K. Sulimov (firstname.lastname@example.org),
Perm State University, 15, Bukireva Str., Perm 614990, Russian Federation
Social sciences take in the importance of the mode of interactions between actors who are involved in interethnic relations. This mode is critical for achieving a balance between actors’ public positions and preferences. The majority of academic researches devoted to the phenomenon of ethnic territorial autonomy (ETA) focus on the arrangements between state and ethnic minorities, firstly, and different tiers of authorities, secondly. Studies of interethnic relations either actualize the problem of ethnic conflicts resolving, or concern an effective participation of ethnic minorities in cultural, social and economic life, and in public affairs. Thus, ETA is regarded both as an instrument and as an arena for parties to dispute. Another perception of an ethnic territorial autonomy is a tier of authority without special distinguishing features. In this article, the author proposes a new approach for consideration, which allows to gain a better understanding of the way an ethnic territorial autonomy balances preferences and expectations as well as positions of actors relevant to it. ETA is an entity with relatively high level of self-governance. The character of its cooperations with other parties concerned and political key players is important to a balance. An ethnic territorial autonomy interworks with both external actors (such as national state, international community, and kin-state) and internal actors, most notably other ethnic minorities that live in the autonomy. The proposed approach allows contemplating an autonomy as a key actor of comprehensive system of external and internal interactions. The author frames the taxonomy of effective and non-effective practices that secure an interethnic balance and functional systems of these two types of contacts around ETA. The character of territorial autonomy authorities’ participation in these interactions, the possibility to de-politicize the ethnicity within them, their consistency, the weight of some of their mechanisms etc. are criteria for the taxonomy. This project view claims to conceptualize ineffectiveness as both risk and probability of refusal to cooperate. It is argued that the securing of an interethnic balance needs both external and internal interactions.
ethnic territorial autonomy, ethnic group, authority, interaction, inter-ethnic balance, interaction mechanism
1. Sartori Dzh. Iskazhenie kontseptov v sravnitel’noi politologii [Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics (III)]. Polis. Political Studies, 2003, no. 5, pp. 65-75.
2. Salat L., Constantin S., Osipov A., Szekely I.G., eds. Autonomy Arrangements Around the World: A Collection of Well and Lesser Known Cases. Cluj-Napoca, RIRNM, 2014. 502 p.
3. Benedikter T. The World’s Working Regional Autonomies: An Introduction and Comparative Analysis. New Delhi, Anthem Press, 2007. 480 p.
4. Panov P. V. Mir etnicheskikh regional’nykh avtonomii: predstavlenie novoi bazy dannykh [The World of Ethnic Regional Autonomies: Introducing a New Database]. Perm University Herald. Political Science, 2016, no. 4, pp. 69-97.
5. Securing a Balance in Interethnic Relations: Regional Autonomy, Integrity and Ethnic Minority Rights (In Russ.) Available at: http://identityworld.ru/index/atlas_era/0-4 (accessed 13.12.2016).
6. Semenov A. V. Politicheskie effekty etnicheskikh territorial’nykh avtonomii: obzor issledovanii [Political Effects of Ethnic Territorial Autonomies: Review of Studies]. Perm University Herald. Political Science, 2016, no. 1, pp. 127-152.
7. Ghai Y., Woodman S., eds. Practising Self-government: A Comparative Study of Autonomous Regions. Cambridge University Press, 2013. 501 p. DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139088206.
8. Cunningham K. Inside the Politics of Self-determination. Oxford University Press, 2014. 304 p. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199364909.001.0001.
9. Lijphart A. The Wave of Power-Sharing Democracy. The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy. Reynolds A., ed. Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 37-54. DOI:10.1093/0199246467.003.0003.
10. The Lund Recommendations on the Effective Participation of National Minorities in Public Life & Explanatory Note. OSCE High Commissioner on National Minorities (HCNM). September 1999. Available at: http://www.osce.org/hcnm/32240 (accessed 13.12.2016).
11. DH-MIN Handbook on Minority Consultative Mechanisms (20 October 2006). Committee of Experts on Issues Relating to the Protection of National Minorities (DH-MIN), DH-MIN(2006)012. Available at: http://www.coe.int/en/web/minorities/dh-minworking-documents (accessed 13.12.2016).
12. Commentary on the Effective Participation of Persons Belonging to National Minorities in Cultural, Social and Economic Life and in Public Affairs. Advisory Committee on the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities, ACFC/31DOC(2008)001. Available at: https://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016800bc7e8 (accessed 13.12.2016).
13. Weller M. Minority Consultative Mechanisms: Towards Best Practice. Political Participation of Minorities. A Commentary on International Standards and Practice. Weller M., Nobbs K., eds. Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 477-502.
14. Palermo F. When the Lund Recommendations Are Ignored. Effective Participation of National Minorities through Territorial Autonomy. International Journal on Minority and Group Rights, 2009, vol. 16, issue 4, pp. 653-663. DOI:10.1163/15718115_016_04-12.
15. Čorni A. The National Minority Consultative Mechanisms – The Councils of National Minorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Innovative Issues and Approaches in Social Sciences, 2016, vol. 9, no. 3. pp. 58-83. DOI:10.12959/issn.1855-0541.IIASS-2016-no3-art4.
16. Fleras A. The Politics of Maori Lobbying: The Case of the New Zealand Maori Council. Political Science, 1986, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 27-43. DOI: 10.1177/003231878603800102.
17. Lundqvist L. J. Consultative Mechanisms in Sweden’s Environment Protection Policy. Environment International, 1982, vol. 7, issue 6, pp. 379-387. DOI:10.1016/0160-4120(82)90153-2.
18. Brown M. B. Fairly Balanced: The Politics of Representation on Government Advisory Committees. Political Research Quarterly, 2008, vol. 61, issue 4, pp. 547-560. DOI:10.1177/1065912907313076.
19. Belonogov Yu. G. Vzaimodeistvie obshchestvenno-konsul’tativnykh sovetov i gosudarstvennykh organov ispolnitel’noi vlasti v sovremennoi Rossii [Interactions between Public Advisory Boards and Executives in Contemporary Russia]. Perm University Herald. Political Science, 2016, no. 1, pp. 19-36.
20. Sulimov K.A., Titova S. R. Konsul’tativno-soveshchatel’nye organy po mezhnatsional’nym otnosheniyam v sovremennoi Rossii: predstavlenie bazy dannykh [Consultative and Advisory Bodies for Interethnic Relations in Modern Russia: Introducing a Database]. Perm University Herald. Political Science, 2016, no. 4. pp. 150-167.
21. Borisova N.V., Minaeva E. Yu. Konsul’tativno-soveshchatel’nye organy po mezhnatsional’nym otnosheniyam: predstavitel’stvo etnicheskikh grupp na regional’nom urovne v Rossii [Consultative and Advisory Bodies for Interethnic Relations: Ethnic Groups Representation at the Subfederal Level in Russia]. Perm University Herald. Political Science, 2016, no. 4. pp. 168-179.
22. Council for Interethnic Relations (In Russ.) Available at: http://kremlin.ru/structure/councils#institution‑28 (accessed 13.12.2016).
23. Wolff S. Power-Sharing and the Vertical Layering of Authority: A Review of Current Practices. Settling Self-determination Disputes: Complex Power Sharing in Theory and Practice. Weller M., Metzger B., eds. Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2008, pp. 407-450. DOI:10.1163/ej.9789004164826.i‑794.81.
24. Sulimov K. A. Mekhanizmy vzaimodeistviya v etnicheskikh territorial’nykh avtonomiyakh: obzor praktik [Interaction Mechanisms in Ethnic Territorial Autonomies: Review of Practices]. Vlast’, 2016, no. 8, pp. 79-85.
25. Methodological Approach. The Heidelberg Institute for International Conflict Research (HIIK). Available at: https://www.hiik.de/en/methodik/ (accessed 28.12.2016).
26. Semenenko I.S., Lapkin V.V., Pantin V. I. Tipologiya etnopoliticheskoi konfliktnosti: metodologicheskie vyzovy “bol’shoi teorii” [Classifying Ethnic Conflicts: Challenges for Political Theory and Methodology]. Polis. Political Studies, 2016, no. 6. pp. 69-94. DOI:10.17976/jpps/2016.06.06.
Registered in system SCIENCE INDEX