This article studies the problems behind the involvement of the Lithuanian diaspora of Uruguay in the political processes at the beginning of the Cold War (second half of the 1940s – early 1950s). The author considers the history of the formation of the Lithuanian diaspora in the South American country starting from the later period of the Russian Empire and its status in the interwar period in the context of the development of the Lithuanian statehood. Additionally, the article describes the emergence and solution of the problem of refugees and displaced persons after World War II in the international context. It is noted that the refugees and displaced persons were mostly representatives of the Soviet Union (including the Baltic states that became part of the USSR in 1940), Poland, Yugoslavia, and other countries of Eastern Europe. The study proves that in the new historical conditions, there was a change in the social composition of the Lithuanian emigration of Uruguay, which was replenished with political opponents of the Soviet regime, collaborators fleeing retribution, and “Westerners” (defectors). Formed as a result of a global conflict and a new system of international relations, this type of diasporas was called “communities of exiles”, “exiled communities”, or “political diasporas”. The politicised nature of such diasporas, which included post-war Lithuanian emigration to Uruguay, led to its participation in the information confrontation with the USSR in the framework of the Cold War that had begun. In this regard, the author examines the attitude of the Uruguayan authorities to the “emigration governments of the Baltic countries”, and, more particularly, the so-called “Lithuanian government” headed by Mykolas Krupavičius in the USA and his “mission” headed by Kazimiro Grauzhinis in Uruguay. The specifics of the situation with the problems of repatriation in the USSR, which is revealed using materials from the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation and emigration periodicals, showed the reaction of the Soviet leadership to the position of Uruguay in relation to Soviet displaced persons (including within the new borders). The author concludes that in the context of intra-diaspora splits, immediately after the war, the nationalist-minded part of the Lithuanian emigration was an active participant of all anti-Soviet campaigns, using finances and all possible information resources for this (primarily, the United States). Hence, the unconditional orientation towards Washington of this part of the diasporas, including the Lithuanian one, which was called upon to sow anti-Russian sentiments and support the negative image of the USSR in the public opinion of the West, becomes obvious and logical.
{"title":"Lithuanian Diaspora in Uruguay During the Beginning of the Cold War","authors":"Mаrina Moseуkina","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.871","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.871","url":null,"abstract":"This article studies the problems behind the involvement of the Lithuanian diaspora of Uruguay in the political processes at the beginning of the Cold War (second half of the 1940s – early 1950s). The author considers the history of the formation of the Lithuanian diaspora in the South American country starting from the later period of the Russian Empire and its status in the interwar period in the context of the development of the Lithuanian statehood. Additionally, the article describes the emergence and solution of the problem of refugees and displaced persons after World War II in the international context. It is noted that the refugees and displaced persons were mostly representatives of the Soviet Union (including the Baltic states that became part of the USSR in 1940), Poland, Yugoslavia, and other countries of Eastern Europe. The study proves that in the new historical conditions, there was a change in the social composition of the Lithuanian emigration of Uruguay, which was replenished with political opponents of the Soviet regime, collaborators fleeing retribution, and “Westerners” (defectors). Formed as a result of a global conflict and a new system of international relations, this type of diasporas was called “communities of exiles”, “exiled communities”, or “political diasporas”. The politicised nature of such diasporas, which included post-war Lithuanian emigration to Uruguay, led to its participation in the information confrontation with the USSR in the framework of the Cold War that had begun. In this regard, the author examines the attitude of the Uruguayan authorities to the “emigration governments of the Baltic countries”, and, more particularly, the so-called “Lithuanian government” headed by Mykolas Krupavičius in the USA and his “mission” headed by Kazimiro Grauzhinis in Uruguay. The specifics of the situation with the problems of repatriation in the USSR, which is revealed using materials from the Archive of Foreign Policy of the Russian Federation and emigration periodicals, showed the reaction of the Soviet leadership to the position of Uruguay in relation to Soviet displaced persons (including within the new borders). The author concludes that in the context of intra-diaspora splits, immediately after the war, the nationalist-minded part of the Lithuanian emigration was an active participant of all anti-Soviet campaigns, using finances and all possible information resources for this (primarily, the United States). Hence, the unconditional orientation towards Washington of this part of the diasporas, including the Lithuanian one, which was called upon to sow anti-Russian sentiments and support the negative image of the USSR in the public opinion of the West, becomes obvious and logical.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140366782","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article presents the results of the process of sporadic formation of the Chinese diaspora in the Russian Far East, revealing the most controversial elements of this process. They are the difficulty of defining the meaning of the concept of “Chinese diaspora” and the date of the origin of the diaspora in the Russian Far East; also, the discussion about the size of the Chinese population in the Far East at the boundaries of the eighteenth and nineteenth and twentieth-twenty- first centuries. The author conducts a cluster analysis of the regions of the Russian Far East regarding the functioning of the Chinese diaspora there using data on the area of the Russian Far East regions, population, GRP per capita, and the number of murders per 100,000 people. Each of these indicators characterises the key areas of development of the regions of the Russian Far East. Based on the results of cluster tree construction, the identification of three groups of subregions of the Far East and map zoning of the region, it is revealed that the geographical proximity of these sub-regions to the Chinese territory has a much stronger influence on the formation of the Chinese diaspora than the economic factor. Yakutia, which accounts for 42 percent of the Chinese diaspora in the Far East, can be singled out separately.
{"title":"The Chinese Diaspora of the Russian Far East: History, Modernity, and Prospects","authors":"Jinhui Wang","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.865","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.865","url":null,"abstract":"This article presents the results of the process of sporadic formation of the Chinese diaspora in the Russian Far East, revealing the most controversial elements of this process. They are the difficulty of defining the meaning of the concept of “Chinese diaspora” and the date of the origin of the diaspora in the Russian Far East; also, the discussion about the size of the Chinese population in the Far East at the boundaries of the eighteenth and nineteenth and twentieth-twenty- first centuries. The author conducts a cluster analysis of the regions of the Russian Far East regarding the functioning of the Chinese diaspora there using data on the area of the Russian Far East regions, population, GRP per capita, and the number of murders per 100,000 people. Each of these indicators characterises the key areas of development of the regions of the Russian Far East. Based on the results of cluster tree construction, the identification of three groups of subregions of the Far East and map zoning of the region, it is revealed that the geographical proximity of these sub-regions to the Chinese territory has a much stronger influence on the formation of the Chinese diaspora than the economic factor. Yakutia, which accounts for 42 percent of the Chinese diaspora in the Far East, can be singled out separately.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140367247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Historians, politicians, and other mnemonic actors are actively debating the question about what characterises the relationship between the Romanov Empire and the Soviet Union, i. e. continuity or rupture. The Soviet regime of the interwar period emphasised discontinuity, both in domestic policy and in the international arena. Whenever references to the Romanov Empire appeared in international treaties of the Soviets of that time, it was only in the context of a renunciation of that legacy. However, on the eve of World War II, the Soviet authorities clearly outlined the Soviet state’s claims to its status as a successor state of the Russian Empire, declaring its right to the territories of the Baltic states, Bessarabia, and the western regions of Ukraine and Belarus that had once been part of the Romanov empire, or were claimed by Russia in WWI, such as Galicia and Bukovina. In the USSR, starting in the second half of the 1930s, the image of the Russian Empire as a “prison of peoples” faded into the background, replaced by the arguments about “objective progressiveness” in annexing certain territories and ethnic groups into the empire. However, the role of the October Revolution as the founding myth of the Soviet society persisted until the Soviet Union’s implosion and left no doubt that the rupture was crucially important for the Soviet authorities. During Boris Yeltsin’s presidency in the 1990s, Russia was trying to shape a new narrative of a young nation, which was starting its history from 1991, but the attempt quite predictably failed. After becoming president, Vladimir Putin almost immediately switched to the narrative of “a thousand-year-old state”, proclaiming the legacy of both the Romanov Empire and the Soviet Union part of national history. The article discusses various historiographic approaches to the issue of rupture and continuity between the Romanov empire and the USSR and concludes that one can speak of a radical rupture between the Russian Empire and Soviet Russia (and later, the Soviet Union), since the Soviet project rejected the key components of the late Russian imperial project. At the same time, we can also argue that the imperial nature of the polity itself survived albeit transformed, not just during the 1917–1922 revolutionary crisis but also during the crisis of the 1990s.
{"title":"The Russian Empire and the Soviet Union: The Dialectics of Rupture and Continuity","authors":"Alexey Miller","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.882","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.882","url":null,"abstract":"Historians, politicians, and other mnemonic actors are actively debating the question about what characterises the relationship between the Romanov Empire and the Soviet Union, i. e. continuity or rupture. The Soviet regime of the interwar period emphasised discontinuity, both in domestic policy and in the international arena. Whenever references to the Romanov Empire appeared in international treaties of the Soviets of that time, it was only in the context of a renunciation of that legacy. However, on the eve of World War II, the Soviet authorities clearly outlined the Soviet state’s claims to its status as a successor state of the Russian Empire, declaring its right to the territories of the Baltic states, Bessarabia, and the western regions of Ukraine and Belarus that had once been part of the Romanov empire, or were claimed by Russia in WWI, such as Galicia and Bukovina. In the USSR, starting in the second half of the 1930s, the image of the Russian Empire as a “prison of peoples” faded into the background, replaced by the arguments about “objective progressiveness” in annexing certain territories and ethnic groups into the empire. However, the role of the October Revolution as the founding myth of the Soviet society persisted until the Soviet Union’s implosion and left no doubt that the rupture was crucially important for the Soviet authorities. During Boris Yeltsin’s presidency in the 1990s, Russia was trying to shape a new narrative of a young nation, which was starting its history from 1991, but the attempt quite predictably failed. After becoming president, Vladimir Putin almost immediately switched to the narrative of “a thousand-year-old state”, proclaiming the legacy of both the Romanov Empire and the Soviet Union part of national history. The article discusses various historiographic approaches to the issue of rupture and continuity between the Romanov empire and the USSR and concludes that one can speak of a radical rupture between the Russian Empire and Soviet Russia (and later, the Soviet Union), since the Soviet project rejected the key components of the late Russian imperial project. At the same time, we can also argue that the imperial nature of the polity itself survived albeit transformed, not just during the 1917–1922 revolutionary crisis but also during the crisis of the 1990s.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140365258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
During the pre-revolutionary decades, the Estonian diaspora was one of the most active in St Petersburg, however, it remains little-studied to this day. An intensive study of the history of Estonian churches in St Petersburg province and the Estonian deanery of the St Petersburg diocese make it possible to raise the question of an organised Orthodox Estonian diaspora that did not merge with the Lutheran one. This article formulates the reasons for introducing this phenomenon into scholarly circulation and characterises its distinctive features. The author refers to documents from the Central State Historical Archive of St Petersburg (primarily, reports from the dean of Estonian district), as well as articles and materials from the first All-Russian population census. The active development of the issue studied by some historians in recent years speaks of its relevance. The article provides an overview of the historical situation, identifies the problems that characterised the life of Estonian migrants in St Petersburg and the province, and describes the contribution to the solution of the problem by Archpriest Pavel Kuhlbusch, senior priest of the Estonian church in the capital and dean of the Estonian parishes of the diocese. Additionally, the author carries out a detailed analysis of the theological aspect of the diaspora’s existence and missionary and educational work inside it. The threat of nationalism caused by the language barrier with the locals, the linguistic community with a Lutheran majority, and the incomprehensibility of the Church Slavonic language for foreigners was the breeding ground of the Estonian diaspora as a whole and led the Orthodox Estonian diaspora to a crisis at the time of the collapse of the Russian Empire. The atheism of Bolshevik ideology finally terminated its life in the 1930s. However, the panhellenism of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which replaced the multiculturalism of the Russian Empire, also failed to contribute to the development of Orthodoxy among Estonians. The efforts Pavel Kuhlbusch made for many years led to an increase in the number of Orthodox Estonians, whose literacy and enlightenment also increased significantly, but his departure to Estonia for episcopal service and death in 1919 had a disastrous effect on the future fate of the Estonian Orthodox diaspora.
{"title":"Orthodox Estonians in St Petersburg Province: The Fate of the Diaspora in an Autochthonous Environment","authors":"K. Kostromin","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.870","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.870","url":null,"abstract":"During the pre-revolutionary decades, the Estonian diaspora was one of the most active in St Petersburg, however, it remains little-studied to this day. An intensive study of the history of Estonian churches in St Petersburg province and the Estonian deanery of the St Petersburg diocese make it possible to raise the question of an organised Orthodox Estonian diaspora that did not merge with the Lutheran one. This article formulates the reasons for introducing this phenomenon into scholarly circulation and characterises its distinctive features. The author refers to documents from the Central State Historical Archive of St Petersburg (primarily, reports from the dean of Estonian district), as well as articles and materials from the first All-Russian population census. The active development of the issue studied by some historians in recent years speaks of its relevance. The article provides an overview of the historical situation, identifies the problems that characterised the life of Estonian migrants in St Petersburg and the province, and describes the contribution to the solution of the problem by Archpriest Pavel Kuhlbusch, senior priest of the Estonian church in the capital and dean of the Estonian parishes of the diocese. Additionally, the author carries out a detailed analysis of the theological aspect of the diaspora’s existence and missionary and educational work inside it. The threat of nationalism caused by the language barrier with the locals, the linguistic community with a Lutheran majority, and the incomprehensibility of the Church Slavonic language for foreigners was the breeding ground of the Estonian diaspora as a whole and led the Orthodox Estonian diaspora to a crisis at the time of the collapse of the Russian Empire. The atheism of Bolshevik ideology finally terminated its life in the 1930s. However, the panhellenism of the Patriarchate of Constantinople, which replaced the multiculturalism of the Russian Empire, also failed to contribute to the development of Orthodoxy among Estonians. The efforts Pavel Kuhlbusch made for many years led to an increase in the number of Orthodox Estonians, whose literacy and enlightenment also increased significantly, but his departure to Estonia for episcopal service and death in 1919 had a disastrous effect on the future fate of the Estonian Orthodox diaspora.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140365811","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article considers the transfer of the military imperial heritage into new hands after 1917, which was especially in demand since this transition took place in an environment of aggravated political, ethnic, and religious conflicts. The most important role in this process was played by the bearers of army practices – soldiers, officers, and generals of various nationalities. A long war was accompanied by a separation of command personnel: military leaders who had not proved their professional worth gave up leadership positions to those who had proved themselves better in leading troops. Breaking the established hierarchical patterns, the turbulence of the revolutionary era allowed many ambitious and talented military leaders to occupy high positions, which was impossible in normal circumstances. The high administrative burden that lay on the generals and officers of the Russian imperial army and the experience of running a military economy prepared them for the role of statesmen in the new states that arose from the ruins of the Russian Empire. Military reserves concentrated in front-line areas made it possible to resolve issues of material support for the national armed forces.
{"title":"Empire after Empire: Military Legacy and the Creation of Nation States","authors":"Vladimir Lapin","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.872","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.872","url":null,"abstract":"This article considers the transfer of the military imperial heritage into new hands after 1917, which was especially in demand since this transition took place in an environment of aggravated political, ethnic, and religious conflicts. The most important role in this process was played by the bearers of army practices – soldiers, officers, and generals of various nationalities. A long war was accompanied by a separation of command personnel: military leaders who had not proved their professional worth gave up leadership positions to those who had proved themselves better in leading troops. Breaking the established hierarchical patterns, the turbulence of the revolutionary era allowed many ambitious and talented military leaders to occupy high positions, which was impossible in normal circumstances. The high administrative burden that lay on the generals and officers of the Russian imperial army and the experience of running a military economy prepared them for the role of statesmen in the new states that arose from the ruins of the Russian Empire. Military reserves concentrated in front-line areas made it possible to resolve issues of material support for the national armed forces.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140366066","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This article analyses the evolution of language policy in the former Soviet Union with reference to documentary sources and its relationship with national policy and the Constitution. The rapid changes in the national policy of the USSR, starting with the idea of full equality of all nations and the right to self-determination, with subsequent changes towards the rapprochement of peoples, influenced the language policy, which evolved from multilingualism to bilingualism with an emphasis on the Russian language. It is important to note that the Russian language did not have a clear legal status in the USSR Constitution, unlike the national languages, which were enshrined in the constitutions and language laws of the Soviet republics. The Russian language mainly spread through administrative decrees, which led to negative consequences such as manipulation of language issues by local nationalists and the emergence of national conflicts, and influenced the process of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Compared to the modern European Union, where English dominates over other languages, the USSR represented a different version of language coexistence and a different language policy. This emphasizes the importance of finding a balance between the unity and diversity of languages and cultures of nations. The lack of a clear position on multilingualism and manipulation of the national sense of language as an indicator of identity contributed to tensions and aroused all kinds of emotions, thus provoking conflicts on cultural and national grounds.
{"title":"Mistakes in Language Policy as a Factor in the Collapse of the Soviet Union","authors":"Liu Juan","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.879","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.879","url":null,"abstract":"This article analyses the evolution of language policy in the former Soviet Union with reference to documentary sources and its relationship with national policy and the Constitution. The rapid changes in the national policy of the USSR, starting with the idea of full equality of all nations and the right to self-determination, with subsequent changes towards the rapprochement of peoples, influenced the language policy, which evolved from multilingualism to bilingualism with an emphasis on the Russian language. It is important to note that the Russian language did not have a clear legal status in the USSR Constitution, unlike the national languages, which were enshrined in the constitutions and language laws of the Soviet republics. The Russian language mainly spread through administrative decrees, which led to negative consequences such as manipulation of language issues by local nationalists and the emergence of national conflicts, and influenced the process of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Compared to the modern European Union, where English dominates over other languages, the USSR represented a different version of language coexistence and a different language policy. This emphasizes the importance of finding a balance between the unity and diversity of languages and cultures of nations. The lack of a clear position on multilingualism and manipulation of the national sense of language as an indicator of identity contributed to tensions and aroused all kinds of emotions, thus provoking conflicts on cultural and national grounds.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140366235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The entrepreneurial activity of the Jews flourished in the Turkestan region after the conquest of the territory of Kokand and part of the Bukhara khanates by the Russian Empire. Starting from the 1870s, Jews who had long lived on the territory of the Bukhara Emirate began to move to the Samarkand and Fergana valleys. The main actors in the economy of Turkestan were the “national” groups of merchants who controlled the entire economic life of the region. On the eve of the conquest of the Turkestan region by Russian troops, Bukharan Jews and the so-called “Sartian” merchants played a significant role in international and domestic trade in the Khanates. In fact, the entire international trade of the khanates was in the hands of intermediaries – Bukharan Jews. With the arrival of the Russians in the region, they stepped up their activities in the newly created Turkestan and tried to take all the threads of the economy into their own hands. The main emphasis is on the activities of Jewish firms and trading houses and their role in the Central Asian economy. For the first time, archival documents are introduced into academic circulation, covering the trading operations of Jewish firms and trading houses in Russian Turkestan. The article also attempts to prove that the adoption of restrictive laws did not affect the successful development of the substantial Bukharan-Jewish capital in the Turkestan region. Based on archival documents, the author demonstrates that the imperial authorities, institutions, and structures actively interacted with substantial Jewish capital in the imperial periphery.
{"title":"“We are the Turkestan Rothschilds”: Jewish Firms and Trading Houses in the Turkestan General-Government","authors":"Bakhtiyor Alimdzhanov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.869","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.869","url":null,"abstract":"The entrepreneurial activity of the Jews flourished in the Turkestan region after the conquest of the territory of Kokand and part of the Bukhara khanates by the Russian Empire. Starting from the 1870s, Jews who had long lived on the territory of the Bukhara Emirate began to move to the Samarkand and Fergana valleys. The main actors in the economy of Turkestan were the “national” groups of merchants who controlled the entire economic life of the region. On the eve of the conquest of the Turkestan region by Russian troops, Bukharan Jews and the so-called “Sartian” merchants played a significant role in international and domestic trade in the Khanates. In fact, the entire international trade of the khanates was in the hands of intermediaries – Bukharan Jews. With the arrival of the Russians in the region, they stepped up their activities in the newly created Turkestan and tried to take all the threads of the economy into their own hands. The main emphasis is on the activities of Jewish firms and trading houses and their role in the Central Asian economy. For the first time, archival documents are introduced into academic circulation, covering the trading operations of Jewish firms and trading houses in Russian Turkestan. The article also attempts to prove that the adoption of restrictive laws did not affect the successful development of the substantial Bukharan-Jewish capital in the Turkestan region. Based on archival documents, the author demonstrates that the imperial authorities, institutions, and structures actively interacted with substantial Jewish capital in the imperial periphery.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140365076","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper offers an analysis of the process by which new borders appeared in Inner Asia during the late imperial period. The research focuses on the borders of Russia, Qing, and Mongolia at the time of the collapse of the Qing Empire and political crisis in Russia, which led to its demise in 1917. The author aims to reveal the influence of these processes on the region referring to transborder smuggling via the transformation of the control and power of central governments. In the author’s opinion, two key factors defined the increase in opium smuggling at the Russo-Mongolian border in 1900–1917. First, political destabilization on the outskirts of the Qing Empire. Second, Cossack regiments were sent from the border to Europe to take part in World War I, thus border control was greatly reduced. The research for this study is based upon the materials of the Russian Imperial customs in the town of Kyakhta, the long-time center of Russo-Chinese trade. Based on archival data, one can trace the volumes and routes of opium smuggling from Iran to Mongolia. The area under consideration is well researched as a cross-border smuggling point; however, the problem of the illicit opium trade is still insufficiently analyzed. This is due to both political obstacles and access to sources. This article is the first attempt at a systematic study of opium trafficking through Kyakhta. The destination of the routes was the town of Maimaicheng, located near Kyakhta and inhabited by Chinese merchants. Opium was also bought by the honghuzi – armed robbers operating near the border. However, when the Civil War broke out in Russia (1917–1922), and the Far Eastern Republic was established, opium supply via the Trans-Siberian Railway declined as this route was no longer safe. Therefore, the notion of regional order and disorder is an important category for this research. This framework offers a way of better understanding Trans-Eurasian relations in the twentieth century.
{"title":"Empires’ Keif, or Opium Trade on the Tea Route in the Era of Late Empires","authors":"Alexey V. Mikhalev","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.878","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.878","url":null,"abstract":"This paper offers an analysis of the process by which new borders appeared in Inner Asia during the late imperial period. The research focuses on the borders of Russia, Qing, and Mongolia at the time of the collapse of the Qing Empire and political crisis in Russia, which led to its demise in 1917. The author aims to reveal the influence of these processes on the region referring to transborder smuggling via the transformation of the control and power of central governments. In the author’s opinion, two key factors defined the increase in opium smuggling at the Russo-Mongolian border in 1900–1917. First, political destabilization on the outskirts of the Qing Empire. Second, Cossack regiments were sent from the border to Europe to take part in World War I, thus border control was greatly reduced. The research for this study is based upon the materials of the Russian Imperial customs in the town of Kyakhta, the long-time center of Russo-Chinese trade. Based on archival data, one can trace the volumes and routes of opium smuggling from Iran to Mongolia. The area under consideration is well researched as a cross-border smuggling point; however, the problem of the illicit opium trade is still insufficiently analyzed. This is due to both political obstacles and access to sources. This article is the first attempt at a systematic study of opium trafficking through Kyakhta. The destination of the routes was the town of Maimaicheng, located near Kyakhta and inhabited by Chinese merchants. Opium was also bought by the honghuzi – armed robbers operating near the border. However, when the Civil War broke out in Russia (1917–1922), and the Far Eastern Republic was established, opium supply via the Trans-Siberian Railway declined as this route was no longer safe. Therefore, the notion of regional order and disorder is an important category for this research. This framework offers a way of better understanding Trans-Eurasian relations in the twentieth century.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140365678","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Based on the fundamental statement that the Russian immigrant community in Northeast China in the late nineteenth – mid-twentieth centuries was a diaspora, this article examines the process of transformation of the nature of the Russian diaspora and the peculiarities of its functioning at certain stages of its existence. The research is based on the conceptual ideas of Imperial and Diaspora Studies. There are four stages of the existence of the Russian diaspora in Manchuria, which differ in the nature of the interaction of Russian immigrants with a foreign cultural environment, due to the sociolegal, economic, and political situation of the diaspora, as well as sociopolitical and sociocultural conditions of the living environment. The Russian immigrant community was formed as an imperial diaspora during the period of Russian domination in Manchuria. Despite the decline of the political and legal status and the marginalization in the early 1920s and later the split into politically antagonistic Soviet and Emigrant colonies, the diaspora retained elements of imperial consciousness and the desire for national and cultural autonomy. In the case of the Soviet colony, this was accompanied by attempts at a new “imperial” expansion in the form of Sovietization of the former alienated zone of the CER. In its turn, focused on the Sinification of the former alienated zone, the policy of the Chinese authorities led to a conflict of interests and hindered the process of integration of Russian immigrants, which was already complicated by the cultural and religious alienation of the living environment. The capture of Manchuria by the Japanese and the creation of the state of Manchukuo, which led to the disappearance of the Soviet colony, actualised the problem of the Russian diaspora’s integration into the multinational community of Manchukuo. Implemented within the framework of the Japanese pan-Asian national policy, the integration led to the strengthening of national defence tendencies and a significant numerical decline of the Russian diaspora. After 1945, the Russian diaspora, which was subjected to political repression, experienced intensive Sovietization and turned into an instrument of Soviet policy in Northeast China. The history of the diaspora ended with mass repatriation and remigration of 1954–1961.
{"title":"The Evolution of the Russian Diaspora in Northeast China (Late 19th – Mid‑20th Centuries)","authors":"Sergey Smirnov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.864","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.864","url":null,"abstract":"Based on the fundamental statement that the Russian immigrant community in Northeast China in the late nineteenth – mid-twentieth centuries was a diaspora, this article examines the process of transformation of the nature of the Russian diaspora and the peculiarities of its functioning at certain stages of its existence. The research is based on the conceptual ideas of Imperial and Diaspora Studies. There are four stages of the existence of the Russian diaspora in Manchuria, which differ in the nature of the interaction of Russian immigrants with a foreign cultural environment, due to the sociolegal, economic, and political situation of the diaspora, as well as sociopolitical and sociocultural conditions of the living environment. The Russian immigrant community was formed as an imperial diaspora during the period of Russian domination in Manchuria. Despite the decline of the political and legal status and the marginalization in the early 1920s and later the split into politically antagonistic Soviet and Emigrant colonies, the diaspora retained elements of imperial consciousness and the desire for national and cultural autonomy. In the case of the Soviet colony, this was accompanied by attempts at a new “imperial” expansion in the form of Sovietization of the former alienated zone of the CER. In its turn, focused on the Sinification of the former alienated zone, the policy of the Chinese authorities led to a conflict of interests and hindered the process of integration of Russian immigrants, which was already complicated by the cultural and religious alienation of the living environment. The capture of Manchuria by the Japanese and the creation of the state of Manchukuo, which led to the disappearance of the Soviet colony, actualised the problem of the Russian diaspora’s integration into the multinational community of Manchukuo. Implemented within the framework of the Japanese pan-Asian national policy, the integration led to the strengthening of national defence tendencies and a significant numerical decline of the Russian diaspora. After 1945, the Russian diaspora, which was subjected to political repression, experienced intensive Sovietization and turned into an instrument of Soviet policy in Northeast China. The history of the diaspora ended with mass repatriation and remigration of 1954–1961.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140366262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Following the collapse of the USSR, a significant number of Soviet citizens not belonging to the titular nations of these countries found themselves in the territories of the newly formed states. This article aims to establish the extent to which the concept of “diaspora” is applicable to the Russian communities that lived in these territories during this period. The migration processes of today contribute to the replenishment of countries bordering on the Russian Federation with people of a different formation, at the same time helping the Russian abroad survive as a phenomenon, which makes the topic relevant. The work draws on legislative acts and other official documents of the state authorities, also referring to published interviews with Russian-speaking residents of these regions (both those living there and those who have returned to Russia). To date, the issue of the concept of “diaspora” is debatable. Without polemizing on this issue, the author bases the study not on the concept itself, but on its characteristics and key features shared by most scholars. The author gives a brief overview of the attitude of the Russian state to this category of population and to the problem of diasporas itself. Showing their transformation in the 1990s, the author concludes that it is inappropriate to apply this notion to the Russians of the near abroad in the above-mentioned period. Instead, the concept of “Russian-speaking communities” seems more appropriate, which does not deny the possibility of further transformation of the community into a diaspora.
{"title":"Russian Diasporas of the Near Abroad in the Post-Perestroika Period: Phantom or Reality?","authors":"Anna V. Uriadova","doi":"10.15826/qr.2024.1.867","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2024.1.867","url":null,"abstract":"Following the collapse of the USSR, a significant number of Soviet citizens not belonging to the titular nations of these countries found themselves in the territories of the newly formed states. This article aims to establish the extent to which the concept of “diaspora” is applicable to the Russian communities that lived in these territories during this period. The migration processes of today contribute to the replenishment of countries bordering on the Russian Federation with people of a different formation, at the same time helping the Russian abroad survive as a phenomenon, which makes the topic relevant. The work draws on legislative acts and other official documents of the state authorities, also referring to published interviews with Russian-speaking residents of these regions (both those living there and those who have returned to Russia). To date, the issue of the concept of “diaspora” is debatable. Without polemizing on this issue, the author bases the study not on the concept itself, but on its characteristics and key features shared by most scholars. The author gives a brief overview of the attitude of the Russian state to this category of population and to the problem of diasporas itself. Showing their transformation in the 1990s, the author concludes that it is inappropriate to apply this notion to the Russians of the near abroad in the above-mentioned period. Instead, the concept of “Russian-speaking communities” seems more appropriate, which does not deny the possibility of further transformation of the community into a diaspora.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2,"publicationDate":"2024-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140366747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：