Main results of a sociological survey on the “relokanty” that was carried out in the countries where they have found refuge. Many are in favor of welcoming them “temporarily”, although only 14% are willing to recognize them as “citizens of my country”.
Moscow () – The Platforma Social Research Center, together with the OnIn company, has published the results of a joint sociological survey carried out over the past two months in the former Soviet states, where the number of relokanty continues to increase, the Russians who fled the war and mobilization. The survey was carried out in Russian, thus excluding the part of the population of these countries that does not speak the language of the former Soviet Union, especially the younger generations, and indeed the 1,350 interviewees are all over 18 years of age. .
The first question in the survey refers to associations with the word “Russians”, the answers to which are divided into 4 categories: positive, negative, neutral and stereotypes. Among the positive ones, which are the majority, are the “good”, the “open”, the “friends” and the “brothers”, while the negative titles are above all the “drunkens”, the “conceited”, the “nationalists ” and the “aggressive”. Among the neutrals, sociologists include responses such as “ordinary people, neighbors, blue-eyed blondes.” The stereotypes refer to “sauna, balalaika dances, Putin, Kremlin, World War II, cold and great country”.
All attest to the “great increase” in the number of newly arrived Russians; in Georgia 92% of those surveyed underline it, in Armenia 83%, in Kyrgyzstan 79% and to a lesser extent than all Belarus, with 35%, and Moldova, with 34%. Related to this is the following question, which asks whether the Russians have brought more benefits or more problems to the life of the countries in question: Armenians (73%) and Tajiks (55%) are convinced of the former, while in Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Belarus the answer “they have not had a decisive influence” prevails, and more than 20% believe that they “have caused harm”.
The most contrasting opinions concern the two bordering countries of the Caucasus, Armenia and Georgia. For Georgians, the most negative effect is the increase in the cost of living and the price of real estate, together with the decrease in Georgia’s authority vis-à-vis third countries that are explicitly in conflict with Russia. Armenians, on the other hand, appreciate the increase in retail trade and the growth in tax contributions, although many Georgians also appreciate the possibility of higher profits due to the increase in the cost of services.
The investigation does not stop at the economic consequences of the presence of the Russians in “friendly” countries, but tries to delve into the importance of cultural relations, largely related to the common Soviet past. Obviously, 55% of Belarusians praise “spiritual closeness”, followed by Moldovans with 48%, while on the opposite side are Azeri (26%) and Georgians (27%). Many are in favor of receiving Russians “temporarily, as tourists” (26%), but also as “close friends” (18%) or “neighbors” (17%), while only 14% are willing to recognize them as “citizens of my country”, “family members” (8%) or “work colleagues” (6%). On the other hand, Russian relokanty are much more open to collaboration: 68% feel a “closeness spiritual” with the inhabitants of the countries that receive them, and 44% are willing to consider them as “true friends.
The last block of questions refers to the need or not for the State to grant aid to Russian emigrants, and in this sense 54% of the inhabitants of all the countries of the former Soviet Union are in favor, while those who are not are sure are equal to those who are against. Many consider language courses necessary (42%), the official regularization of the workplace (41%) and, more generally, cultural adaptation, with information on the history of the host country (35%). The relokanty themselves are in substantial agreement on all these things, however many of them would like financial support, although the local citizens are not quite in agreement with that.
The final comment from experts, such as sociologist Maria Makusheva, warns against juxtaposing opinions from different countries, from the Caucasus, Central Asia and Western Europe, which are hardly compatible with each other. However, the old friendships of Soviet heritage continue, although many concerns are raised about the disruptions that the Russians bring to the economic life of the “brotherly” countries.
