Meskhetian Turks in Krasnodar: part 3
Reply-To: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 1998 09:14:08 +0200 (EET)
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Subject: Meskhetian Turks in Krasnodar: part 3
From: MINELRES moderator <[email protected]>
Original sender: Alexander Ossipov <[email protected]>
Meskhetian Turks in Krasnodar: part 3
MESKHETIAN TURKS IN KRASNODAR TERRITORY IN 1998: NO PROGRESS, NEW
PROBLEMS
Newsletter No.3, (continuation)
Alexander Ossipov,
programme manager,
The 'Memorial' Human Rights Centre,
Moscow, Russia
6. Ambiguous role of the UNHCR Moscow office
The UNHCR Moscow office has been involved in the case since May 1997
on request of MNRP. The representatives of UNHCR visited Krasnodar
territory in October 1997, and the main output was the decision to
fund the local administration for improving the condition of living in
the areas where Turks resided. According to the letter of 3 November
1998 from the UNHCR Moscow office addressed the 'Memorial' HRC:
'In Krasnodar, UNHCR supports the implementation of community based
projects in the field of education and medical services in the
settlements with a large presence of Meskhetian Turks. Purpose of this
assistance is to create favourable conditions for the acceptance of
Meskhetian Turks by the local population of these villages. More
specifically, UNHCR's objectives are to prevent the emergence of
inter-ethnic tensions in those communities and to address the need to
regularize the legal status of Meskhetian Turks.'
According to the local sources, the total amount granted to the
administrations of two districts (Krymsk and Abinsk) is 230,000 USD,
and one third of this sum was transferred to Krasnodar by September.
UNHCR did not put forward any preliminary conditions of observing
Russian legislation and stopping persecutions and direct
discrimination against Meskhetians. UNHCR also refrained from clear
legalist approach and stated 'the need to regularize the legal status'
of Meskhetians. It is quite natural, that the Krasnodar authorities as
well MNRP evaluated this position as a clear support to their approach
towards Meskhetians and many times since November 1997 declared that.
As far as we know the UNHCR in no case has publicly refuted these
statements, or remonstrated against persecutions and involuntary
displacement of Meskhetians.
The UNHCR position looks quite understandable. I have no grounds for
any doubts about good will and best intentions of the UNHCR officers,
but I am not sure that they understand the situation clearly. The
Krasnodar authorities offered them one of their interpretations the
situation (there are several versions for various audiences) which
sounds as follows: the Turks came, social conditions (schooling,
medicine etc.) deteriorated, that caused discontent among the local
population and a threat of violent conflict, thus the administration
was not able to grant Meskhetians registration by places of residence
for the reasons of preventing further escalation of conflict. This
explanation, while it looks extremely doubtful, might have been shared
by UNHCR without any criticism. First, the main idea looks suspicious:
a minority (Meskhetians) itself is a source of problems, and they
should blame themselves for their troubles. It is not convincing that
Meskhetians, who constitute only 6.6% of the population in Krymsk
district and 1.9% in Abinsk district (places of their 'compact
settlement') and less then 15% in any settlement wherever they reside,
who don't have access to legal job market and social security system
could be a real cause of social problems.
Anyway, the UNHCR response followed the same logic, it offered extra
funding to the local social infrastructure to decrease discontent and
social tensions. I guess, those who made decision on funding could not
imagine that this step would have a reverse effect. UNHCR avoids the
issues of observation of the Russian legislation and doesn't want to
demonstrate any discord with Russian authorities, apparently it is
being interpreted as a clear approval. UNHCR grants money for conflict
regulation, and the Krasnodar administration gains a stimulus for
keeping the situation as it is and using UNHCR as a gold mine by
claiming more and more funds for 'conflict regulation'. By the way,
the Russian authorities (of the federal and regional level) since 1994
permanently talk about their desire to obtain money from UNHCR, IOM
and other international organisation for 'solving the Meskhetian
problem'.
7. The Hague Consultations
Another blow on the Krasnodar Meskhetians was the Hague meeting on the
issues relating to the Meskhetian Turks, held on 7-10 September under
the auspices of the OSCE High Commissioner for National Minorities.
The informal consultations were initiated and hosted by OSCE HCNM in
co-operation with UNHCR and the Forced Migration Projects of the Open
Society Institute. Participants included representatives of the
governments of the Russian Federation, Georgia, Azerbaijan, as well as
representatives of the 'Vatan' society. Among the main goals of the
meeting were: to exchange first hand information on the situation, to
discuss the problems currently facing the Meskhetians Turks and
respective authorities, to attract attention of the international
community to the Meskhetian Turk case and to establish a follow-up
framework of activities. On the basis of the discussion the
participants came to a set of general conclusions concerning the
necessity of full rehabilitation of Meskhetian Turks, respect for
their human rights and of promotion of inter-ethnic tolerance. Among
the conclusions was the following:
'The participants <...> emphasized further the need to regularize the
legal status of Meskhetian Turks in the respective countries of
residence. In this context, particular concerns were expressed about
Meskhetian Turks in Krasnodar Krai of the Russian Federation, and in
Georgia; stressed the need to take measures to prevent/reduce
statelessness among Meskhetian Turks in accordance with international
norms and standards, in particular the 1961 Convention on the
Reduction of Statelessness...'
Thus, the meeting preferred to bind all the components of the
Meskhetian problems (migration to Georgia, respect to human rights,
non-discrimination and citisenship issued) together into one package,
to look upon the issues of human rights and citisenship as the matters
of political negotiations, not to recognise the very problem of
non-implementation of the national legislation and of Meskhetians'
persecutions on ethnic ground. What is of the key importance is the
approach to a part of Meskhetian Turks as stateless persons, while
concerning Russia there is no problem of statelessness within this
group, there is a problem of violation of the Russian legislation and
international obligations of the country. Hence, the Hague meeting
might be a generous present for those in Russia, who discriminate
against Meskhetians and try to expel them from the country.
8. Revival of the Russian governmental commission on Meskhetian Turks
The governmental Commission on Meskhetian Turks was revived in August
by a governmental decree. This commission was formed for the first
time in 1994, but within the first year actually worked irregularly
and then ceased its activities. The new commission consists of the
representatives of MNRP (in October this Ministry was divided into two
- the Ministry of Nationalities Affairs and the Ministry of Regional
Affairs), MIA, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Federal Migration Service,
Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Social Protection and some other
agencies. Representatives of the Meskhetian organisations are not
included. The first sitting took place on 22 September.
Representatives of NGO's were invited to participate only in the
debates on the first item of the agenda, i.e. the current situation of
the Meskhetian Turks in Russia, then they were not allowed to witness
the further discussion and no additional information was conveyed to
the concerned NGO's.
Nevertheless, we can be aware of what and how the commission was
talking about since we have the starting report, presented by a
commission member, the Head of the North Caucasian Department of MNRP
(now a deputy head of a department within the new Ministry of
Nationalities Affairs) Nikolai Bugay, as well as a brief information
on the commission activities published in a Krasnodar official paper
'Kubanskiye Novosti' (the issue of 19 November). The commission looks
upon Turks who still live in Russia without residence permits as
illegal immigrants and stateless persons, who violated the
government's decision on limitation of the Meskhetians' settlement by
the central Russia. The commission's prior objectives will be
negotiations with Georgia on the future Meskhetian repatriation and
gradual resettlement of the Meskhetians from the places of their
compact residence, continuation of the current 'repatriation' (i.e.
eviction to Turkey).
This position is not surprising, since the federal agencies have
already expressed the same attitude towards Russia Meskhetians as not
an 'appropriate' ethnic group for Russia. Now we are able to conclude,
that the governmental staff is infected with racism, and the
Meskhetian case has been one of the best pretexts to demonstrate that.
This conclusion is particularly true in respect to the Ministry of
Nationalities Affairs and MIA. Only one detail - a MNA staff member, a
head of a division and a member of the commission on Meskhetian Turks
Michael Burlakov is a council member of the Russian National Unity,
known as a neo-Nazi party, an advisor of its chief, Alexander
Barkashov. Many other employees of MNA don't look much better.
***
Thus, the situation of Meskhetian Turks in Krasnodar is not improving
so far. The new elements are direct and overt involvement of the
Russian federal agencies and some international organisations. That
means for them taking direct responsibility on the situation, and it
is not apparent that they will able to face the respective challenges
adequately.
--
==============================================================
MINELRES - a forum for discussion on minorities in Central&Eastern
Europe
Submissions: [email protected]
Subscription/inquiries: [email protected]
List archive: http://www.riga.lv/minelres/archive.htm
==============================================================