Exclusion, violence, and optimism: Ethnic divides in Kyrgyzstan

Abstract

The nation-building projects in much of post-socialist Eurasia have been characterized by the promotion of ethnic majorities and marginalization of minority groups. In dialogue with the scholarship on nation-building, ethnic exclusion and conflict, and ethnic migration, this study examines individual views on current and future interethnic relations, assessments of prospects for own ethnicity, expectations for future economic changes, and intentions to migrate abroad in the multiethnic nation of Kyrgyzstan. I use nationally representative survey data to model differences in these outcomes across the majority-minorities divides and between regional subgroups of the nation’s ethnic majority. The results show that a native minority that experienced recent ethnic violence has the most negative assessment of current interethnic relations. However, the minority group of outside origin, which never suffered direct violence but whose size and societal preeminence have eroded rapidly, is least optimistic about the future and is most inclined to migrate. Yet, the analyses also detect substantial regional differences within the ethnic majority, underscoring the complexity of historically-rooted ethnocultural and socioeconomic cleavages as well as of more recent political experiences. I interpret these findings within the context of evolving meanings of ethnic identity and national belonging in this rapidly changing society.

Group Normative Propensities, Societal Positioning, and Childbearing: Ethno-linguistic Variation in Completed and Desired Fertility in Transitional Central Asia

“…In addition, fertility desires may reflect ethnic group members’ more general confidence and optimism, which, in turn, are likely to be influenced by both perceived and experienced vulnerabilities associated with ethnic group membership (cf. Agadjanian, 2020 ). Although much of demographers’ attention has understandably focused on correspondence between fertility desires and subsequent fertility behavior (e.g., Bongaarts & Casterline, 2018 ; Quesnel-Vallée & Morgan, 2003 ; Schoen et al, 1999 ; Westoff & Ryder, 1977 ), we caution against a narrow vision of desired fertility as a mere predictor, accurate or not, of actual fertility performance.…”

“…While the ethnic labeling, systematically introduced and enforced in Central Asia in the Soviet era, has remained remarkably rigid and stable after its end (cf. Abramson, 2002 ), the shifting meanings and positioning of different ethnolinguistic segments in the post-Soviet period have shaped their distinct group-shared identities and sense of belonging, and have translated into different labor market outcomes and diverging levels of societal optimism, political participation, and emigration intentions (e.g., Agadjanian, 2020 ; Agadjanian & Oh, 2020 ; Agadjanian, Dommaraju, et al, 2008 ; Agadjanian, Nedoluzhko, & Kumskov, 2008 ; Gorina & Agadjanian, 2019 ). We add to this complex panoply of ethnolinguistic dynamics by analyzing variations in fertility behavior and desires across the ethnic and linguistic divides.…”