A HISTORY OF INNER ASIA

284 A history of Inner Asia
growing number of foreign countries, including Western Europe, the
Russian Federation, the United States, the People’s Republic of China,
the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Arab countries, and Israel.This combination
alone reveals the magnitude of the novelty and the nature of
their independence: treating Russia as a foreign country would have
been anathema under the previous system; dealing directly with the
United States would have been treasonous; contacts with China
depended entirely on the vicissitudes of relations between Moscow and
Beijing; friendship at the same time with the Arab countries, Iran, and
Israel might have seemed impossible.
Russia may have become a foreign country, but her role in each of the
five republics has been paramount and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable
future.There are many reasons for that, some obvious, some discernible
only on closer look.Comparison with “French” North Africa
and “British” India may again be instructive here.The bureaucratic,
intellectual, scientific, technological, economic, and logistical infrastructure,
including publishing, is to a large degree Russian-trained and functions
in Russian, just as it does in French and English in the latter two
areas.In Central Asia too the former colonial power’s language and
legacy form a bond if not of unity, then at least of smoother communication
and access to scientific and technological literature.On the other
hand, the idea of a common Turkic language – a “modernized” form of
Chaghatay, may yet gain favor and the dream of Turkistani nationalists
of the 1920s could come true.More likely, however, is further consolidation
of the separate forms of Turkic, with English making an inroad into
the hitherto exclusive domain of Russian as the supranational language
even in Central Asia.
Then there is the factor of minorities, primarily Russian and
Ukrainian, living in the five republics.It is of course not limited to
Central Asia, and the news media have profusely reported the degree to
which this problem has caused tension between the three Baltic republics
and Russia, for example.Similar questions have arisen at the time of
decolonization in other parts of the world, especially in French North
Africa.The intensity and nature of the problem varies with the republics,
but one question, that of double citizenship, is universal.Should the
Russians living in a republic have the right to be citizens of that republic,
while also retaining Russian citizenship? In order to qualify for local
citizenship, should they be required to fulfill certain conditions, the foremost
being knowledge of the local (Uzbek, Kazakh, etc.) language?
Since Russian presence has tended to concentrate in compact neighbor-