On July 1-3, 2010, Kazan hosted the III Eurasian Scientific Forum "Eurasia on the Way to a Multipolar World: from the Confrontation of Geopolitical Systems to the Dialogue of Cultural and Historical Societies", organized by the Center for Eurasian and International Studies of Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University (head-B. M. Yagudin). The forum was attended by 147 participants from different cities of Russia, Ukraine, South Ossetia, the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Iran, Tajikistan and Poland.

Speaking at the opening of the forum, the Minister of Education and Science of the Republic of Tatarstan A. Kh. Gilmutdinov emphasized the value and significance of such events for Tatarstan. This point of view was also supported in the greeting of the Vice-President of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan N. M. Valeeva Street.

Addressing the forum participants, Iranian Consul in Kazan Saed Mohammad Reza Zarei noted that human culture, which reveals itself to us in its various guises, basically goes back to common values and carries a message of unity of humanity. In his opinion, Tatarstan as one of the cultural centers of Russia, inspired by the culture and civilization of Islam, has proved its tolerance towards all religions.

Speaking at the plenary session, Corresponding Member of the Board of Directors V. V. Khomenko, Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Tatarstan, analyzed the post-crisis development of Russia in the context of Eurasian integration. In his opinion, the economic crisis has passed, and Russia, having withstood a powerful blow from it (the reason for such consequences is still the same-the raw material component of the Russian economy), can become a leader in broad Eurasian integration. The report of sociologist A. L. Salagaev (Kazan State Institute of Technology) was devoted to the study of the state of the Russian ethnos in the XXI century. un-t), according to which the Russians, while remaining the state-forming people of Russia, found themselves in a situation of depopulation and facing the threat of degradation as a nation. As Chairman of the Russian Culture Society of Kazan, he also touched upon the situation of Russians in Tatarstan, in particular the question of why the Russians of Tatarstan do not create their own national and cultural autonomy.

Hamid Reza Solki, Vice-Rector of Jamiyat Al-Mustafa Al-Alamiya University (Qom, Iran), spoke about geoculture, believing that the era of geoculture is coming to replace the geopolitics that emerged as a result of colonial wars and the imperialist policies of Western powers in the 20th century. The report of the rector of Kazan Russian Islamic University R. M. Mukhametshin examined the phenomenon of leadership in the Russian Islamic Ummah, which is characterized not only by competition between individual representatives of the Muslim spiritual administration, but also by ethnic competition between Tatars and natives of the North Caucasus. The Arab theme was touched upon in the speeches of Moscow researchers G. G. Kosach and E. S. Melkumyan (both RSUH), who spoke respectively about the Arab world as a phenomenon and about the place and role of the Persian Gulf region in world politics.

The plenary session also included a report by Deputy Secretary General of the International Road Transport Union (Moscow) I. B. Runov on transport support in Eurasia. He believes that Eurasian economic integration, including transport issues, depends on the ability of political leaders to make compromises.

The most prominent events of the forum were the round table "Greater Caucasus: Internal problems and external Challenges" and the section "Political and socio-economic development of the Republic of Tatarstan on the threshold of the second decade of the XXI century".

page 134
The round table brought together leading experts on the problems of one of the most turbulent regions of Eurasia. It was opened by Adviser to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic R. A. Zargaryan. The NKR he represents is unique, as it is not recognized by any state, including Armenia. Nevertheless, there is no institution of presidential successors and there are truly democratic elections, which result in a change of political leadership. The Karabakh issue was continued by G. K. Mnatsakanyan (Kazan State University), who spoke about the Karabakh factor of Turkish foreign policy. According to the Kazan Caucasian expert, despite the current warming of relations between Ankara and Yerevan, Turkey will not risk spoiling relations with Azerbaijan over Karabakh.

A. G. Areshev, a Moscow expert (Moscow, Strategic Culture Foundation), devoted his report to Russian-Armenian relations. In his forecast of the development of relations between the two countries, it was emphasized that Armenia will remain a strategic partner and ally of Russia in Transcaucasia. In the context of Armenian-Russian relations, a report was delivered by a Kazan researcher and journalist Ya. A. Amelina, who highlighted the activities of the already established Azerbaijani lobby as a real force influencing many decisions in Russia. F. F. Aboszoda, one of the leaders of the Talysh people, spoke about the situation in Transcaucasia.

A significant place in the framework of the round table was occupied by the consideration of the situation in the North Caucasus.

Speaking about the reaction of Muslims of Tatarstan to the military events in Chechnya in the late XX - early XXI centuries, the representative of the Spiritual Administration of Muslims of the republic V. M. Yakupov noted that if during the first Chechen war (1994 - 1996) Tatarstan Muslims sympathized with the Dudayev regime, then during the second Chechen war (1999 - 2001) this sympathy (at least at the level of the Spiritual Administration of Muslims of the Republic of Tatarstan) was on the side of the federal troops carrying out the counter-terrorist operation. T. E. Dzeranov (Vladikavkaz, North Ossetian Institute of Humanit. and social networks. research.). The report of R. R. Suleymanov (Kazan, Center for Eurasian and International Studies) considered the "case of Mufti Evteev" and the reaction of Muslims of Russia and Tatarstan to it. Analyzing the general situation in the North Caucasus, political analyst A. A. Epifantsev (Moscow) came to the conclusion that Russia is losing this region. A. Skakov (Moscow, Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences) presented a report on the prospects of development of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In his opinion, South Ossetia is oriented towards Russia, but the option of its unification with North Ossetia and joining Russia cannot be ruled out. As for the "pro-Russian" orientation of Abkhazia, it may soon be replaced by a Western orientation.

The section "Political and socio-economic development of the Republic of Tatarstan on the threshold of the second decade of the XXI century" was attended by the most famous Kazan specialists (political scientists, ethnologists, sociologists and Islamic scholars).

D. M. Iskhakov (Center for Ethnological Monitoring of the World Congress of Tatars) made a report "Tatars of the XXI century: vectors of demographic and political development of the nation". In his opinion, the Tatars may be artificially divided by the upcoming population census. He believes that only the awareness of the Tatars themselves of their common ethnicity will be a test for the nation, which only in this case will acquire the status of the second largest ethnic group in Russia. This topic was continued by the Kazan historian N. G. Garif, who spoke about the problem of Bulgarianism in Tatarstan as an attempt to split the Tatar ethnic group on the eve of the upcoming population census.

In a speech by political scientist S. A. Sergeev (Kazan State University) technology, un-t) analyzed the results of the first three months of being in power in Tatarstan of its second president, Rustam Minnikhanov. His colleague V. A. Belyaev noted that there was a change of generations of the ruling elite in the republic. Despite the" agrarian " origin of both presidents, R. Minnikhanov strives for the selection of managerial personnel not on the basis of personal loyalty, but on the basis of professional qualities.

Sociologist L. V. Bestsheva (Kazan State Technological University). un-t) considered the ethnic composition of the ruling elite of Tatarstan. Her conclusion was pessimistic: in the new government of Tatarstan, headed by I. Khalikov, there is only one Russian minister, who heads the Ministry of Informatization and Communications. Based on the results of her sociological research in the environment of

page 135
It is obvious to young people that the Russians of Tatarstan believe that it is easier for Tatars to take up leadership positions. The second report by Ya. A. Amelina was titled "Tatarstan without Shaimiev: the loss of the regional championship". The change of political leadership in the republic, in her opinion, has led to the fact that the generation of politicians actively fighting for federalism as a model of the Russian state structure is being replaced by a generation of technocratic politicians and managers, a prominent representative of which is R. Minnikhanov. This will lead to the fact that Tatarstan, having become a strong economic region, will lose leadership in the Russian Islamic community, which will probably pass to Chechnya, and then Grozny, and not Kazan, will become the" Muslim capital " of Russia. The second speech of R. R. Suleymanov was devoted to the formation of the power elite of Tatarstan (on the example of the former mayor of Kazan, now the representative of Russia in the Organization of the Islamic Conference Kamil Iskhakov).

A significant place in the work of the section "Political and socio-economic development of the Republic of Tatarstan on the threshold of the second decade of the XXI century" was occupied by issues related to the internal situation in the republic. So, in the report of the political scientist A. V. Bogachev (Kazan State Technological University). un-t) "Social protest in Tatarstan at the present stage" it was about social protests in Kazan. It was emphasized that the protest rallies held in Kazan in the first half of 2010 against rising prices and tariffs could also turn into political speeches. But, naturally, the analysis of the internal republican situation could not fail to touch upon ethno-confessional problems.

The usual perception of Tatarstan as a republic, where the Tatar ethnic component almost fully dominates, was questioned by the Kazan public figure F. S. Safiullin, who made a report " Destruction of monuments of Tatar national culture in the XXI century: who is to blame and what to do?". The speaker had in mind, first of all, the destruction of the rooms of "Bulgar", in which the classic of Tatar literature Gabdulla Tukay lived and worked. This happened at the initiative of officials with the complete silence of the Tatar public, which was evidence of the " spiritual degradation of the nation." In turn, the speech of priest Oleg (Sokolov), who represented the rector of the Kazan Church - a monument to Russian soldiers who fell during the capture of Kazan, was devoted to the situation around this church. In his opinion, the temple cannot be considered as a monument to the conquest of Kazan and as a symbol of the conquest of the Kazan Khanate. In accordance with the situation in Tatarstan, it is advisable to erect a monument to the Tatar soldiers who fell in the defense of Kazan.

The results of teaching both state languages - Tatar and Russian - in schools of Tatarstan were presented by the Deputy Chairman of the Society of Russian Culture of Kazan, moderator of the Internet community "Russian language in schools of Tatarstan" M. Y. Shcheglov. Based on the data of this community, the speaker stressed that the forced teaching of the Tatar language to Russian children in the republic's schools did not lead to any positive results.

The report of F. A. Salman, Director of the Kazan Center for Studies of the Noble Quran and the Most Pure Sunnah, was devoted to the process of spreading the ideas of Salafism in Tatarstan. In his opinion, the Muslim community of the republic is experiencing a huge impact of these ideas today. Supporters of Salafism are also present in the Spiritual Administration of Muslims. The secular Tatar separatists were replaced by Salafists, who pose a threat not only to the federal center, but also, first of all, to the Tatar society.

A special "round table" was devoted to the development of modern Turkey, where the main speakers were political scientist Aidar Garayev (Turkey, Ankara University) and the famous Russian Turkologist B. M. Yagudin (Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University).

The topic of A. Garayev's speech is energy cooperation between Russia and Turkey. In his opinion, these relations have reached the level of strategic ones, having acquired the status of interdependence. Turkey is a party interested in uninterrupted supplies of Russian gas. This excludes the possibility of any actions on its part that could (as was the case with Ukraine) damage the existing bilateral contacts.

B. M. Yagudin's speech concerned a new phenomenon of Turkish foreign policy, which he called "neo-Ottomanism". In his opinion, in modern Turkey, the ideas of Kemalism are becoming a thing of the past, when this country seeks to distance itself from the European Union, which does not see the possibility of accepting it into its ranks. As a result, Turkey's leaders seek to develop relations with the countries of the Arab East and Iran, which logically leads them to a deterioration in relations with Israel. At the same time, Turkish Kemalists are losing their influence inside the country, where Islamists are openly attacking the highest army officers as a traditional threat.

page 136
Atatürk's ideas, and junior officers and rank-and-file of the Turkish armed forces are in favor of supporting Erdogan.

A number of sections of the forum focused on the issues of interaction and mutual influence of cultures in the Eurasian space (moderator-V. A. Vorontsov, representing the Center for Eurasian and International Studies), domestic and foreign policy of Western countries (moderators-A.V. Abakunova, Director of the Center for the Study of Interethnic and Intercultural Relations, Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine, and A. N. Abakunova, Associate Professor of the Moscow RUDN University. Komarov), History of culture and law in Eurasia (moderator-Associate Professor of Stavropol State University S. O. Zvonok).

At the same time, the forum included a "round table" dedicated to the problems of modern Iran and Central Asian states (hosted by the Director of the Center for Iranian Studies of the Institute of History of the Republic of Tatarstan A. A. Arslanova and Professor of the Tatar State Humanitarian and Pedagogical University A. A. Burkhanov), as well as a "round table" dedicated to integration in the post-Soviet space (hosted by professor of Kazan (Volga Region) Federal University A. G. Bolshakov and Professor of Nizhny Novgorod State University I. V. Ryzhov) and political and ethno-confessional processes on the continent.

As a result of the forum, a resolution was adopted in which its participants expressed their hope that the Kazan Eurasian Scientific Forum will become an annual event.

page 137

Permanent link to this publication: