The Roots of Security Narratives on Islam in Russia: Tatar Yoke, Official Religious Institutions and the Western Influence.

• Author: Kocak, Muhammet

Introduction

Muslims constitute almost ten percent of the Russian population today. The Muslim population lives in different regions of Russia, speaking different languages and representing diversified socio-political dynamics. For instance, Tatarstan, located in the middle of the Russian Federation, has just over fifty percent Turkic-Muslim population; whereas the Chechen Republic located in the southernmost flank of Russia has over ninety percent Chechen-Muslim population. In addition, Russia's metropoles are home to millions of Muslims who have migrated from the Muslim regions of Russia and from the post-Soviet countries. Russia also shares borders with multiple Muslim majority countries and often engages in dialogue with several Muslim communities in different regions.

Islam is not a novel phenomenon for Russia. The Russian history is deeply intertwined with the histories of Muslim communities that have lived inside and around the territories of today's Russia. The Russians have had periods of conflict, competition, subjugation and cooperation with Muslims located inside and outside of Russia. The deep roots of Islam in Russia make the image of Islam and Muslims in Russia both complex and specific. I argue that the image of Islam in Russia impacts the way the nation deals with Muslim communities. Russia produces diversified narratives of Islam and these narratives have the potential to be used to politicize or securitize at least a portion of Muslims. This work examines three primary narratives on Islam that stem from diversified roots.

The first narrative stems from the period when Orthodox Russians were subjugated by the Golden Horde, whose rulers converted to Islam in the 14th century. The rule of Golden Horde is still remembered as the Tatar yoke in modern Russian historiography. Such narrative impacts the way Russia considers Muslims, especially communities in the Volga region, and creates tension between today's Russian Federation and the Republic of Tatarstan.

The second narrative stems, from the period when the Russian Empire expanded becoming a heterogeneous Empire, with a significant Muslim population. From the mid-18th century, the Russian Empress Catherine II (1) attempted to employ a portion of Muslim ulama (2) in order to integrate Muslim communities into the imperial structure. The Muslim population who were connected to the Empire through religious channels would be deemed trustworthy while others who follow different paths would be punished. The tradition of cultivating a trustworthy Muslim religious caste would survive the Soviet Union. Today, the Russian state still maintains ties with certain religious figures in different Muslim regions.

The third narrative stems from the openness of Russia to the Western influence. In the early 18th century, Peter the Great embarked on his modernization project, through which he introduced Western technology and customs to Russia. This was the beginning of a long period of ambivalent relations with the West. On the one hand, Russia aspired to become a European power by adopting European-style reforms and becoming more engaged with European politics. Europe, on the other hand, has never readily accepted Russia to the club but has readily exported a European way of life. The image of Muslims in Russia has not been independent from the Western influence as well. As a result, the image of Islam in the West has influenced the image of Islam in Russia on multiple occasions.

To examine the security narratives of Islam in Russia, I use a social constructivist framework and benefit from the premises of securitization theory. A social constructivist framework enables us to examine the practical consequences of the image of Islam in Russia. The securitization theory helps examine how Islam is considered a threat to not only the Russian state, but also Russian civilization and state sovereignty. Using securitization theory, I identify the way Islam is coded in the Russian psyche and the threat Muslims were supposed to pose to state, sovereignty and civilization.

The aim of this work is threefold: first, to assess to what extent memory created by the historical shifts in power dynamics between the Russian rule and the Muslim population influences the national securitization language vis-a-vis Islam; secondly, to examine how Russia's securitization language vis-a-vis Islam differentiates from that of the West; and, last but not least, to analyze the properties of Russia's securitization narrative towards Islam.

Theoretical Framework

This work benefits from the securitization theory and uses a social constructivist framework. I examine how Russia sees Islam and how Russia's narrative on Islam enables extraordinary measures against Muslim communities by the Russian state. Social constructivism helps to analyze the impact of Russia's perception of Islam on its dealings with Muslim communities. Securitization theory helps understand and explore how these narratives can be politicized and securitized.

Social Constructivism

Social constructivism sees the social world as one of our own making and considers language as the most important way to making the world what it is (3) Constructivism was first conceptualized in 1989 by Nicholas Onuf, in World of Our Making, where the author argued that the phenomenon of international relations depends on how we think about it (4) The framework was popularized by Alexander Wendt, a leading figure in constructivist theory in international relations discipline. Wendt used the famous statement 'anarchy is what states make of it' as the title of his oft-cited article and employed constructivism to build a bridge between rationalist-reflectivist and realist-liberal debates in the international relations discipline, promoting constructivism as via media (5) It is important to note that Wendt has thoroughly benefited from Anthony Giddens' structuration theory (6) With reference to Giddens' structuration theory, Wendt challenged the structural approaches of Alexander Waltz and Immanuel Wallerstein in International Relations discipline (7) He proposed an approach that takes social structures into consideration in analyzing the affairs of international politics (8)

Social constructivism underlines the role of agents in constructing structures. Agents are human or non-human entities that act on behalf of human beings within the framework of the role attributed to them. Institutions are constructed by these agents who act in accordance with their presence and construct institutions by acting on them. Rules constitute an important part of the interaction between agent and structure by making the process of interaction continuous and repetitive. Rules gain function through agents who abide by them (9) According to Onuf, rules play both constitutive and regulative role in this process of interaction (10) To sum up, per social constructivism, agents and institutions interact in a social construction within the framework of certain rules that govern these interactions.

This framework helps understand and explain how societies make people and how people make societies, as well as the roles of rules and institutions in this process. Although it is not originally an international relations theory, social constructivism gained significant popularity in this discipline. Security is one of the areas where the framework was used to explain the way certain issues become the matters of security and addressed accordingly.

Securitization Theory

Securitization theory attempts to explore what quality makes something a security issue and what do terms 'existential threat' and 'emergency measures' mean (11) The concept of securitization was first used by Ole Waever in 1995 (12) and further developed in 1998 by Barry Buzan, Ole Waever and Jaap De Wilde in a book titled as Security: A New Framework of Analysis. As presented by Buzan and Waever, securitization theory uses a constructivist framework (13)

Securitization can be defined as the practice of framing an issue as something beyond politics or above politics. According to securitization theory, an issue can be classified in a spectrum ranging from non-politicized (handled within the framework of established rules of the game) through politicized (requiring governmental action) to securitized (constituting existential threat to a certain referent object) (14)

There are three units in securitization theory: referent object, securitizing actors and functional actors. Referent objects are things that are claimed to be existentially threatened and have a legitimate claim to survival. Traditionally, states are considered as referent objects in international relations theory. Securitization theory enables the examination of not only the military threats but also economic, political and societal security threats to not only states but also societies, governments and other forms of real or imagined communities (15) Securitizing actors are the ones who securitize certain issues by declaring that a referent object is existentially threatened. A president, king or an opinion leader can act as securitizing actor. Functional actors are...