Federalism and Local Politics in Russia

Federal discourses, minority rights, and conflict transformation 677 The controversial status of republicsThe existence of republics is for titular ethnic groups a demonstration thatautochthonous people are not merely treated as ‘small brothers’ of ethnicRussians. 49 Conventional justifications for the reception of the status as arepublic include traditions of settlement, the spiritual meaning of a given territory(‘homeland’), and a ‘making up’ for past historical grievances or repression.In part ethnic symbolism also serves the preservation and development ofa regional identity.Republics are entitled to adopt constitutions of their own, which are notsubject to approval by the Russian Federation. The republics have permanentrepresentation vis-à-vis the President and the federal government. For apolitical culture fixated on symbols of power, titles such as ‘President of theRepublic’ or other attributes of statehood provide a soft resource of power. 50The republics are also allowed to introduce their own state languages.Additionally, they can sign international treaties as long as these are withinthe confines of the Constitution. 51 However, with the exception of a constitutionand state languages, all other competencies are also shared by thepurely territorial regions (oblasti and kraya).In the republics usually one or several state languages exist of the titularethnic groups. Among other things, this means that legal acts are publishedin these languages; education in these languages is promoted as well as theiruse in mass media and cultural policy. The promotion of titular languagesand cultures is deemed to be essential – without the status as a republic it isfeared that no governmental support of minority cultures would exist at all.Most of the republics support their Diaspora, e.g. members of the titularethnic groups residing outside the republic. 52 A certain uniqueness of therepublics also consists in the name, number of deputies and competencies ofrepublican legislatures. In the republics, titular ethnic groups are usuallyover-represented in politics and administration.Constitutionally, the republics are almost equated with other regions.Independent sources of political power are very limited. Republics can nolonger claim sovereignty, although they are still deemed to be states. InRussian constitutional thinking, the concept of state – comparable to statesin the USA – seems less disreputable than sovereignty. 53 Nevertheless, thehighly symbolic dispute on sovereignty has political implications. Thesovereignty declarations of the early 1990s were declared null and void and aright to secede explicitly denied. ‘Self-determination’ no longer involvessovereignty. The final decision-making power is held back for the centralgovernment. The exclusive sovereignty of the central government de factoimplies pretence for absolute sovereignty. The relevance of retaining thestatus of statehood of republics may nonetheless create a better protectionagainst dissolution than the mere territorial units, which are not seen asstates. 54 But whether the ascription of statehood really protects againstextinction remains to be seen.