Russia, one of the most ethno-culturally diverse countries in the world, provides a rich case study on how globalisation and associated international trends are disrupting, and causing the radical rethinking of approaches to, inter-ethnic cohesion. The book highlights the importance of television broadcasting in shaping national discourse and the place of ethno-cultural diversity within it. It argues that television’s role here has been reinforced, rather than diminished, by the rise of new media technologies. Through an analysis of a wide range of news and other television programmes, the book shows how the covert meanings of discourse on a particular issue can diverge from the overt significance attributed to it, just as the impact of that discourse may not conform with the original aims of the broadcasters. The book discusses the tension between the imperative to maintain security through centralised government and overall national cohesion that Russia shares with other European states, and the need to remain sensitive to, and to accommodate, the needs and perspectives of ethnic minorities and labour migrants. It compares the increasingly isolationist popular ethnonationalism in Russia, which harks back to "old-fashioned" values, with the similar rise of the Tea Party in the United States and the UK Independence Party in Britain. Throughout, this extremely rich, well-argued book complicates and challenges received wisdom on Russia’s recent descent into authoritarianism. It points to a regime struggling to negotiate the dilemmas it faces, given its Soviet legacy of ethnic particularism, weak civil society, large native Muslim population and overbearing, yet far from entirely effective, state control of the media.

This report provides an overview of the present situation of minority and indigenous peoples’ rights in Russia. It examines the difficulties in the implementation of international mechanisms for minority and indigenous protection, with a focus on the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities, although other international standards (emanating from the OSCE and United Nations) are also taken into account. In particular, the report considers the complexities in the participation of civil society in international monitoring mechanisms. Following an introduction and an overview of domestic and international legislation, the report provides: a) an overview of the main problems confronting minorities and indigenous peoples in Russia; and b) an outline of the factors affecting the implementation of international mechanisms on minority and indigenous protection. It ends with a series of recommendations to improve the participation, recognition and treatment of minorities and indigenous peoples in the country.

The collapse of the Soviet Union suddenly rendered ethnic Russians living in non-Russian successor states like Latvia and Kyrgyzstan new minorities subject to dramatic political, economic, and social upheaval. As elites in these new states implemented formal policies and condoned informal practices that privileged non-Russians, ethnic Russians had to react. In Russian Minority Politics in Post-Soviet Latvia and Kyrgyzstan, Michele E. Commercio draws on extensive field research, including hundreds of personal interviews, to analyze the responses of minority Russians to such policies and practices. In particular, she focuses on the role played by formal and informal institutions in the crystallization of Russian attitudes, preferences, and behaviors in these states. Commercio asks why there is more out-migration and less political mobilization among Russians in Kyrgyzstan, a state that adopts policies that placate both Kyrgyz and Russians, and less out-migration and more political mobilization among Russians in Latvia, a state that adopts policies that favor Latvians at the expense of Russians. Challenging current thinking, she suggests that the answer to this question lies in the power of informal networks. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Communist party, Komsomol youth organization, and KGB networks were transformed into informal networks. Russians in Kyrgyzstan were for various reasons isolated from such networks, and this isolation restricted their access to the country's private sector, making it difficult for them to create effective associations capable of representing their interests. This resulted in a high level of Russian exit and the silencing of Russian voices. In contrast, Russians in Latvia were well connected to such networks, which provided them with access to the country's private sector and facilitated the establishment of political parties and nongovernmental organizations that represented their interests. This led to a low level of Russian exit and high level of Russian voice. Commercio concludes that informal networks have a stronger influence on minority politics than formal institutions.

This book explains how state institutions affect ethnic mobilization. It focuses on how ethno-nationalist movements emerge on the political arena, develop organizational structures, frame demands, and attract followers. It does so in the context of examining the widespread surge of nationalist sentiment that occurred through the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It shows that even during this period of institutional upheaval, pre-existing ethnic institutions affected the tactics of the movement leaders. It challenges the widely held perception that governing elites can kindle latent ethnic grievances virtually at will to maintain power. It argues that nationalist leaders can't always mobilize widespread popular support and that their success in doing so depends on the extent to which ethnicity is institutionalized by state structures. It shifts the study of ethnic mobilization from the whys of its emergence to the hows of its development as a political force.

Twenty-five million Russians live in the newly independent states carved from the territory of the former Soviet Union. When they or their ancestors emigrated to these non-Russian areas, they seldom saw themselves as having moved "abroad." Now, with the dissolution of the USSR, these Russians find themselves to be minorities—often unwelcome—in new states created to fulfill the aspirations of indigenous populations. Will the governments of these newly independent states be able to accept the fact that their populations are multi-national? Will the formerly dominant and privileged Russians be able to live with their new status as equals or, more often, subordinates? To what extent do the new regimes' policies of accommodation or exclusion establish lasting patterns for relations between the titular majorities and the minority Russians? Developing the concept of interactive nationalism, this timely book explores the movement of Russians to the borderlands during the Russian Empire and Soviet times, the evolution of nationality policies during the Soviet era, and the processes of indigenization during the late Soviet period and under the newfound independence of the republics. The authors examine questions of citizenship, language policy, and political representation in each of the successor states, emphasizing the interaction between the indigenous population and the Russians. Through the use of case studies, the authors explore the tragic ethnic violence that has erupted since the demise of the Soviet Union, and weigh strategies for managing national conflict and developing stable democratic institutions that will respect the rights of all ethnic groups. Jeff Chinn is associate professor of political science at the University of Missouri-Columbia. Robert Kaiser is assistant professor of geography at the University of Missouri-Columbia.