Unrest in Bashkortostan Sparks National and Ethnic Tensions

The Baymak district court in Bashkiria has ordered the administrative arrest of nine individuals involved in an unauthorized rally on January 17. Charged under Article 19.3 of the Administrative Code for disobeying a police order, they received sentences ranging from eight to 15 days of arrest. Additionally, local resident Fail Alchinov, found guilty of inciting hatred or enmity (Article 282 of the Criminal Code), was sentenced to four years in a penal colony on the same day.

These verdicts come on the heels of large-scale protests in Bashkortostan, where thousands expressed anger over Alchinov's conviction. The unrest marks one of the most significant protests in Russia since the commencement of the "special operation" in Ukraine. Analysts speculate that despite ongoing censorship and persecution, societal discontent persists due to economic uncertainties and perceived unfair and repressive federal policies toward the regions.

In an interview with Farida Kurbangaleeva from republic.ru Political analyst Abbas Gallyamov emphasizes the ethnopolitical nature of the protest, attributing it to long-standing resentment in the regions against Moscow's over-centralization. This sentiment, fueled by economic disparities and perceived cultural suppression, is particularly pronounced in national republics facing the erosion of regional identity and the imposition of Russification policies.

Gallyamov argues that the war factor exacerbates tensions, as people view Moscow's actions as imperialism, sacrificing their lives in conflicts unrelated to their interests. The arrest and sentencing of Alchinov, seen as a truth-teller defending Bashkortostan's interests, served as a catalyst for the explosive protests.

In an interview, Gallyamov notes that Bashkortostan's protests are ethnically charged, although the demonstrators did not overtly display nationalist or separatist slogans. The emotional undercurrents, grounded in perceived Moscow-centric policies, may potentially lead to increased separatist sentiments. Gallyamov identifies the possibility of regions considering secession if Moscow continues to ignore their demands.

Baymak, as the capital of the Bashkir Trans-Urals where 80% of the Bashkir population resides, holds strategic significance. The language used by Alchinov and the protesters in Bashkir during the demonstrations underscores a regional identity that could evolve into calls for secession if demands are continually overlooked.

While the immediate focus of the protests is on regional issues, discontent also extends to the broader political landscape. Gallyamov believes the protesters' appeals to "dear Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin" are temporary, anticipating that dissatisfaction with Putin may grow as the government suppresses protests and ignores demands.

Gallyamov draws parallels with historical movements, noting that the dissolution of the Soviet Union did not commence with outright declarations of independence but evolved from regional grievances based on economics and culture. Similarly, current protests rooted in economic disparities may eventually turn political if Moscow remains unresponsive.

The op-ed highlights the Kremlin's efforts to counter separatism, as evidenced by the establishment of anti-separatism, ethnonationalism, and extremism task forces in regions like Buryatia, Voronezh, and Orel. Gallyamov suggests that the Kremlin's attempts to suppress protests may exacerbate resentment, potentially leading to a "parade of sovereignties" akin to the 1990s.

As the unrest coincides with other challenges, such as food shortages, utility accidents, and a general sense of discontent, Gallyamov argues that the cumulative effect could pose a threat to Putin's legitimacy. He stresses that Putin's power is contingent on the perception of popular support, making the upcoming elections crucial for maintaining the illusion that Putin represents the will of the people.

In conclusion, the article paints a complex picture of discontent in Bashkortostan, driven by ethnic, economic, and political factors. The trajectory of events in the region, particularly the response from Moscow, may have broader implications for Russia's internal stability and Putin's political standing.