There was a riot in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous District, local as yet. A family of reindeer herders Aipiny denied the oil field development of "LUKOIL-West Siberia" on their tribal land. The son of the head of household, Alexander Aipin, said: "If they find oil here, we’ll be swept away from this land; but we have nowhere else to keep deers. We have already shifted our place for five times. That's the limit."
This complicated situation was described in details by the "Express Kamchatka". The material is available here.
Online-journal «7x7» collected ideas of experts, environmentalists, scientists and social activists. We took their opinion on how it is possible to resolve such situations; what is the responsibility of the parties — the state, the indigenous residents and businesses; and if it was the first “wake-up call” in the KhMAD.
Dmitry Nesanelis, ethnologist, Candidate of Historical Sciences, member of the Public Chamber of the Republic of Komi:
— Traditionally "LUKOIL-West Siberia" LLC (AZS) considered to be a kind of paragon, including the highest production, environmental and social standards. All other subsidiaries of LUKOIL were expressly or by implication requested to emulate the undisputed leader.
Recently, it became clear that the "impeccability" of Lukoil was somehow flattered, mildly speaking. It concerns, among other things, the relationships of the company with the indigenous peoples of the North (Small Indigenous Peoples of the North). Which are, in particular, the Khanty and Mansi.
Heated conflict developed between the Khanty family Aipiny and the oil major, obviously, had some background. It seems plausible that Aipiny were four times obliged to change the territory of their business activity. But on the fifth time the lid came off. And we can understand them! I think that all this was a result of the absence of serious legal principles governing the relationships of oilers and the indigenous peoples (Khanty) with traditional lifestyle. And also the results of the improper performance of PR&GR service of "big" LUKOIL and its West Siberian branch. If the local but still ethno-social conflict developed, then the relevant departments didn’t conduct a preventive work with kinship communities and ethno-cultural associations of Khanty.
I think it's a wake-up call. However, it’s senseless to draw a large-scale inference about the "rebellion" against the "Kremlin, oligarchs and chekists" from this story. We are dealing with a heated episode; nothing more. Big-time politics is nowhere near.
Ivan Ivanov, environmental scientist, civic activist:
— Theoretically, the situation could be resolved by a fair trial, which would place the interests of the individual ahead of the interests of corporations. But I am very sceptical about the justness of our courts. I am glad that among indigenous peoples there is an awakening that there is no place to run further. In my opinion, there is only one way out not to spill this over into separatism, — it’s an honest dialogue. Yes, this is the first wake-up call for the government. It won’t be able to force people to keep silence.
Valentina Semyashkina, member of the Save the Pechora Committee:
— Such situations are better to be prevented, not to bring people to revolt. Here in Russia they have already been and will happen again. Because, firstly, our legislation concerning indigenous peoples classifies them by variables (there is legislation for the minorities, and it doesn’t reach the peoples with the population size more than 50,000). There is no quantitative criterion of reference to indigenous peoples in the world. Secondly, the Russian legislation concerning indigenous peoples doesn’t work or works poorly: and the laws themselves are not good enough; the implementation mechanisms are not thought through. Thirdly, in the situation of conflict between big business and citizens (or even an entire nation) our government is always on the side of big business, it doesn’t notice people usually. This is not normal, of course.
Such situations shouldn’t be resolved in haste (as we usually do). It’s possible to extinguish the conflict temporarily in haste, but not to remove its causes. We need another approach — not only to the peoples with traditional lifestyles, but also to such areas as a whole, to their development. You can’t look at these areas as if they were only landfills for oil, gas and gold.
The government, and especially business, is still far from the long-range path. And certainly far from the most responsible one. The consent of indigenous communities in the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous District was just bribed — for tiny money. And it happens not only there. But the compensation is not the best option for solution of this problem. On the public hearings on development projects it is needed to talk primarily about the risks and their minimization, about the conditions and possibilities of maintaining the traditional lifestyle, of the traditional habitat, traditional culture, and then about compensation. We need an independent ethnoecological expertise of the projects. And it would be a responsible approach — such an understanding would be desirable for the government, business and also for the local population — indigenous peoples. Yes, it's a wake-up call. Although I don’t think that it is the first one.
Galina Hatanzeyskaya, daughter of reindeer herders:
— Reindeer moss grows 100 years. A whole century! If you destroy it, deers will just die off. What was already touched 20-30 years ago — is not recovered yet. If I were one of the reindeer herders, I wouldn’t not admit the oil companies to tribal lands. The offered payment probably won’t solve the problem. There are cases when herders quit traditional farming after compensation. In fact, oilers are more interested in reindeer herders than herders in oilers.
Kirill Istomin, researcher of Institute of Language, Literature and History of KSC of the RAS, ethnographer:
— We all know that Yeremey Aipin is a politician. An influential man. I doubt that his brother would rebel without such relations. Moreover, this is not the first case. The KhMAD is famous for the fact that a law of ancestral landowning was enacted there sooner than anywhere else; and oil companies were forced to sort out conflicts with the indigenous peoples. At first the conflicts were sorted out for a box of vodka, there was nothing about 5 million. But oilers offered various help for Khants — from satellite dishes to verge for raw-hide tents, as they cut down the forest in the area.
This rebellion probably denotes that someone from the indigenous peoples attempts to revise the standards. And it’s quite reasonable, on the one hand. And on the other hand, such direct payments to native population scare me a little. They are usually not useful for the reindeer herders. They often receive it, quit traditional farming, and lose themselves into drinking. It would be better if oil companies employed the herders, bought their meat and developed traditional farming; would provide subsidies for herders to feed themselves.
Dmitry Latynin, entrepreneur, Usinsk:
— The theme is serious. It resembles the case of the Khimki forest. In Russia as far as the eye can reach, there is something that is expensive. The issue requires a very serious consideration. On the one hand, oil is a strategic reserve of our country and regional budgets. On the other hand, I suppose that they can gamble on the environmental problems. We need to create a commission to investigate the territory. It’s necessary to compensate for people’s losses; but on the other hand, it is also fraught with the following: give meat to earner today, and he himself will cease to procure, to deal with the aboriginal matter. The religious questions also can’t be disregarded. Maybe Khanty worship these places, and the population will prevent any intervention. There is nothing to do without conciliation and cooperation of oil companies and indigenous people. They will have to find the golden mean...
Yaroslava Parkhacheva, Maxim Polyakov
Original: http://7x7-journal.ru/item/34720?r=komi
