“The Rat King has nothing to lose and before his death he wants to drink plenty of human blood”: how to minimize the risks of a possible civil war on the territory of Idel-Ural?

The author of this text is Shamil Amangildin, head of the Bashkortostan branch of the Federative Party. The material is very debatable, it is difficult to agree with the author on some issues, but his approach to the problem makes one think, and this is already a lot.

Putin’s Fascist regime goes Va-Bank. The rat king has nothing to lose, and before his death he wants to drink plenty of human blood. There are rumors about his desire to use a “dirty” bomb on the territory of the so-called Russian Federation, blame Ukraine for this and use tactical nuclear weapons in response. As a Bashkir liberal nationalist, I am not indifferent to the fate of the Bashkir and other fraternal peoples of Idel-Ural. So what should we, the national minorities of Idel-Ural: Bashkirs, Tatars, Udmurts, Chuvash, Erzya, Moksha, Maris do?

Let’s start with the obvious phenomena.

First. Putin mobilizes a disproportionately high share of national minorities among those mobilized by Russia for the war in Ukraine. Ideally, for the Russian-fascist world and Putin, Dagestanis, Buryats, Chechens, Ingush, Tatars and Bashkirs should die at the hands of Ukrainians, killing Ukrainians. After that, if Putler pleases, it is possible to dismantle the national republics, turn Bashkortostan into Ufa Region, and Tatarstan into Kazan Region. A draft law on the abolition of the Constitutional Court of Tatarstan has recently been introduced. A significant part of the Bashkirs and Tatars joyfully, with songs and playing the harmonica, goes to war ON THE SIDE OF THE MAIN ENEMY OF THE BASHKIR AND TATAR NATIONS.

Second. Putin fascist regime HAS OBVIOUSLY LOST. The ideology of the Russian-fascist world has obviously been defeated. Putler, in agony trying to extend the life of his regime, is forced to throw more and more cannon fodder into the furnace of the war. His Russian-fascist world is not needed to progressive humanity, HER MAJESTY HISTORY. His Russian-fascist world, historical reconstructions of the Russian Empire and Neo-Soviet Revanchism are only needed to Putler, the CHEKIST CORPORATION, Ukrainian-phobic residents of Eastern Ukraine and zombanauts, whom Putler’s propaganda spawned in huge numbers. Putler, by announcing partial mobilization, DELAYED the end of his political regime, but did not change the obvious fact of losing in the future.

Third. Putler creates contradictions among the national minorities of the territory he controls. Sometimes he uses the principle of “divide and rule”. This happens in the case of Bashkirs and Tatars (discourse on national identity and the status of the Tatar language) or, for example, in the case of Chechens and Ingush (discourse on the borders between Chechnya and Ingushetia). Sometimes Putler uses the “combine and manage” principle. Such a mechanism is implemented in relation to the Erzya and Moksha peoples, who were united into a single ethnic Mordva ethnos in order to destroy the Erzya and Moksha languages ​​and create an artificial “Mordovian” language, which is alien to both Erzya and Moksha. Here Putler is not a pioneer. The British Empire, when leaving India, created corresponding conflicts in its former colony.

Now let’s think about how to minimize the risks of a possible civil war on the territory of our national republics: Bashkortostan, Tatarstan, Udmurtia, Chuvashia, Mordovia, Mari El in connection with a possible future turmoil in the so-called Russian Federation.

First, a simple assumption. Suppose all Bashkirs, Tatars, Udmurts, Chuvashes, Erzyas, Mokshas, ​​Maris would have brains like mine. What would they do in this case? The same thing as me – emigrated from the Russian Federation, away from mobilization, or followed the strategy of AAN (Active Armed Non-intervention). I.e. no one would fight for the MAIN ENEMY OF THE BASHKIR, TATAR, UDMURT, CHUVASH, ERZYA, MOKSHA, MARI NATIONS, SITTING IN KREMLIN AND SHAKING DOWN HUMANITY WITH NUCLEAR WEAPON. They would do everything not to be mobilized and not get into the war. If they got to the war, they would either shoot their commanders or surrender to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. As a result, the combat losses of representatives of the IDEL-URAL NATIONS would be minimal. (Possible losses as a result of a nuclear strike by Putler on Kazan or Ufa are not considered in this article.)

However, not all representatives of the IDEL-URAL NATIONS have the same brains as mine. In general, individual variability of the brain overlaps ethnic, racial, and sexual ones. The propensity for zombification is also different for everyone. Therefore, they do not behave in the way that is optimal for their nations.

In Bashkortostan, PUTLER’S PROTECTOR is actively mobilizing Bashkir cannon fodder, and the argument that “these guys will gain combat experience in Ukraine and  will start fighting on the side of the Fourth Bashkir Republic in the future” seems to me somewhat naive. The necessary skills (including the skills of managing “bayraktars”) can be obtained by serving in the Turkish army, quietly, not drawing attention, following the AAN strategy and not participating in the war on the side of the ENEMY OF THE BASHKIR NATION.

Putler is our common enemy. This is the enemy of the UKRAINIAN NATION. This is the enemy of the BASHKIR NATION. This is the enemy of the TATAR NATION. This is the enemy of the CHUVASH NATION. This is the enemy of the UDMURT NATION. This is the enemy of the MARIAN NATION. This is the enemy of the ERZYA NATION. This is the enemy of the MOKSHA NATION. You won’t believe it, but Putler is also the enemy of the RUSSIAN NATION. This will become obvious to most Russians after the end of the Putler political regime. But the study of Putler’s influence on the Russian NATION is not the subject of this article. This article is about us, the NATIONS of IDEL-URAL and how to minimize risks of the civil war in our territory.

Let’s now move on to answering the question posed in the title of the article and think about how we can minimize the risks of civil war on our lands.

First. I often observed how the Republic of Bashkortostan and Idel-Ural were artificially opposed. Allegedly, the Republic of Bashkortostan is our Motherland, it is the Bashkir Republic, the brainchild of Zaki Validov. And Idel-Ural is something alien, not ours, Tatar. As a Bashkir liberal nationalist and a citizen of the Republic of Bashkortostan, I report the following: Idel-Ural (if we mean the union of Bashkortostan, Tatarstan, Mordovia, Udmurtia, Chuvashia, Mari El) is not some kind of alien formation for me. I am a supporter of Bashkortostan joining the union of national republics of Idel-Ural, with building horizontal ties between our republics and jointly defending our national rights.

Second. There is a risk of liquidation of the national republics by Putler. What to do if Putler liquidates the national republics within the Russian Federation? The Russian Federation has already been recognized as a terrorist state. Accordingly, any legislative initiatives of Putler after the recognition of the Russian Federation as a terrorist state lose their force. Therefore, in this case, after the end of the Putler political regime, it is necessary to contact the international authorities with a request to restore the national republics within the Russian Federation and their sovereignty. If it is needed to ensure the security of the Bashkir, Tatar, Chuvash, Mari, Udmurt, Erzya, Moksha peoples from fascist marauders, it is necessary to ask the international authorities to deploy peacekeeping military contingents along the perimeter of the Idel-Ural borders.

Third. There is a Bashkir-Tatar discourse that needs clarification. In short, the essence of the Bashkir-Tatar discourse boils down to disputes about what kind of identity (Tatar or Bashkir) certain people should have, as well as the issue of recognizing the Tatar language as the state language in the Republic of Bashkortostan. Also, in extremely rare cases, there are calls for joining the territories of Western Bashkortostan to Tatarstan and, vice versa, the territories of Eastern Tatarstan to Bashkortostan. There is no conflict at the household level and the level of the Bashkir and Tatar peoples. Let me, as an active participant in the discussions within the Bashkir-Tatar discourse, make a number of suggestions on this issue:

1) I, as a Bashkir liberal nationalist, believe that each person has the right to decide for himself what kind of national identity he has. A person has the right to be a Bashkir. A person has the right to be a Tatar. A person has the right to be both a Bashkir and a Tatar at the same time. A person has the right to be a Bashkir by origin, but a Tatar by language. A person has the right not to be either a Tatar or a Bashkir. A person has the right to be a Tatar in Tatarstan and become a Bashkir upon entering Bashkortostan. A person has the right not to have any national identity at all. A person has the right to have a tribal identity, but not to have a national identity. A person has the right to have both tribal and national identity at the same time. For example, Ralif Safin, a representative of the Kyrgyz family, may have the Kyrgyz family identity, consider himself a Tatar in language, but understand that he is a descendant of one of the Western Bashkir families. At the same time, the language of Ralif Safin differs significantly from the language of the Kyrgyz of Kyrgyzstan, although this fact does not mean that Ralif Safin does not have the right to have a Kyrgyz national identity. In general, language is indirectly connected with identity. The example of Russian-speaking Ukrainians fiercely fighting for Ukraine is a clear example of this. As you, I hope, understand, I am for complete liberalism in this matter.

Own national identity is a personal matter of each individual, it is not the responsibility of the state, it is not the responsibility of Putler or Tishkov, Rakhimov or Shaimiev. The national identity cannot be imposed. If a person internally resists some kind of national identity, he will not become the one they want to “create” out of him. The case with the language is a little different. The languages ​​of the indigenous peoples of the so-called Russian Federation are being systematically and successfully destroyed. And after the destruction of these languages, in the next generations, identity will also be destroyed. And this is also one of the reasons why the Russians amount to  80% of the population of the so-called Russian Federation.

The example of the Karelians in Karelia clearly demonstrates this.

2) In the West of the Republic of Bashkortostan, it is necessary to “legitimize” (as a language of interethnic communication or a regional language of a number of regions) the Tatar language and the western dialect of the Bashkir language simultaneously, together with the “legalized” state Bashkir and Russian languages.

Why should this be done? To reduce potential conflicts. If a person has a Tatar identity and considers his language Tatar, he should have the opportunity to study in the Tatar language, have access to Tatar-language resources, etc. If a person considers himself a Western Bashkir, then in a similar way he should have the opportunity to study in the Western dialect of the Bashkir language, have access to resources in the Western dialect of the Bashkir language. The closeness of the Tatar and the western dialect of the Bashkir language should not be misleading.

National identity is not always based on language. Let us recall once again the example of Russian-speaking Ukrainians fighting for Ukraine. The fact that the Bolsheviks called the language of the Western Bashkirs “Tatar” does not mean that it is the language of only those with the Tatar identity. The Western Bashkirs have the right to exist and have their language recognized as the Western dialect of the Bashkir language.

3) It is necessary for all the republics of Idel-Ural to mutually recognize the subjectivity and territorial integrity of each other, and further conclude agreements on friendship and cooperation. In case the representatives of the Republic of Tatarstan do not want to recognize the Republic of Bashkortostan within its current borders, it is necessary to sign a moratorium for a hundred years on discussing the borders between the republics.

The Bashkirs should not expect a mean stab in the back from the Tatar brother during the tense period of the formation of the statehood of the Idel-Ural republics. The Tatars also should be sure that Eastern Tatarstan will not become part of Bashkortostan and will not create problems in the future. I consider Bashkortostan as my Motherland, the Motherland of the southern, eastern, northern and part of the western Bashkirs and Tatars. I regard Tatarstan as the Motherland of Tatars and Western Bashkirs. There’s no sense in trying to reshape borders. After the fall of the Putler political regime, it will be necessary to build the new life based on the values ​​of the Western Civilization, and our future generations, after the end of the moratorium for a hundred years on discussing the borders, will be able to peacefully resolve any issues without problems.

If there are any unresolved issues regarding the borders within the Republic of Mordovia, it is proposed to sign a moratorium for a hundred years on the discussion of borders within the Republic of Mordovia (i.e., where the territory of Erzya conventionally is , where the Moksha territory is), or jointly decide that borders are not needed, and the corresponding population will receive satisfaction of their cultural, linguistic and other needs according to the number of the corresponding population in the corresponding settlements.

4) All the republics of the Idel-Ural should also mutually recognize the subjectivity and territorial integrity of the Ural Republic, the Siberian Republic, the Far Eastern Republic, the Nizhny Novgorod Republic, etc. (if they appear), sign agreements on friendship and cooperation with them, establish horizontal ties. As a Bashkir liberal nationalist, I have a positive attitude towards the idea of ​​“adding ethnicity” to the respective republics, i.e. I support the idea of ​​naming the respective republics as Russian Ural Republic, Russian Siberian Republic, Russian Far Eastern Republic, Russian Nizhny Novgorod Republic, etc. As a Bashkir nationalist, this approach is beneficial to me as in this case, there will be no claims to my Motherland Bashkortostan. In other words, my people will be less likely to be liquidated due to russification and assimilation as a result. Each nation within the common house, the Federation, has its own apartment. Russians, since there are many Russians, have many such apartments – the Russian Ural Republic, the Russian Siberian Republic, etc. Russians do not go to a foreign monastery with their own law, we do not go to them with ours. Russians do not act as an older brother, they evolve their imperial fascism and gradually become a normal European Russian nation in the territories of the respective Russian Republics.

5) For the Russian population of the non-Russian republics of the Idel-Ural, all conditions for a normal life are being created, including a hundred-year moratorium on the abolition of the status of the Russian language as the state language in Bashkortostan, Tatarstan, Udmurtia, Mari El, Mordovia, Chuvashia. At the same time, the republics of the Idel-Ural have the opportunity to pursue their own demographic policy, including to stimulate the arrival of the Bashkir population from the Russian Ural Republic to Bashkortostan, the Tatar population to Tatarstan, impose restrictions on permanent residence in their republics for non-indigenous people who arrived, if their numerical superiority leads to the loss of of the language,  the identity, etc. of the indigenous nationalities. 

Thus, based on the principles of friendliness, understanding the desires of neighbors, realizing the all harmfulness of imperial fascism and Putin’s political regime, it is possible to try to develop a number of measures that reduce the probability of civil war on the territory of the Idel-Ural.