Issues of National\Ethnic Minorities in Contemporary East-Central Europe

Abstract

An issue of peaceful coexistence of ethnically divided society has been the hill of Aquila's of the history of East-Central Europe (We imply only the countries of Visegrad: Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, and Slovakia). Late projects of modernization and the formation of the centralized nation-state mostly turned the political entities in a given region into ethnically exclusive countries, which became the principal obstacle to the consolidation of democracy and the effective state-building process for many years. The question was especially problematic between the Wars. The situation changed significantly after the end of WW2, causing the state borders changes, and societies became much more homogenized in an ethnic sense because of people's flows/exchanges from country to country. The presentation aims to review the civic integration policies of ethnic minorities in East-Central Europe after the collapse of socialist regimes and the establishment of consolidated democracies. Post-communist transformations raised the legitimate fears of reviving old ethnic stigmas in the region, but the situation developed in different ways, and fortunately, the fears turned out none justified. Despite some misunderstandings, the question of 'ethnicity" has not been associated with fear of destabilization anymore. As practice shows up, the question has gradually transformed from the "box| of securitization to the phenomenon of democracy and democratization. "Bloody lands" (a term coined by Timothy Snyder) turned to the geographic area of peaceful coexistence, but with notable preservation of the historical past in understanding of "national' and 'ethical" that differs it from the old Western democracies, where the "national" and "stateness" are strongly interconnected and stands separately from the concept of 'ethnicity." Rogers Brubaker's theory on the "nationalizing state", created on the experience and model of East-Central Europe, implied the building of a modern nation-state based on old historical experience, where the ethnic core of the society is declared as the cornerstone of the foundation of political legitimacy and "demos," which bears the discriminatory character in its turn toward ethnic/national minorities. Brubaker's theory turned out to be proved only partly, which implies recognition and separation of "ethnic minority" from its "national" counterpart. As a result, one is able to argue in favor of the hierarchical organization of ethnic/national relationships in a given space, as the obvious heritage of a complex historical past that possibly contains some signs of discrimination, as Brubaker argues. However, it is worth to be noticed that the actual situation has been significantly different from the circumstances between Wars: firstly, the current states from East-Central Europe are rather homogenous in an ethnic sense, and ethnic/national minorities have less influence over the general public sphere as it was in the past; Secondly, current political regimes are more democratically consolidated (even in Hungary's and Poland's democratic declines), that provides more just frames for minorities rights and activities. At the same time, the EU membership and international frames propose the minority's wide range of possibilities on national and international levels. Therefore, the fate of the formation of a "nationalizing state" (that implies the creation of a nation-state on a base exclusive ethnic core that is discriminatory in its turn) went in a little different direction, unlike its creator sow it. That is why, in our view, Roger Brubakers "nationalizing state" requires further discussion and rethinking to interpret East-Central Europe's development better.