CC BY
12
S. Sirazhudinova,
Ph. D. (political), a doctoral student
of South-Russian Institute of Management
(RANEPA Branch)
POWER AND EXPECTATIONS
IN THE REPUBLIC OF DAGHESTAN (1)
The North Caucasus region is complex, problematic, attracting wide attention, and requires urgent actions to reduce tensions in order to avoid social and other complications. There is one of the most difficult situations of the North Caucasus nowadays in the Republic of Daghestan. Acute social problems, specific features of the region, intra-religious and ethnic tension are not only solved, but on the contrary, become more acute.
The change of the political elite in Dagestan in 2013 has led to an obvious excitement, given rise to a rapid surge in expectations among the people of Daghestan. At that time it was difficult to find indifferent persons to the political transformations, happening in the society.
In January 2013, M. Magomedov resigned from the post of the head of Daghestan. R. Abdulatipov (Deputy of the State Duma, «United Russia» faction) has been appointed acting the head of the republic by the Decree of the President of Russia. The first speeches and actions of R. Abdulatipov have been discussed everywhere, often extolled and idealized and met with skepticism only by a few. September 8, 2013 Ramazan Abdulatipov was elected the head of the Republic of Daghestan in the 17th Session of the People's Assembly of the Republic of Daghestan (86 out of 88 deputies of parliament). There were no contradictions in the society about this. Much has been done during this period, but not as radically as people would like.
Modern political transformation is a very interesting period for research and its researchers, it gives a great opportunity to understand
the expectations of people: what they want, what society is concerned about the most.
Daghestan society is very complex and extremely multi-compound, and therefore the expectations of all its members are different. But at the same time, the quantitative data (obtained as a result of investigations) can clarify and identify the most common questions and problems. If significant place is given to the study of expectations in the foreign political science and sociological science [Simon 2009], there is little such investigations in Russia. One of the most important works on the study of the system of expectations, giving a comprehensive assessment of the socio-political situation in the Russian Federation, as a whole and in the Saratov region in particular, was carried by Mamonov [Mamonov 2007]. These expectations, their specific features are studied in most works. One of these specific features is a matter of trust. The position of Russian scientist V. Grishin is interesting for studying the trust [Grishin 2010].
Dissertations in sociology on the theme of "trust" were defended under the direction of Yuri Volkov. A. Starostin, A. Ponedelkov, S. Kislitsyn were engaged in research of certain aspects of this issue and the question of power in the framework of the Rostov school.
Comprehensive assessment of expectations, the investigations of the public opinion, the importance of their resolution for the population, ways and measures to stabilize the situation, almost have not been conducted in the North Caucasus republics. Comprehensive political analysis of the socio-political situation in the Republic of Daghestan, the collection of empirical data to identify the expectations and the most important issues for the citizens have not been carried out here , despite the relevance of the topic.
Series of sociological studies in the Republic of Daghestan under the common name "Expectations of Daghestan" during the period from
February 2013 to May 2014 have been conducted by the center for research of the global contemporary issues and regional problems "Caucasus. Peace. Development". The total sample of respondents was 1950 people. (1250 - the first part of the study, which was conducted in 2013, and 700 respondents - the second part, held in 2014).
The studies have high representativeness, because different age (from 18 to 65 years) and social groups were interviewed. They were conducted in Makhachkala and in 9 regions of the Republic of Daghestan, both mountainous and lowland. The overall results of the studies reflected the dynamics of the most common sentiments prevailing in the Daghestan society.
Conducting such studies will clarify the situation in the republic, find sources of social and political conflicts and tension, assess their depth, find out the expectations the population of the Republic and apply this knowledge in practice to stabilize the situation.
According to the studies, in 2013 the masses' attitudes were as follows: the joy of the arrival of the smart and intelligent person and experienced politician to power; satisfaction with the first steps of the head of the republic; desire to support the President and his course. Public moods were permeated by faith in Ramazan Abdulatipov and hope for him.
According to the respondents, the situation in the republic of Daghestan was evaluated as "difficult", "bad", "heavy" and "terrible" (76%). Some noted the complex and difficult situation in the country, the President of the expected difficult times and the need for a radical remedy the situation. Corruption as one of the most important characteristics of modern Dagestan was marked by 3.8%, the country was called a backward subsidized region, the most backward republic -about 3%. Another 3% said that Daghestan is a problem in Russia, its regions with a lot of problems which solution have been delayed.
10.7% of respondents in the country give a positive assessment of the situation.
There were answers such as "tolerably", "no worse and no better than in other regions of Russia." Some believed that the problem lay in the fact that the country was "like two poles of the planet: some are drawn to the West, the other in the East." The statement of R. Abdulatipov of feudalism in the Daghestan society, on the transition from feudalism to the wild capitalism was quoted very often.
This period was perceived by the citizens as the expectation of developments, waiting for better due to a turning point because of the new president-elect (2.3%).
When they were asked: "What changes would you like to see in the country?" - 35.5% of respondents answered: "fundamental and radical", 10% noted the importance of establishing order (which should be tough, according to most respondents), 8.6% would like to eliminate the clan system, 6.7% were in favor of the elimination of corruption, 5% of respondents wanted "quiet life", "destruction of terrorism" and "freedom for the Republic from Wahhabism", 4.8% of respondents noted the importance of a complete change of political cadres ("change of power, and not to play chess"), 4.7% wanted increasing salaries; 4.6% - jobs and raising living standards, 3.9% - attention to the formation of human resources, 2.9% - the cleanliness and measures to achieve it, 2.5% said that it was important to begin appreciate people, 2.4% noted the importance of enhancing the culture; the same percentage of respondents expected the social improvements, and 2.3% said that it was necessary to do so, as the current head doing.
2.2% of respondents noted the importance of improving the quality of education, and the emergence of an "honest education" in the country. The importance of improving the roads was emphasized by 1,7%. There were also mentioned laws, mutual understanding,
justice; many respondents noted the importance of prosperity, peace, stability and sustainability.
The study results showed that the people expected "noticeable" and "very large" changes ("almost all have to change in the country"). Changes are needed in all areas, but the people are worried about the political sphere and the sphere of security the most, it speaks about the great expectations and the complexity of the situation, because the people do not wish of something perfect, but only elementary order.
The political tone of expectations of the people in Daghestan (the desire to change the political elite) is the desire to change the methods and trends in policy to eradicate corruption, waiting for sweeping changes in the Daghestan society, the emergence of social mobility and the removal of the general social tension.
Analyzing the percentage of respondents' answers, it turned out that most people are concerned about issues such as the order, the replacement of personnel, the liquidation of clan politics and the eradication of corruption.
The current policy of Daghestan was recognized: as positive 6% (half of the responses included the word "now", "today is positive, but in the past - not") as normal - 3.8% ("currently satisfied", presently "moderate"), as negative (negative) - 42.3%. Many noted that "the recent political changes have had a good impact", "positive in February." 4% of respondents noticed with surprise: "Is there a policy in Daghestan?" or "There is no politics in Daghestan."
The issue of corruption, as one of the most painful for the population throughout the study, was raised in 2013 and in 2014 ("everywhere, a lot of corruption," "everything is corrupt"). Opinions on this question have not been changed during the year of the new president in office. To the question: "What needs to change in the country?" - Prevailed the following response: "the power and the
political elite" - 27.3% (staff, management, power, political elite, heads of government, government, leadership, political figures, to appreciate smart people, the consciousness of the political elites, enhance the credibility of the government, to dismiss Amirov).
The next response was to eradicate corruption - 9.8% (especially in public institutions, in education). The third, by importance, was the proposal to break the clan system - 7.1%. Then, 5.6% of respondents thought it was important to do away with Wahhabism, terrorism and extremism; 3% believed it was important to fight the corrupt system of education, and irregularities in completion of the CSE. Also, questions: purity, justice, economics (2%), changes in stereotypes and consciousness of the people, and the relationship to the nation, were important for the people.
The majority of respondents saw Ramazan Abdulatipov as the leader of the republic (54% in 2013 and 40.5% in 2014). Most would like to see a person as a leader: honest (8.4%), intelligent (6.2%), Russian (impartiality - 4.1%), a person outside the Daghestan political elite, independent of them, honest and decent. Then answers followed, such as "educated," "competent," "decisive," "strong, hard man", "patriot", "need someone like Stalin", "any person who takes the responsibility" and "someone who can establish the order."
The people see as the ideal head of the republic:
1) male, politically mature, adult, respected of elite (51.6%);
2) imam with a secular education (10.1%);
3) scientist (7.3%);
4) a beautiful, decent and cultured woman (6%);
5) Ramazan Abdulatipov - intelligent, educated, raised and living in Daghestan, about 3.5% were in favor of him. There were also "patriot" (loves his people, a patriot of his country, his land) and "determined person."
The state ideal leaders were recognized as follows: Stalin -11.6% (surprisingly, the answer was given by young people mainly, of which 76% were men); then, Ramazan Abdulatipov as an experienced politician - 10.7%; Ramzan Kadyrov, - 9.7%; Peter I - 4,1%; Vladimir Putin, - 3.5%; Daniyal, Said Amirov and Elizabeth I (Tudor) gained 1.5%.
Also, respondents mentioned: Vladimir Lenin, Abraham Lincoln, Genghis Khan, Alexander Macedonian, Pinochet, Bismarck, Caesar, Hugo Chavez, Alexander Lukashenko, Muhammadrasul Saaduev and Confucius.
The absence of the perfect leader noted 10.8% of respondents. 8% believed that "we do not have a similar one", 2.8% of respondents -that "there are no ideal rulers (people)." Also, the selection of individual qualities, in addition to the selection of individuals, served as the answer to this question yet. Thus, such qualities as honesty, intelligence and justice were noted separately.
Respondents also gave the following explanations: "If the initiatives are carried out further, we shall have him", "the person liquidating national discord", "a man who loves his republic and the people," "he should take care of his people", "charismatic" , "a man of his word."
Dagestan residents consider such measures as: 1) job creation ("fight against unemployment", "providing people with normal work") - 7.4%; 2) the use of harsh methods of - 5.4%; 3) the fight against corruption and its reduction and elimination - 4.6%; the fight against terrorism - 5.1%, important steps to establish the situation in the republic. It was also deemed necessary to act in a peaceful way (3.4%), to pay wages on time, to keep the law, to fight the clan system to ensure order. There was an answer: "nothing can help already."
These answers of respondents show the expectation of more stringent and radical measures from leadership. The Chechen Republic was cited as an example very often. But there were also supporters of a peaceful way, gradual reform, democratization, and coherence.
The most popular party was the "United Russia" - 46%, then the Communist Party - 21%, the Liberal Democratic Party - 3%. 21% of respondents noted a lack of popular party for them. 22% voted in favor of quotas on representation of ethnic groups in the government, noting that nationality was not important - 54.6%.
The main identified problems were: terrorism (Wahhabism, extremism) - 17.5%, - 15.4%, corruption, and unemployment - 8.7%. There were also identified such problems as the clan system, environmental and disorder. They were followed by banditry and crime, nepotism, lack of education, lack of culture, national problems and dirt. It was clearly noticeable the difference between the responses of the older generation and the young people: if corruption was a major problem for the older generation, then terrorism and radicalism - for the youth.
Respondents offered the following solutions to the problems: 1) rigidity in the leadership, the control of a strong central government, a strong president - 21%; 2) the creation ofjobs, - 16%; 3) joint efforts -13%; 4) the fight against terrorism, extremism and Wahhabism - 11%; 5) support of the law - 7%.
Responses showed contradictions in understanding what people really wanted. "What ideology is the best for the country?" - It turned out that the most attractive was democracy - 26%, while almost the same number of responses was gained by religious (Islamic, moderate) ideology - 25%, tolerance was noted by 17% of respondents, liberal ideology - 16%, and totalitarian and dictatorial ideology - 13% of respondents.
Thus, the preferences of the people are complex and internally contradictory as the society itself. The sympathies of the population are mainly on the side of the ideology, which is based on the combination of "religion and democracy" or "secular and religious."
"How do you see Dagestan?" - The answers were:
1) democratic - 39%; 2) religious (at least "to some extent") -12%; 3) modernized - 9.2%; 4) socialistic - 8.7%; 5) anarchic - 7.6%; 6) communistic - 6.7%; 7) archaic - 3.9%; 8) liberal - 3.4%; 9) theocratic - 2.1%; 10) other (dictatorship, feudalism, chaos, anarchy and modernized the archaic, etc.) - 6,5%.
According to respondents' opinion, society should aim to golden middle (44%), the modernization (41%), traditionalism (8.3%) and "silver ideal" (2.3%).
The percentage of optimistic people, who believed that the current head of Dagestan could improve the situation in the country at the time of coming to power, was 74% ("I hope and believe in him"). Pessimists were only 14%. Many who answered positively, doubted and emphasized: "If it will help all", "if not prevent," "if you will." By the end of 2014, 82.7% were disappointed in their expectations.
The primary measures, taken by the head of the republic, should be (according to the opinion of the population):
1) change of power and political elite (to recruit new people in power, to create a decent team, to get all ministries to work according to the law, to carry out certification of officials, to replace ministers, to remove old staff, to recruit new state structure and management, to change the corrupt officials, to pick up decent power structures, give a chance to young people) - 20%. It has been quite a lot of answers, «It is necessary to reassure Amirov, so that he "came down to the ground"», «dismiss S. Amirov»;
2) fight against corruption and its elimination - 15%
3) fight against terrorism and wahhabism - 10%;
4) establishment of order -8.1%;
5) fight against unemployment and job creation - 7%;
6) fight against clans - 5%.
There were such opinions as "act more," "to agree with people", "to find common ground with people", "to listen the nation," "revive the economy," "fight against ignorance," "to eliminate the abuse at the time of USE", "improve education in the country", "to do away with religious strife", "peace in Dagestan", "implement their plans", "stop bribery", "to hold the gas in the village", "to restore order in the relations between people".
All expectations are not realized, of course. According to the respondents, the majority of them are guided by: 1) Party ideas - 37%; 2) Ideology, - 31%; 3) Ethnic ideas, - 13%; 4) Personal characteristics, -3%. The rest of the answers, "based on the decency of the candidate", "judging by the human abilities," "common sense, intuition," "I do not vote - do not believe anyone."
According to the respondents, there were changes for the better in 2013, though not radical. Respondents believed the situation was changed in the past 3 years in the country: a) for the better - 5%; b) for the worse - 47% (very); c) has not changed - 45%. During the year, the situation in the republic, a) was significantly changed for the better -4%; b) slightly changed for the better - 39%; c) slightly changed for the worse - 23%; d) was not changed - 40% (but maybe Abdulatipov can change it). The survey demonstrates, that even though the situation was not significantly changed for the better, but the deterioration of the situation was significantly decreased in the eyes of society.
The opinion of the experts about the coming to power of Ramazan Abdulatipov is as follows: S. Kislitsyn believes that R. Abdulatipov is a not a temporary figure, because there are few large
(federal) politicians originally from the Caucasus. It is obvious that he is not the protégé of any lobbying structures in Dagestan, or in Moscow. He was not involved in serious political and corruption scandals. Nothing is known about the disreputable ties. He is an open statesman and an outstanding scientist-ethno-politics, who tends to be among the best representatives of the Soviet past. Ramazan Abdulatipov has introduced strict planning, so that the actions of the authorities would be ahead of events. Abdulatipov already drew attention to the lack of proper information, and personnel policy in the country. He will lead the fight against corruption, but considering that corruption is a way of life in the Caucasus. He will not be able to break the clan system at once, even if he wanted to. (This is the problem of mental character.) At present, his main task is to put an end to extremism and terrorism, as well as internal collaborationism, when part of the state apparatus and business representatives is sabotaging the fight against political gangsterism. This is possible, but requires considerable effort, personal control and personal courage. Conclusion: R. Abdulatipov will not have instant success, but general trend is positive, undoubtedly.
Sungurov notes that the situation should change with the coming of Ramazan Abdulatipov to power because his relationships with the Republican elite are much weaker than that of his predecessors. A certain independence of the former president was one of the reasons for his factual dismissal, as he did not support the initiative of his Ossetian colleague to abolish the election of the head of the republic. It can be assumed that the new president will be much more manageable.
As the results of the study, the people have high expectations for the authorities, and the authorities should know about the problems and expectations of the people. The authorities are trying to implement
some of the expectations, and some of them - ignore because of their falsity. Identified problems should be solved, as it is the path to stability of the society. But it is not easy. Public expectations are multiple, some of them are contradictory and difficult to implement. The complex poly-ethnic society affects the assessment of the effectiveness of the head of the republic by the population. This activity is assessed mostly through the prism of personal, group, religious or ethnic interests. There were a lot of expectations, but not all of them have been implemented and will be implemented soon.
Literature
1. V. Grishin. 2010. Ratsionalnye I irratsionalnye aspekty sotsialnogo doveriya v mentalnosti rossiyan. [Rational and irrational aspects of social trust in the mentality of Russians.] - Monitoring Obschestvennogo Mneniya. № 1 (95), pp. 156-171.
2. M. Mamonov.Otsenka ozhidaniy naseleniya kak sposob analiza obschestvenno-politicheskoy situatsii 2007. [Evaluation of expectations of the population as a way to analyze the socio-political situation] - Policticheskaya Ekspertiza:. POLITEKS. № 2. V. 3, pp. 208-216.
3 D.M. Simon. 2009. Public Expectations of the President. - The Oxford Handbook of the American Presidency (ed. by G.C. Edwards, W.G. Howell), pp. 135-159.
"VLAST", Moscow, 2015, № 2, pp. 195-201.
H. Holiknazar,
Ph.D. (Hist.), Director, Center for Strategic Studies under the President of the Republic of Tajikistan REPUBLIC OF TAJIKISTAN - IMPORTANT LINK IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM AND EXTREMISM
Tajikistan has experienced all the horrors of civil strife, with its segments of terrorism soon after receiving independence. Any instability and especially civil war creates a fertile ground for the
