Политология/2. Политическая конфликтология

PhD in Political Science Polyakov E.M.

Voronezh State University, Russia

Terrorism and structural violence in post-soviet Russia

The concept “structural violence” was proposed by J. Haltung 45 years ago [1, 168-187]. Two years later together with T. Høivik he described the structural violence (hereinafter – SV) as a situation “whenever people die, are injured or have other deprivation due to poverty and injustice of social, economic and political institutions, systems or structures”. [2, 73-76]. They also proposed to measure the structural violence relying on data on life expectancy.

Other scientists, G. Köhler and N. Alcock, proposed two models of measuring the magnitude of SV [3, 343]. They specify a null-model which represent a hypothetical state of affairs without SV, what required an answer for question: how many deaths would be avoided, if all countries enjoined the same living conditions as Sweden (the “Swedish model”) or if the currently available global wealth had been equally distributed around the world (the “Egalitarian model”)?

G. Köhler and N.Alcock proposed the following formula to give an answer to a question, according to the Swedish model:

V1 = Pn / En – Pn / Es (Equation 1),

where Pn – the country's population N, En – life expectancy for country N, Es – Swedish life expectance [3, 345].

Based on this methodology and official statistics [4], we should try to calculate the proportion of SV in post-soviet Russia and compare the number of deaths, caused by SV with the number of deaths, caused by political terrorism. As model regions we should take the Republic of Dagestan and Republic of Ingushetia, because their population has the highest life expectancy from 1990 until 1999 and from 2000 and until now, respectively. But in our analysis we will use data for two decades only, i.e. 1990-1999 (Dagestan as model region) and 2000-2009 (Ingushetia as model region). All empirical data you may find in Appendix at the end of this article.

Substituting shown in Tables 1a and 1b data in Equation 1, we obtain the loss in population from structural violence in Russia during 1990-1999 and 2000-2009, presented in Table 2a and 2b, respectively [5, 25].

We can note that in the early 1990s, the ratio of losses from structural violence and the general population in Russia was approximately 0.77 per thousand inhabitants. As destabilization in the North Caucasus (primarily because of the Ossetian- Ingush conflict) and the beginning of the first Chechen war (1994-1996), the ratio changed to 1.2 – 1.4.

Between military campaigns (1996-1998) it has decreased, reaching the beginning of the decade – 0.72. Basayev's invasion of Dagestan in the ratio jumped to 1.01, and, since the 2000s, has continued to grow, reaching a peak of 2.0 in 2004. Then again we are seeing a downward trend, with the result in 2009, nearly the same in 1999, namely 1.03 and a gradual increase in the early 2010s to 1.38 (see Figure 1).

On the other hand, we can note a decrease in the number of crimes related to violence in the first place, murder and attempted murder. In 1990 number of such crimes was 15.6 thousand; in the next five years their number has doubled and remained at this level virtually unchanged for decade [6, 299]. Only since the mid 2000s, we are seeing a reduction in the number of murders; by 2010 their number was reduced to 1990 level (see Figure 2).

Also shows the contradictory dynamics terrorist activity. According to G.Hahn, the number of terrorist attacks for 5 years (2008-2012) ranged from 373 to 583, first gaining and then cutting, without any apparent logic. Number of victims of terrorist attacks and was within a few hundred people [7, 23].

According to a Russian official data, the peak of terrorist activity occurred in 2005 (203 cases), followed by the number of attacks has dropped by almost an order of magnitude, up to 25-30 cases per year [8, 180]. Thus, we can say that in modern Russia the approximate ratio of population loss of structural violence, armed violence and terrorist attacks is 2000:200:2.

Appendix.

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Table 1a. Life expectancy in 1990–1999 years.

	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999
Russia	69,2	68,9	67,8	65	63,9	64,5	65,8	66,7	67,1	65,9
Dagestan	73,1	72,6	72,1	70,5	70,5	70,4	70,3	70,5	70,5	70,6

Table 1b. Life expectancy in 2000–2009 years.

	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Russia	65,3	65,2	65	64,9	65,3	65,4	66,7	67,6	68	68,8
Ingushetia	72	74,8	74,4	74,4	74,6	73,5	73	75,2	76,1	74,1

Table 2a. Magnitude of structural violence in Russia, 1990–1999 years.

	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997	1998	1999
Population, millions	147,7	148,3	148,5	148,6	148,4	148,5	148,3	148,0	147,8	147,5
Victims of SV, thousands	113,9	109,7	130,6	178,3	217,3	192,9	144,3	119,6	106,2	149,0

Table 2b. Magnitude of structural violence in various areas, 2000–2009 years.

	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Population, millions	146,9	146,3	145,7	143,5	144,2	143,5	143,2	142,9	142,7	142,7
Victims of SV, thousands	209,3	284,6	276,2	281,8	288,8	245,1	227,2	212,6	222,3	147,5

References:

1. Haltung J. Violence, Peace and Peace Research // Journal of Peace Research, 1969, No 6.

2. Haltung J., Høivik T. Structural and Direct Violence: A Note on Operationalization // Journal of Peace Research, 1971, No 1.

3. Köhler G., and Alcock N. An Empirical Table of Structural Violence // Journal of Peace Research, 1976, No 4.

4. The data of life expectancy in the Russian regions have been taken from Rosstat. Date Views 21.11.2013 http://www.gks.ru

5. Demograficheskiy Yezhegodnik Rossii (Russia’s Demographic Yearbook). – Moscow: Rosstat, 2009.

6. Rossiyskiy statisticheskiy yezhegodnik (Russian Statistical Yearbook). – Moscow: Rosstat, 2011.

7. See: Hahn G. Getting the Caucasus Emirate right / A Report of the CSIS Russia and Eurasia Program. – Washington, DC: CSIS, 2011.

8. Rossiya v zifrakh (Russia in Figures). – Moscow: Rosstat, 2013.