Paul Goble
Fairfax, March 29 – Preliminary results from the 2010 Russian census highlight some of that country’s most serious underlying problems and thus appear likely to be the subject of intense discussion and debate not only among commentators but also in the upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections.
The results released yesterday show a continuing decline in the total Russian population, a hollowing out of much of the country, an increase in the gender imbalance Russia has suffered since World War II, and, what is especially disturbing to many Russians, a shift in the ethnic balance of the population as a result of differential birthrates and immigration.
And those trends -- which some observers are already suggesting may be even worse than the official figures show -- help explain why some Russian leaders wanted to put off the census or at least reports of its findings until after the 2012 presidential elections lest the census data call attention to the failures of Moscow’s policies over the last decade.
Yesterday, “Rossiiskaya gazeta” published preliminary results for the 2010 Russian census (www.nr2.ru/rus/325729.html). Even this small sample has sparked widespread discussion as well as reignited suspicions in many quarters that this census like the one in 2002 was distorted by massive falsifications of various kinds.
The three most striking features of these data were first, the overall decline in the population, some 2.2 million or 1.6 percent, since 2002; the worsening of the gender imbalance in the country because of super-high mortality rates among working age men, and the relative decline in the ethnic Russian share of the population, even though ethnic data were not released.
On the one hand, as many commentators noted, non-Russian regions grew while predominantly ethnic Russian ones declined in size, further hollowing out the ethnic Russian core of the country and raising questions in the minds of some about the future of the Russian nation and hence of the Russian state.
And on the other, as other writers noted, the decline in the size of the total population would have been far greater had it not been compensated for by a massive influx of immigrants, few of whom have been ethnic Russians (in contrast to the situation in the 1990s) and many of whom are increasingly culturally and linguistically different from Russians.
Liberal opposition figure Boris Nemtsov was among those who pointed to all these things. He suggested in a comment to Novy region that “citizens of Russia are disappearing at a speed of about 500,000 a year. That is, the total loss [for the intercensal period was at least] five million” (www.nr2.ru/moskow/325874.html).
These population trends, Nemtsov said, “mean one thing:” neither the country nor the state “has a future.” What must be done, he said, is “to reorient resources awy from the special services and the enrichment [of the few] toward health care and a healthy way of life” and to stand the economic policy in the country in order to create a middle class.”
Making those changes requires a change in the country’s leadership, he said. “under the current regime, the withering away [of the nation and hence of Russia’s future] will continue.”
Coming from a different perspective, Moscow commentator Mikhail Delyagin agreed, although he put it somewhat differently. According to him, the withering away of Russia has been stopped at least in official statistics but only at the cost of a change in the ethnic composition of the country (forum-msk.org/material/economic/5842854.html).
According to Delyagin, increasingly social and economic conflicts may soon take the form in Russia “if not of national then of ethno-cultural” ones, and if that proves to be the case, he argued, “this will mark a colossal step toward the degradation and archaization of all of Russian society.”
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Window on Eurasia: Forty Percent of Tajiks Now Have Trouble Getting Safe Drinking Water
Paul Goble
Fairfax, March 29 – Just how serious water problems have become in post-Soviet Central Asia both because of longstanding trends and the current drought is underscored by a report that two out of every five of the residents of Tajikistan, one of only two countries in the region with a water surplus, are now facing difficulties in getting water that is safe to drink.
Moreover, officials at the Tajik state agency responsible for supplying water to the population told CA-News last week, the situation in that 7.5 million-strong republic is even worse in some rural districts, a development that is certain to lead to more outbreaks of disease and spark new political problems (www.centrasia.ru/news.php?st=1300778160).
“Despite an excess of water resources,” a Dushanbe official said, “a difficult situation has arisen in supplying drinking water to the population has developed,” one in which almost three out of every four residents is forced to rely on inadequate water distribution facilities or lack them altogether.
The greater part of the water distribution system in Tajikistan was built 40 to 60 years ago and has not been adequately maintained or updated. As a result, “more than 50 percent” of it is not in working order, with all but a tiny fraction of the remainder at risk of failing in the near future.
According to Tajik officials, the situation is especially bad in rural areas where a shortage of funds and “the liquidation of administrative structures which early were responsible” for maintaining the system has left no one in charge and created a situation where what water and sewage facilities there are “do not correspond to sanitary norms.”
“With the transition to mark relations,” one official says, “the budget for the construction of public works, including water systems, was sharply reduced.” As a result, planned construction was either cancelled or spread over a longer period of time. Now, to bring things up to standard would “require colossal means” and the assistance of foreign governments.
Since 2008, Dushanbe has been attempting to rectify the situation as part of a 12-year-program, but even if that program is successful, it will reduce the share of Tajiks who lack access to potable only from 40 percent to 20 percent, meaning that more than two million people there will still not have safe drinking water.
What makes this lack of potable water so striking is that in the glaciers and lakes of Tajikistan are more than 800 billion cubic meters of fresh water, the source of more than 55 percent of all the water resources of Central Asia, of which Tajikistan historically has taken only 15 percent of the total.
If Tajikistan is forced to take more out of this flow in order to deal with its own water crisis, that will have consequences for downstream countries like Uzbekistan with which Tajikistan does not have good relations even now. And thus water could become the cause of new conflicts, possibly involving the use of military force, between the two.
That water can play that role in international affairs is suggested by yet another report last week: Because of a serious drought, Beijing is now buying land abroad in order to ensure that its farmers will be able to feed the still-growing Chinese population, water-driven purchases that could spark additional conflicts as well (www.ng.ru/world/2011-03-22/1_china.html).
Fairfax, March 29 – Just how serious water problems have become in post-Soviet Central Asia both because of longstanding trends and the current drought is underscored by a report that two out of every five of the residents of Tajikistan, one of only two countries in the region with a water surplus, are now facing difficulties in getting water that is safe to drink.
Moreover, officials at the Tajik state agency responsible for supplying water to the population told CA-News last week, the situation in that 7.5 million-strong republic is even worse in some rural districts, a development that is certain to lead to more outbreaks of disease and spark new political problems (www.centrasia.ru/news.php?st=1300778160).
“Despite an excess of water resources,” a Dushanbe official said, “a difficult situation has arisen in supplying drinking water to the population has developed,” one in which almost three out of every four residents is forced to rely on inadequate water distribution facilities or lack them altogether.
The greater part of the water distribution system in Tajikistan was built 40 to 60 years ago and has not been adequately maintained or updated. As a result, “more than 50 percent” of it is not in working order, with all but a tiny fraction of the remainder at risk of failing in the near future.
According to Tajik officials, the situation is especially bad in rural areas where a shortage of funds and “the liquidation of administrative structures which early were responsible” for maintaining the system has left no one in charge and created a situation where what water and sewage facilities there are “do not correspond to sanitary norms.”
“With the transition to mark relations,” one official says, “the budget for the construction of public works, including water systems, was sharply reduced.” As a result, planned construction was either cancelled or spread over a longer period of time. Now, to bring things up to standard would “require colossal means” and the assistance of foreign governments.
Since 2008, Dushanbe has been attempting to rectify the situation as part of a 12-year-program, but even if that program is successful, it will reduce the share of Tajiks who lack access to potable only from 40 percent to 20 percent, meaning that more than two million people there will still not have safe drinking water.
What makes this lack of potable water so striking is that in the glaciers and lakes of Tajikistan are more than 800 billion cubic meters of fresh water, the source of more than 55 percent of all the water resources of Central Asia, of which Tajikistan historically has taken only 15 percent of the total.
If Tajikistan is forced to take more out of this flow in order to deal with its own water crisis, that will have consequences for downstream countries like Uzbekistan with which Tajikistan does not have good relations even now. And thus water could become the cause of new conflicts, possibly involving the use of military force, between the two.
That water can play that role in international affairs is suggested by yet another report last week: Because of a serious drought, Beijing is now buying land abroad in order to ensure that its farmers will be able to feed the still-growing Chinese population, water-driven purchases that could spark additional conflicts as well (www.ng.ru/world/2011-03-22/1_china.html).
Window on Eurasia: Ingush Now Trust Yevkurov Less than They Do Zyazikov, Poll Shows
Paul Goble
Staunton, March 29 – Yunus-Bek Yevkurov, a professional soldier with a reputation for incorruptibility, who many viewed as the savior of the North Caucasus republic of Ingushetia, is now trusted less by the population there than his discredited predecessor as Ingushetia head, Murat Zyazikov, according to an independent poll.
That survey, conducted by the independent “Dosh” journal, is the latest blow to the hopes of many in Moscow and the region that someone like Yevkurov could establish order there and puts additional pressure on the center to allow these republics to choose their own leaders rather than have them imposed from above (www.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/182925/).
Some 1500 residents of Nazran and other Ingushetia cities and villages were asked: “Whom do you trust more: Ruslan Aushev, Murat Zyazivok, or Yunus-Bek Yevkurov?” 81.8 percent of those responding named Aushev, 9.5 percent identified Zyazikov but “only 8.7 percent” said they trusted Yevkurov the most.
Israpil Shovkhalov, the editor of “Dosh,” said that what surprised him and his colleagues was “not the high level of trust for the first president Aushev. It has long been known that he is the most popular Ingush politicial. What was surprising was the sharp and almost crushing decline of trust to the present head of Ingushetia,” especially relative to the hated Zyazikov.
When Yevkurov replaced Zyazikov, Shovkhalov said, “his willingness to meet with the people, his accessibility and openness, his opposition to corruption in a literal sense delighted people,” especially in contrast to Zyazikov who was widely suspected of organizing the killing of some of his opponents.
“But how then could it happen,” the “Dosh” editor, asked, “that after less than half-way through the presidential term of the third leader of the youngest Russian republic, [the incumbent] has lost the trust of the majority of his [former] backers?”
Olga Allenova, a special correspondent for “Kommersant,” told Kavkaz-uzel.ru that the Ingushetians may have had too great expectations for Yevkurov and are now not surprisingly disappointed. He arrived as “the new, ‘Medvedev’ candidate and everyone thought well now he will put everything in order, deal with corruption” and everything else.
But many of those problems have been beyond his powers to correct. In addition, many in Ingushetia are furious at Yevkurov for “surrendering” the Prigorodny district to the Osetians, Allenova said, forgetting that he took that step under pressure from Moscow and in order to remove one of the neuralgic situations in the area.
According to the “Kommersant” journalist, however, Yevkurov’s chief failure and hence the explanation for his low rating lies elsewhere, in his inability to deal with corruption endemic to the republic. “But,” she writes, “corruption turned out to be stronger [than he] because the roots of Caucasian corruption are in Moscow and not in the Caucasus.”
According to Olga Bobrova of “Novaya gazeta,” Yevkurov initially benefitted from comparisons with his despised predecessor, but soon it because obvious that he could not end many of the same problems, including violence and kidnappings, that had brought opprobrium on Zyazikov’s head. And then the people turned against him.
Moreover, she added, Yevkurov turned out to be “not free from the vertical” of Vladimir Putin and therefore found out rather quickly that he could not fulfill the promises he made to the people if those promises ran against the interests of those above him in Moscow. That too sapped his authority.
In recent days, Yevkurov appears to be reducing his standing with the population still further. Four days ago, “Kommersant” reported that he had openly justified the use of force against a peaceful demonstration by the Ingush opposition, a statement that has cost him additional support (www.kommersant.ru/Doc-y/1607389).
Staunton, March 29 – Yunus-Bek Yevkurov, a professional soldier with a reputation for incorruptibility, who many viewed as the savior of the North Caucasus republic of Ingushetia, is now trusted less by the population there than his discredited predecessor as Ingushetia head, Murat Zyazikov, according to an independent poll.
That survey, conducted by the independent “Dosh” journal, is the latest blow to the hopes of many in Moscow and the region that someone like Yevkurov could establish order there and puts additional pressure on the center to allow these republics to choose their own leaders rather than have them imposed from above (www.kavkaz-uzel.ru/articles/182925/).
Some 1500 residents of Nazran and other Ingushetia cities and villages were asked: “Whom do you trust more: Ruslan Aushev, Murat Zyazivok, or Yunus-Bek Yevkurov?” 81.8 percent of those responding named Aushev, 9.5 percent identified Zyazikov but “only 8.7 percent” said they trusted Yevkurov the most.
Israpil Shovkhalov, the editor of “Dosh,” said that what surprised him and his colleagues was “not the high level of trust for the first president Aushev. It has long been known that he is the most popular Ingush politicial. What was surprising was the sharp and almost crushing decline of trust to the present head of Ingushetia,” especially relative to the hated Zyazikov.
When Yevkurov replaced Zyazikov, Shovkhalov said, “his willingness to meet with the people, his accessibility and openness, his opposition to corruption in a literal sense delighted people,” especially in contrast to Zyazikov who was widely suspected of organizing the killing of some of his opponents.
“But how then could it happen,” the “Dosh” editor, asked, “that after less than half-way through the presidential term of the third leader of the youngest Russian republic, [the incumbent] has lost the trust of the majority of his [former] backers?”
Olga Allenova, a special correspondent for “Kommersant,” told Kavkaz-uzel.ru that the Ingushetians may have had too great expectations for Yevkurov and are now not surprisingly disappointed. He arrived as “the new, ‘Medvedev’ candidate and everyone thought well now he will put everything in order, deal with corruption” and everything else.
But many of those problems have been beyond his powers to correct. In addition, many in Ingushetia are furious at Yevkurov for “surrendering” the Prigorodny district to the Osetians, Allenova said, forgetting that he took that step under pressure from Moscow and in order to remove one of the neuralgic situations in the area.
According to the “Kommersant” journalist, however, Yevkurov’s chief failure and hence the explanation for his low rating lies elsewhere, in his inability to deal with corruption endemic to the republic. “But,” she writes, “corruption turned out to be stronger [than he] because the roots of Caucasian corruption are in Moscow and not in the Caucasus.”
According to Olga Bobrova of “Novaya gazeta,” Yevkurov initially benefitted from comparisons with his despised predecessor, but soon it because obvious that he could not end many of the same problems, including violence and kidnappings, that had brought opprobrium on Zyazikov’s head. And then the people turned against him.
Moreover, she added, Yevkurov turned out to be “not free from the vertical” of Vladimir Putin and therefore found out rather quickly that he could not fulfill the promises he made to the people if those promises ran against the interests of those above him in Moscow. That too sapped his authority.
In recent days, Yevkurov appears to be reducing his standing with the population still further. Four days ago, “Kommersant” reported that he had openly justified the use of force against a peaceful demonstration by the Ingush opposition, a statement that has cost him additional support (www.kommersant.ru/Doc-y/1607389).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
