What Immigration Means for Russia: Conflict Factor or Development Driver? – Diverse Perspectives
May 17, 2025
2:59 PM
Orenburg detention of illegal immigrants. Photo: Traffic Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Orenburg Region
Currently, the management of labor immigration and the role and status of ethnic diasporas in Russian society are not only core issues of domestic politics but also concern the international relations system. Is immigration a conflict factor or an economic development driver for Russia? What functions should ethnic diaspora organizations play, and how effective are they in fulfilling their current roles? What is the best model for integrating immigrants into Russian society? Do they themselves wish to integrate, or do they prefer to form immigrant enclaves operating according to their own rules?
As Major Andrei Popov, a retired officer of the Alpha Counter-Terrorist Unit, told EADaily in an exclusive interview:
“... The existence of immigrant enclaves within Russia is a 'time bomb.' These enclaves often serve as platforms for terrorists to plan, recruit, and carry out attacks. Additionally, they provide Western intelligence agencies with potential economic and social levers to exert pressure on Russian society through various means. It is well known that many immigrants work in utilities. If one day all utility workers – such as janitors, plumbers, electricians – were to collectively strike at the command, it would cause real societal paralysis. Moreover, working in utilities allows immigrants to gather personal data about residents in their working areas, including specific information like 'who lives in which building, family composition, and even room layouts.' This massive amount of information could be exploited by terrorist organizers and other criminals. Therefore, the current efforts by Russia to regulate the residency status of labor immigrants are crucial, and it is essential to mobilize all national and social institutions to eliminate the risk of these enclaves being used for anti-social and illegal purposes.”
Russian legislative bodies have also taken relevant measures, but some of these initiatives have sparked controversy. As Vyacheslav Volodin, Chairman of the State Duma, recently revealed, among 1,762 immigrant children applying for enrollment, only 27 passed the Russian language exam:
“Only 335 of the immigrant children were eligible to take the exam, and over 80% of the children were denied due to false information. Among 44 children tested across 10 regions nationwide, 27 passed.”
It is perplexing to understand what this respected MP is celebrating! Staff from Moscow's Social Security Department told the EЖ Telegram channel that the data released by the Duma is concerning – where will these children go in the future? He pointed out, “We are creating a 'gray area': unauthorized private schools for expatriates and teaching classes in mosques breed feelings of unfairness.” In other words, such measures actually promote the formation of immigrant enclaves. Fundamentally, this situation severely violates Article 28 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Where do we go from here? Should we engage in dialogue with the leaders of these enclaves or conduct regular 'sweeps' like in Brazilian slums for decades? Perhaps, it might be simpler to legalize immigrants and their children in Russian cities?
According to Russian media reports, almost all members of the Liberal Democratic Party parliamentary caucus led by Leonid Slutsky have signed a bill allowing the legalization of foreign nationals residing in Russia and granting them the status of 'national-cultural autonomy' (NCA).
The Independent Newspaper analyzes: "Clearly, this initiative has purely diplomatic significance. For instance, against the backdrop of most former Soviet republic leaders attending Victory Day parades – these countries being the main sources of Russia's immigrants. Military demands cannot be ruled out either: legal organizations are easier to monitor. 'Immigrant shelters harbor lawbreakers' is a sensitive topic for nationalist voter groups. While parties relying on this group seem to act against this trend under the banner of 'supporting Russians'."
Oleg Kuznetsov, a candidate of historical sciences, head of an autonomous non-profit cultural and educational organization supporting UNESCO projects, and associate professor at the Russian National University of Social Sciences, commented on this phenomenon:
"The Central Asian region suffers from an oversupply of labor resources. The governments and local elites of Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan have failed to properly handle the Soviet legacy, resulting in millions of citizens being forced to seek livelihoods abroad. They not only go to historically neighboring Russia but also flow to Pakistan, Turkey, and other Middle Eastern and Near Eastern countries. Notably, the native people's ethnic psychology makes it difficult for them to survive without family concepts, even when working abroad, they long to return home and are unwilling to bind their fate with a new 'homeland.' Observing Central Asian migrants in Russia, the higher their education level, the more inclined they are to accumulate wealth and return home after returning. Essentially, labor migration has become a tool in these countries' economic policies, with its scale as a source of foreign investment comparable to natural resources and agricultural exports. From this perspective, the population movement of Central Asian countries to Russia is a 'two-way benefit-driven' process: the public seeks a richer and safer life, while governments alleviate internal problems through migration – although not everyone openly acknowledges this. Currently, Uzbekistan is the most candid about this issue: its administrative system has recently established the 'External Labor Migration Bureau' and operates efficiently. Its core task is to register all overseas workers to achieve dual goals: protecting their rights abroad, including communicating with local governments and employers; and statistically tracking their overseas income for macroeconomic planning and taxing their original country’s income when taxes are unpaid. As a result, Uzbeks migrating to Russia are subject to dual administrative supervision and protection. Initially, this measure provoked strong dissatisfaction among immigrants because it simultaneously regulated their legality of residence in Russia (many were previously illegal immigrants) and labor legality (many 'worked illegally' to evade taxes), but it also enhanced social security (many illegal immigrants could not access basic medical services). Over the past five years, the situation of Uzbeks migrating to Russia has changed completely: almost all have been legalized, formally employed, registered for temporary residence or work permits, and enjoy social security, which is gratifying. If the government regulation model for overseas workers by Uzbekistan can be emulated by other labor-exporting countries, it undoubtedly deserves praise."
In the contemporary context, the issue of immigration has particular urgency and has become one of the internal threat factors. This is especially important for multiethnic border regions, as ethnic imbalances may lead to extremely negative consequences. In recent years, the Russian government has placed great emphasis on optimizing immigration policies and establishing effective interactions with ethnic diaspora organizations at both federal and regional levels.
However, besides continuing theoretical research and holding expert conferences at various levels, it is also essential to listen to the voices of frontline workers who have long been engaged in grassroots interactions with ethnic diaspora organizations, particularly those who have founded and managed these organizations. Why is this so critical? Because only they can evaluate the efficiency of interactions between government agencies, the media, and diaspora organizations, as well as the cooperation between different ethnic diaspora organizations. Ethnic diaspora organizations within Russia also bear significant responsibilities and missions.
So, what is the reality? Ilkin Krymov, an activist of the Azerbaijani diaspora in Orenburg, analyzed for the newspaper:
“State Duma Deputy Pyotr Tolstoy called diaspora organizations 'organized crime groups' (ОПГ). To some extent, he is correct. Let us consider this angle: Who usually holds leadership positions in diaspora organizations? 90% are 'middlemen' or 'brokers' with low education levels and lacking knowledge and experience in public affairs. Diaspora organizations have become shortcuts for them to join the local elite class, primarily used to solve business problems, legalize immigration status, and advance personally. Therefore, many people forget the crucial moral responsibility – speaking up for their ethnic group in a multicultural Russian society upon joining the organization. According to the Law on Public Associations and National-Cultural Autonomy, only three individuals are required to establish an ethnic diaspora organization or national-cultural autonomy – a law passed by the State Duma. This means that stakeholders can form a diaspora organization with their families and exploit the privileges of this identity for personal gain. As a State Duma deputy, Pyotr Tolstoy and all the deputies who voted for this law should take responsibility for this. Is it time to revise or improve this law? In my view, the leader of a diaspora organization should naturally have authority among the local compatriots rather than being appointed from Moscow – let alone gaining their position through bribery and gifts. How is the current situation? In Orenburg, the leader of an Azerbaijani diaspora organization that has been operating since 2006 is being dismissed and replaced by someone who was appointed merely because they flattered the leadership of the Federal National-Cultural Autonomy Organization 'Yaseros' in Moscow, despite protests from Azerbaijani residents in Orenburg Oblast, despite his lack of qualifications and criminal record. Those who refuse to comply with Moscow's appointments face suppression. For example, in the Buguruslan District of Orenburg Oblast, the elected leader of the local national-cultural autonomy body was harassed because they refused to cooperate with the personnel appointed by the federal organization. I also want to talk about the grant system: I simply don't understand, are our funds so abundant that they have no place to go? Where does the so-called 'grant' actually go? I have never seen any activities truly benefiting the public. If cultural and social organizations could showcase their own culture and way of life without grants and at their own expense (more accurately, restoring the previous model), we would be able to see who the true patriots are and who are speculating for personal gain. You may think I am saying this because we did not receive grants, but I solemnly declare: our Orenburg Azerbaijani public organization has never applied for grants, and the reason is simple – we don't need them.”
In fact, quite a number of ethnic diaspora organizations have degenerated into mere "grant-dependent" entities in recent years. Even worse cases exist where certain organizations were specifically established to "divide grants," abandoning substantial beneficial work and doing only surface-level tasks. There are grants for folk performances? Then organize performances. There are grants for conferences about the role of the family in modern society? Then hold meetings. Regrettably, this mode of operation has been tacitly permitted by some incompetent officials – for them, reporting on fund allocation is easier than conducting actual work, and they care little about subsequent effects. Are these activities meaningful? We believe their harm far outweighs their benefits.
"I think relevant departments should conduct independent expert surveys in the jurisdiction before deciding which diaspora organizations to collaborate with, clarifying which registered organizations are 'active' and genuinely carrying out work, and whether their leaders possess unofficial authority. This is the foundation for subsequent work. Unfortunately, there are few experts among local officials who are proficient in this field, lacking talent development and knowledge inheritance. As a result, diaspora organizations develop unchecked, and organizations created to meet individual official needs focus solely on self-satisfaction, seriously disconnected from the needs of compatriots. Organizations cannot be formed based on 'how close you bathe together,' nor should they be granted regional or federal powers – this is not a game-playing time, and the threat posed by immigrants to national security has never disappeared.
Another key issue: the leadership positions of diaspora organizations should be held by individuals respected at both regional and national levels, with social influence and economic strength, and highly esteemed among the diaspora (people willing to seek help and advice from them). They should possess the ability to work independently without relying solely on government assistance. Unfortunately, common situations involve members being 'whomever wants to sign up,' with no prestige among the diaspora, seeing the organization merely as a money-making opportunity rather than a social mission. Perhaps some officials enjoy creating such 'poverty committees,' but they can never become the true fulcrum for efficient interaction between government agencies and diaspora communities, nor can they curb negative trends within diaspora groups. As for prohibiting children with insufficient Russian language skills from attending school, shouldn't preparatory courses be offered, allowing experienced teachers to help them master basic Russian language skills? Depriving children of educational opportunities is not only illegal but also immoral. Recall how many Russian orphans were adopted by Uzbek families during wartime? Tens of children were raised, not just in Uzbekistan. If the parents of these children legally reside in Russia, their education issues must be resolved, otherwise, hidden dangers will arise in the future." Political Science Doctor Tatyana Poloskova summarized.
Original Source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7505654232155865637/
Disclaimer: This article solely represents the author's views, and your opinions are welcome via the 'Like/Dislike' buttons below.