Federalism and Local Politics in Russia

Unification as a political project 91voters supported the idea of merger. 27 Such support for unification did notcome as a surprise. The unification campaign had actually been conductedfor quite a long period of time, even though officially it started just onemonth before the referendum. But an analysis of the regional press demonstratesthat only the views of those who fully supported the merger were fullyrepresented in the mass media.One would have expected at least some opposition in the Okrug thatwas losing both its political independence and institutionalized ethnic territorialcommunity. However, such opposition was very weak and givenlittle voice. Even one of the opposition leaders, the former chairman of theOkrug Legislature, Ivan Chetin, did not fully disagree with the concept ofunification but insisted that the full conditions of the merger, includingthe Okrug’s special status, should be clarified from the very beginning. Thelow level of opposition to the merger can be explained by a number offactors.First, the pro-unification campaign was very proactive if not to sayaggressive and gave very little chance for the opposition to fight against themainstream – press, TV, radio, visits of federal politicians, discussion clubs,cultural events, show business star tours, etc. – everything was working infavour of unification. The circulation figures of Permskii Krai, a specialnewspaper fully devoted to the unification process, were very high – aboutone million copies. 28 The campaign even became part of the education process– schoolteachers were asked to talk about the common history and cultureof the peoples living in Perm Oblast and the Komi-PermyakAutonomous Okrug, so that children would be aware of the referendum andprospects for unification, and discuss such ideas with their families. 29Second, one should consider that the political culture of the Komi-Permyak rural population is dominated by passive loyalty to government,which is hardly compatible with the open expression of opposition to officialpower. Moreover, long before the merger was put on the political agenda theOkrug’s population clearly expressed the view that they were not interestedin autonomy as such, but were more interested in being part of a largercommunity. 30Third, the propaganda in favour of unification almost entirely rested oneconomic arguments – there was widespread dissemination of economic datashowing the economic gains, which would flow from the merger, while othermore sensitive political issues were not given so much publicity. The Oblastand Okrug elites made full use of a document that lauded the economicbenefits of the merger. According to the ‘Prognosis for Socio-EconomicConsequences of Unification of the Perm Region and the Komi-PermyakAutonomous Okrug’, the merger would lead to the construction of an additional225 km of roads, a rise in the Okrug’s per capita income from 2,575roubles to 2,812 roubles in 2006, and the average wage would rise from 3,912roubles to 4,578 roubles. 31 Such positive economic data was naturally veryattractive to the citizens of the Okrug.