economist, Tashkent city
THE PROSPECTS OF INTENSIFICATION OF THE TURKIC WORLD INTEGRATION
Formation of the Modern Turkic World
The modern Turkic world has been forming for centuries and the layout of the Turkic peoples settlement has formed under the influence of migration processes of the Turkic peoples, which had the nature of expansion before XVI century; and after that period the area of the Turkic peoples settlement or supremacy has significantly shrunk.
The following regions can be symbolically separated out from Eurasian continent according to cultural-climatic attributes:
- Europe – densely populated by predominantly Christian peoples damp western side of Eurasia;
- Asia – densely populated by predominantly Buddhist and Hindu peoples monsoon damp eastern, south-eastern and southern sides of Eurasia;
- Middle East – rarely populated by predominantly Muslim peoples arid south-western side of Eurasia with the Mediterranean precipitation regime;
- Central Eurasia – the region located between Europe and Asia and embracing both part of Europe and part of Asia, but differing from Europe and Asia with its vast surfaces, inland location, severe climate, and in tote with rare density of population.
It should be noted that this division is to a large extend relative, and certain areas according to various attributes can be referred to different regions.
Central Eurasia for the millenniums has been the main region of the Turkic peoples’ settlement. Internal Asia, i.e. the region embracing Southern Siberia and Central Asia is considered to be the historical motherland of the Turkic peoples, from where they moved mainly in western and south-western direction.
Moral values of the Turkic peoples that had formed particularly under the influence of the conditions and style of living of an average Turk became the basis for the high martial qualities of the Turkic peoples. Turkic societies virtually corresponded to mobile and disciplined armies. Thanks to this the Turkic peoples over a period of millenniums founded empires, particularly embracing adjacent regions (Europe, Asia and Middle East). This circumstance let the Turkic peoples expand their area of living or become ruling class at the territories from Pacific Ocean and Bengal Bay to Central Europe and Maghreb.
Migration of the Turkic peoples to the West i.e. to Eastern and Central Europe proceeded in several waves and was extensive by amount and time. Suffice it to mention that the first known waves of Turkic expansion to Europe took place in the period of Roman Empire. The most known groups of the Turkic peoples that consecutively founded their empires in Central and Eastern Europe were the Huns, the Avars, the Bulgars, and the Hazars.
However the most influence to the formation of the modern East European Turkic peoples was exerted by the successors of the above mentioned groups – the Pechenegs and the Kypchaks, especially the latter. Migration of the Kypchaks to Eastern Europe and supplanting by them the Pechenegs took place mostly in XI century. It is that time which can be considered as the beginning of the Kypchak period in Eastern Europe, which is lasting till present.
Later on after accession of the fragments of the Golden Horde to the Moscow state Kypchak peoples could retain only settled (non-nomadic) Muslim areas in Middle Volga-Ural, Crimea, and the part of the Northern Caucasus. Nomadic Kypchaks who had mostly accepted Orthodoxy partly joined in the Moscow aristocracy; the most part of them formed the initial backbone of the military estate of the Russian Empire – the Cossacks, which afterwards (as per increase of the Slavic element) became the component of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples. It should be noted that the Cossacks had played exceptional role in annexation by Russia of the territories of the Great Steppe and Siberia; the Cossacks played a very important role in the subsequent history of Russia particularly in the wars with European powers.
Part of the nomadic Kypchaks practicing Islam who had taken the name of Nogays was consecutively supplanted from Volga, South Ukrainian and North Caucasian steppes mostly to Ottoman Empire and Central Asia.
Though migration of Turkic tribes to the South-East – to Anatolia, Iran, Azerbaijan, and Iraq also proceeded in several waves, expansion of the Seljukids in XI century was determinant in the settling of the Turkic peoples in this region. Afterwards through Anatolia the Turkic ethnic groups moved to the Balkans.
Turkic population settled in Balkans was also supplanted during the wars of Christian Empires with Ottoman Empire as a result of withdrawal of the latter.
In XIV-XV centuries migration of Yakuts from South Siberia to the Lena basin took place. Afterwards Yakuts widely spread along the Lena river tributaries at a vast territory.
Thereby the general layout of the modern settlement of Turkic peoples has formed. The general area of Turkic peoples’ settlement passes from Lena basin through southern Siberia, Central Asia, Central Volga and Ural, Caucasus and Crimea to Zagros, Anatolia and Balkans. Thus the Turkic peoples occupy vast territory within Eurasian continent which almost does not have access to Oceans only having access to some inner continental seas. This circumstance predetermined historical prevalence of land interrelations and integrations of the Eurasian nations, considerable part of which always consisted from Turkic peoples. Numerous empires of continental type that had been founded and collapsed (and reconstituted again) in Eurasia were the striking illustration.
Availability of close interconnection and recurrent integration of the parts of the Turkic world in the past is proven by the level of proximity of languages and cultures of the Turkic peoples.
Ideas of Ethnical Integration in XIX- and the beginning of XX centuries
During the most part of medieval period Central Eurasia had been virtually divided between Turkic and Turkic-Mongol empires. For instance, to the end of medieval period, in XVI century practically all of Islamic Eurasia, as well as India, North Africa and South-East Europe were divided between the Ottoman, Safavid, Baburid empires, as well as the Sheibanid and other Turkic states. However the Turkic world has never acted on the world arena as a single whole, vice versa great empires created by the Turkic peoples wasted much of their energy to struggle with each other.
By XIX- and XX centuries the situation had drastically changed and the Turkic peoples transformed from military and ruling caste of Eurasia to the group of nations who had became colonies and semi-colonies of the great powers.
At the turn of XIX- and XX centuries under the influence of European nations, ethnic principle of self-identification disseminated throughout the Turkic world. As the dissemination of this principle and of the knowledge about Turkic populated area, cultural proximity and geographical and historical community of the Turkic peoples continued, ideas of Turkism as a movement for the freedom of the Turkic peoples and for creation of their own center of power occur and develop in XX-th century. Thus the idea of consolidation of the Turkic peoples based on ethnical principles rather than on dynastic, geographic and religious principles occurred for the first time in history. Objective necessity of this idea was manifested by the fact that public figures of various Turkic peoples, viewing Turkism as a part of the course for national revival, liberty, and cultural development of the Turkic peoples, became the followers of the idea independently from each other.
As a result of rigorous repressions pursued by totalitarian regimes in the beginning and the middle of XX century Turkism collapsed as an idea deserving to exist. The most damage to Turkism was inflicted by Stalinism, by which particularly the majority of conspicuous Turkism followers had been repressed.
The most damage inflicted to Turkism consisted in discrediting the idea of integration of the Turkic peoples itself and the total informational taboo regarding historical and integration potential of Turkic peoples.
The absence of awareness among the Turkic peoples’ public about the Turkic world as a community with a vast potential, lasting even after USSR collapse, as well as a spread image of the Turkism as a certain destructive movement invented by “enemies” or something utopian obstructive for implementation of realistic plans is an illustration to severity of the damage inflicted to Turkism.
Ideas have played not less and maybe more role than material values in the history of humanity from the point of view of amount of wars and conflicts, and forced or voluntary expenses of societies. One cannot characterize ideas by extreme categories searching only positive or only negative features. The level of constructivism or disruptiveness of ideas depends on which characters the ideas predominantly acquire, and accordingly in which forms are the ideas being implemented.
Ideas of integration of ethnically close groups are constructive from the point of view of consolidating peoples, conflict resolution between them, merger of regions etc. Though, isolationistic trends initially exist in such ideas, and these trends can prevail in case of excessive accentuation on ethnicity to the prejudice of mankind unity. And if interests of an ethnical group are considered much higher than interests of other groups the idea would take undisguised aggressive character.
Thus in 30-th and 40-th of XX century the idea of German nationalism containing pragmatic aspiration for review of Versailles system discriminatory for Germany and for uniting the European Germans in a sole state, as per the victories of Germany, ever more attained the features of the idea of superiority of Germans and legitimacy of sacrificing the interests of other groups for the interests of Germans; thus the idea doomed the German nation to defeat.
The events of the World War II are often viewed as a struggle between the nations who belonged to capitalistic, national-socialistic and Bolshevik alignments. But it is worth to remember that in the course of these events two ideas of ethnical integration – Pan-Germanism and Pan-Slavism – were implemented.
Unification of German-speaking countries of Europe into the sole state was over a period of centuries a national aspiration of European Germans. By reason of location of German territories among the midst of the great powers of Europe, and the antagonisms between Prussia and Austria regarding the hegemony in Germany, Prussia under the rule of Bismarck had to levy three wars and administer a complicated diplomatic game until achieving the unification of Germany. In 1871 Bismarck managed to unite in German empire all German-speaking countries except Austria, Luxemburg and Switzerland. After 1871 annexation of Austria to the Reich turned to be the main goal of Pan-Germanists.
Collapse of Germany in World War I not only led to detachment from Germany and Austria of the several German-populated regions, but also put Germany into the state of limited sovereignty under the conditions of Versailles system. Reunification of Germany and Austria was deliberately inhibited.
Recovery of Germany’s positions began with the coming to power of national-socialists in 1933. During the next years the limitations of Versailles system against Germany were abrogated, and Austria, Sudet region and Klaipeda were reunified with Germany. Though these achievements of Germany were feasible by means of war blackmail, in this stage the policy of national-socialists was focused on restitution of Germany’s sovereignty and annexation of German-populated areas striving to unite with Germany.
Further expansion of the Reich acquired features of aggressive war against other countries in the course of which the Reich annexed North-Western Poland, populated not only with Germans but predominantly with Poles, Alsace and Lorraine and Luxemburg, German-speaking population of which had ambiguous attitude to unification with the Reich. Germany managed to unite Europe under its’ authority but European countries turned to a disparaged status; especially this was applicable for Poland and Czechia which were turned to directly occupied territories. It was clear that the further policy of Nazi government was guided not by interests of German people and the necessity to defend Europe, as they declared, but mainly by the purpose to oppress and plunder European nations.
The policy of national-socialists pursued at occupied territories of USSR was the peak of their aggression and chauvinism.
Defeat of Germany was the effect of overwhelming dominance of the resources mobilized against Germany in comparison with the resources mobilized for Germany’s benefit. Germany could overcome this dominance if it used the opportunity of involvement of the forces who viewed Germany as their ally in their struggle for interests. For instance France could be turned to a valid ally after proliferation in France of anti-British public moods as a result of operations held by British against French navy in 1941. After intrusion of German army into USSR, Germans found there allies from the part of soviet population viewing Germans as the ally in struggle against Bolshevik regime. But the policy of national-socialist regime virtually of oppressing of occupied countries led to a limited capability of allies’ mobilization in Europe, and in USSR this policy led to resistance to German army not only of Bolshevik machinery but the most part of the USSR population.
Policy of Nazis of plundering other nations was to a large extent driven by the problem of exigent lack of resources for carrying out military campaigns that they met from the very first years of war and that they had to solve immediately and by any means. But to a large extent this policy was justified and became possible because of the official legitimization and propaganda by the national-socialistic ideology of Germans’ superiority. Thus, the national-socialistic ideology doomed Germany to confrontation with other nations and to consolidation of many nations against Germany disproportionate with the Germany’s resources. Even in case of adequacy of the Germany’s resources the national-socialistic ideology was doomed to defeat in the long-range prospect because of its amorality.
Policy of national-socialists also discredited all achievements of Germany obtained during the period of Nazi rule. By results of the end of the war, all German-speaking regions annexed to the Third Reich, including Austria were detached from Germany, as well the quarter of Germany’s pre-war territory, the German diasporas that traditionally had big influence in East European were deported from several East European countries. The projects of the ever more separation of Germany were not realized though Germany was separated into Western and eastern because of the West and USSR contradiction. The German people suffered total moral-psychological catastrophe and humiliation, Germany henceforth was deprived of the chance to become a military-political center in the nearest future.
Catastrophe of Germany conceded opening for realization in Europe of another idea of ethnic integration – Pan-Slavism. Unification of Slavic countries of Eastern, Central and South-Eastern Europe under Russian authority had been the purpose of Russian Pan-Slavists during XIX- and the beginning of XX centuries. This purpose was actually achieved in 1945 when USSR took its control over East European countries, including all Slavic countries.
In contrast to Germany ethnicity was not key factor in Bolshevik ideology, and the main purpose of USSR was to spread communistic regimes and its own supremacy at European territory, but the Slavic factor also played role in the expansion of USSR to Europe. For instance, in order to legitimize to the Soviet army and East European nations expansion of the military operations into the boundaries of Eastern Europe, pro-Slavic and anti-German rhetoric in a certain extent was used in military and political propaganda of USSR.
Redivision of Europe after the end of war also had pro-Slavic trends. About one hundred thousand square kilometers of Germany’s pre-war territory populated mainly with Germans was handed over to Poland (most probably as a compensation for Western Ukraine and Western Byelorussia which before war had belonged to Poland and then annexed by USSR). German city Königsberg with the contiguous territory was handed over to Russia. About fifteen million Germans were deported from several regions of Eastern Europe, first of all from former German provinces, Czechoslovakia, Poland, and Yugoslavia. Several Adriatic regions belonging to Italia were transferred to Yugoslavia, however the transfer of South Dobruja from Romania to Bulgaria, which took place under the patronage of Nazi Germany remained unchanged.
As a result of the above-mentioned boundary revisions Slavic countries also attained and expanded their strategic access to sea. Thus, Poland acquired not only about one hundred thousand square kilometers of German territory but also Baltic seashore with the 500 kilometer extent, whereas before war it had practically no access to the sea except narrow coastal zone that had separated Germany from East Prussia and became one of the formal reasons of German-Polish war in 1939. Russia gained Königsberg/Kaliningrad port at the Baltic Sea. Yugoslavia significantly increased its access to Adriatic Sea at the expense of Italian territories, as well as final linkage to Yugoslavia of the coastal territories that had for a long time been under Italian governance or considerable influence of Italians. Bulgaria increased its Black sea shore at the expense of coastal zone of Dobruja.
However Warsaw pact existed for about only 45 years. As a result of socialistic system collapse, five Slavic countries united in a sole Warsaw pact separated to 13 Slavic countries of the different political orientation. Separation of Yugoslavia was accompanied by inter-Slavic war. Part of Slavic countries joined NATO, which was considered to be Russia’s contestant.
The main reasons of collapse of Slavic countries unification within the Warsaw system were that the unification processes had happened to be realized under the regime, which had certain achievements in industrial development, science and education progress, but discredited itself by aggressive and amoral policy, unification had been realized not on equal right conditions, but on the basis of military and political dominance of one country, and that elements having non-integration orientation had been integrated.
Warsaw system had no sufficient foundation to cement integration of the Slavic countries unified within the system. In this union USSR being more backward in social-economic aspect tried to dominate above more progressed East European nations. Catholic Slavic nations, oriented mostly to Europe did not have popular intention to integrate with orthodox Slavic nations, and their forced unification did not last for long.
In contrast to Pan-Slavism and Pan-Germanism integration within European Union became an example of successful integration for all integration initiatives of the world. European Union has the following features distinguishing it from the cases of Pan-Slavism and Pan-Germanism realization:
- Integration within European Union has been realized voluntarily, step-by-step, and on relatively equal right basis.
- Integration within European Union has not been oriented against anybody, and has been based primarily on economic and cultural approximation.
- Civilization uniformity of European nations has been the basis of integration in European Union.
- Demand in integrating European nations in terms of regionalization of the whole world and emergence of economic and political centers in America and East Asia has served as a basis of integration in Europe.
- Developed democratic values and developed civil society served for overcoming of political barriers in Europe.
Development of Turkism ideas in the present
In the end of XX century with the growth of ethnical self-consciousness of the Turkic peoples and with the emergence of independent Turkic states, the idea of necessity of convergence and developing cooperation between Turkic peoples gained a new impulse, though according to the above-mentioned reasons it did not become popular. However the following premises for integration of the Turkic peoples make the integration intensification indispensable and a wider spread of the idea amongst the Turkic public expected:
- Requirement of joint activity on conservation and development of cultural and spiritual potential of the Turkic world.
- Demand in consolidation of Turkic region’s potentials in terms of regionalization of the whole world.
- Requirement of centralized vindication of interests of the Turkic world subjects because of its situation in the center of Eurasia in the intersection of interests of the most powerful global actors
- Community of geo-economic interests which particularly proceed from
- Location of the most of the Turkic countries inside the continent which is associated with the lack of access to sea and their being closed up on each other which results in necessity of the joint efforts for access to sea and to additional transport routes
- Location of the most of the Turkic countries at the centers of existing and potential routes of commodities and energy resources transportation and necessity of decreasing the barriers at these routes in order to encourage commodities and energy resources transportation at trans-Eurasian itineraries.
So far as the ideas of ethnical integration proceed from national-patriotic sentiments, in which achievement of national goals occupies central position, they primordially contain a tendency to grow into chauvinism and extremism. This is comparable with the tendency of rational urge of an individual to vindicate his interests to develop into egocentrism. That’s why level of constructiveness of such ideas directly depends on how much they are able to overcome these trends, harmonizing their own interests with the interests of other groups and with other factors of reality. Thus ideas of ethnical integration are bound over following ethics coherent to respectful attitude to the interests of other groups and issued from primordial priority of mankind unity over ethnic interests.
Impossibility of integrating peoples by chauvinistic and compelling ways is proven by the examples of foundation of empires and unions in the past. “High energy” of a nation that enabled creation of high culture and civilization that was not obtrusive but attractive for other nations was the basic for foundation of empire. And though the majority of empires in the past were founded by military means, just “high energy” of empire, which ensured moral-psychological cementation of the union with its attractiveness, was the determinant factor of empires’ existence. Later on, as a result of culture degradation, the attractiveness of union for the peoples who composed the empire had decreased, that forced the center to apply measures of compulsion to hold the peoples within the empire. This in its turn decreased attractiveness of union even more and stimulated centrifugal trends on a larger scale.
The viability of Turkic empires was determined by the combination of high martial qualities of the Turkic armies and the principles of tolerance. Lack of tolerance was the right sign of decline of the Turkic empires, which can be observed by the example of the Baburid’s Empire and Ottoman Empire etc. at their late existence.
In consequence of widespread settling of the ancient Turkic ethnic groups, the modern Turkic peoples have formed by mixture with the non-Turkic ethnic groups; which is illustrated with racial differences between the Turkic peoples.
One can often meet opinions, which reflect extreme points of view to the origins of Turkic peoples, either that a Turkic people originates only from ancient Turkic tribes, or only from aboriginal population which just had changed its languages to one of the Turkic dialects. Naturally, the truth is in the middle, and genetically Turkic peoples are the descendants of both ancient Turkic tribes and the aboriginal population of the territories where the Turkic tribes had migrated to.
This circumstance firstly is the cause to ascribe to the heritage of the Turkic peoples inhabiting certain territories both the Turkic heritage that had formed beyond the territory and the pre-Turkic heritage that had formed at the territory. For instance Turkish people can by rights consider as its own heritage both Orkhon-Yenisei inscriptions and monuments of the antiquity in Anatolia.
Secondly this circumstance motivates basing the integration not on racial-genetic foundation but on the factor of self-conscious, together with being itself a test for overcoming racist and isolationistic tendencies. Progressive empires and religions were those who allowed to anyone become its member with the precondition of service to the common purpose.
Thus development of common-Turkic self-conscious, i.e. attractiveness of reckoning oneself among the Turkic community, rather than the racial-genetic motives, is the main factor of strengthening of the Turkic world unity.
Formation of common-Turkic self-conscious directly depends on popularization of the common-Turkic historical heritage more by token the majority of historical heritage, including cultural heritage, empires, historical figures of certain Turkic peoples can be referred to several Turkic peoples or to the whole Turkic world.
Disjunctive approach to the history of the Turkic world, and misrepresented handling of the Turkic peoples’ names which had often been given arbitrarily, is often used to understate the Turkic peoples’ historical potential.
For instance by handling of the Crimean Tatars’ name, they endeavor to date the beginning of inhabitance of Crimean Tatars in Crimea from the period of intrusion of “Tatars” (“Mongol Tatars”) in XIII century. Meanwhile it is clear that firstly the Turkic ethnic groups, had inhabited Crimea long before intrusion to Crimea of XIII century “Tatars”, and secondly Crimean Tatar people has absorbed not only Turkic but also non-Turkic elements, who inhabited Crimea both in pre-Turkic period and simultaneously together with the Turkic ethnic groups’ inhabitance. It is obvious that binding the Crimean Tatars with XIII century “Tatars” purposes representing Crimean Tatars as just one of episodic peoples that had inhabited Crimea, and inherently they attempt to create more tolerant attitude to the fact of Crimean Tatars’ deportation.
Basing on the several Turkic peoples names which these peoples were given long after their formation as ethnic groups, some Soviet sources had a tendency to decrease a period of existence of certain elements of culture for instance the appearance of written language amongst these Turkic peoples. Together with representation of the history of certain Turkic peoples separately from the history of ancient Turks, all this significantly understates the historical potential of the Turkic peoples.
Restricted approach to the perception of a certain Turkic people’s historical heritage occurs to be applied by Turkic people’s representatives themselves too. For instance debates regarding whose descendants are Idel Tatars – of Bulgars or of Golden Horde Kypchaks are spread amongst some Idel Tatar intellectuals. Such formulation of problem considerably abridges historical heritage of Idel Tatars whereas Idel Bulgaria had been a state founded by the ancestors of the modern Idel Tatars, which during the period of Golden Horde just transformed into one of the most culturally and economically advanced regions of the empire along with Khorezm and Crimea, and played a great role in political life of the empire, i.e. Idel Tatars are the descendants of Bulgars who substantially mixed with the Kypchak during Golden Horde period, in other words, Idel Tatars are the descendants of both Bulgars and Kypchaks.
On the other hand glorification of the historical heritage of the Turkic peoples as an end in itself results in origination of various theories regarding of some ancient nations or some historical achievements to belong to Turkic peoples. By example of some ancient civilizations which now turned to mediocre countries it can be concluded that historical potential is important factor of people’s self-conscious, however the more important is the people’s state and achievements in present.
Various theories being created at present regarding indigenous inhabitance of Turkic peoples at certain territories (as response to the claims of neighboring people) also seem to be superfluous whereas the majority of the world peoples inhabits the territories beyond their historical origin and that fact does not influence the legitimacy of their inhabitance.
During the Cold War might of United States and USSR was determined not only with their military and technological potential but also with systems of values being offered to the world by these powers, which together with the paragon of their achievement was able to allure mass in various countries and mobilize allies. The Turkic world has a task if not to form a unique system of values then at least to form and expand a common-Turkic spiritual platform to be established from national potentials. Such a spiritual platform can be formed from singers, singing in several Turkic languages and popular in several Turkic countries, popularization of the famous persons of a Turkic people like Chingiz Aytmatov as a common-Turkic person, or persons related to several Turkic peoples like Maqsud Shayhzoda, Alihantura Saguni and others, promotion of projects like Turkovision, Turkic award in cinema, Turkic championship in various sports, promotion of Turkic wrestling in the world etc.
The ways of practical realization of Turkism ideas
The level of attractiveness of Turkism directly depends on the practical application of equality principle, i.e. the principle of inadmissibility of hegemony in the integration of any country, despite the natural difference in the level of influence to the integration process of the different potential of certain Turkic peoples and countries.
Turkey being the Turkic country with the most potential is simultaneously a country with vast geopolitical significance and developed imperial self-conscious. Turkey has traditional influence to Balkans, Middle East, and Caucasus, and considers these regions as priority directions of its foreign policy. As per development of Turkism ideas consideration of the Turkic world as Turkey’s potential sphere of influence along with the Balkans, Middle East, and Caucasus occurs to be present amongst some circles, i.e. for these circles Turkism is just means to strengthen Turkey’s positions in the Turkic world, in other words in Eurasia at the expense of the Turkic world. On the other hand beyond Turkey too there is an image about Turkism as a consolidation of Turkic countries around Turkey.
Representation of Turkism as an instrument of spreading by Turkey of its influence to Eurasia was largely used during persecutions of Turkism, and is continuing to be used with this purpose because such representation discredits Turkism at most and most importantly it discredits Turkism amongst the very Turkic public.
Turkey thanks to its potential undoubtedly will play a key role in the Turkic world. Turkey’s potential has always objectively served for conservation and strengthening of the rest part of the Turkic world, and because of this Turkey deserves gratitude of the whole Turkic world. Along with this Turkism is expedient to be developed not as a strengthening of subject Turkey’s influence to object Turkic world but as a motion of subjects of the Turkic world towards each other. This tendency is beginning to dominate as per reinforcement on world arena of positions of Turkic states that gained independence in 1991 and other Turkic regions as well as intensification of their role in the Turkic integration which is especially noticeable by example of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. In order to promote this tendency it is required to pursue a policy of geographical and financial distribution amongst the whole Turkic world of the projects having common-Turkic significance.
Civilization proximity of integrating countries is the foundation ensuring facility of the integration and its durability. Despite the historically cultural proximity of Turkic peoples during the last two centuries they were incorporated into different empires often hostile to each other or isolated from each other, and within these empires policy of disuniting Turkic peoples had been pursued, which resulted in civilization split between Turkic peoples.
It will be recalled that after crash of world colonial system new alignments of countries consisting from former colonies and mother countries emerged such as the British Commonwealth of Nations, Commonwealth of Independent States etc., which to a large extent was predetermined by the existence of interrelations system, common language, common standards that had formed during colonial period. For instance “near abroad” term is widely used currently in CIS countries, and the term includes some regions which are thousands kilometers distant and does not include some countries and regions which are adjacent.
People who grew in a single cultural environment have certain common values, as it were, psychological “points of contact”. For instance the films of the soviet classics category are such kind of “points of contact” for millions of people whose youth and childhood fall on soviet period. World War II subject plays a factor of integrating people in Russia and partly in other CIS countries that’s why this subject is actively supported by Russian government.
The above-mentioned proves the primary importance of the very factor of psychological and communicative intimacy and the necessity of activity on forming “the near abroad” within the Turkic world.
In this connection the main objective of Turkism at present is to create the single cultural and informational space embracing the whole Turkic world, i.e. to extend civilization community of the Turkic peoples.
It is expedient to concentrate the efforts on the very humanitarian integration of the Turkic peoples, rather than the political, because of the following circumstances:
- By the example of other ideas it is evident that politicization of an idea is a factor of development of radical tendencies within the idea, whereas humanitarian cooperation develops individual contacts and strengthens mutual understanding among peoples.
- In consideration of the specifics of the Turkic world, which consists in the inhabitance of the Turkic population of Eurasia both in the countries where they constitute ethnic minority and in the countries having different political orientation, focusing on political integration of the whole Turkic world would become destabilizing factor of international policy.
- Political integration in any event is limited with certain tactical interests of the governments whereas civilization unity has long-term and fundamental character. It can be proved by the example of several political integrations that have declarative and formal character and inversely by the communities that have solid internal unite despite the formal disconnection.
- Implementation of integration process by governments entails contention for dominance and other contradictions which can acquire the character of invincible in terms of non-developed civil society in the Turkic world.
Regional economic-political integration of Turkic peoples can have either ethnic or not on principle ethnic character, because Turkic regions are related with economic and political ties to non-Turkic regions; in this connection isolationistic approach would result in losses for all interconnected regions. Together with this efforts on integration of all Turkic peoples within a single integration should be condition for such integration but the main condition is appropriate vindication of interests of the Turkic peoples within the integration particularly by means of consolidated vindication of interests of the Turkic peoples.
Civilization character of integration is a basis to choose as an object of integration of not the Turkic states but the Turkic community and to intensify civil initiatives in the integration process, i.e. increase the role of non-governmental organizations.
As priority measures of intensification of the Turkic world integration it is recommended to focus the efforts of non-governmental and governmental bodies on the following activities:
1) Organization of cultural-educational satellite TV channels (taking into consideration large-scale involvement and accessibility of television) embracing the whole Turkic world both in terms of broadcasting geography and information constituents.
Organization of such television seems to be the most topical problem of today of integrating the Turkic world because the main problem that requires primary solution is a vacuum of information about the Turkic world in the Turkic world itself as well as beyond the Turkic world.
As long as organization of such television is a matter of much time and efforts coordinated broadcasting of TV channels of Turkic states and regions via single satellite at adjacent frequencies can be a preliminary solution of the problem, as well as organization of broadcasting of TV channels of one Turkic state at the territory of another.
Within the course it is required to stimulate on the Turkic states TV channels the Turkic world subject which is now being represented inadequately.
2) Coordination of Turkic languages development and policy on their mutual approximation.
The languages of Turkic peoples are mutually intelligible and that is the specific and advantage of Turkic peoples as compared to other groups of ethnically close peoples, as well as it is one of the foundations of the Turkic peoples’ unity. In this connection it is necessary to pursue dedicated concerted policy of coordination of Turkic languages development, in order to vector their development not in different but in approximating directions.
3) Joint educational and scientific programs, translations of the heritage of one Turkic people to other Turkic peoples’ languages and its popularization amongst them, joint cultural activity.
4) Consultations on unification of norms and standards, on simplification of trade, investment and visa procedures, encouragement of business relations and tourist flows between the Turkic regions.
5) Moral support of inter-Turkic marriages by nominal stimulating remuneration of individuals espousing inter-Turkic marriages, and media coverage of their most striking examples.