• HOME
  • REVISTA GEOPOLITICA
    • BOARD
      • DIPLOMATS
      • NATIONAL BOARD
      • INTERNATIONAL
    • 2022
      • nr. 92-93/2022
    • 2021
      • nr. 91/2021
      • nr. 89-90/2021
      • nr. 87-88/2021
      • nr. 86/2021
    • 2020
      • nr. 85/2020
      • nr. 84/2020
      • nr. 83/2020
      • nr. 82/2020
    • 2019
      • nr. 81/2019
      • nr. 80/2019
      • nr. 78-79/2019
      • nr. 77/2019
    • 2018
      • nr. 76/2018
      • nr. 75/2018
      • nr. 74/2018
      • nr. 73/2018
    • 2017
      • nr. 72/2017
      • nr. 71/2017
      • nr. 70/2017
      • nr. 68-69/2017
    • 2016
      • nr. 67/2016
      • nr. 66/2016
      • nr. 64-65/2016
      • nr. 63/2016
    • 2015
      • nr. 62/2015
      • nr. 61/2015
      • nr. 60/2015
      • nr.59/2015 EN
      • nr.59/2015 RO
    • 2014
      • nr. 58/2014
      • nr. 57/2014
      • nr. 56/2014
      • nr. 54-55/2014
    • 2013
      • nr. 53/2013
      • nr. 52/2013
      • nr. 51/2013
      • nr. 49-50/2013
    • 2012
      • nr. 48/2012
      • nr. 47/2012
      • nr. 46/2012
      • nr. 44-45/2012
    • 2011
      • nr. 43/2011
      • nr. 41-42/2011
      • NR. 40/2011
      • nr. 39/2011
    • 2010
      • nr. 38/2010
      • nr. 36-37/2010
      • nr. 35/2010
      • nr. 33-34/2010
    • 2009
      • nr. 32/2009
      • nr. 31/2009
      • nr. 30/2009
      • nr. 29/2009
    • 2008
      • nr. 26/2008
      • nr. 25/2008
      • nr. 28/2008
      • nr. 27/2008
    • 2007
      • nr. 24/2007
      • nr. 23/2007
      • nr. 22/2007
      • nr. 21/2007
    • 2006
      • nr. 20/2006
      • nr. 19/2006
      • nr. 18/2006
      • nr. 16-17/2006
    • 2005
      • nr. 14-15/2005
      • nr. 13/2005
      • nr. 12/2005
      • nr. 11/2005
    • 2004
      • nr. 09-10/2004
      • nr. 07-08/2004
      • nr. 06/2004
      • nr. 04-05/2004
    • 2003
      • nr. 02-03/2003
      • nr. 01/2003
  • EDITORIAL
  • APARIȚII EDITORIALE
  • G-FOCUS

GeoPolitica

Portal de analize geopolitice, strategice si economice

  • ASOCIATIA “ION CONEA”
    • SCOP
    • DONATIONS. SPONSORSHIPS. ADVERTISING
  • Carti TOP FORM
  • G-FOCUS
  • Comanda GEOPOLITICA!
  • ABONAMENTE
  • G-FOCUS
  • CONTACT
  • GDPR
  • 05/07/2022
You are here: Home / GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS / RUSSIA & FSU / TATARSTAN AND BASHKORTOSTAN: A POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS TEST FOR TSAR PUTIN

TATARSTAN AND BASHKORTOSTAN: A POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS TEST FOR TSAR PUTIN

by https://www.geopolitic.ro/author/

 

Glauco D’AGOSTINO*

Summary. The process of institutional centralization launched by Mr. Putin in a Federation currently counting 85 entities (including the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol’) is likely to collide with the self-government aspirations, particularly by the 22 republics, because of a documented extensive presence of ethnic minority groups living in their territories. Each of them has its own constitution and legislation. But, according to the Russian Federal Law, all regional heads are to be nominated by Russian President. On the other hand, the Tatar Constitution, aimed to guarantee minority ethnic, religious, or linguistic rights, maintains President of the Republic has to be popularly elected. This situation is creating a framework, if not of legal uncertainty, at least of institutional tensions threatening to escalate, unless it would be properly addressed, also due to the specific ethno-religious features of Republics, particularly Tatarstan and Bashkortostan.

The Republic of Tatarstan, along with its wealthy mineral deposits, strong production, highly skilled labour force, has one of the powerful and varied regional economies in Russia and a solid financial stability, too. Tatarstan is also deemed as a model for successful economic development. The Republic of Bashkortostan, a region bordering Siberia, since Soviet times has based its economy on oil, adding more recently the chemical and energy systems. Bashkir President is known for his technocratic and reformist line, with a spotlight on foreign investment. Both republics are regarded as a model of winning multiethnic states, mainly for the ability to bring together Christians and Muslims to live peacefully.

Definitely, a cultural, religious, and economic recovery is going through Tatarstan and Bashkortostan people. Obviously, given the peculiarities offered by the post-Soviet times, difficulties and problems, especially for the previous republic, contrast a cautious optimism.

Moscow concerns give substance to the ghost of never vanished pan-Turkism, since Tatarstan still has relevant independence movements, with a mix of nationalist ideals and religious revival, but all of them with features of peaceful struggle and never extremist.

The traditional theological school of law among Muslims of the region is the Hanafī one, and the gradual presence of Salafis in the Ural region is regarded by many (though disputed by others) as a source of rampant extremism. Certainly, fighting a school of thought, as far as deemed extreme, by demonizing its adherents on behalf of the primacy of a school referred to as ”traditional”, has not resulted in considerable aftermath. The Russian Federation should undertake to recognize and to spread among Tatarstan and Bashkortostan population the value of ethnic and religious coexistence underpinning the Russian Federation concept in the post-Communist era.

Keywords: Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Russian Federation, Putin, centralization, self-government, ethnic minority, Ufa, Kazan, Moscow, pan-Turkism, nationalism, independence movements, Hanafī Islam, Salafism

 

* Architect, independent scholar of Political Islam, writer, director and manager of the website www.islamicworld.it

Related

Filed Under: RUSSIA & FSU Tagged With: Bashkortostan, centralization, ethnic minority, Hanafī Islam, independence movements, Kazan, Moscow, Nationalism, pan-Turkism, Putin, Russian Federation, salafism, self-government, Tatarstan, Ufa

About

ARTICOL INTEGRAL
Pe geopolitic.ro sunt publicate abstracte ale articolelor publicate în Revista GEOPOLITICA, care poate fi comandată pe www.geopoliticamagazine.com, în format tipărit sau electronic.

AUTHORS

ES dl Mircea Geoana - Secretar General Adjunct NATO

GEOPOLITICA MARILOR PUTERI ÎN ASIA-PACIFIC

Controversat 11.03.2022 (p II)

Controversat 11,03.2022 (p I)

Contextul geopolitic - Olectie de viata (p II)

Contextul geopolitic - O lectie de viata (p I)

Interviu cu `Sasha` (Slaviansk -2019), militar in trupele speciale ucrainene

Legile puterii cu Alexandra Pacuraru martie 2022, partea a II-a

Interviu cu Oleksandra Tsekhanovska, analis razboi hibrid

Legile puterii cu Alexandra Pacuraru martie 2022, partea I

Pe linia de contact ucraineano-rusa, 2019

Subiectiv de Marti, 1 Martie 2022

INTERVENTIE NEWS MAGAZIN ANTENA 3, 27.02.2022/13.00

Russia's Gamble in Ukraine

RAZBOI SI PACE IN EUROPA DE EST

Revista GeoPolitica

Antena 3 - Situatia din Ucraina

Extras din conferința Institutului Schiller "Crearea unei noi arhitecturi de securitate"

NOUTATI EDITORIALE

Ucraina în ghearele ursului Putin // Intelligence4ALL - 14.02.2022

Analiza de intelligence și Strategic Foresight - 21.01.2022

Analiza de intelligence și Strategic Foresight - 20.01.2022

KEYWORD

Asia Centrală (26) Azerbaijan (27) Black Sea (44) carte (37) China (71) conflict (36) cooperare (29) criza (30) energie (28) energy (27) EU (46) Europa (35) European Union (41) geopolitica (157) geopolitics (54) globalizare (55) identitate (26) integrare (28) internationala (32) Irak (47) Iran (62) Islam (41) lansare (44) marea neagra (94) NATO (96) Orientul Mijlociu (29) putere (26) religie (26) Romania (184) Rusia (123) Russia (79) securitate (85) security (48) strategy (26) SUA (77) terorism (56) terrorism (34) Turcia (67) Turkey (38) Ucraina (58) UE (99) Ukraine (51) Uniunea Europeană (55) USA (30) şcoală (33)

Afganistan Tragedia unui popor 06.10.2021

Social Media

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • Google+

Emisiunea "Obiectiv Strategic" - invitati Vasile Simileanu si Olivia Comsa

GeoPolitica Copyright © 2015 - Log in