Geopolitical Codes of Post-Soviet Ethno-National Communities

The article examines the processes of constructing identities in Moldovan ethnic minorities of Gagauz and Bulgarians. It reflects the results of the field study in relevant regions of the country in 2015. As Moldova is located in a contested zone defined by competition between Russian and European discourses the local population faces a serious, although misleading geopolitical choice. The authors attempt to illustrate the discursive complexity and specific features of Gagauz and Bulgarian national identities with the examples of their spatial images. While the representatives of the two groups migrated to the Moldovan territory simultaneously and lived side by side for a long time their identity developed in different ways, due to the variety in external pressure and opportunities. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union the Gagauz minority managed to acquire some administrative and political autonomy. Meanwhile, the Bulgarian population retains wider set of identity choices. So far, it refused to join the Gagauz autonomy and engaged in some cooperation with the state of Bulgaria. Both ethnic groups, however, suffer from depopulation and pressure from the dominating Moldovan elites. They attempt to achieve more inclusive national space in Moldova and at the same time rely on ties with the Russian culture and state to respond to the ethnic majority. The Russian language and memories of common co-citizenship in the Soviet Union remains a significant part of their identity. The preferences of Gagauz and Bulgarians stipulate them to choose the pro-Russian geopolitical orientation (with some certain divergence) which allows the authors to state the variety and multidimensionality of geopolitical discourses in Moldova.

1. Agnew J.A. (2003). Geopolitics: Re-visioning World Politics. London: Routledge, 2003. 154 p.

2. Anderson B. (2001). Voobrazhaemye soobshhestva [Imagined Communities]. Moscow: Kanon-Press-C, Kuchkovo pole. 288 p.

3. Anderson E.A. (2005). Backward, Forward, or Both? Moldovan Teachers’ Relationship to the State and the Nation. European Education. Vol. 37. No. 3. P. 53–67. DOI:10.1080/10564934.2005.11042396 Bulgar C.C. (2006). Istoriya i kultura gagauzov [History and Culture of the Gagauz]. Chi in u: Pontos. 746 p.

4. Flint C. (2006). Introduction to Geopolitics. London: Routledge. 256 p.

5. Gadzhiev K.S. (2011). Nacionalnaya identichnost: kontseptualnyj aspekt [National Identity: Conceptual Aspect]. Voprosy filosofii. No. 10. P. 3–17.

6. Grek I. (2006). Etnodemograficheskie protsessy sredi bolgar Moldovy i Ukrainy v seredine XVIII–XX v. [Ethno-demografic processes among the Bulgarians in Moldova and Ukraine in the mid XVIII – XX centuries]. Rusin. No. 4. P. 123–141.

7. Guboglo M. N. (2007). Kontseptualno-metodicheskaya otvetstvennost’ v poznanii etnicheskogo faktora [The conceptual-methodical responsibility in congnition of the ethnic factor]. Rusin. No. 1. P. 60 – 81.

8. Johnson C, Coleman A. (2012). Vnutrennij «Drugoj»: dialekticheskie vzaimosvjazi mezhdu konstruirovaniem regionalnyh i nacionalnyj identichnostej [The Internal Other: Exploring the Dialectical Relationship Between Regional Exclusion and the Construction of National Identity]. Kulturnaja i gumanitarnaja geografija. No. 2 P. 107 – 125.

9. Karanfil G. (2009). Bytovaja leksika gagauzskogo jazyka (na osnove nazvanij odezhdy i obuvi) [Domestic lexicon of the Gagauz language (on the basis of the names of clothes and shoes)]. Turkestanskaja Biblioteka. 91 p.

10. King Ch. (1994). Moldovan Identity and the Politics of Pan-Romanianism. Slavic Review. Vol. 53. No. 2. P. 345 – 368. DOI: 10.2307/2501297

11. Kolosov V.A., Zotova M.V. (2011). Geopoliticheskoe videnie mira rossijskimi grazhdanami: opyt primeneniya metodov "kriticheskoj geopolitiki". "Kriticheskoe" napravlenie v geopolitike: stala li, nakonets, geopolitika naukoj? [Geopolitical World Vision by Russia Citizens: the Record of “Critical Geopolitics” Methods Application. “Critical” Paradigm in Geopolitics” Has Geopolitics Finally become Scholarship] In Geograficheskoe prostranstvo Rossii: obraz i modernizatsiya. St. Petersburg: VVM. P. 92-114.

12. Kvilinkova E. N. (2014). O sohrannosti tradicionnoj obryadnosti u bessarabskih gagauzov i bolgar cherez prizmu svyazi vremen [About Conservation of Traditional Rituals of the Bessarabia’s Gagauz and Bulgarians through Time]. Istoriya i sovremennost'. No. 1(19). P. 182–189.

13. Neumann I. (2004). Ispolzovanie drugogo. Obrazy Vostoka v formirovanii evropejskih identichnoctej [Uses of the Other. The 'East' in European Identity Formation]. Moscow: Novoe Izdatelstvo. 336 p.

14. Nikoglo D. K (2010). Voprosu o formirovanii ehtnicheskih mifov i simvolov u gagauzov [The Issues of Emergence of the Ethnic Myths and Meanings among Gagauz]. In Etnosociologicheskie i ehtnopsihologicheskie praktiki: metodologicheskie podhody i kommentarii. ed. by M. V. Marunevich. Chisinau: Kishinev-Komrat. P. 50 – 81.

15. Okunev I.YU. (2009). Geograficheskoe voobrazhenie kak predmet issledovaniya kriticheskoj geopolitiki [Geographic Imagination as a Subject Matter for Critical Geopolitics’ Research]. Politicheskaya nauka. No. 4. P. 126–137.

16. Olcott M.B. (2010). Kazakhstan: Unfulfilled Promise. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 322 p.

17. O’Tuathail G. (2005). Critical Geopolitics: The Politics of Writing Global Space. London: Routledge. 46 p.

18. Sergeeva Z.V. (2015). Vizual'nye proyavleniya identichnosti v Kishineve [Visual Representation of Identity in Chisinau]. Sravnitel'naya politika. Vol 6. No. 4 (21). P. 59–61.

19. Yiftachel O. (1998). Nation-building and the Division of Space: Ashkenazi Domination in the Israeli “Ethnocracy”. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics. 1998. Vol. 4. No. 3. P. 33-58. DOI: 10.1080/13537119808428537

20. Zvjatkov N. V. (2015). Golos Gagauzii: Gagauzskaya avtonomiya glazami eye zhitelej [The voice of Gagauzia: Gagauzian autonomy with the eyes of its citizens]. Chi in u: Intellect Group.102 p.