How was the colonial policy of the USSR and tsarist Russia manifested itself in Central Asia and what was the stimulus for active decolonial discourse in the regional states.
In its traditional interpretation, colonialism is when the so-called developed countries conquer independent nations (domination over the “rest of the world”).
The period of colonialism is 16th to 20th centuries. The peak was during the outbreak of the First World War. It is often identified with the imperialism.
The signs of the colonial policy are exploitation, both economic and social, and loss of sovereignty, seizure of territories, occupation, migration of mother country residents to the colony and annexation of territories.
If we look at the exploitation in terms of economy, it means the use of resources, cheap labour, etc.
In terms of civilizational exploitation, it means cultural and religious expansion
There are three to five types of colonialism.
Traditional — settler. It involves large-scale migration of mother country residents. They settle down in the best territories and oust colonized residents to the countryside.
This principle was followed when North America, Australia, New Zealand were settled. Also, this type of colonialism is considered typical for Russia.
There is the exploitation colonialism. It means the exploitation of resources available in the area and the use of cheap labour. This type of colonialism was peculiar to India, as well as the states of Africa.
There is the internal colonialism, which takes place within one state. It is peculiar to the Russian Empire (this is what Aleksandr Etkind wrote about in his book “Internal colonialism”), when discrimination came from the fact that some controlled more resources than others did. This inequality allows more powerful groups to colonise those who are weaker. However, this type of colonialism is also peculiar to former colonies.
No doubt, when we speak about the USSR, the traditional rhetoric here is the so-called voluntary accession of countries to the Union. But in the modern sense, it is a kind of colonisation.
In fact, the autonomy of all states that took place after the Bolsheviks seized power was just an appearance. In its classical sense, colonialism differs from the concept of the Soviet Union. However, today there are discussions, especially in academic circles, that the post-Soviet, post-imperial periods should be equated to post-colonial periods.
All signs of colonialism existed in Central Asia during the USSR in one way or another.
First, there was the exploitation of resources, and the indigenous people (also called ethno) were ousted to the countryside.
There were also indigenisation (political campaign intended to bridge the gap between the central power and the population) and sedentism (transition from the nomadic lifestyle to sedentary).
Moreover, the nation-building policy was pursued, when notions of “titular nations”, representatives of the indigenous population, were formed. However, privileges were distributed unevenly. For example, despite the appointment of representatives of titular nations for senior positions in the culture and cinema office, the centralised power always requested reporting to the higher authority.
It can include the language policy and the fact that the governments of republics had very few representatives of the so-called “titular nation”.
For example, some indigenous residents still do not speak their mother tongue. The main language of instruction was Russian, while indigenous languages fell by the wayside.
In general, the nostalgia for the Soviet period makes the people of these countries vulnerable to the propaganda. Self-orientalism of the own national identity is also the consequence of impact of that period.
We can still feel the echoes of that time now. It is mainly demonstrated in the “leadership” of Russia in the “Eurasian” region.
Also, public figures of Russia often publicly doubted the territorial integrity of the states and their statehood, in general. The impact is made due to the economic dependence, and also via the Eurasian Economic Union, where the welfare, obligations and responsibility are distributed unevenly.
The population in the region is also vulnerable to the propaganda via media resources, TV and online platforms.
We need it to rethink and recover our own national identity. We need it even more especially as the Russian party reacts negatively to the attempts of the state to pursue the intense policy of widespread introduction of the mother tongue. The “anti-Russian” rhetoric exists here.
The nation-building process in Central Asian countries usually took place from above. Now the society wonders “Who are we?” and the war in Ukraine has intensified this process. Moreover, the issues of own national identity have become more relevant than ever among indigenous nations not only in Central Asia, but also in Russia.