INTERACTION OF THE STATE WITH THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THE NORTH, SIBERIA AND THE FAR EAST. THE THEORETICAL ASPECT
https://doi.org/10.48137/23116412_2025_3_41
Abstract
The article examines the dynamics of interaction between the Russian state and the indigenous peoples of the North, Siberia and the Far East in the 1990s–2000s through the prism of the Adizioglu -Robinson theory. According to this theory, the creation of the State Committee for the North can be interpreted as an attempt by the state to legitimize control over the territories of indigenous peoples through the rhetoric of protecting their rights. Particular attention is paid to the role of the State Committee for the North in the development of federal programs for socio-economic development. The article shows that programs aimed at integrating indigenous peoples into the market economy ignored their cultural specifics, which led to the marginalization of traditional ways of life. This confirms Adizioglu’s thesis that state modernization projects often reinforce social inequality, disguising it as progress. The study of the interaction of the State Committee for the North with other government bodies reveals the mechanisms of bureaucratic socialization (Robinson), where partnership with indigenous peoples became an instrument of symbolic inclusion rather than real dialogue. Legislative initiatives, analyzed through postcolonial optics, are interpreted as the formalization of state domination, where the rights of indigenous peoples were limited to a framework convenient for the resource exploitation of their territories.
About the Author
M. V. StorozhukRussian Federation
STOROZHUK Mikhail V. – graduate student
Moscow
References
1. Filin A. Kalma asks for protection // Soviet culture. October 27, 1988. p. 3.
2. Agitaev E.A. Problems of employment of the population: an ethnic aspect // The northern peoples of Russia are on their way to the new millennium. Collection of documents, articles, memoirs and reflections. M. 2000. pp.126-137.
3. Veblen T. Theory of the leisure class. M.: Librocom. 2011. 368 p.
4. Ajemoglu D., Robinson J. Why some countries are rich and others are poor. The origin of power, prosperity and poverty. Moscow: AST. 2019. 692 p.
5. Akopov S.V., Rozanova M.S. Identity in the era of global migration. St. Petersburg: DEAN, 2010. 272 p.
6. Kryazhkov V.A. Indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North in Russian law. Moscow: Infra-M. 2010. 560 p.
7. Michels R. The Iron Law of the oligarchy: Sociology of political parties. Moscow: Mysl. 2000. 416 p.
8. North D. Institutions, institutional changes and the functioning of the economy. Moscow: Foundation of the economic book “Beginnings”. 1997. 180 p.
9. Nureyev R.M. Institutionalism: yesterday, today, tomorrow. Moscow: Economics. 2005. 416 p.
10. Pavroz A.V. Interest groups and political regimes: a neo-institutional analysis of modern Russia: dissertation by Dr. Polit. Nauk. SPb.: Publishing House of St. Petersburg State University. 2013. 478 p.
11. Hodgson J. Evolutionary Institutional Economics. Moscow: Gaidar Institute Publishing House. 2012. 576 p.
12. Convention No. 169 of the International Labour Organization “On Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries” (1989) // https://www.un.org/ru/documents/treaty/OHCHR-1989 (accessed: 10.03.2025).
Review
For citations:
Storozhuk M.V. INTERACTION OF THE STATE WITH THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THE NORTH, SIBERIA AND THE FAR EAST. THE THEORETICAL ASPECT. Post–Soviet Continent. 2025;(3):41-54. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.48137/23116412_2025_3_41