The World of Russian emigres in the late XX – early XXI centuries

The intellectual heritage of the Russian community abroad has been one of the key elements of the society’s consolidation in creating a new historical consciousness in Russia. It was a consequence of global processes at the turn of the century. The current geopolitical situation has led to the emergence of new trends in the development of world intellectual, information, and cultural processes. The concept of a multipolar world, which is becoming increasingly influential, involves the diversity of civilizations and flourishing national cultures that interact and enrich each other on a constructive basis. Russia’s commitment to these principles of international life was formulated back in 2000 in the “The foreign policy concept of the Russian federation”, which proclaimed Russia’s aspiration “to achieve a multi-polar system of international relations that really reflects the diversity of the modem world with its great variety of interests.”[12] At the same time, attention to one’s own culture, awareness of one’s unique historical experience and promotion of such values in global media has become one of the prerequisites for strengthening the international influence of a country.

The President of Russia Vladimir Putin in his Address to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in 2018 noted the growing impact of global processes on the economy and culture of all subjects of international politics and the important role of our country in ensuring a positive vector of global development:

This is a turning period for the entire world and those who are willing and able to change, those who are taking action and moving forward will take the lead. Russia and its people have expressed this will at every defining moment in our history.

As Mr Putin stressed, Russia was consistently developing its foreign policy:

… Our policies will never be based on claims to exceptionalism. We protect our interests and respect the interests of other countries. We observe international law and believe in the inviolable central role of the UN. These are the principles and approaches that allow us to build strong, friendly and equal relations with the absolute majority of countries.[13]

Highly intensive global cultural dialogue and informational exchange is also taking place between metropolises and the diaspora across the world amplifying their mutual attraction and interest in each other. Ideas of historical, cultural, and civilizational unity, communicated from the metropolis to the diaspora in the media and on the Internet, art, scientific publications exert significant influence on the public opinion of compatriots in communities abroad by actively engaging them in the international diplomatic and cultural dialogue.

Russia in the early 21st century lays special emphasis on the shaping historical consciousness based on traditional and social values, in particular as a factor of consolidation of the Russian society. It addresses challenges of modernization transit in the context of dramatically increasing global financial, economic, and political competition. In this context, the engagement between Russia and the world of Russian compatriots abroad provides ample opportunities and at the same time contradictions and challenges. They arise from the complex structure and heterogeneity of the Russian community abroad with three main segments: Russian-speaking diasporas of the post-Soviet states (the near abroad); several waves of Russian military, political, and economic emigration in the 1920-1980s and their ancestors (the far abroad). There are also migrants of the 20–21st century from Russia and other territories of the former USSR living in different countries and regions across the world. Formally, the last group is part of the Far Abroad community, but it has some significant social and moral differences from the “old” emigration.

The cooperation with compatriots abroad in the last quarter of a century (from the 1980-1990s) was the most fruitful and intense in terms of shaping the national historical consciousness of the Russians. This experience can be seen as a qualitatively important and unique in the Russian history, when a diaspora that existed in almost complete isolation from the metropolis for several decades has given its historical Motherland a huge cultural heritage filling some considerable gaps in the social, political, intellectual, spiritual, and artistic development of the country.

In the 20th century, Russia went through a tragedy of ideological and informational split with its compatriots abroad. It was based inter alia on fundamentally different vision of the national history and cultural traditions. In the USSR, this resulted in a decisive elimination of many names, events, and facts from the scientific and educational environment that did not ht into the official doctrine of “the history of the USSR in the pre-Soviet period” as well as in totally negative views on the Russian emigration and hushing up its contribution to the global culture. On the contrary, the Russian community abroad developed a cult of the pre-Revolutionary period and underestimated the achievements of the Soviet era in many areas, including economy, science, and culture. Nevertheless, from the very start, the Russian emigre community had an idea for renewing the common historical path and reuniting the divided flows of the “river of time” that embraced the history of Russia in its entirety. The events of the Great Patriotic War have shifted significantly the community’s perception of the post-revolutionary emigration. For many people, patriotism, and love for their homeland lost its retrospectivity and vagueness no longer concerning the old or the imaginary new Russia, but an actual country with its advantages and disadvantages. The Soviet authorities also became more tolerant to the representatives of the post-revolutionary emigration, but the development of the opposition movement among the Soviet intelligentsia, which increasingly took the form of political and religious emigration; the ideological support of the opposition from abroad during the Cold War era became a major new watershed dividing the Soviet Union and Russian community abroad. According to the official Soviet doctrine, their relations could not even be close to the system of “metropolis – diaspora”. The Russia abroad in the 20th century was almost completely excluded from the overall picture of the national history and culture.

In the 1990s-2000s, an intensive multidimensional dialogue between the state, the society of the Russian Federation and the world of foreign compatriots outside the former USSR ensured the restoration of the unity of cultural and historical tradition and the de-ideologization of their images. Gradually, information gaps were filled, and mental contradictions were largely smoothed out, which was facilitated by extensive contacts between Russians and communities of Russian emigrants and their descendants on a personal and public level. Hundreds of scientific publications, articles, numerous publishing and museum projects, ample information on the media convincingly testify to the fact that the legacy of the Russian emigration of the 1920 – mid-1980s has become an organic part of the Russian science and culture. Thus, many values and meanings (from deep inborn knowledge of traditions of the pre-revolutionary era to creative achievements of outstanding Russian intelligentsia in the late 20th century) became a starting point for shaping modern scientific knowledge, education, art, various public initiatives.

The current modernization of the Russian Federation and the search for possible directions of its further historical development are largely related to the adoption of traditional cultural values of the Russia abroad, based on centuries-old cultural foundations. At the same time, a new vision of Russia and Russian history, including a keener and more objective view of the Soviet era and the social and cultural life in the USSR, has emerged in the Russian community abroad.

In the 1990s, the emergence of Russian-speaking communities and their socially and politically difficult life in the young states of the former Soviet republics created a completely new model of relations between the metropolis and the diaspora in the Russian history. This time Russia acted as a focal point for Russian compatriots living in “new foreign countries,” and later, after overcoming its own social and economic problems and regaining international influence, Russia became a champion of their civil rights and cultural and linguistic identity. Migration flows from the CIS and the Baltic States to Russia in the 1990s included a significant number of Russian-speaking migrants who left the territories of the young post-Soviet states due to social and political instability and changing legal status of the Russian language. The adoption of the languages of the title peoples as State languages has become a major challenge for administrative staff, teachers, and higher education teachers, especially the older generation. In addition, the Russian-speaking population was subjected to moral pressure, and, in a number of countries, to direct threats from radical nationalists with the tacit support of some local elites. The result of this process was the exodus of a mass of diploma holders and qualified workers to Russia and the West resulting in smaller number and lower quality of Russian-speaking communities in the near abroad.[14] Later, the young generation of foreign compatriots in the post-Soviet space for the most part chose the integration into the societies of their countries, but many also sought to preserve family traditions, the Russian language. They educated their children in the spirit of the Russian culture, thus being involved in the social life of their diasporas and Russian cultural policy centers abroad. At the same time, the most socially active representatives of Russian compatriots in the CIS countries (entrepreneurs, students, artists) joined the Russian-speaking communities in Western Europe, the USA, Canada, Israel, and Australia. In the 2000s, the majority of institutional structures of the Russian community abroad outside the post-Soviet space were small Russian societies and clubs in large cities, regions or states in different countries based on the principle of association of fellow-countrymen or knowledge of the Russian language. As a rule, they were united in associations within the country. The founder and most active participants were mainly first or second-generation emigrants or citizens of the Russian Federation (as well as of other post-Soviet states) permanently residing abroad. Such associations were most common in those regions of the world where the number of Russian compatriots had increased significantly in recent years, for example in Italy, Spain, Greece, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Germany, Norway, China, etc. By this time, the 20th century emigrants and their descendants had been strongly assimilated and dissociated with the exception of communities of Russian compatriots in France and the USA. They were the largest centers of Russian emigration, which preserved the system of traditional diaspora structures (military historical societies, Russian schools and youth organizations, church parishes, publishing houses, bookstores, etc.). A key aspect of the institutional development of the modern Russian community abroad was the emergence of various communities on-line. The majority originated from international social media, feedback from readers of e-magazines in Russian, advertising needs of businesses that used the Russian-language Golden Pages and other similar information sources, etc.

The public policy of the Russian Federation on the promotion of the cultural dialogue with the Russian community abroad promotes regular World Congress of Compatriots Living Abroad and the Coordinating Council of Russian Compatriots, as well as the activities of the Russkiy Mir Foundation, Russian diplomatic institutions and representative offices of the Federal Agency for CIS Affairs, compatriots living abroad, and international humanitarian cooperation (Rossotrudnichestvo). The result of these projects was the Russian Centers of Science and Culture operating in the Russian community abroad under the auspices of Russian public and private organizations. They have helped the society of foreign compatriots to bond over their interest in the culture, language, modern life, and traditions of their historical homeland. At the same time, a considerable information space (including the Russian-language foreign press, literature, and the Internet) was filled with a lot of historical documents, memoirs, studies, popular scientific texts, which more and more fully revealed the complex, contradictory nature of historical ways of Russia and Russians in the 20th century. Russian state institutions and public organizations working in the held of cooperation with foreign compatriots have created information portals that allow to develop cooperation and cultural dialogue on a global level.

The key to understanding the essence of modern dialogue between the Russian Federation and communities of foreign compatriots is the ideology of the “Russian World.” The unity of the Russian community abroad and modern Russians is being created, i. e. it is based on a mutual recognition of the common historical past and tolerance toward it. In Moscow, a participant of the 5th World Congress of Compatriots Living Abroad presented the idea of the Russian world as a civilized historical and cultural community:

The Russian world is a planetary space with millions of people creating a Russian identity. And the Russian world does not need any proof of its existence! Here we have Russia with a unique and inimitable inflorescence of cultures of many ethnicities. There we have millions of our compatriots for whom the world without Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, Tchaikovsky and Rachmaninov, Chaliapin and Hkhvorostovsky, Tupolev and Sikorsky, Rodnina and Kharlamov would be imperfect. The Russian world is a kind of noosphere, so to say, which includes both East and West. Rudyard Kipling once said ‘East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,” but in Russia, as in the Lobachevskian Geometry, those that cannot meet nevertheless do meet.[15]

An active promoter of the Russian world concept in the international information space is the Russkiy Mir Foundation and its centres overseas. It is noteworthy that the annual Assemblies of the Russian World are held on November 3, on the eve of the Day of National Unity. The Foundation, whose main task is to support and promote the Russian language worldwide, also implements the principle of moving to the future in line with a continuous historical tradition, focusing on new generations of the international community of the Russian world in all its diversity and uniqueness. Vyacheslav Nikonov, Executive Director of the Russkiy Mir Foundation, speaking at the opening of the Third Assembly of the Russian World in the MSU Intellectual Centre in 2009, said,

The Russian world is not a memory of the past, but a dream of the future of people belonging to a great culture, who are acutely responsive to injustice, who care about notions of honour, service, who are constantly striving for freedom.[16]

The concept of the unified cultural and spiritual space of the Russian world is extremely important for the further development of the domestic and foreign policy of the Russian Federation on compatriots abroad. It has been formulated for quite a long period of time. Obviously, the ideological and cultural gap that existed for decades cannot be bridged overnight. In the 1990s, when the Soviet historiography in Russia was being revised, including the period of the revolution and the Russian civil war, of the topic of the ideological confrontation between the USSR and Russian emigration remained highly politicized among the intelligentsia both at home and abroad. The dialogue with the Russian community living far abroad began to reach a qualitatively new, constructive level, when the Russian intellectual environment, education, and enlightenment systems and mass media established modern approaches to the Russian history which sought to create an objective picture of the historical process through a civilized and tolerant scientific discourse.

The visit of the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin in November 2000 to Sainte-Genevieve-des-Bois Russian Cemetery near Paris was a symbolic step in this direction. The Russian President laid wreaths at the graves of Vika Obolenskaya, a prominent member of the French Resistance movement, and the great Russian writer Ivan Bunin. Standing at the graves of the White movement participants, Vladimir Putin expressed the sentiment that was later widely reported in the press: “We are children of the same mother, Russia, and it’s time for us to unite.” In 2003, during a meeting with representatives of the Russian emigration, again in France, at the Hotel de Ville in Paris, President of Russia Vladimir Putin reiterated that the memory of the tragic events endured by our country should become the basis for joint fruitful work of the Russian nationals and compatriots abroad for the benefit of the future Russia. The same idea was put forward in the opening speech of Vladimir Putin before the participants of the 4th World Congress of Compatriots in Moscow on October 26, 2012:

You share a common concern for Russia’s future and its people, a commitment to be useful to your historical homeland, to promote its socioeconomic development and strengthen its international authority and prestige.[17]

In fact, the same call was addressed to the citizens of Russia and their compatriots living abroad, the appeal for a consensus and unification on the basis of a common goal which is the peace and prosperity of the Motherland, regardless of political views, religious beliefs, professional interests, etc. It is on the same basis that a modern course of the development of relations between Russia and the Russian community abroad at the state and social level is being shaped. This course is aimed at cooperation in the present and the future.

At a meeting with historians in Tyumen, Chairman of the Russian Historical Society Sergey Naryshkin also discussed the topic of historical understanding of the events of the revolution of 1917 and the ensuing civil war.

I believe that the centennial celebrations in 2017 should result in a deep reflection on the lessons learned and become a tribute to the memory of our ancestors regardless of their political beliefs. There should be no belated settling of accounts and division into who was right and who was wrong,’ said Naryshkin. ‘The revolution’s contemporaries have long been gone: both the heroes and the perpetrators on both sides. A century is enough to see those events not as a reason to split the society, but as a historical event, “a fact of biography”.’[18]

The participants of the V World Congress of Compatriots said they were seeking an informed, objective assessment of the events of the past. They also discussed a project aimed at building a National Reconciliation monument to the centenary of the October Revolution. Prince Nikita Lobanov-Rostovsky, who offered this idea, stressed in his speech that there could be no unity without tolerance and reconciliation.[19]

A number of important thoughts on the vision of national history were expressed in the community of Russian compatriots at the VI Assembly of the Russian World, held on November 3, 2012 in Moscow under the motto Russian language and Russian history. The Director of the Institute of Russian History of the Russian Academy of Sciences Yuri Petrov, summing up the discussion on the Year of Russian History, stressed that the diversity of views in the scientific community is undoubtedly necessary for the development of scientific knowledge, but the pluralism of opinions does not cancel the task of developing coordinated positions on key issues in the Russian history:

Unlike the elites, in science, not only diversity is not prohibited, but even welcomed. All this is good,’ said Yuri Petrov. ‘But I believe we need a new national history, and the Institute of Russian History has suggested such an initiative. We have spearheaded this project which should unite all experts on Russian history including Russian nationals, members of the Russian world, and the best foreign professionals.[20]

The world of Russian compatriots abroad is undoubtedly socially and politically heterogeneous when it comes to the historical retrospective and modern events in Russia and abroad. This heterogeneity often affects the internal life of Russian-speaking communities, leads to controversy and disputes, instability in the composition of coordination councils and other representative bodies in a given country, etc. At the same time, almost all institutional structures of Russia Abroad (Russian Centers, schools, clubs, etc.) directly engage with Rossotrudnichestvo and institutions of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, representative offices of the Russkiy Mir Foundation, or with public organizations close to Russia in spirit and nature of their activities.

Currently, of the development of the public life in Russia shows an increase in activity and number of people participating in cultural and historical associations addressing the consolidation of the Russian society, including the continuity of traditions within the Russian culture in all their diversity and complexity. This trend also creates new opportunities for widening the dialogue with the world of Russian compatriots living abroad. At present, the historical retrospective and modern life of the Russian foreign countries are reflected in the activities of the leading public associations of national figures of science, culture, and enlightenment, i. e. the Russian Historical Society (RHS), the Russian Military Historical Society (RMHS), the Russian Society of Historians and Archivists (ROIA), the Russian Society Znanie and the Imperial Orthodox Palestine Society (IPPO). Their close ties with the Russian community abroad are based on a common determination to restore and preserve historical memory and cultural traditions covering all chronological and territorial flows of the Russian “time river.” Most of these societies have their prototypes in well-known pre-revolutionary scientific and cultural organizations with high reputation in the scientific world. Thus, the Imperial Russian Historical Society (IRHS), founded in 1866 in St. Petersburg, united not only famous historians, but also high military and civil officials who contributed to the study of the Russian history and archaeology. In 1909–1917, the IRHS was chaired by Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich, who was executed by the Bolsheviks in Petrograd in 1919. Other members of the IRHS dissolved after the revolution were also repressed. Thus, for the Russian scientific emigration, the Imperial Russian Historical Society was not only part of the corporate tradition, but was also surrounded by an aura of memories of the tragic days when the empire collapsed.

There have been three attempts by the Russian community abroad to revive the Russian Historical Society. It was spearheaded by an outstanding historian Yevgeny Shmurlo (1853–1934), a representative of the St. Petersburg Sergei Platonov’s historical school, author of scientific works and documentary publications on the history of Russia during the era of Peter the Great, the Russian-Italian relations and the contacts between Russia and the Vatican in the 17th century, etc. By 1917, Yevgeny Shmurlo was a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences in the category of historical and political sciences, the Russian Geographical and Archaeological societies, the Historical Society at the St. Petersburg University and several provincial academic archive commissions. In emigration, Shmurlo was among the leaders of the Russian historical science abroad, participating in the work of the Academic Council and Academic Commission of the Russian Foreign Historical Archive, the philological department of the Russian Academic Board and the Russian Academic Group in Czechoslovakia. In 1925–1932, he headed the Russian Historical Society in Prague, which operated under the auspices of the Union of Russian Academic Organizations Abroad. His successor for two years was Aleksandr Kizevetter (1866–1933), a graduate of the Moscow University, student of Vasiliy Klyuchevsky and Pavel Vinogradov, one of the leading specialists in the history of the 18th century Russia. He was also a politician, a member of the Central Committee of the Constitutional Democratic Party and a member of the second State Duma. In Prague, in the 1920s and 1930s, Kizevetter gave lectures at Charles University and at emigrant institutions, i. e. the Russian Law Department and the People’s University. The emigrant RHS also included Petr Struve, Venedikt Miakotin, Antoniy Florovsky, Georgiy Florovsky, and other representatives of the Russian humanitarian science who lived in Czechoslovakia in the interbellum. It was