The Republic of Sakha (Yakutia): between Turkestan and North Asia.

As big as India and as empty and remote as Iceland. That could be a good summary of the
Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). The country is by far the largest of the autonomous republics of the Russian Federation. And besides that, it is very rich in natural resources and much closer to North Asia than to European Russia. But if the Sakha republic is named that way, its is because it is the homeland of the Sakha, who form the vast majority of its indigenous population. Confronted with the legacy of centuries of Russian colonization, the Sakhas find themselves with the challenge of asserting themselves in a changed international environment.

Historical background

Origins

The Sakhas are currently the second largest indigenous people of Siberia, after the Buryats. Despite their rather hazy origins, it is quite sure that they descend from Turkic nomads who were related to the Uighurs and the Kyrghyz, and origi-nally came form the Baikal lake region. From 1410 onwards, during the turbulent times following the crumbling of the Mongol empire, the forebears of the Sakhas were pushed northward by the invading Buryat Mongols, and eventually ended up in the southern basin of the river Lena. Once there, they subjugated Siberian peoples like the Evenks and Yukagirs, and gradually mixed up with other incum-bent Siberian aboriginals. This ethnic fusion eventually yielded the Sakha people as they exist today. The Sakha language belongs to the Turkic language group, making Sakha the geographically most remote offspring of the Turkic stem. And within the Turkic languages, Sakha belongs to the northeastern branch, which comprises also Uighur, Tuvan, Khakass and Altai Turkic. But even with regard to those languages, Sakha is an odd man out. This is mainly due to the relatively large amount of aboriginal Siberian language components in the Sakha language, as well as to the remoteness of the region in which Sakha developed. Hence its hardly intelligible for speakers of ‘mainstream’ Turkic languages like Kazakh or Tatar.

Traditional economy and society

Another distinctive feature of the Sakhas is the character of their traditional society, which is based on three fundamental elements. The first was an economy based on nomadic horse and reindeer breeding, hunting and fishing. While horse breeding may be quite common among Turkic peoples, in this part of Siberia it is rather unique. The deteriorating of nomadic lifestyle of the Sakhas started after 1850, when a part of the Sakha tribes in the south started to shift towards agriculture, on the demand of the Russian colonists in the southern Lena valley. And the collectivization between 1930 and 1933 gave the death blow to the traditional economy. The large majority of the Sakha nomads were either settled by force, deported of forced to work for state farms, while large scale exploitation of raw materials and the importing of heavy industry severely disrupted the environment of the Sakha nomads.

The second fundamental element of traditional Sakha society was the authority of the tojon or tribal chiefs, which emphasizes the tribal character of Sakha society. That means that there was rarely such a thing as one Sakha chief of khan, only a council of tojon and the predominance of
the main Khangala tribe. In this respect, Sakha society much ressembles that of the Turkmens, whose tribal socie-ty is also dominated by the main Tekke tribe. The tojon were completely autonomous until 1782, when the Russians established administrative units in Sakha and often coopted tojon to govern the new tribal ulus. During the collectivization and the purges, the tojon institution was completely destroyed or once more coopted in the nomenclatura.

And the third element of Sakha society is the highly developed animistic religion of the Sakha. The core of this religion is a cult of heaven, based on the worshipping of the ‘white creator’ Er Toyen. Along with the Sakha language, this tengri religion was actually the sole binding agent between all the nomadic tribes, thus making a nation of the Sakhas. Moreover, it distinguishes the Sakhas once more from the large majority of Turkic peoples who profess Islam. As happened with native peoples all over Siberia, Russian missionaries succeeded in converting a part of the Sakhas to Orthodox Christianity between the seventeenth and nineteenth century. In some cases, the conversion happened forcibly. But in many others, local tojon voluntarily adopted Christianity.
This was not because of affinity to Christianity, but mainly because Christians were extempted from paying the yassak or tribute to the Russian rulers. In practice, animism and Christianity tied up with each other, or were professed side by side. Animistic practices, however, got a severe blow when Joseph Stalin had most Sakha shamans executed or deported after 1931.

Present situation

But what are the Sakhas up today ? Today, there are about 440,000 Sakhas living in East Siberia and the Russian Far East, almost all of them in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). This republic was established in 1922 as the Yakut Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic (ASSR) of the Russian Federation (the then RSFSR), and lays in the Russian Far East economic region. Its present name was adopted in the beginning of 1992, just after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Containing an enormous taiga area of more than 3.1 million square kilometres, cut in half by the mighty Lena river, the Republic of Sakha comprises a little more than 1 million inhabitants. To say the least, overpopulation will not be a real problem for some time to come. This does not mean however, that it will the same with ethnic tensions. The republic may be named after the Sakhas, the Sakhas themselves do not form a majority in their own titular area any more, on the contrary. This is actually more rule that exception with Siberian and Far Eastern natives. The following table gives a detailed view of the ethnic distribution since the founding of the republic as such (in % of the population). *These are mainly Ukrainians, and also indigenous Siberian peoples (Evenks, Dolgans, Evens, Yukagir and Chukchi), who today number 2.1% of the population.

Now what is the relevance of these figures ? The most striking fact is, that since the founding of the Soviet Union, the proportion of Sakhas in their own national territory ever declined in favour of Russians, who now form two thirds of the population. In a way, this symbolizes the entire recent history as well as the economic importance of the area.

Russian penetration of Sakha lands began in 1632, when Russian explorers build a fort which they called Yakutsk, a place which is still the capital of the republic. Its main importance the control over the Lena (the main transport artery of the entire region), as well as over the rich fur, gold and log territories in its vicinity. This did not meant however, that full scale Russian settlement occured in Sakha territories, for the area was too remote and too harsh in climate for the settlement of Russian peasants. Even during the gold rush of 1850, the numbers of Russian traders, gold diggers, exiles and hunters were far too limited to numerically dominate the natives. And especially the Sakhas, who still formed an absolute majority in their area in 1917. This drasctically changed after
1934, when the frenetic collectivization and industrialization programmes of Stalin aimed, among other things, at the exploitation of the Lena gold reserves in the south of the republic. Like happened in the north of Kazakhstan under the Virgin Lands programme some twenty years later, large numbers of Russians and Ukrainians were either deported or attracted with interesting wages to work in the mining industry. In 1939, they made up more than one third of the population of the republic. And when the extraction of diamont, coal, lead and, to a lesser degree, oil and gas started in earnest after 1951, the Sakhas were gradually outnumbered by Russian immigrant workers.

Political and social consequences

What was the social result of the Russian immigration movement ? In short, the Sakhas were confined to stagnating agriculture in an impoverished and neglected countryside, while the Russians had entrenched themselves in the cities. In 1989, for example, more than 70% of the inhabitants of Yakutsk were Russians and only 20% Sakhas. The Russians were also almost the only to benefit from the mining develop- ment. Again in 1989, almost 90% of the mining industry staff was Russian. This fundamental cleavage between Russian cities and mining industry on the one hand, and Sakha countryside and agriculture on the other, has been the breeding ground for an increasing Sakha national consciousness for quite some years now.

Sakha consciousness

In 1979 and 1986 (still under the Soviet Union), severe ethnic disturbances in Yakutsk not only directly opposed Sakhas against Russians, but also indicated that Sakha ethnic nationalism was much alive. The riots were a direct cause for reviving the nationalist Sakha Omuk movement, which was founded in 1921 but forced underground soon afterwards. Another indication for a growning national consciousness is the strength of the Sakha language: in 1991, more than 95% of the Sakhas considered the Sakha language as their mother tongue and thier language of primary use (by comparison, among the Evenks only 11% still speak Evenk). This becomes more evident when one takes a look at the language affinity among children form mixed Sakha- Russian marriages (yet one fifth of all marriages in the republic): 78% of children from mixed marriages with a Sakha father and a Russian mother choose Sakha as their first language, while among children with Russian father and a Sakha mother this is 17%.

Besides the deep social cleavages between Sakhas and Russians in a potentially very rich country, other factors also impeted the growth of national conscious-ness among the Sakhas. First, Sakha national consciousness is directly linked with the ecological situation. Indeed, the destruction or the taiga and the rivers are considered as a direct result of Russian colonialism and an attempt on the traditional Sakha environment and the Sakhas them- selves (for 55% of the Sakha peasants live below the poverty line). Second, the Sakhas have a very specific and developed cultural back-ground (profiled through language and religion), which is much different from the Russian one. Hence they have a framework to assert themselves with. And third, the Sakhas were not always sub- jugated, on the contrary. For centuries, they themselves had the overlordship over many Siberian peoples like the Yukagirs and Evenks. So the fact that the Sakha are a minority in their own republic today, is resented as all too frustrating.

The autonomy of the Sakha republic

As said, the leadership of the Yakut ASSR changed the name of the republic to Republic of Sakha in early 1992. At the same moment, Yakutsk signed the Fede-ration treaty, but only after being granted much more autonomy that it had as a part of the RSFSR. Is that a consequence of Sakha national consciousness ? Ironically, it isn’t. The demands and moves towards more autonomy are, first of all, a move made by the heavily Russianized party apparatus in Yakutsk. Things become much clearer if one knows that the Republic of Sakha produces 90% of the diamonds and 40% of the gold of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the republic lays much closer to the economically booming Far East than to European Russia. So potentially, it is a very rich country, and the first to benefit from its autonomy is the incumbent power apparatus. Demands for an extension of existing autonomy (or even for outright independence), are a way for the local nomencla-tura to collect taxes themselves and control foreign investments, without interference from Moscow. This pattern, by the way, is most typical for many autonomous republics in the Volga-Ural region, Siberia and the Far East.

In this context, grass roots Sakha nationalism embodied by movements like Sakha Omuk can go two different ways. The one option is, that is will be coopted by the republican government to legitimate its power. But this is only possible, when more autonomy for the republic also leads to improving living conditions for the Sakhas themselves. And when it happens in such a way, that the Russian majority (which comprises, after all, the large majority of skilled workers of the republic) is not directly threatened in its interests. In short, the Sakha republic could become a bicultural society, where political and administrative power shifts to the Sakhas, while economic power remains largely in Russian hands. That way, both would be complementary and a base for stability. The other option is, that Sakha nationalism radicalizes into a mouthpiece for the economically ever more marginalized Sakha population. In this quality, it will remain an internal social movement of the discontented.

Conclusion: Turkestan or North Asia ?

It is most symbolic that in 1992, the authorities of the Sakha republic opened permanent representation offices in Japan and Korea, rather than in Turkey. And despite the Turkic background of theSakhas, their identity contains a large Siberian component. On the other hand, the Republic of Sakha does not have any border with any country except Russia, and two thirds of its population consist of ethnic Russians. Thus it is likely to remain into the Russian Federation for quite some time to come. And ironically, this is the base on which the Sakha republic will maintain and even develop its connections with the Turkic world. In order to counterweight the influence of Moscow, the Sakha republic strenghtend the ties with Tatarstan and Bashkortostan, two equally Turkic
republics whose geographic, economic and demographic situation is much alike that of the Sakha republic. This came forward, forexample, with their common protest against the first Federation treaty in 1992. Turkestan might be further away, but a friend in need is a friend indeed.

Bibliography:

E. Calabuig, ‘Changements gÇopolitiques dans le grand nord sibÇrien. Yakoutie, naissance d’une nation.’, Le Monde Diplomatique, 42(490), 1995,pp 6-7.

K. Dawisha & B. Parrot, Russia and the new states of Eurasia. The politics of upheaval. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).

M. Ferro, ‘Revendications tatares, aspiration bachkires, rÇclamations ossätes. La Russie, Ö son tour, menacÇe de dÇmembrement ?’, Le Monde Diplomatique, 38(438), 1991, pp 4-5.

G. Fondahl, ‘Siberia, native peoples and newcomers in collision’, in: I. Bren-ner & R. Tarras, Nationas and politics in the Soviet successor states (Cambrigde: Cambrigde University Press, 1993), pp 477-510.

R. Gîtz & U. Halbach, Republiken und nationale Gebietseinheiten der Russischen Fîderation. Geographie, Bevîlkerung, Politik und Wirtschaft. (Kîln: Bundesinstitut fÅr ostwissenschaftliche und internatio- nale Studien, 1993).I. Ramonet, ‘Dans le grand dÇsordre de la Russie. Une espoir pour le autochtones de SibÇrie ?’, Le Monde Diplomatique, 40(472), 1993, p 12.

A. Roxburg & P. Hanson, ‘The Russian Federation: republics, districts and territories.’, Regional surveys of the world. Eastern Europe and the CIS. (London: Europa Publications Limited, 1994), pp 587-591.

Foot notes:

1. Sakha is the name the Yakuts call themselves, while Yakut (the name under which the Sakhas are internationally better known anyway) is the Russian designation for the Sakhas.

2. There always was a high turnover among the Russian immigrants. Most of them only came to Yakutia for the high wages and interesting conditions, and left back for European Russia after a couple of years. This alienated the Sakhas and Russians from each other.

3. Even during the nineteenth century, many Siberian aboriginals were assimilated into the Sakha instead of the Russian culture, while many Russian hunters, in order to survive and work properly, learned the Sakha language and adopted Sakha customs.

Bruno De Cordier