Külügyi Szemle - A Teleki László Intézet Külpolitikai Tanulmányok Központja folyóirata - 2003 (2. évfolyam)
2003 / 3. szám - EURÓPA - Sáfi Csaba: Néhány szó az Oroszországi Föderáció külföldön (határon túl) élő honfitársakkal kapcsolatos állami politikájáról szóló szövetségi törvényéről
Résumé emotional and rational arguments clash in both cases, and historical and frequently one-sided 'facts' are pitted againt each other. Therefore, it is worth discussing how Russia, as the mother country having the largest number of national minority beyond its borders, tries to support and assist its own compatriots who live in other states. The spirit of the law reflects the confusionwith regard to the national minorities of some ten million. The Soviet Union collapsed so suddenly that Russia did not even have a theoretical framework to handle the issue. The emotional and rational arguments coming from within and without clashed at the same time, and this situation delayed the formation of the official concept. The creation of a unified standpoint was made even more difficult by the power struggle between the executive and the legislative branches of government. The more or less pragmatist governments found themselves opposed in this question by Duma, which was dominated by nationalists, who believed in the idea of a unified nation despite its being dismembered. Judging from the text of the law, this latter opinion prevailed. No matter that the law reflects goodwill in a number of cases, it is regarded by some as the first step to restore the Soviet Union. It is true that this wish seems to be fading in the face of reality of the successor states. At the same time this wishful thinking might have played a role in the fact that none of the successor states came out so strongly againt the law and its provisions as certain neighbors of Hungary have done and are doing. It happened despite the fact that the law mentions such sensitive topics such as national-cultural autonomy and a certificate demonstarting the belonging to a national group. The law extends the privileges on all the compatriots all over the world, as opposed to the Hungarian benefits' law. Thus, it wishes to preempt the attacks with regard to the restoration of the empire, while it attempts to settle the different issues of the totally different groups of compatriots in one single law. As the law does not make a difference between the people of Russian origins in the successor states and in the Western countries (in which category it is not exclusively the ethnic Russians who can be included), the latter are entitled the same support as the people int he former groups who live on a much lower living standard. A question arises logically concerning the law: does the present state of the Russian economy and finances make it possible to support the copmatriots extensively? At the same time, it is worth mentioning that the law, perhaps to prevent the potential worries of the successor states, emphasizes it several times that the support of the compatriots is in harmony not only with the internal laws of Russia, but als» with the generally accepted norms and principles of international law, and it also takes the practice of other countries into account. Therefore, with the creation of the law makes it possible to approach the issue in a unified legal and political framework. However, no matter how many positive elements the federal law regarding the compatriots contains, if the law looks wishful thinking in the light of the economic situation of Russia, the tasks facing the country, the lack of executive orders and central administrative organs, and the uncertainties concerning the scopes of authorities. 2003. ősz 25
