From: thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet,talk.politics.soviet,soc.culture.europe
Subject: Re: Answers and questions about ESTONIA ( wARussian Speakers in Estonia
Date: 5 Jan 93 14:04:12 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <Sorokin.48.726181236@ps1.iaee.tuwien.ac.at>, Sorokin@ps1.iaee.tuwien.ac.at (Sorokin Zhenya) writes:
> In article <1993Jan4.121618.1@cc.helsinki.fi> thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi writes:
>>In article <Sorokin.43.726080290@ps1.iaee.tuwien.ac.at>, Sorokin@ps1.iaee.
>>tuwien.ac.at (Sorokin Zhenya) writes:
>>
>>> It is obvious, that in such cases special legislation 
>>> must be elaborated, instead of universal one, which is equally applicable 
>>> to a russian-spaking person born in Estonia, say, 28 years ago and to a 
>>> Nigerian, applying for citizenship in 2012.
>>
>>
>>Here I can't follow your train of thought. Who has elaborated "a universal
>>legislation"?
>>
> 
> Mybe I am wrong, but as far as I understood, the naturalization law in 
> Estonia IS UNIVERSAL? I am afraid of being biased, because German and  
> Austrian mass-media cover Baltic issue very poor, so most of information for 
> me is from Russia.
 

Still I do not get the point? What would be a difference between universal
and non-universal naturalization law?

Usually, naturalization laws concern everyone wanting to be naturalized and
hence they are universal in some sense of the term.


>>> Current boycott of naturalization campaign (I remember the figure 5% applied 
>>> only, is it correct?) means that r.-speakers think, that they will gain 
>>> more by waiting. 
>>
>>
>>This is disinformation: there is no boycott: every one can voluntarily
>>apply for Estonian citizenship. Still, I think that the majority of
>>non-citizens will be waiting until February to see whether the tables
>>will be turned...
>>
> 
> 5% IS BOYCOTT, whether it is explicitly organized, or not. I remember this 
> figure from one of Tanel's angry postings here. 


If only 5% of Estonian residents buy Coke and not Pepsi, it's no
boycott but a free decision.


>>I would like to call them Nevzorovka. They have used violence in
>>the Baltic states and supported atrocities. Only NASHI.
>>
> 
> I do not know, how good you are in Russian, but we used to call him 
> Nevrozov, when he was only the TV-star from Leningrad.
 

Exactly Nevzorov from Lenski, as some Finns call the city. He was
the chauvinist-populist TV-anchor in "600 seconds" (if I recall correctely).

 
>>> I could suggest one solution to break this boycott: Appoint a NEW elections 
>>> to Riigikogu (and President, maybe). 
>>
>>
>>In 1996, your wish will be fulfilled. There is no boycott to break: the
>>non-citizens that will apply for citizenship, will vote in the next
>>Riigikogu elections. The others will vote in other elections - Russia
>>should have a new congress of people's deputies!
>>
> 
> 1996 is too far. Ordinary people operate with time periods not longer than 1 
> year.
 

Ordinary people wait for the next elections.


>>> This will also split the russian-speaking community, which now 
>>> tends to unite under NASHIs' slogans. 
>>
>>
>>I fail to see this kind of tendency in Estonia. The reactionaries do not
>>have a very good reputation. Do you really think they would have a mass
>>support nowadays ANYWHERE in imperium? Rutskoi, perhaps, but I suppose
>>we could count him out from NASHI.
>>
> 
> Unfortunately, you underestimate "Soviet mentality" in Russia, 


In Russia, all right! I agree that the next Russian goverment would be
something very unpleasant.



> as well 
> as the influence of mass-media, given the current still very unstable 
> freedom of mass-media in Russia. Recent Congress showed it very clearly. 


Still, the congress of peoples' deputies reflect the past of Russia,
not the contemporary conditions.

<del.>

> What is the situation in the estonian universities, by the way? 
> 


Sorry, I do not have time today to elaborate this issue, but to cut
a long story short: BAD.

Besides, there is only one university in Estonia: Tartu/Dorpat.

<del.>

>>The minorities in Estonia are protected by:
>>
>>(1) The modern constitution that guarantees the rights of non-citizens
>>    which reflects the determined will of Estonian citizens
>>
>>(2) The minority legislation and laws on cultural autonomy which are
>>    partly introduced and will be introduced in Estonia.
>>
>>(3) The integration of Estonia to Helsinki process (which has taken place,
>>    Estonia is a member of CSCE). In previous summer the Helsinki summit 
>>    accepted the minority rights regulation.
>>
>>(4) The integration of Estonia to the Council of Europe - which is
>>    the main institution that monitors the democracy in Europe.
>>    This will happen in spring 1993, at least I hope so.
>>
>>What more guarantees do you need? You won't be getting any more...
>>
> 
> We still seem to misunderstand each other. 
> 
> If you are a citizen, then you CAN NOT be legally discriminated (I am not 
> going to discuss apartheid or nazism), because any issued law in modern 
> democracy by definition applies to all citizens.


And non-citizens as well. This is the very ultra-democratic feature of
the brand new Estonian constitution: it is designed to take account of
the fundamental rights of non-citizens.

 
> Being a non-citizen, you are by definition discriminated, 


Non sequitur. You just can not vote in Riigikogu elections.


> and thus depend 
> upon current political situation in Riigikogu or whatever, which you can not 
> even influence.


Applying for citizenship should clear this problem.

 
> There can be various ways of discrimination. To mention a few, here are the 
> examples of Austrian situation ( your paragraphs (1)..(4) apply):
> Higher education is free for citizens and (generally) not for non-citizens.


I am afraid that the higher education will not be free even for Estonian
citizens in the future. I think that the Estonian government has declared
that there will be no differences between citizens and non-citizens in
education. But, we'll see...


> Possibility of state service is very limited.


Indeed. In every country.


> There are a lot of limitations on land purchase and usage.
> The same with owing enterprises, etc.


Exactly the economic rights of citizens and resident non-citizens are equal 
in Estonia - however, there might be minor differences. But the main
outline, equality in this respect was an outspoken goal of the present
government.


> In certain branches, upper limit on the percentage of non-citizen employee 
> exists, which makes it more difficult to get job.
> etc., etc., etc. 
> 
> All wonderful organizations and forums you mentioned defend only human and 
> most basic civil rights of the people. 


Only? I think it's something of crucial importance.


> They obviously do not object to the 
> cituation above. Still, Austria is very loyal to foreigners. They 
> constitute >40% of the population of Vienna, which is the most 
> international city in Europe. 


Estonia will be warm for foreigners, too: especially for enterpreneurs.


>>> Yes, but what are the "states involved" for a 28-years-old wo(man) (
>>> russian, jewish, ukrainian, etc.) born in Estonia (Latvia), having her(his) 
>>> home there, etc., etc. no matter what language (s)he masters? I see only 
>>> one!
>>
>>
>>The states involved are:
>>- Russia (until March just a formality)
>>- perhaps Ukraina (I do not know details)
>>- Israel (ditto)
>>- Latvia (if the residency requirement is met, or, Estonia).
>>
> 
> Israel is involved for every Jew, but imagine your statement above written 
> by a German to back some changes of german law?!? 


I don't understand your argument.


> It can not matter even a bit, if some other nation is ready to give its 
> citizenship! 


I think it matters quite a lot. When the prison of nations is broken down,
there are various possibilities that are open.



> I still stand on the point, that a matured man BORN >18 years 
> ago in Estonia can not be viewed as intruder, colonist, whatsoever.


I have not used those words. Neither has the Estonian government.

My opinion has been and still is: the people born in Estonia should
receive the citizenship without language requirement.

Just an application and citizen's oath. It should be as easy as a
civil marriage. But not simpler than that.

I suppose that the Estonian opposition would be more interested in
this kind of amendment than the current Estonian right-wing - right-
wing-social democrat -government.


thinks
the observer
Tapani Hietaniemi, Universitas Helsingiensis
                   urbs fennorum