The Role of the Russian State in Facilitating the Integration of Ethnic Groups in Peripheral Regions throughout History

Abstract The Russian state has significantly contributed to the process of integration of ethnic groups into its peripheral regions, such as the North Caucasus region which is home to the ethnic groups of the Chechens, Daghestanis, and Circassians, the vast expanse of Siberia and the Far East populated by indigenous peoples of the Evenks, Yakuts, Buryats, and Chukchi, and the Volga-Ural Basin where Tatars, Bashkirs, and Chuvash dominate, through both a variety of mechanisms, including the use of force (military campaigns, deportation and forced Russification), economic incentives (resource extraction, construction of infrastructure such as the Trans-Siberian Railway, trade advantages), and various institutions (imperial governorates, Soviet autonomous republics, and post-Soviet federal districts) over time in the broad sweep of history from the period of Muscovy’s territorial expansion to today.. This study will examine the ways in which the state has developed and utilized strategies of integration — imperial expansion (16th–19th centuries); revolutionary federalism (1917–1922); Soviet korenizatsiya and deportations (1920s–1980s); and post-Soviet centralization (1991–today) — to promote assimilation, autonomy, and socio-economic inclusion. Utilizing an historical-institutional framework, this study examines several case studies of different regional settings utilizing a variety of types of primary source materials (archival documents, census data, and ethnographic information). Overall findings suggest that although the state was able to provide the infrastructure and education necessary to facilitate integration in many cases, outcomes have been inconsistent and have depended upon the specific circumstances. In fact, political centralization often undermined ethnic group agency and exacerbated intergroup tensions. To illustrate, although imperial Russia provided significant economic integration to the ethnic groups living in Siberia, it also resulted in cultural alienation; similarly, while Soviet policies provided nominal autonomy to these same ethnic groups, they ultimately served to mask central control over the region. In conclusion, the article demonstrates that the state’s role in facilitating integration has been ambivalent, resulting in either stability or separatist movements depending upon the context, and has implications for current debates regarding federalism in the era of globalization and resource competition. Overall, this study contributes to the study of state-minority relations within both multi-ethnic empires and federations.