It would be a mistake to assume that ethnopolitics is only a matter of confrontation between different ethnic groups. On the contrary, there is a range of examples where it is pursued in a spirit of compromise and co‑operation. One of them is the case of the Jewish Autonomous Region of Birobidzhan, in Post‑Soviet Russia. Often ethnic groups realize that co‑operation and cultural coexistence are more profitable than conflict. Beginning in 1928 the Soviet Union set aside a territory the size of Belgium for Jewish settlement, located some five thousands miles east of Moscow along the Soviet‑Chinese border. Believing that Soviet Jewish people, like other national minorities, deserved a territorial homeland, the regime decided to settle an enclave that would become the Jewish Autonomous Region in 1934. In fact, the establishment of the JAR was the first instance of an officially acknowledged Jewish national territory since ancient times. But the history of the Region was tragic and the experiment failed dismally. Nevertheless, Birobidzhan’s renewed existence of today is not only a curious legacy of Soviet national policy, but after the break‑up of the Soviet Union and the definite religious rebirth, represents an interesting case‑study in respect to interethnic relations.
“We are the lost generation”. Communities of Birobidzhan Jews in Israel: field research report (July 2012) In this article I describe the fieldwork conducted in Israel in 2012 among those who have emigrated from the Jewish Autonomous Oblast in Russia. Along with a general overview of the research I present a detailed analysis of my interlocutors’ discourses regarding the languages they speak and their attitude towards Judaism and what is commonly understood as Jewishness. I concentrate mainly on the knowledge of Yiddish (which up until now is the official language in Birobidzhan) and Hebrew, and also on the categories that define the Jewish element of identity for them.
A “zoo” and “mock-up”: On the most frequent ways of portraying BirobidzhanThe article analyses the most common ways of depicting Birobidzhan by journalists, bloggers, film-makers and writers. Established in 1934, The Jewish Autonomous Region is an administrative unit within the Russian Federation. Foreign visitors and visitors from other parts of Russia usually perceive it as “exotic”, “funny”, “absurd”, “grotesque” or “artificial”. Its history is seen as a “failure”, especially when compared to Israel. In various representations, the notion of “utopia” is used in a very narrow, negative sense of “unrealistic pipe dream”. This orientalisation results in the objectification of local residents and delegitimisation of their practices of making sense of the region's history. „Zoo” i „makieta”. O dominujących sposobach pisania o BirobidżanieW artykule przeanalizowane zostały najczęstsze sposoby opisywania Birobidżanu przez dziennikarzy, blogerów, filmowców i pisarzy. Utworzony w 1934 r. Żydowski Obwód Autonomiczny wciąż istnieje jako jednostka administracyjna w ramach Federacji Rosyjskiej. Zazwyczaj traktowany jest przez odwiedzających z innych części Rosji lub z zagranicy jako „egzotyczny”, „śmieszny”, „absurdalny”, „groteskowy” czy „sztuczny”. Jego historia postrzegana jest jako „porażka”, zwłaszcza w porównaniu z historią Izraela. Autorzy rozmaitych przedstawień Birobidżanu posługują się także koncepcją „utopii” w jej zawężonym, negatywnym rozumieniu, jako „nierealnej mrzonki”. Orientalizacja Żydowskiego Obwodu Autonomicznego przyczynia się do uprzedmiotowienia jego mieszkańców i delegitymizowania ich praktyk nadawania sensu historii regionu.
The Jewish Autonomous Region (JAR) of Birobidzhan in Siberia is still alive. The once famous “Siberian Zion”, at the confluence of the Bira and Bidzhan rivers, a stone’s throw away from China and a day from the Pacific Ocean, 9,000 km and six days by train from Moscow, is still a geographical reality. The political class of the Soviet Union decided to create a territory the size of Belgium for a settlement for Jews, choosing a region on the border between China and the Soviet Union. It believed that Soviet Jews needed, like other national minorities, a homeland with a territory. The Soviet regime thus opted to establish an enclave that would become the JAR in 1934. We should note that the creation of the JAR was the first historically fulfilled case of building an officially recognised Jewish national territory since antiquity and well before Israel. Nevertheless, many historians declared this experiment a failure and the history of the Region only tragic. It is interesting to note, however, that the survival of the JAR in post-Soviet Russia has been not only a historical curiosity, a legacy of Soviet national policy, but today – after the collapse of the Soviet Union – it represents a very interesting case study. It is also a topic useful for the analysis and understanding of inter-ethnic relations, cooperation, and coexistence and it is a unique case of geographic resettlement that produced a special case of “local patriotism”, as an example also for different ethnic groups living in the JAR, based on Jewish and Yiddish roots.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.