples of Russia, world cultural values;

Accounting for the mutual influence of national customs, traditions and rites of religion, support for the efforts of religious organizations in peacekeeping activities (2, p.25).

The Russian question is the most important within the framework of the Russian national question. "Interethnic relations in the country will largely be determined by the national well-being of the Russian people, which is the backbone of Russian statehood." This position defines historical role Russian people, which, due to the corresponding national policy of the USSR, was not officially considered an object of national policy. Only in May 1945 was the merit of the Russian people in the war with Germany assessed (see Appendix No. 1).

Before 1917 legal name Russia was the "All-Russian Empire". In its Constitution, the name “Russian State” was also used. It was a multinational state with many faiths, with flexible constitutional forms that allowed for a variety of confederal relations (for example, with Finland, with part of Poland) and even principalities with their own monarchs, as, for example, in the case of the Khan of Nakhichevan. This multinational character was also reflected in the imperial passports, which not only accredited the imperial citizenship common to all the inhabitants of Russia, but also the nationality and religion of each citizen, in accordance with each individual's own will. Among the citizens of the Russian Empire there were subjects of non-Russian and even non-Slavic nationalities, who were listed as Russians in their passports at their own request. As a result, the name "Russian" was used in the broadest sense of the word: Russians were called all Russian citizens who called themselves that way, even if they had a different ethnic origin. Russian culture and the Russian state did not recognize national and racial discrimination, as they were anti-racist in spirit.

The problems of the national and cultural development of the Russian people are becoming more and more urgent. This is because the national program of the Russian people has not been introduced into the concept of nation-building in Russia, since there is no state policy regarding the Russian people - a policy that would declare the Russian people united throughout Russia, former USSR and throughout the world, as did the World Third Council of the Russian people. Without this policy, Russia will continue to fragment. This issue is raised with particular urgency, including in connection with the painful transformation of Russians as an ethnic majority into an ethnic minority in a number of national-state formations of the Russian Federation.

The absence of the Russian people of their own statehood, which is different from the all-Russian one, introduces objective contradictions into state structure Russia as a federation. According to international standards, a state in which at least 67% of the population is represented by one nationality is mono-ethnic. From this position, Russia is a multi-ethnic, but mono-ethnic state. The Russian people, constituting the majority of the country's population, is a backbone nation in Russia. The national security of the state as a whole largely depends on the position and national well-being of Russians. For Russians, the tasks of improving their position in society are now in the first place, i.e. improving the quality of life across the entire spectrum of existing problems of national existence - from socio-economic to spiritual and moral. Moreover, the dominant needs are to increase national solidarity and the level of state protection of Russians.

In November 1998, parliamentary hearings “On the concept and development of a state program for the national and cultural development of the Russian people” were held, held by the State Duma Committee on Nationalities. In the speech of the First Deputy Minister V. Pechenev, the fact of belittling the role of the largest people of the country was recognized and a proposal was made on the advisability of considering the issue of the proportional principle of the formation of power structures. At the hearings, it was noted that national relations today pose a considerable danger to the country. As a result of the absence of the Russian program and the implementation of the “Law on Sovereignty”, the historical national space of the Russian people, the Russian language, has been torn apart, and a blow has been methodically dealt to the resurgent Orthodoxy throughout Russia. Meanwhile, Orthodoxy is the spiritual bond of the nation.

It is necessary to consider the question of the Russian people in the general context of the state and prospects for resolving the entire complex of national problems on which the fate of Russian federalism depends. The very fact of holding parliamentary hearings on the issue “On the concept of the state program for the national and cultural development of the Russian people” indicates that the Russian problem has finally ceased to be the subject of political speculation and is increasingly becoming, on the one hand, the subject of serious study, and on the other hand, it is an essential factor in national policy. It should be noted that, although the fundamental approaches to the problem of the Russian people today are defined by the “Concept of the State National Policy of the Russian Federation”, it is clearly not enough on its own. A strong internal tension is accumulating in the Russian national environment, which simply needs to be removed. I see one of the means of relieving such tension in the preparation of the “State Program for the National-Cultural Development of the Russian People”. I have no doubt that such a program is necessary.

national question in Soviet time identified, in fact, only with the problems of the non-Russian population, national minorities. The Russian people were not only taken “out of the brackets” of national policy, but were declared by Lenin to be almost the main culprit of the inequality of nations that existed in Russian Empire and became one of the reasons (although not the main one) of its collapse. From the false idea of the collective responsibility of the Russian people for national inequality in Russia, demands were made for the need to create at its expense a whole system of advantages for non-Russians. Russians in the Russian state found themselves in fact in an unequal position with other peoples. In Soviet times, an attempt to raise the Russian question as an urgent problem caused rejection among some under the influence of international doctrine, which proclaimed the merging of nations as the goal of socialism; for others, it was equated with the anti-Semitic intrigues of the Black Hundreds; and still others (perhaps, most of them were among the Russians themselves) did not notice this problem at all. Meanwhile, it is obvious that the general state of interethnic relations in Russia depends to a large extent on the well-being of the Russian people, which makes up more than 4/5 of the country's population. That is why in our country the main content of national relations is objectively determined by the Russian question. (3, c.130). The main trouble for Russia, R. Abdulatipov, a specialist in national processes, considers that “national policy is not free from the influence of moneybags...” (8, p.5).

In February and May 2001, the State Duma held parliamentary hearings on the draft law “On the Russian People”. The draft Committee on Nationalities Affairs of the State Duma of the Russian Federation states that the federal law “On the Russian People” defines the legal foundations for the status and development of the Russian people, which historically played the main, unifying role in creating a single multinational Russian state. Making up the absolute majority of the country's population, it is still its basis today, and at the same time it has no other form of statehood, except for the all-Russian one. The law establishes the fundamental legal principles to express and protect the state interests of the Russian nation, prevent its depopulation, ensure original national and cultural development, achieve adequate representation of Russians in all federal and local legislative and executive authorities, in educational institutions, culture and the media of the Russian Federation, restore the unity of the Russian people destroyed as a result of the collapse of the USSR (4, p. 10).

On December 17, 2001, a “round table” was held in the State Duma of Russia on the topic “Representation of peoples in state authorities and local self-government bodies”. The participants of this forum stated that one of the main and most effective forms of implementing the Concept of the State Ethnic Policy of the Russian Federation, the formation of a legal framework for regulating interethnic relations, the most important guarantee of stability in the country, a guarantee of interethnic harmony is the factor of representation of Russian ethnic communities in the state authorities of the Russian Federation, state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments. It was noted that when forming authorities at different levels, it is necessary to take into account the ethnic factor, and in the representation of the Russian peoples in the system of power, the principle of proportional representation should be maintained with the allocation of a certain representative quota for each of the peoples living in the territory of the subject of the Russian Federation. The need was emphasized “to achieve the eradication of the negative aspects of the process of ethnicization of state authorities and local self-government bodies, in particular, the “washing out” of Russian and Russian-speaking civil servants from the state apparatus. And consider the representation of the peoples of Russia as an integral part of the process of democratization of Russian society.”

During the discussion that unfolded in the meeting room, the following was stated: “The principle of national proportional representation is being violated everywhere with a huge infringement of the rights of Russians - for example, the national composition of the State Duma, where there are disproportionately few Russians. There are also problems in the formation of executive power personnel. As noted by the head of the department of personnel policy of the RAGS A. I. Turchinov, that as soon as the “national cadre” gets to the top of the ministry, department (let's take the Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations or the now deceased Minnats), these instances immediately change, filled with personnel of the same nationality ousting Russians and other workers. Chairman of the Committee on Nationalities Affairs of the State Duma V.I. Nikitin stated that in the national republics the ousting of Russians from all spheres of legislative and executive power had reached an obscene climax, and this disproportion must be eliminated” (5, p. 2).

Previously, almost no attention was paid to the Russian problem in management practice. In the State Concept, it is mentioned only in connection with the task of using the Russian language as a national language. Until now, the problems of Russians cause unjustified modesty among managers and fears that any manifestations of interest in it may become a reason for accusation of chauvinism. Meanwhile, the possibility of preventing both peripheral ethnic separatism and interethnic conflicts largely depends on the resolution of this problem.

The Russian problem now has several main manifestations. This is the ongoing outflow of the Russian population from most regions of Russia, which violates the existing balance of ethno-political forces and interests. And the insufficient participation of Russians in the political life of a number of regions, including those where they are numerically the largest ethnic community, both due to the political and legal restrictions existing in some republics, and due to their own weak political activity and self-organization. And the problem of adaptation of forced migrants from other countries to the new living conditions in the regions of Russia. As well as the deterioration of the general psychological well-being of Russians.

In the national policy of Russia, the problem of indigenous peoples (IPN) is acute. In Russia, according to the Unified List of Indigenous Peoples of the Russian Federation, approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of March 24, 2000 No. 255, 63 peoples are classified as indigenous peoples. This is special group ethnic groups living in places of traditional settlement of their ancestors. These peoples are characterized by the originality of language, culture, economic activity and way of life in general, which bears the imprint of natural conditions and the historical path of development. Due to insufficiently thought-out state policy, indifference to their problems, paternalistic policies and industrial expansion, the identity of the small peoples was under threat.

Legislative foundations have been created in recent years legal status indigenous peoples. In 1993, the rights of these peoples were for the first time enshrined at the constitutional level, when the state guaranteed their rights in accordance with the generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation (Article 69). In 1996, the law “On the Fundamentals of State Regulation of the Socio-Economic Development of the North” was adopted. In 1999, the federal law “On Guarantees of the Rights of Indigenous Minorities of the Russian Federation” was adopted, and in 2000, the federal law “On general principles organizations of communities of indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East”, which have enriched the legal basis of the status of indigenous peoples. But, despite all the shortcomings of the legislation, a more serious problem is its implementation in practice.

The activities of indigenous peoples can also be regulated by the state not only with the help of the law, but also by agreement. The use of a public law contract in regulating the activities of indigenous peoples is successfully used abroad, for example, in Canada. In Russia on state level for the first time such a possibility was mentioned in the resolution of the State Duma of May 26, 1995 “On the crisis situation in the economy and culture of the small indigenous (aboriginal) peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation”, which proposes to consider the issue of creating a system of contractual relations between the Government of the Russian Federation and territorial associations of indigenous communities. Paragraph 8 of the State Policy Concept on the delimitation of jurisdiction and powers between the federal, regional and municipal levels of government (February 2001) recognizes the possibility and necessity of concluding agreements on the delimitation of jurisdiction and powers between local governments and the federal center.

Thus, at the present time, at the legislative level and in the public consciousness, the idea of contractual legal regulation of the relationship of indigenous peoples has been developed as possible option their existence in modern world. Although little has been done in practical activities in this direction, nevertheless, the creation and operation of public associations of indigenous peoples, primarily the Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East in the center and in the regions of their residence, the development of communities, attempts at cultural self-determination, the creation representative bodies of power from indigenous peoples and the struggle of indigenous peoples for constitutional rights “to their original habitat and traditional way of life”, can ultimately lead to the creation of decent living conditions for indigenous peoples. Autonomous okrugs have become ineffective as forms of social patronage over indigenous peoples, and the autonomous status of okrugs is often used for exploitation by the newcomer ethnic majority. natural resources these territories.

Unregulated ethnic migrations, both the continuing outflow of a number of ethnic groups outside Russia and the illegal influx of migrants from abroad, should become a subject of special attention of national policy (See Appendix No. 2).

In national politics, two aspects stand out most: political and cultural. The political aspect is presented through the activities of state, including local, authorities, for example, through the allocation of relevant budget items, legislative acts, resolutions on specific issues (for example, on the return of religious buildings, the opening of classes or national schools).

The cultural aspect is direct activity national cultural centers, associations, national schools, press, etc. National-cultural autonomy can be considered as an element of civil society. This is an extraterritorial formation, it is not endowed with any powers of authority, and its activities are determined in the field of ethno-cultural problems. An example is the fact that only Krasnodar Territory in 2003, three Georgian national-cultural public associations were registered in the department of justice: in Novorossiysk - the Georgian cultural and educational society "Sakartvelo", existing since 1997, in Krasnodar - the Krasnodar regional public organization "Georgian community" Iveria "", since 1999 ., in Sochi - Krasnodar Regional Public Organization "Georgian Cultural Center" Iveria "", since 1999). Giving the NCA any political rights in the current situation is dangerous.

In the context of the rehabilitation of the repressed peoples, the Ministry of Federation of Russia ensures the work of the interdepartmental commission on the problems of the Meskhetian Turks living in Russia.

The Ministry of Federation of Russia, as a state customer, participates in the implementation of a number of federal targeted programs aimed at providing state support for the cultural revival and development of the peoples of Russia: “Development of the socio-economic and cultural base revival of Russian Germans for 1997-2006”, “Socio-economic development of the Republic of Kalmykia and national-cultural revival of the Kalmyk people for 1997-2002” and other programs.

Ethnic problems are closely related to the problems of federalism, which makes them of particular relevance. Life, including the experience of national policy in the USSR, has shown that artificial nation-building leads to contradictions between ethnic groups and the state. Ethnocratic processes cause obvious damage to the territorial integrity of Russia, affecting geopolitical processes. The problems of federalism are among the most complex and multifaceted. But they are key to the future fate of Russia. Without an optimally constructed state national and regional policy, it is impossible to carry out any socio-economic and political transformations. As long as the situation in the sphere of federative and interethnic relations is unstable, it is impossible to overcome the systemic socio-economic crisis, and interethnic harmony still provides some minimum of stability and makes it possible to carry out activities in the direction of reform.

However, with regard to federalism, there is no common understanding among its researchers that it is, first of all, a means of optimal regulation of interethnic relations, ensuring diverse forms of state building, taking into account the cultural and legal traditions of the peoples inhabiting Russia. All existing models in world practice for eliminating contradictions between the goals of ethno-national and general civil development within the framework of federal states are reduced to two main directions - adaptation and unification. Unification can manifest itself in the construction of a federation based on ethnic federalism or in the complete elimination of ethnicity from federal relations, i.e. on the so-called province of the federation. For us, ethnic federalism is unacceptable because it can increase the expulsion of Russians and national minorities from the republics and give rise to ethnic cleansing. The federation's provincialization is unfeasible (in any case, in the coming decades) because of the resistance of the ethnic elites, who retain the possibility of mobilizing the population of the republics for an open struggle against the federal center. AT modern conditions it is more reasonable “not to break the established forms of federal relations, but to more fully adapt them to serve both national and general civil tasks of the development of Russian society. Such an approach can be implemented in the “ethno-political integration” scenario, which provides for the preservation of the ethnic specificity of the regions and the “completion of the framework” of common ties and relations within the federation” (6, p. 217).

Greatest political significance has a state language, to which the state provides support and develops it. It is seen as a force that ensures the stability and unity of society. Knowledge of the state language in many countries is included in the circle of requirements necessary for obtaining citizenship. According to the 1993 Constitution, the state language of Russia is Russian, although the republics can set their own official languages. The state language sometimes changes due to a change in the ethnic or social situation, the loss of sovereignty by the state. So, in Byzantium from the IV century. Latin dominated, from the 7th century. before the fall of the empire - Greek. In countries with a numerically dominant language, the official language tends to be difficult to accept by ethnic minorities, and regional languages are widely used. In ethnically diverse countries, the state language is spreading more widely and with greater ease.

As a means of interethnic communication, the language should be acceptable to all ethnic groups. With a mosaic ethnic structure, a language that does not coincide with the autochthonous languages is often chosen for the role of such a language. In India, this is English language, although Hindi is more common here. The intention to change the official language from English to Hindi sparked the Tamil and Bengali protest movements (1965). In former colonies, this role is often played by the language of the former metropolis. In the USSR, the language of interethnic communication was Russian.

Language policy is the activity of the state and other political forces to establish the status of a language in society. It provides conditions for the functioning of languages, determines the scope of distribution, the possibilities of relevant research. Appropriate decisions on the language issue affect the fundamental interests of the ethnic group - cultural, socio-political, etc. In authoritarian regimes, language policy is carried out in violent forms, accompanied by the imposition official languages and restrictions on the use of native languages. The language policy in democratic states is based on the principles of equality of languages, linguistic self-determination of the individual, creates wide opportunities for the use of native languages, although it is limited by appropriate resources and specific conditions. To designate language policy, the term “language construction” is used, which implies the choice of language, the definition of its norms, the use in the names of streets, villages, etc. Language policy is a direction of social, cultural, educational, publishing and, especially, national policy, carried out both in the form of individual events and in their complex, directed by legislative acts.

The language policy is embodied in the Constitutions with an indication of the state language. Some countries have a policy of bilingualism (bilingualism) or multilingualism (multilingualism). In these cases, the language of interethnic communication is added to the native language, endowed with state status, as well as some foreign language. For example, Burma (1974 Constitution), Pakistan (1973 Constitution) or Iran (1979 Constitution) has one state language, Switzerland has four national languages, etc. The Russian Constitution (1993) proclaimed right to preserve mother tongue, guaranteed the conditions for its study and development. Tataria and North Ossetia have adopted two state languages - respectively, Tatar and Russian, Ossetian and Russian.

The language policy with respect to the state language, which is the monopoly of the official sphere of communication, is distinguished by the greatest strength, is supported and stimulated by the state in every possible way. For this purpose, appropriate structures are being created - translation, document management, examinations are introduced for access to administrative positions, etc. The question of choosing the state language is most characteristic and acute for countries that have gained independence. The requirements of the language policy are the need to study the language, determine the scope of its distribution - education, publication, etc. Its general focus is related to the support of a certain people: in Russia, the language policy took the form of Russification, indigenization, in the Arab countries - Arabization, etc. Language repressions, restrictions and prohibitions imposed by the dominant ethnic elites are caused by the desire for social and political integration of society, increasing its stability. The ruling elite of the post-Soviet states use language to expand their influence, creating a language filter to cleanse prestigious social niches and protect them from unwanted ethnic counterparts.

In any state, the language policy is always a reflection of the policy of the state. It manifests itself, is carried out through a system of specific state measures. Language policy, as a rule, comes down to the following main areas:

Elimination of illiteracy;

Choice and establishment of the state (official) standard language;

A certain position of other languages in relation to the state language;

Definition of spheres and types of language states and situations of each of the languages;

Codification and improvement of the content of the state language.

On February 5, 2003, the State Duma of Russia adopted in the third, final, reading the law “On the State Language of the Russian Federation” (earlier, in the first reading, it was adopted under the title “On the Russian Language as the State Language of the Russian Federation”.) 248 people voted for the adoption of the law deputies with the required minimum of 226, 37 people were against, one abstained. The law is aimed “to ensure the use of the state language of the Russian Federation throughout the entire territory” of the country. Article 1 notes that, in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the state language throughout Russia is Russian. The law imposes a number of restrictions on the use of the Russian language as the state language, in particular, “the use of colloquial, derogatory and swear words and expressions, as well as foreign words in the presence of commonly used analogues in the Russian language, is not allowed.” The law outlines the areas of use of the state language. It is subject to mandatory use in the activities and names of government bodies, in constitutional workflow, in official correspondence, when naming geographical objects and issuing documents proving the identity of a citizen of the Russian Federation. In addition, the state language, in accordance with the law, must be used in advertising. It is provided that violation of the law entails liability established by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

State national policy should be focused on creating conditions that allow each people to preserve national dignity, self-consciousness, exercise their national independence and free development, and determine their own destiny. And at the same time, the national policy should be a factor in the national consolidation of the peoples of Russia. This policy should be aimed at maintaining the spirit of interethnic communication. The principle of self-identification of peoples and the principle of their communication among themselves, cooperation should not come into conflict with each other. This will help to avoid inter-ethnic tensions, conflicts between peoples, as well as confrontations with power structures. The policy of friendship between peoples and the policy of their freedom and independence should not be different policies, but a unified state national policy of Russia. A harmonious balance of two factors - ethnic, national, and international, universal - should be the essence of the state national policy of Russia in modern conditions.

Literature:

Ivanov V.N. Federal Russia (crisis and ways to overcome it). M., ISPI RAN, 1999.

Akieva M.Kh. Interaction of cultures as a factor in the political consolidation of society / Spiritual and cultural processes in modern Russia. M., 1998.

Interview with Deputy Minister of National Policy of the Russian Federation V.A. Pechenev / Ethnographic Review, 1999, No. 3, pp. 130 - 132.

Project / National newspaper, 2001, No. 4 - 5.

Representation / National newspaper, 2002, No. 6 - 7.

Bedzhanov M.B. Russia and the North Caucasus: interethnic relations on the threshold of the 21st century. Maykop, Publishing House "Adygea", 2002, 443 p.

Russian Bulletin, 2003, No. 4.

North Caucasus, 2000, No. 8

Applications

Application No. 1

TOAST IN HONOR OF THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE

Speech by I. V. Stalin at a reception in the Kremlin on May 24, 1945 (7) in honor of the commanders of the Red Army.

“ Comrades, allow me to raise one more, last toast.

I would like to raise a toast to the health of our Soviet people, and, above all, the Russian people.

I drink, first of all, to the health of the Russian people, because they are the most outstanding nation of all the nations that make up the Soviet Union.

I raise this toast to the health of the Russian people because in this war they have earned general recognition as the leading force of the Soviet Union among all the peoples of our country.

I raise a toast to the health of the Russian people, not only because they are the leading people, but also because they have a clear mind, steadfast character and patience.

Our government made many mistakes, we had moments of a desperate situation in 1941-1942, when our army retreated, left our native villages and cities in Ukraine, Belarus, Moldova, the Leningrad Region, the Baltic States, the Karelian-Finnish Republic, left, because there was no other choice. Some people could have already said to the government: you have not lived up to our expectations, go away, we will set up another government that will make peace with Germany and ensure peace for us. But the Russian people did not agree to this, because they believe in the correctness of the policy of their government and made sacrifices in order to ensure the defeat of Germany. And this confidence of the Russian people in the Soviet government turned out to be the decisive force that ensured the historic victory over the enemy of mankind - over fascism.

Thanks to him, the Russian people, for this trust!

For the health of the Russian people!”

Ps.: Unfortunately, in the following decades, these good words addressed to the Russian people were forgotten by the country's leadership.

Application No. 2

RESOLUTION OF THE FEDERATION COUNCIL
OF THE FEDERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
about the situation in the Krasnodar Territory, emerging in the field of migration and interethnic relations(extracts)

The Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation expresses concern over the situation in the Krasnodar Territory, which is developing in the field of migration and interethnic relations and posing a threat national security Russia.

In the territory Krasnodar Territory located a large number of foreign citizens and stateless persons, many of whom stay in the Russian Federation illegally.

A visa-free regime and a simplified procedure for crossing the state border of the Russian Federation in its individual sections increase the flow of illegal migrants from the Commonwealth member states Independent States. In the system of state executive authorities of the Russian Federation there is no authorized body responsible for the formation, implementation and improvement of the state migration policy.

At the same time, the process of repatriation to Georgia of the Meskhetian Turks temporarily residing on the territory of the Russian Federation is being unjustifiably delayed.

In this regard, in the Krasnodar Territory, there has been a noticeable ethno-social imbalance with possible political consequences, characterized by a growing numerical disproportion between the indigenous population of the region and migrants, which creates conditions for interethnic tension among the inhabitants of the region.

The solution of demographic and interethnic problems in the Krasnodar Territory is hampered, on the one hand, by the lack of effective legislative mechanisms for regulating migration processes, on the other hand, by the incomplete implementation of regulatory legal acts previously adopted by state authorities. The need for a speedy solution to the problems associated with illegal migration has been repeatedly noted by the President of the Russian Federation, the Security Council of the Russian Federation, and the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation. Despite this, the problems of illegal migration, which have already gone beyond regional problems, remain unresolved.

Having listened to and discussed the information prepared by the working group of the Federation Council on studying the situation in the Krasnodar Territory, created by the order of the Chairman of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation dated May 20, 2002 No. 175 rp-SF, the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation decides:

1. Recommend to the Government of the Russian Federation: to submit to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation as a priority ... the draft federal law “On State Regulation of Migration in the Russian Federation”, which should provide for the participation of state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in setting quotas that limit the settlement of migrants in the territories of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the possibility of temporary resettlement of certain categories of citizens, foreigners and stateless persons from areas of conflict situations and environmental threats, the conditions for creating temporary settlement sites for illegal migrants in the territories designated by the state ... for the repatriation to Georgia of Meskhetian Turks temporarily residing on the territory of the Russian Federation.

2. Propose to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to consider, as a matter of priority, draft federal laws regulating migration processes in the Russian Federation.

3. Propose to the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation to exercise effective supervision over the implementation of the Federal Law “On Citizenship of the Russian Federation” and other regulatory legal acts regulating the legal status of foreign citizens and stateless persons.

Speech at a scientific seminar « State policy of nation-building in modern Russia » at the Center for Problem Analysis and State Management Design, 2011

“The foundation of a reasonable national policy in Russia should begin with the restoration of the equal status of different peoples and ethnic groups that live in Russia, and, first of all, with the restoration of the right to institutionalize the national identity of the system-forming nation of our state - the Russian people,” the author is convinced. This will be discussed on, which will take place on June 1 in St. Petersburg.

We invite you to participate and discuss. Register, come, send to the editor your thoughts and stories.

The discussion of not only the specific content of modern nationality policy, but also its basic concepts: “nation”, “national relations”, “national conflicts” is often conducted in an undertone, since national issues are inexplicably included in the category of “delicate”. For too long, the international shyness of Russian social scientists led to the fact that almost all components of national relations were among the “non-discussable subjects”, supposedly understandable by default and so to everyone.

The most serious problems that arose on ethnic grounds were presented mainly as local, private and insignificant conflicts (the only exception was, perhaps, the only deportation during the Great patriotic war and two hundred years of persecution of Jews, especially under Soviet rule). At the same time, it was as if forgotten that the category of national relations is much broader than the category of national conflicts.

In my opinion, the national is among the inalienable values of every person, and national ideals are no less important for people than moral ideals. How these values are used in politics is another question. But for every reasonable person who knows his history, nationality means a lot. Moreover, from my point of view, it can be considered as the last value, which allows to maintain at least some foundations for the diversity of states and other communities in the period of globalization. It is possible that nationality may be the last stronghold in the identification of a person. There are different opinions about this. You can often hear how high-ranking people, well-known in science, say that the national question is nothing more than "toys for politicians", that the concept of a nation, an ethnic group is secondary. Life, however, proves otherwise. In Soviet times, when 120 nationalities coexisted on the territory of a single state (this is the number of only those peoples that were taken into account by statistics), the community of the Soviet people really existed and the national-state bonds were very strong.

What were they based on? From my point of view, on three fundamental positions.

Anyone who was in Soviet times in Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, in other union republics, could see that all the posts of the first, and often the second echelon of power were occupied by people of the so-called "titular" nationality. This was a mandatory norm that created a sense of national significance among people with “title” affiliation, it was a kind of sign of external respect for the people, and such respect was to some extent confirmed by the fact that a person of a certain clan-tribe became the head of a shop, a factory director, a secretary of a district committee or the Central Committee of the party.

The second stabilizer of the Soviet national equilibrium was money. The unified state cauldron was distributed among the republics, and by no means evenly among the individual national "outskirts". Much more money was spent on the restoration of the Baltic states immediately after the war than on the restoration of the much larger and completely devastated territories of central Russia. The difference between these regions became immediately obvious: the Baltic republics had good roads, comfortable cities, and the post-war destruction, which was almost non-existent, was instantly eliminated.

Thirdly, there was a massive offensive of well-prepared cultural achievements of all the Union republics on the grateful field of Russian culture, and through it - into the all-Union, and indeed into the world cultural space. According to such a scenario, for example, films from Lithuania and Georgia received a multi-million viewer, and books - a multi-million reader. Moreover, books of excellent prose and excellent poetry by Russian writers and poets often waited until a volume from the national union republics, translated by those awaiting their turn, was skipped ahead in state Russian publishing houses. And not a single award of a package of Stalin, Lenin, and then State Prizes was complete without the fact that people from the “oppressed outskirts” did not become laureates. It was absolutely correct national policy. The bad thing was that Russian culture and, to a certain extent, the culture of the peoples who were given national autonomies on the territory of the RSFSR, completely fell out of the sphere of this policy.

What is happening now on the fragment of the Soviet Union left by modern Russia? Outwardly the same, but in a more crude form and without any hint of cultural mutually enriching exchange. A third of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation are named after nationality, and Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Udmurtia, others national republics, in contrast to the regions and territories, in accordance with the Constitution are proudly called states. The line of a certain division and distancing from the bulk of the Russian people is present today in the personnel policy of almost every one of these states. What is happening today with the second position - with money? Let me give you a few figures: in 2010, each citizen of Russia had 5,000 rubles. funds from the federal budget in the form of a variety of transfers. Now the same indicators North Caucasus: Stavropol Territory - 6000 rubles. per person per year (which is not surprising - Russian people live there). Republic North Ossetia- 12000; Kabardino-Balkarian Republic - 12900; Karachay-Cherkess Republic - 13600; Republic of Dagestan - 14800; Chechen Republic - 48,200. One Chechen has 10 times more federal budget funds than a resident of Russia as such, and in total in the North Caucasus there are 6 times more national funds per capita than in Central Russia, the Far East, Siberia, etc.

It is not surprising that Grozny is becoming the most comfortable, most luxurious city in Russia, it is not surprising that only brick houses grow in the villages of Chechnya. All this is presented as some kind of compensation for the hostilities on the territory of Chechnya, but at the same time, not a single Russian person who was forced to leave the republic during the so-called ethnic cleansing of Dudayev received a single ruble of compensation for his abandoned home, for his abused women. This national policy of "two standards" is very, very dangerous.

More and more so-called nationally colored territories are becoming mono-ethnic. Chechnya, of course, is the leader in this list; Russians in this republic are either military personnel or builders. But after all, everyone understands that on the mono-ethnic territory of a multinational state, people do not have the opportunity to understand what it means to live in a multi-ethnic environment. Therefore, going beyond the limits of their small society, they begin to feel and, most importantly, behave differently. So-called inter-ethnic and national conflicts arise for one of two reasons: one side either feels extremely humiliated, or considers the other completely worthless. Today, the most humiliated side of all the peoples of our country are the indigenous Russian people. It is enough to look at the map of modern Russia from the point of view of the socio-economic development of the regions. The poorest and devastated territories are primordially Russian lands. There, representatives of other peoples do not see oppressors in Russian people, but the Russians themselves seem embarrassed to talk about the equality of people of different nationalities, they are afraid to defend their national interests, fearing to be branded as Russian chauvinists or nationalists.

In addition, the Russian people have absolutely no national solidarity - it has been uprooted from our consciousness. A Tatar or a Kalmyk will try to provide all possible assistance to the "compatriot". A Russian person is unlikely to help his neighbor just because he is of the same nationality as him. Russian national solidarity is practically destroyed, and any attempts to recreate it, even at the local level, are perceived by domestic and foreign media as a violation of the rights of other peoples.

It seems to me that the foundation of a reasonable national policy in Russia should begin with the restoration of the equal status of the different peoples and ethnic groups that live in Russia, and, first of all, with the restoration of the right to institutionalize the national identity of the system-forming nation of our state - the Russian people. If this does not happen, the field of interethnic conflicts will only grow, the Russians will be in conflict as a worthless nation, without solidarity within itself, weak-willed and unpromising. I would not like to think that this is our national policy.

V.N. Leksin

MORE RELATED

For thousands of years in relations between peoples, the ruling elites have proclaimed a short and hard principle: "divide and rule." This rule was skillfully used by the rulers of Ancient Rome, colonial powers (England, France, Spain, Portugal, etc.) and empires (Austro-Hungarian, Turkish, etc.). In fact, the aims, principles and mechanisms of the policy applied in relations between peoples were reduced to this notorious formula.

However, the best minds of mankind have always dreamed of a society of true national harmony, in which peoples “forgetting to unite in a great family of strife” (A.S. Pushkin). But only in the 20th century, and only in individual states, did this dream come true. The priority here belongs to the USSR, Switzerland, Belgium, the Russian Federation and some other countries in which economic stability has been achieved and the national question has been basically resolved.

1. Definition of the national policy, its objectives, principles and mechanisms for implementation

National politics- a system of measures taken by the state, aimed at taking into account, combining and realizing national interests, at resolving contradictions in the sphere of national relations.

National politics- this is a purposeful activity to regulate the relationship between nations, ethnic groups, enshrined in the relevant political documents and legal acts of the state.

Legal framework at the global level:

1. individual and collective rights. But there are contradictions between them, that is, sometimes it is impossible to determine what it is: individual or collective right

2. the right to the integrity of the state. There are several thousand ethnic groups in the world. Hypothetically, all of them can call themselves a nation and demand national rights. Hence

3. The principle of national self-determination International law does not give an answer to this question, that is, the states themselves determine their principles.

Types of ethnic policy

1. Genocide is a state policy aimed at the complete physical destruction of a race, an ethnic group. For example: the actions of the Nazis in relation to all whom they considered "subhuman" (Jews and all Slavic peoples).

2. Discrimination- any distinction, exclusion, limitation or preference based on race, color, ancestral, national or ethnic origin, with the aim or effect of destroying or detracting from the recognition, enjoyment or exercise on an equal footing of human rights and fundamental freedoms in political, economic, social and cultural or any other areas of public life. Discrimination is recognized as existing when there are two elements: making distinctions based on ethnicity or ethnic origin, skin color - and restrictions in any form, as a result of making these distinctions, on the ability of one or those against whom these distinctions are made to enjoy fundamental rights and freedoms on an equal footing.

3. Assimilation the merger of one nation with another, with the loss of one of them of their language, culture, national identity. In many countries, under the conditions of national and religious oppression, forced assimilation took place: this was the case in the Austrian Empire, later in Austria-Hungary, in Tsarist Russia. Similar processes continue now in some capitalist countries(Spain, Greece). In a number of countries where there are national minorities, natural A is taking place. In the USSR and other socialist countries, under conditions of complete equality of all peoples, some small peoples, having overcome centuries of economic and cultural isolation, merge with larger ethnic communities.

4. Integrationism- eg. France. Any citizen is automatically French, losing his ethnicity.

5. Polyculturalism- recognition by the state of the nth number of ethnic entities on its territory. But when ethnic groups different status, this can lead to ethnic conflicts.

National policy is implemented at the following levels:

nationwide
regional
local

Also, national policy is a concentrated expression of social, economic, linguistic, migration, demographic and other policies.

National policy differs in purpose, content, direction, forms and methods of implementation, results.

VARIETY OF NATIONAL POLICY

	National consolidation Interethnic integration Rapprochement of Nations National isolation, isolation Upholding ethnic "purity" Protection of the national from the influence of the foreign
	humanistic internationalist inhumane Nationalist great power chauvinist
Orientation	Democratic peacekeeping Creative progressive Totalitarian, destructive, reactionary
Forms and methods of implementation	Violence, tolerance, respect Domination, suppression, repression Violent, rude, humiliating, divide and conquer
results	Concord, unity, cooperation, friendship Tension, confrontation, conflict

An important task of a multinational state is the optimization of interethnic relations, i.e. search and implementation of the most favorable options for the interaction of subjects of interethnic relations.

The main thing in the content of national policy is the attitude towards national interests, taking into account their: a) commonality; b) discrepancies; c) collision. The commonality of the fundamental interests of individual subjects of interethnic relations and national interests on a state scale has objective grounds. The divergence of interests is connected with the objectively existing specific conditions and needs for the development of national-ethnic communities. When national and political interests are intertwined, their divergence can develop into a clash, a conflict. Under these conditions, coordination of national interests is necessary as a prerequisite for their implementation, which is the meaning of national policy: coordination of national interests as a prerequisite for their implementation,

National policy, like any other, can and should be considered from the point of view of determining certain parts, stages and priorities in it. However, this is very difficult, since in the real practice of interethnic relations one often gets the impression that this and not another problem is a priority and requires immediate attention and resolution. It seems to every nation, nation-state formation, region that it is their problems that are the most urgent, requiring immediate intervention and action.

National policy should distinguish between:

strategic, long-term goals and objectives that require a conceptual approach, program planning.
tasks of an immediate nature - stem from a long-term policy, regulate interethnic problems that arise from life, arising in the course of current events.

In multinational Russia, the strategic, program goal is:

strengthening the unity and cohesion of all peoples on the basis of national revival and interethnic cooperation,
strengthening federal relations and ties,
the formation of a state-political and interethnic community - the Russians.

Actual tasks of the national policy for the nearest period:

settlement of interethnic conflicts,
reduction of tension in interethnic relations (where it exists), protection of the Russian and Russian-speaking population in near abroad,
solving the problems of refugees and internally displaced persons, etc.

The national policy strategy was developed and justified in the concept of national policy and the state program for the national revival of interethnic cooperation between the peoples of Russia.

When developing a national policy, certain principles and guidelines must be taken into account. The most important of them are the following:

National policy should be developed based on the characteristics of the country, the level of its socio-economic development.
The policy in relation to nationalities should be associated with economic, social, cultural, educational, demographic and other types of state policy, in combination with which national policy can be implemented.
the scientific nature of national politics, which implies strict consideration of the laws and trends in the development of nations and national relations, scientific and expert study of issues related to the regulation of interethnic relations, reliance on a truly scientific analysis of ongoing processes, on qualified forecasts, and assessments of available alternatives to the political course. Where issues of national policy are considered not on the basis of a scientific approach, but subjectively, errors and excesses are inevitably made.
Differentiated Approach in the practical implementation of national policy in the regions and republics. Should be considered:
- natural and climatic conditions,
- socio-historical features of the formation of an ethnos, its statehood,
- demographic and migration processes,
- ethnic composition of the population, the ratio of titular and non-titular nationalities,
- confessional characteristic,
- features of national psychology, the level of ethnic self-awareness, national traditions, customs, the relationship of the ethnic group with other socio-ethnic communities, etc.

National policy should cover all levels and forms of national relations, including interpersonal relations. It should be aimed at every person, every ethnic community, group, regardless of whether it has its own national-state formation, whether a person lives in “his” republic or in a foreign environment.

Add-ons

Human rights (from the Constitution of the Russian Federation).

Article 19. 1. All are equal before the law and the court.
2. The state guarantees the equality of human and civil rights and freedoms regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, place of residence, attitude to religion, etc. Any form of restriction of the rights of citizens on the grounds of social, racial, national, linguistic and religious affiliation is prohibited.

Article 22. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.

Article 23. Everyone has the right to privacy privacy, personal and family secret, the right to privacy of correspondence, telephone conversations, etc.

Art. 26. 1. Everyone has the right to determine and indicate their nationality. No one can be forced to determine and indicate their nationality.
2. Everyone has the right to use their native language, to freely choose the language of communication, upbringing, education, creativity. (Comm: Nationality is characterized by adherence to the culture of the definition of the People, as well as language. Nationality is the belonging of a person to a particular people. The choice of nationality does not entail any consequences for a person, because they are guaranteed all the same rights and freedoms.

Art. 27. the right to free movement on the territory of Russia, as well as to travel outside its borders.
Freedom of thought and speech, freedom of religion, the right to participate in the management of state affairs, social security, free labor, the right to education.

Dear friends!

Our website is powered by pure passion. We do not require registration, money for downloading books. So it was and so it will always be. But to host a site on the Internet, funds are required - hosting, a domain name, etc.

Please don't be indifferent - help us keep the site alive. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

National policy has always been part of the activity of any state. It should regulate any society. Its directions and goals directly depend on the orientation of state policy. Some countries deliberately incite This approach is typical for fascist (nationalist) regimes.

National policy in developed democratic countries On the contrary, it is based on the principles of respect for all people, regardless of their origin. The policy of the state in them is aimed at the formation of tolerance, cooperation and close rapprochement of nations. The main value in democratic countries is the life of a person, as well as his freedoms and rights, regardless of his nationality. The meaning of democratic and humanistic politics is the maximum harmonization of the interests of different peoples, their implementation according to the principles of respect for each person. National policy is a system of measures of state influence, designed to create favorable conditions for each individual and all peoples.

An important task is to prevent possible conflicts on the basis of ethnic hostility. The national policy of Russia has very complex and important tasks to solve emerging problems in order to do this, it is necessary to carry out well-thought-out actions, on the one hand, aimed at preserving and developing the identity of all peoples, and on the other hand, at preserving the integrity of the state. Russian national policy, as in others, is based on documents that define this policy. These documents include the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Concept of National Policy of the Russian Federation. Their main principles are as follows:

Equality of freedoms and rights regardless of race and nationality of a person;

Prohibition of restriction of the rights of citizens;

Equality;

All rights guaranteed;

Promoting the development of languages and cultures.

Consistent implementation of these meets the vital interests of all the peoples living in the country.

The national policy of different states can change its nature from ethnic cleansing and national terror, artificial assimilation, to partial political or complete cultural autonomy of different peoples. In essence, it reflects the policy of a multinational state in relation to the peoples inhabiting it.

In Russia, this policy is aimed at evolutionary development the full national life of all peoples within the framework of the federation and the creation of equal relations between them, the formation of mechanisms for resolving any conflicts. Anyone, even small people living on the territory of the country, all rights are granted (up to the provision of territories for state national formations). It is believed that such a national policy of the Russian government really makes it possible to maintain a very precarious interethnic balance. Recently, the main trends of national life activity, its likely prospects, have been outlined, allowing us to formulate proposals for the interethnic consolidation of Russian citizens and for strengthening its unity and statehood:

It is necessary to develop a scientific theory of harmonization of interethnic relations and a program for the life of our society, corresponding to it;

Creation of a program of action based on the practical and legal observance of regional and national all subjects of the Federation;

The revival of a great and strong power with a developed economy and democratic order.

State policy in the national question. Modern national policy of Russia

1. Definition of the national policy, its objectives, principles and mechanisms for implementation

Add-ons

Dear friends!

Report a typo

Text to be sent to our editors:

Your comment (optional):