Relations with the permanent population

Almost all the official materials and publications from 1989 are characterizing the attitude of a considerable part of the population of Krasnodarski Krai to refugees, including Meskheti Turks, as negative, sometimes hostile. In 1990–1991 meetings were held in some settlements setting forth the demands for evicting the «newcomers», including Meskheti Turks. The Cossacks movement became more active in 1989–1990, and Cossacks took the initiative in anti-migrant campaign. The population’s dissatisfaction was stirred up by gradual introduction of a fixed distribution system in respect to some foods (through cards or tickets) and other products (sugar, soap, etc.). The refugees demanded for granting such cards thus making angry local population. The dissatisfaction of local population was also caused by sharp rise in prices for real estate connected with coming to the Krai of a considerable number of forced migrants.

The tenseness has achieved its peak at the end of 1991, particularly when the bread cards were introduced. The meetings demanding for expelling the refugees became more frequent, instigating leaflets appeared in Krymsk and Abinsk districts. Two events should be mentioned that touched directly Meskheti Turks and that are characterizing very strikingly the situation of that period. A meeting was held in December at the collective farm «Sopka Geroyev» (Kievsky village Soviet of Krymsk district) demanding for expelling Meskheti Turks [the minutes of the meeting are available with the authors]. The leaders of Meskheti Turks who lived in settlement Economicheskoye promised to local Cossack activists that Meskheti Turks leave the area by April next year. More than 30 Meskheti Turk families were forced to leave the settlement by spring 1992 for Rostov region, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan.¹ At night in November a group of unknown people destroyed five houses of Meskheti Turks at settlement Kholmsky in Krymsk district, and those who were staying in them were cruelly beaten. One of the participants of the assault was detained by Militia officers, according to T.Svanidze. The criminal case then instituted was stopped allegedly by application of Meskheti Turks themselves who were forced, according to Sadain Tamimov.

According to the interviewed, both Meskheti Turks and the representatives of local administrative bodies, a turn to better occurred in the beginning of 1992. The measures taken by the Krai’s authorities (establishment of a commission of the Krai’s Soviet, issuing the Resolution # 97), as well as change of the economic situation have assisted in some relaxation of tension; though Meskheti Turks’ conditions have not changed essentially the situation is stable in general up to now.

It is difficult to assess the real mood of local population, as no independent studies were performed in the Krai. Only the results of a survey are known carried out by local authorities on August 19, 1990 among the residents of Krymsk and Krymsk district concerning the unorganized migration from Transcaucasus and Central Asia and the possibility of living together with them. 14,261 residents of the town took part in the survey, and 21,666 residents of the district; 93,4% of the participants representing the town supported leaving of the town by the migrants, that is, opposed the idea of living together with them, and the same was the opinion of 86,5% participants from the district.² In 1989, according to the census of the population, 51.5 thousand people lived in Krymsk, and 62.9 thousand people in the district;³ the percentage of voters among them was amounting to 70%. Despite large-scale nature of voting, there are doubts relating to representativity and objectiveness of the results. Besides, it is not possible to assess the today’s situation using a five-year old information. So the changes that occurred in the population’s attitude in respect to refugees may only be assessed by fragmentary data and our own observation. The difficulty of assessment is caused, to a considerable extent, by the fact that the opinions concerning the mood of local population are expressed mostly by representatives of local administrative bodies and active participants of Cossack movement. The adequacy, authenticity and objectiveness of the information is very doubtful as covering official policy by the «people’s» opinion is a long-time Soviet tradition, and the leaders of Krasnodarski Krai are not an exception here.

First, there are certain grounds to assert that good relations are formed now between Meskheti Turks and their closest neighbors who have gate rid of some prejudices in respect to the refugees after several years of living together, and they are estimating at their true worth their diligence, benevolence, readiness to help. For the last 2 or 3 years local Russians begin to visit the Turks’ weddings, funeral repasts. Our 1995 year’s expedition has mentioned some cases where, despite a large-scale «anti-Caucasian» propaganda, local people were expressing their indignation in respect to illegal actions of Cossacks and Militia against Meskheti Turks. So Russian women and customers defended Turks at a municipal market in Abinsk on July 1, 1995 when they were treated rudely by Cossacks during their traditional «raid» for inspection of documents. During the «inspection of compliance with the requirements of passport regime» that was carried out by Cossacks together with Militia in settlement Kholmsky early in the morning on June 9, 1995 that converted actually into a pogrom, the Russian neighbor of the family Beridze run to Militia to save the Meskheti Turks who were detained. The women who live in Tabakosovkhoz (farm Armyansky, Krymsk district) tried to intercede for the Turks who were beaten by Cossacks, though the Cossacks threatened them, too; after the incident they wrote a collective message to the Militia’s head office.⁴

The neighbors are, of course, sympathizing to the Meskheti Turks for their condition where they are deprived of civil rights, but their feeling is rather passive, although these people would be able to assist in changing the administration’s position by their joint efforts and to destroy negative stereotypes of social consciousness in respect to refugees.

According to Meskheti Turks themselves, they sometimes have to listen to insults from local people, first of all, those who are unknown to them. A negative and even hostile attitude in respect to «non-Slavic» migrants is wide-spread (it is rather difficult to assess the extent of it) among the population. A certain role in it is played by mass media, that is readily providing its services to nationalist publications and statements calling to prevent the «predominance of non-Slavic nationalities» and advocating for the slogan «Kuban to Kubanians».

Relations with the administration

Contacts of Meskheti Turks with the representatives of authorities are formed in different ways on different levels and in different districts.

The most calm and tolerant attitude in respect to Meskheti Turks is demonstrated in general by heads of lower-level administrations (settlements and villages), that is, the people who contact directly with the population due to the nature of their activities. The head of administration of settlement Nizhnebakansky T.A.Shaprynskaya, head of Kievsky village Soviet A.A.Maryasov, head of Gostagaevsky village Soviet of Anapa district V.A.Pogrebnoy with whom we could talk directly state that there are no problems at all in the relations with Meskheti Turks, while all inevitable small misunderstandings and domestic conflicts are usually solved successfully with Turkish leaders. Our interlocutors were making reservations asserting that in the situation connected with Meskheti Turks they are almost not able to do something independently as they are forced to fulfill the decisions taken by higher authorities. They are also characterizing the existing state of affair where people are staying in a «suspended» position as an abnormal one, and consider that it should be made good by the Krai’s authorities or by the Federal authorities.

The Meskheti Turks’ representatives, in turn, state that they have plane and constructive relations in general with administrative bodies of most of the settlements where they have to live, particularly in settlements Akhtyrsky and Kholmsky of Abinsk district, at villages and settlements of Belorechensk. But there are examples of another kind where some heads of administrations (for example, Moldavansky village council of Krymsk district, Kubansky village council of Apsheronsky district) are having an unfriendly attitude in respect to Meskheti Turks, according to Meskheti Turks themselves.

As concerns managers of enterprises, the situations existing in different places are also solved in different ways. Some managers are interested in Meskheti Turks as workers or lessees and try to meet their needs and even help them to a possible extent. Other managers are deliberately creating maximum possible inconveniences for those who are not registered as residents: workers — Meskheti Turks are the last who are taken on and the first who are dismissed, they are prevented from employment, managers try to pay them less wages (for example, by temporary transfer from one team to another without taking into consideration the working hours already performed), delay execution of rent documents for land plots or delay in allocation of such plots, allocating the worst lands, refuse from allocation of hayfields (the examples are available with the compilers of the report).

The attitude of district administrative bodies in respect to Meskheti Turks is also varying. It is quite tolerable and constructive in Belorechensk — leaders of local organization of the Vatan are provided with a possibility of operative solving any problems that may arise with the head of administration who is benevolent in general in respect to Meskheti Turks. A calm attitude in respect to Meskheti Turks is demonstrated by leaders of Abinsk district, although the administration doesn’t miss any opportunities to express their opinion in favor of departure of Meskheti Turks from Kuban. The administration of Apsheronsky district is demonstrating a negative attitude in respect to Meskheti Turks looking back at local Cossacks. Leaders of Krymsk district are of the most rigid attitude: they are not only guided strictly by the restrictive directions of the Krai’s authorities but take their own measures, as it was recognized by V.V.Remmler, aimed against Meskheti Turks to make their conditions worse.

No unified rigid scheme can be traced in accordance with which the Militia’s attitude to refugees would be built. A lot is depending on a leader’s personality, the level of corruption (the citizens who are not registered and so are deprived of civil rights are a constant source of income in the form of fines taken without issuing a receipt) and the degree of adherence to nationalist ideas was influenced, of course, by participation of Militia men in inspections of compliance with the requirements of passport regime conducted together with Cossacks. Some cases are known to us where Militia officers defended refugees against expressed arbitrariness on the part of Cossacks and enlisted Militia men. Positive assessments on the part of our informers were given to the head of the Department of Internal Affairs of Apsheronsky district A.I.Fedorov, head of the Department of Internal Affairs of Belorechensk district. The most cruel oppressions on the part of law protection bodies were experienced by Meskheti Turks in Krymsk district.

The most intolerant to Meskheti Turks are, according to our impressions, representatives of the Krai’s administration. It was their initiative that they issued illegal acts aimed against migrants, with their obvious support the propaganda campaign is conducted kindling public dissatisfaction in connection with migration processes in the Krai, they are authorizing and supporting the activities of Cossack organizations. According to the information received from confidential sources, there are supporters of «rigid» and «soft» line in respect to Meskheti Turks, and a parity exists between these groups. The supporters of «rigid» line are insisting on forcing Meskheti Turks from Kuban by all means available including deportation.⁵ The supporters of «soft» line are advocating for preservation of status quo, that is, present «suspended» condition of Meskheti Turks.

Meskheti Turks say, they perceive actions taken by the majority of officials, particularly those of the Krai and district levels, as a system of pressure and refined mockery aimed, first of all, at producing the most possible inconveniences for «non-Slavs» and force them from the Krai. Such activities are facilitated greatly by formally indefinite condition of Turkish refugees deprived of civil rights. According to many of our interlocutors — Meskheti Turks, some officers, particularly in Krymsk district, are not masking the deliberate nature of their actions aimed against Meskheti Turks. According to almost all of our informers, they have to meet systematically, when they have contacts with officers, particularly in district administrations and the State Traffic Inspectorate, an expressly rough and humiliating treatment [specific evidences are available with the authors of the report]. Many Meskheti Turks are of the opinion that the authorities try to provoke them for hasty actions that might be used as a ground for more strict pressure and repressions against the refugees.

As it is known, the arbitrariness and procrastination of bureaucrats are a powerful weapon of pressure against the population of other nationalities and making «soft ethnic clean-ups», but it is almost impossible to prove the systematic and goal-oriented nature of such practice. We can only give some examples characterizing the existing situation.

In all the dis|ricts of the Krai where Meskheti Turks live the authorities have ignored the veterans — Meskheti Turks during celebration of the 50th anniversary of the Victory over the Nazi Germany, although the resolutions taken by Russian leadership were making provisions for celebration in honor of veterans, awarding memorable signs and gifts as well as lump-sum prizes for all veterans irrespective of their citizenship or registration of residence. Irony of fate, many of Turks–veterans were participating the war serving in so called Caucasian divisions and took part in the combats on the territory of Kuban in 1942–1943, precisely at the places where they found themselves now.

To fulfill the Resolution # 97 of the Krai’s Small Soviet in different districts, several forms of reference notes have been developed for registration of temporary residence of Meskheti Turks who are not registered as permanent residents. In Apsheronsky district, Abinsk district and Belorechensk such reference notes are issued by village/ settlement administrations. More complex procedures have been introduced in Krymsk district: Meskheti Turks should be issued first a reference note from local «leader». From autumn 1994 local administrations require that such reference notes be provided by the Umid society that acts in settlement Nizhnebakansky and are not recognizing the references issued by the Vatan. Such requirements are not having any sense as all the administrations are provided with signed and sealed lists of all Turks who live at their territories, and the passports and visas service of the municipal district’s Department of Internal Affairs has a file where all the information relating to Turks living within the district is recorder.⁶ After a trip to settlement Nizhnebakansky to get a reference note from A.Bayrakhtarov (upon payment of 5 thousand roubles) it is necessary to take at the financial department of the village administration a reference note (receipt) on payment of taxes, receive a medical reference note on ACDC inoculation and X-raying. In accordance with existing medical standard, X-raying is only permitted once a year, but the reference note on X-raying is required each time, that is in 6 months.⁷ With these documents a man receives from the deputy head of village administration (upon payment of the respective charge amounting to 5 thousand roubles and checking the lists of Meskheti Turks available with the village administration) a reference note certifying temporary residence on the territory of the respective settlement or village.⁸ Having got this paper as well as a reference note issued by local «leader» he goes to Krymsk passports and visas service and receives (free of charge) a reference note on temporary registration valid for a half-year period. Such reference notes are not issued for entire families, and each person should pay charges individually. Krymsk passports and visas service issues such reference notes three times a week and services 10 persons during one working day. Sometimes the people are required to produce the reference notes of temporary registration issued earlier, and those who have not got such reference notes (for example, in cases such documents were seized by the Militia or Cossacks) should explain their situation to the officers of the passports and visas service. So, to be issued the reference note people should spend a lot of time (up to three weeks) and efforts, go to Nizhnebakansky and Krymsk, and very often without any result, although such reference notes might be issued by village administrations. According to S.Tedorov, Krymsk administration refused from the proposal to limit issuing reference notes by village administrations. A question arises: why did the Krai’s administration establish a half-year term of reference notes on temporary registration? The reference notes from the «leader», village administration and district’s passports and visas service are only necessary for temporary registration of motor vehicles [June 29, 1995].

In April 1995 Krymsk town’s passports and visas service, allegedly by initiative of district administration⁹ stopped issuing reference notes on temporary residence, and a direction was also received by village administrations not to issue reference notes on temporary residence. It was a very painful strike on Meskheti Turks as it was dangerous to move with run out reference notes even within own district, and the State Traffic Inspectorate did not prolong temporary registration of motor vehicles. Issuing the reference notes was only resumed in Krymsk in the middle of June 1995.

We had to listen to a lot of complaints on actions of Militia officers. According to Meskheti Turks, they often meet rudeness and procrastination when they need to prolong temporary registration of motor vehicles and perform technical inspection. Their vehicles having provisional registration numbers are stopped by officers of the State Traffic Inspectorate particularly often; fines are imposed under various grounds, and very seldom receipts are issued for the entire sum of fine.¹⁰

Fines are also imposed regularly for «violation of passport regime» during inspections performed when the people are at home, at streets and markets.¹¹ Fine sums have grown lately to 50-80 thousand roubles, receipts often are not issued, sometimes parts of the actual sums are specified. According to our interlocutors, it is a usual practice (examples are available with the authors of the report).

It it necessary to mention the position taken by the Department of National Affairs and Migration Affairs/Department of National Affairs and Migration Affairs and Regional Policy. It was the Department itself where a number of initiatives arose directed at adoption of restricting measures, particularly against Meskheti Turks. It was just the Department that launched the idea of talks with Georgian authorities on repatriation of Meskheti Turks to Georgia on the conditions of Georgian party, although the Department’s officers could not be uninformed of purely adventurist nature of the initiative, and people cannot move anywhere without proper preparation, including to Georgia. It was just the Department of National Affairs and Migration Affairs that has converted the talks with Georgia concerning migration of 100 families to Tsalka district into a propaganda action to stir up Cossacks against Meskheti Turks. The Department is actually used as a retransmitter to communicate any rumors of Meskheti Turks to the Krai’s administration in a pseudo-scientific and «ennobled» form in order to form its attitude. With a high degree of reliability we can assert that the opinions of a «double game» and destructive role played by the Vatan, as concerns migration to Georgia, of essential «cultural incompatibility» between Turks and local population, etc. were born in the midst of the Department.

Ideological Background

The representatives of the authorities are denying, as a rule, that the pressure against the «non-Slavic» refugees and particularly Meskheti Turks is having a discriminating, deliberate and goal-oriented nature. But a system of explanations and arguments has emerged used by representatives of authorities to explain proper nature of the restrictions that are introduced. The anti-migrant policy is not only motivated in private interviews, but is used in broadcasting and local press, in public statements of politicians and public activists. The ideologic situation is predetermining the motives, nature and direction of actions taken by the persons having power in their hands, and so it should be analyzed in details.

The public, official and unofficial statements concerning migration problems in Krasnodarski Krai may be accumulated into several points. 1) External migration, particularly migration of «non-Slavs», is an evil, without any doubts; migration is not considered in any case as a factor and incentive of territorial development, but it is an axiom that it causes worsening of social and economic situation as increases pressure on social infrastructure and local budget, decreases saturation of the market with products and consumer goods, aggravates the competition relating to residence and work. 2) Migrants are a mass of dependants who are parasitizing the budget and make a serious contribution to worsening criminal situation. 3) The migration is destabilizing the political situation: growth of the number of «strangers» is sharpening dissatisfaction on the part of local population and provoking conflicts. 4) Taking into consideration the above points, the authorities must take prohibitive and repressive measures directed against migrants.

Substantiation of the policy aimed against Meskheti Turks particularly is forming a kind of hierarchy system within which the arguments of different levels are used depending on the general context, the degree of openness of a representative of authorities or ideological orientation of the public activist or a mass media organ.

The first level may be called conditionally «bureaucratic fundamentalism». These are the arguments such as: «We are not decision-makers, we are only fulfilling laws and instructions of higher bodies». An opinion is expressed that the restrictive measures are not directed against Turks or any other nationalities, but are touching Meskheti Turks in accordance with general formal grounds.

The second type of arguments is that Meskheti Turks are offenders in their essence, the persons who «live illegally at the Krai territory» as they came to the Krai without permission of the authorities. Meskheti Turks have ignored the decision taken by the USSR leadership concerning migration to Non-Chernozem Zone, the Regulation on passport system and Resolutions of the Krai authorities relating to limitation of registration regime, so they cannot enjoy civil rights in full. «When the conflict began, the Government has determined the places for settlement of the persons of Caucasian nationalities — Saratov, Tambov and other regions. That’s your problem that you do not read resolutions».¹² Popular are the references to the Turks’ promises made in 1989–1990 that «they have come to the Krai for a time only, until solving the problem of their repatriation» based on which it is inexpedient to provide any «roots» to them.¹³ It is often emphasized that Meskheti Turks should be grateful to administration that it met their wishes on «humanitarian grounds», that is, provided a legal status, permitted employment, ensured all the possibilities for education and obtaining medical assistance — many things that it was not obliged to do.

The third level are the references to social problems and the Krai’s limited capabilities, as concerns reception and accommodation of a considerable number of migrants. This is an explanation for restrictive measures aimed against migrants, and they emphasize that no distinction is made between those who are entering the Krai and those who live there for more than 6 years already. Representatives of the administration emphasize that nobody has invited Meskheti Turks, and there is nothing the Krai owes to them, moreover, «the budget is not made from rubber... Actually, they were invited to the regions where registration is possible».¹⁴ Officers of administrations are adapting to law-protecting style, and their argument is that coming of migrants is threatening to make the situation unstable and increasing the load at social infrastructure — so «the rights of the Krai’s population are violated».¹⁵ Besides, naturally, it is assumed that «protection of rights and interests of local population» may be ensured by «unloading» of the region from migrants, and not at the cost of future development of the social infrastructure.

Among the rhetoric techniques used by representatives of the administration a reference should be mentioned to the specific situation of the Krai and extraordinary circumstances («overpopulation», «neighboring to frontier», «neighboring the areas of national conflicts» and even «specific strategic position»), that are allegedly used as bases of the specific status and specific rights of the region making it possible for them to use provisions of Federal legislation selectively.¹⁶

The fourth level — appeal to the «people’s opinion». Many representatives of the authorities express the opinion that they have nothing against Turks, but in case the residence of Meskheti Turks on the Krai’s territory becomes legal, it may provoke even an uprising of local population. The representatives of the administration (and Cossacks) depict a picture of popular wrath that is just falling upon the heads of newcomers. V.A.Limorenko: «If two or three Russians are violated in Kholmsk, we shall not be able to stop the people. Cossacks shall come, and beat everybody. An ethnic war shall flare up then».[October 31, 1994]. During the meeting with Cossacks of Krymsk district a threat of potential people’s insurrection was depicted as a «new Fergana». The explanations of the reasons of the people’s dissatisfaction are very different.

First, some interlocutors were mentioning the grounds of social nature.¹⁷ Turks coming to the Krai were buying dwelling houses without wrangling, the most of them had motor vehicles, and local people suspected that they had «unearned incomes» (the fact that they have received big money having sold their houses in Uzbekistan in 1989–1990, and some of them bought motor vehicles for these money, naturally, were not taken into consideration). An overwhelming majority of Meskheti Turks are not workers in public sector and are living first at the cost of personal plots and resale of products — local people consider it blamable though Turks have not any other ways of earning their living. We have already mentioned the conflicts connected with fixed distribution of foods and consumer goods in 1990–1991. «The time when foods and consumer goods were distributed in accordance with the number of residents passed away. And should the distribution was in accordance with the number of residents, we would be strangled».¹⁸ The population is also dissatisfied allegedly with «predominance» of «Caucasians» at the market, and their high level of income, etc.¹⁹

Second, an opinion is expressed sometimes of a higher criminality of «non-Slavs», particularly Meskheti Turks. For example, A.S.Fedenko (former head of administration of Abinsk district and former Cossack ataman of the district) considers that all the criminals in Krasnodarski Krai are «strangers from Transcaucasus».²⁰ As it was mentioned above, this concept is not having any bases and is disproved by many representatives of the authorities, even those who are not sympathizing with Meskheti Turks.

Third, an opinion became popular among bureaucrats concerning an «incompatibility» of different cultures and anxiety of the population about its «identity» in the conditions where the number of migrants of other nationalities, particularly Meskheti Turks, grows. Such is the position, in particular, of the Krai’s Department of National Affairs and Migration Affairs and Regional Policy²¹). «If there was 200 or 300 Meskheti Turks and they come within 5 or 6 years, nobody noticed them, but the case is that they came within a half-year or a year, and not 8 or 10 thousand but 120 or 126 thousand in the district — that’s too many, too evident».²²

Following the example of Mikhail Savva, when he was the head of the Department of National Affairs and Migration Affairs, as well as other bureaucrats, pseudo-scientific argument was brought into use concerning certain «critical percentage» of «strange migrants» amounting to 15% allegedly derived experimentally by certain English scientists — when the percentage is exceeded, the population begins to demonstrate hostility to newcomers.²³ «...The exceeding of 15% of refugees and forced migrants means, in accordance with international experience, serious social and political consequences.»²⁴ The thesis is widely used now by bureaucrats of the Krai and local level in some other modification making it possible to refer to a sharp threat to political stability directly and simultaneously decline all responsibility for the situation referring to «objective conformity to natural laws».²⁵ The exceeding of the «critical percentage» here is posed as leading to a social explosion. A majority is assessing the «critical percentage» as amounting to 15 per cent, some others — as 10 per cent (V.V.Ostrozhny, V.P.Ustalov, N.I.Kucherenko²⁶). As a rule, it is not specified there who should be considered as «strangers» — all migrants or those of certain ethnic category, and within what territorial framework the account should be performed (a locality, district, Krai?).²⁷

So the representatives of the authorities in a slightly masked form were supporting the slogan of «ethnic purity of the population». It should be mentioned that in order to substantiate their position the representatives of the authorities are often using direct misinformation. Quite different concepts of «refugees — permanent residents of the Krai», «people from other regions staying in the Krai» and «non-Slavs» are often substituted by each other. «... We have registered (on legal and illegal bases) 26 thousand people — only for three months! [within the last quarter of 1993 — A.O., O.C.] ... A simple mathematic calculation demonstrates: if such rate is preserved, the Krai’s population shall be supplemented by a million of strangers».²⁸ Instead of the balance of migration general public sees the number of people who entered the Krai or were registered. An extremely rarely publicized is the fact that the migration flow is ensured mainly by migrants from other Russian regions. Besides, the fact is not mentioned, as a rule, that the external migration is not affecting in general the ethnic proportions of the Krai’s population:²⁹ representatives of «Russian-speaking population» (mainly representatives of Slavic people) are exceeding 87% of all migrants from the «near abroad», and Russians were amounting to 83.9% of those who became permanent residents of the Krai in 1994 (Armenians — 5.5%).³⁰ The same proportions have preserved in 1995: 25,331 persons were registered in the first quarter; among them Russian — 83% (Eastern Slavs — 88.8%), Armenians — 5.1%, Azerbaijanians — 0.3%. If compared with the data of 1993, 114,170 persons were registered, among them 88% were Russians, 5% — Armenians.³¹

The fifth level is the opinion concerning protection of the Krai’s «ethnic purity» and the opposition against «Caucasian colonization» but expressed openly. The most open and sharp statements concerning national problems and the problems of migration are usually made by Cossack leaders and activists, but such statements are readily published by official press. Particularly, such materials are often published by Kubanskiye Novosti — before February 1994 it was the organ of the Krai Soviet, later — an independent newspaper actually preserving the status of a semi-official newspaper close to the Krai’s Administration.³² But in some cases representatives of the administration themselves, particularly those who are Cossack activists at the same time, are expressing purely racialist motives of hostility in respect of refugees.³³

In talks on these themes phrases may be heard sometimes that Slavic population is afraid of becoming a national minority at Kuban because of «Caucasians» inflow.³⁴ The opinion is often expressed that the migration flow may become uncontrolled without strict prohibitive measures.³⁵ The acting head of the migration service of Krasnodarski Krai who asked not to disclose his name, was speaking rather openly in July 1995 that the main purpose of the migration policy pursued at Kuban is «to cut off the wave of migrants–Caucasians». Why? — «... there are more than 1 million migrants in the Krai. If such rate [of migration] is preserved in future, Russians may become an ethnic minority in 30 years».

In accordance with our impressions of three trips, the most widely used arguments set forth by representatives of the administration to confirm expediency of the policy pursued are those of the fourth and the fifth levels (the necessity of preservation of certain level of the ethnic and confessional homogeneity of the population). For example, deputy head of administration of Krymsk district S.K.Burdin and Krymsk district public prosecutor N.P.Slepichev told that only one problem is connected with Turks in the district — the fact of their residence there causing dissatisfaction of local population [November 28, 1995]. A similar attitude was expressed by deputy head of the Department of National Affairs and Migration Affairs V.V.Ostrozhny [November 30, 1995]. Besides, a distinction is disappearing between open and masked arguments in favor of «ethnic filters» and «soft ethnic clean-ups».

The role of Cossack formations

A clear distinction should be made between successors of the persons who were Cossacks before 1917 and the members of public organizations that are forming together the «Cossack movement». These concepts are quite different: many Cossacks by birth stay aside from presently active formations, and quite opposite, not all activists of Cossack movement are successors of Cossacks by birth —, but for convenience we shall call the members of present Cossack formations «Cossacks» without further explanations. The main problem, in our opinion, are claims of some organizations calling themselves «Cossack» for a special governmental status. Leaders of «Cossack movement» are claiming that Cossacks are a special ethnic community, and so they should be provided special group-wide rights.³⁶ After 1917 Cossacks were subject to cruel repressions on the part of the Soviet authorities, and the ideas of restoration and historic revenge are very strong among modern Cossacks under the name «rehabilitation». These ideas combined with strong nationalist mood, cult of violence and social archaism are causing a nihilism of many leaders and activists of Cossack movement in respect to law in general and active legislation in particular.

Cossack movement enjoyed and is enjoying the support on the part of the state. The line of supporting Cossack movement is pursued by the Center — the USSR and Russian authorities, but this subject is outside the framework of the present report. In some regions of Russia, including Krasnodarski Krai, Cossack organizations with the connivance of the Federal authorities are building militarized formations and appropriating certain power functions. At the same time they exert a powerful pressure at regional administrations and lower level authorities, and those are demonstrating at least a readiness of making concessions to Cossacks. Although the authorities are protesting against or ignoring up to now the expressly illegal actions on the part of Cossacks, the Cossack leaders are receiving various assistance from administration and have an access to the levers of power. The appropriation of powers of law — securing and administrative bodies by Cossack organizations leads to rude violations of law and human rights. It is not simple to segregate the events where violations are performed by legal authorities from those where informal (Cossack) organizations are at fault.

The following Cossack organization are active at the territory of Krasnodarski Krai: Vsekubanskoye Kazachye Voisko (before 1992 — Kubanskaya Kazachya Rada) and several smaller groupings (Kubanskoye Kazachye Voisko, All-Kuban Cossack Association «Kuban», etc.). In the districts of our interest, where Meskheti Turks live, the most active are the divisions of Vsekubanskoye Kazachye Voisko. Cossacks have no competitors among public organizations at Kuban region, as concerns the scale of activity and closeness of interaction with the authorities.

The support of Cossacks is expressed, first of all, by introduction of office of deputy head of administration in charge of Cossack affairs in administrations of districts and the Administration of Krasnodarski Krai. The authorities were always winking at the activities of Cossack formations, permitted their activities together with the Militia, and this practice was legalized by the Resolution of the Head of Administration of Krasnodarski Krai # 220 dated April 19, 1994 «On extraordinary measures in respect to struggle with criminality».³⁷ The officers of law-securing bodies were entitled to be members of Cossack organizations.

The position of Cossack leaders and activists in respect to «non-Slavs» and their migration to Krasnodarski Krai is extremely chauvinistic.³⁸ From the very beginning of Cossack movement (from 1989–1990) one of the principal directions of its activities was the struggle against «non-Slavic» migrants. It was and is reflected now in the form of meetings of the population demanding for prevention of entering and for forcing «Caucasians», illegal «actions» conducted together with Militia for «protection of public order». Cossack organizations are expressing regular threats at the address of «illegal migrants» and «persons of Caucasian nationalities». For example, a categorical demand to the authorities was adopted at the meeting of the Taman division of the Vsekubanskoye Kazachye Voisko in Slavyansk on October 29, 1994 on taking strict measures against migrants and expelling them from the Krai; luckily, the appeal had not any serious consequences. A striking event was issuing of the «Statement of atamans and the Council of elders of Ekaterinodar division of the Vsekubanskoye Kazachye Voisko adopted on June 19, 1995 during Budennovsk events. The statement contained an ultimatum to »persons of Caucasian nationality" who stay illegally at the territory of Krasnodarski city and the Krai; they were ordered to leave the Krai before July 1, 1995, «...otherwise the Council of atamans shall not be responsible for any actions taken by Cossacks and take decision on repatriation of Caucasians». Cossacks demanded that the administration should «stop immediately any registration of strangers at the Krai’s territory, stop issuing guest visas and other visas and invitations to any persons of Caucasian nationality»; «to supply infantry weapons, means of protection and transportation to Cossack formations». The public prosecutor’s office and the Department of Internal Affairs were demanded in a rigid form to «reconsider personnel policy and to get rid immediately of workers of Caucasian nationality» [the duplicate of the document is available with the compilers of the report]. The threats contained by the ultimatum, as usual, were a bluff that time, but they have seriously incandesced the atmosphere at the Krai.

The Cossack leaders are using two ethnic groups to form the «hostile image» — Armenians and Turks. The hostility in respect to migrants of other nationalities is explained partially by the above mentioned arguments of social nature, but the emphasis is made at the «essential» aspect — the fact that «primordial Slavic lands» are populated by «strangers». Some interviewers told that Turks, similar to other «non-Slavs», are challenging local population by their very way of life, impose their laws to them.³⁹

We were not able to get answer to the question, why such minor ethnic group as Meskheti Turks is attracting so much attention on the part of Cossacks. Perhaps, Meskheti Turks are one of the first migrant group at Kuban. Perhaps, traditional Turkophobia is also playing a certain role here. It is always very difficult to the representatives of Cossacks to answer the question about the nature of their direct accusations at the address of Meskheti Turks. The claims are either abstract and ambiguous (their challenging conduct) or absurdist (imposition of their way of life) or are not confirmed (overpopulation, criminality). The talks are brought to notorious «Caucasian colonization» or «Moslem expansion» that Cossacks are intending to prevent.

No doubts, Cossack leaders try to attract sympathies of Slavic population by the slogans of ethnic purity. The movement advocating for class privileges of a minority (in accordance with the most bold estimates, the number of Cossacks by origin is hardly exceeding one fourth of the Krai’s population⁴⁰), it cannot advance any constructive slogan attractive for a majority of the population. So Cossack activists are counting on chauvinism trying to win the game using nationalist and social demagogy. Besides, they do likely understand that it is necessary to give certain assignment to ordinary members and supporters of their movement, otherwise the organization shall be doomed to degradation. Aggressive rituals and actions against «strangers» help to solve the problem. Pumping of a hysteria in respect of mythologic «Caucasian colonization» and criminal dominance of «migrants» is helping to obtain special rights for building militarized structures and carrying out common actions together with the Militia.

The Cossacks’ activities aimed against «strangers» and «foreigners» are not only limited by public threats and other ritual and propagandist actions such as meetings of all kinds. The «raids» for «inspection of passport regime» accompanied by searches at houses, round-ups at the market places, simply beating of people, etc. are usual or rather wide-spread practice now.⁴¹ Almost all the «conflicts», reports of which are available with us, are such «inspections» and «raids» of Cossacks performed in an extremely aggressive and provoking form, sometimes accompanied by violence.

The events that occurred at farm Shkolny (March 1994)

On March 26, 1994 a group of Cossacks of Krymsk town’s Cossack Krug was moving from Anapa using two buses. Passing village Varenikovsky the Cossacks moved to farm Svet and farm Shkolny for inspection of passport regime and warning Meskheti Turks of expulsion. The Cossack who were not quite sober were breaking into houses, humiliating and beating people. In total, 22 houses were «inspected», in two houses (owned by the Safarovs and Ridvanovs) 6 persons have got injuries of different heaviness. A criminal case was instituted in respect of the fact of injuries. Here are some evidences of witnesses and participants of the conflict.⁴²

Makhmudov Abdullah: «Two buses moved up at 8 p.m., we were at home, just had a supper. Cossacks are entering, Militia man Sandrak was together with them, he is the head of our Militia section. They demanded that we produce documents. Took our passports and reference notes of temporary residence. They were insulting us. Pointing at the hearth: What is it? We say, it is an oven. Well, you all should be burnt here. To sluice over with solar oil and to burn down».

Alishanov Nureddin: «They returned passports to us, but have torn the reference notes of temporary residence, and told us: we give you a 10-day period, you may go to any place you like. The head of Militia section said: the Cossack meeting decided that you leave, and it is a law».

Mamedov Ansar: «At nine or at nine and a half they enter the house, and there are only the wife with children and the grandmother. They begin search, lifting things by whips, children were afraid».

Gafurov Islam: «Cossacks come in and ask: are there any weapons? What weapons can we have? We came here not for war. We run from that Uzbekistan crowd to live peacefully, calmly... A young man was looking TV, a Cossack comes up and beats him without any words. The Cossacks were not sober, but the head of Militia section, now the head of Militia department, — he was sober. My parents are 80 now, they were very afraid, and both fell ill then».

When the Cossacks searched through about 20 houses, a part of them together with the head of Militia section went by one of the buses «to inspect the discotheque». The rest of the Cossacks decided to carry on raid, and began to «inspect» two houses of farm Shkolny at the corner, where Meskheti Turks lived, according to the head of Militia section.

A large group of Cossacks (about 20 persons) armed with truncheons and lashes entered the Ridvanovs’ house when it was about 21 o’clock. They rushed into the house, turned everything upside-down searching weapons. The mother (63 years old) was very afraid and cried. They beat her at her face. The father Mekhrali Ridvanov, 63 years old, and his two sons were made go out with their hands wrung, at the court they were beaten with fists and truncheons. The younger son Mekhrali was crying: «What are you doing, on what grounds you assault at night, frighten children and old men?» The Cossacks said they give them 10 days to leave. Mekhrali was dragged into the bus and moved to the vineyard. They were beating him with lashes until he lost consciousness. They left him on the road unconscious and left the farm. Mekhrali reached home in several hours, badly beaten. He was subject to medical expert examination, but the head of Militia section A.A.Sandrak persuaded him to leave. Mekhrali left for Uzbekistan and only came back in 7 months.

The second serious conflict took place at Zakhaddin Safarov’s house (he is 45 years old, has 4 children). Cossacks who were not sober, about 12 men, came into the house, not accompanied by a Militia man, and demanded for passports and the document certifying ownership for a truck. Zakhaddin told them that he would produce the documents only in presence of the head of Militia section. One of the Cossacks struck him by whip at his head and said: «Really a literate man». His wife Zulaikha ran out, they struck her too at her head and back. They twisted a lash around his younger seventeen year old son’s neck beating him by their feet, then they threw him at the floor and dragged him towards the bus. The elder son, 20 years old, took a pitchfork and struck a Cossack at his foot having injured him. A command followed: «Catch and kill him». The young man ran away and concealed himself. Seeing the beaten people are not moving, the Cossacks got into the bus and went away.

On March 28 a message was reported by TV that Meskheti Turks attacked Cossacks at farm Shkolny. The program editor explained later that the information was received from Cossacks.

Krymsk municipal district’s Department of Internal Affairs has instituted a criminal case in respect of the fact of beating Meskheti Turks. Captain Barsukov was appointed an investigator. The investigation has found out that the action was headed by ataman Ushakov. Five more Cossacks were identified. Ushakov has acknowledged the fact of beating and filed a counter-claim (in respect to three victims).

A pressure began against Meskheti Turks to persuade them to withdraw their claim. A Cossack Oleg Bardadym who came to Varenikovskaya from Kirgizia threatened Meskheti Turks in the office of deputy head of district administration that they would unleash new bloodshed if the Turks go on with their claim, and he has set forth an ultimatum to them on behalf of the Cossacks.

On June 3, 1995 Zakhaddin Safarov was called to investigator Barsukov who made the following statement: «If you want to pass the suit to the court — do it, as it is your right, but you’d like to live here. You may file your complaint to the United Nations, or to Moscow, but the suit shall return her». The talk was rather peaceful, a compromise was proposed in the form of a document filed to the head of the municipal district’s Department of Internal Affairs lieutenant-colonel Ruban stating that they have no claims against the Cossacks. Such document was written by the victims. The criminal case was terminated.

The applications of 16 families, residents of farms Shkolny and Svet written a year ago and filed to Militia (without a receipt) disappeared without any trace.⁴³

The events at Tabakosovkhoz (November 1995)

An event unprecedented even for Krasnodarski Krai — a mass public birching took place on November 12, 1995 at Tabakosovkhoz (farm Armyansky, Prigorodny village council, Krymsk district). Six Turkish families live at the farm. In the morning, about 10 o’clock, a group of Cossacks (to be more precise, a group of people wearing Cossack uniform) gathered in the center of the village, about 60 persons, including local Cossacks (Kuren Novoukrainsky) and those who came from Krymsk as well as, possibly, from Abinsk, village Varenikovskaya and Slavyansk. As it was reported by local people, several young people were acting together with Cossacks wearing a camouflage and black uniform with stripes on their sleeves, resembling the sign of right-wing radical party Russian National Unity (leader — Barkashov). According to the majority of local people who saw it, the Cossacks were sober. Those who gathered there were armed with lashes, whips, rubber truncheons. The Cossacks also had gas pistols, some of the witnesses said they saw several hunter guns and automatic rifles. The Cossacks were moving along the farm by two buses and several passenger cars, they rushed to Turkish houses, dragged males, beating them and pushing to the bus. Among those who were beaten were several women (including elderly) and children. Several women were taken to the place of execution together with the males. Two local men, a Yezid and a Russian, were caught together with Turks and beaten. The male persons were taken to the center of the village, Mironov Street, taken out from the bus, undressed below their waist, laid upon the pavement and beaten with lashes. Then the Cossacks went by buses and cars to the «White House» (1 Torgovaya Street) where four more Turks were beaten. All the Turks were threatened that they would be dealt and deported soon, if they did not leave Tabakosovkhoz within two days. The witnesses are unanimous in their evidences that the «operation» was led by ataman of the Kuren Novoukrainsky Boris Yastrebov. During the Cossack action at Tabakosovkhoz power supply and telephone communication were disconnected.

20 people were subject to physical violence on November 12. 12 male were subject to birching: from Tabakosovkhoz — Bayram Kibarov, Mizam Tairov, two guests of Bayram Kibarov from village Varenikovskaya — Rustam Tedorov and a man called Sarvar, Karim Mamadaliev, Viktor Tishchenko,⁴⁴ Yezids Vakikh Adjiyan and Nurik Samuyan; from the «White House» — Khaireddin Badalov, Sabir Sharipov, Shaevki Bayramov and Ziyah Bayramov. The most of them had 10 to 15 strikes by birch; V.L.Tishchenko had 20 strikes, and Bayram Kibarov had 30 strikes (for him and for his father).

In house # 34 on Trud Street Shamil Kibarov (63 years old) had his arms pinioned, a pistol was set to his temple, they kicked him. S.Kibarov fell and lost consciousness, and then he was thrown to bus. In S.Kibarov’s house young men in Cossack uniform searched the rooms, pushed his daughter-in-law Louisa and Nadira Kibarovs, they were beaten with fists, their hands were wrung, they were forced to stand on their knees. L.Kibarova’s seven-year old son was struck with a truncheon.

The house of S.Kibarov’s son Bayram (14 Mekhanicheskaya Street) was subject to destruction: four window glasses, a luminaire, glassware, the oven were broken, golden jewelry was stolen from the trunk that was broken up. His car «Moskvich-408" was overthrown and seriously damaged.⁴⁵

In Mamadalievs’ house (16 Trud Street), the Cossacks have pushed away the children and the master’s 65-year old mother Afideh who was ill. Two-month old child of Fatima Mamadalieva was thrown from the perambulator to force her from the house. Afideh was struck with a stick, they set a pistol to her chest. At street Afideh lost consciousness and was laying in the court for some time (others were brought by bus for execution and to the «White House»). On November 14 in the morning Afideh Mamadalieva died.

At Mukhammadiyevs’ house (23 Trud Street) the Cossacks have broken the window glasses, searched the rooms. The Cossacks shot with a gas pistol at the master’s daughter Makhigul, they fired point-black at her face, and she lost consciousness and got a burn. The Cossacks took away keys from the house and the documents certifying the ownership over the house, and passed them to the former owner of the house N.Sizova. The same day in the evening a self-made explosive device was thrown to a gutter at the house edge by unknown people, and the roof was slightly damaged.

The Cossacks’ assault was caused by a domestic conflict between two residents of Tabakosovkhoz, Sarvar Tairob and Vassily Khmara (66 years old). A rumor was afloat among the Cossacks of Krymsk district that S.Tairov had beaten V.Khmara and made an attempt to rape him (the latter thing is denied by V.Khmara himself). At the same time a rumor was afloat that a 13-year old girl was raped by a Turk.⁴⁶ On November 18 the Krai’s newspaper Kubanskiye Novosti published an anonymous article «A new opposition» that informed of an attempt to rape an old pensioner, a rape of a girl and a sharp opposition between local population and Meskheti Turks, and the necessity was discussed of moving the Turks «to the places that were earlier allocated to them by the Government of Russia». All this was used as a ground for those who desire to «punish Turks».

After the events that took place on November 12 the independent TV studio «Krymsky ekran» transmitted on November 15 the information of the events at Tabakosovkhoz. Before it the deputy head of administration N.I.Kucherenko called up to the studio demanding that the program should be cancelled. After the program was broadcasted, the director and employees of the studio were repeatedly threatened in a written form and by telephone on the part of Cossack activists, including Krymsk ataman I.B.Bezugly. Head of the district administration G.E.Popov also called up to the studio to express his discontent in respect to the information of the events at Tabakosovkhoz.⁴⁷

In respect to the fact of injuries inflicted by Cossacks on some persons a criminal case # 79267 according to Articles 206, part 3, and 113 of the RSFSR Criminal Code was instituted on November 13; it was assigned to investigator of the municipal district’s Department of Internal Affairs E.A.Fatikov. Later, on November 20, when Krymsk ataman I.V.Bezugly passed to the municipal district’s Department of Internal Affairs V.I.Kmara’s application written to ataman B.D.Yastrebov, the case # 79284 was instituted in accordance with Article 112, part 1 of the RSFSR Criminal Code in respect to the fact of beating V.I.Khmara; at the end of November the case was dealt by inquestor V.Gevoev. The officers of the municipal district’s Department of Internal Affairs carried out some investigation actions, including search at Krymsk Cossack headquarters and at the houses of some Cossack activists.

Other incidents

In the evening on March 2, 1995 at village Varenikovskaya major Vasilets together with local Cossacks (20 or 25 persons) carried out a «raid» along Turkish houses. The Cossacks armed with whips and sabres came into houses without permission, performed search, humiliated people. The Cossacks have taken away 33 passports and one birth certificate from Meskheti Turks. Meskheti Turks who applied for return of their documents to the Cossack headquarters, had to pay 10 to 40 thousand roubles to receive them (without issuing any receipt). The other day the passports were transferred to the village administration, and the Meskheti Turks who applied for them had to pay already 100 thousand roubles. One document — birth certificate of Alijan Bakhriyev was lost irretrievably.⁴⁸

On June 9, 1995, from 5 to 6 o’clock a.m. at settlement Kholmsky of Abinsk district Cossacks together with Militia men carried out a large-scale operation for inspection of passport regime. More than 100 Cossacks took part in the raid. Along with local Cossacks those from Krymsk, village Fedorovskaya and Mingrelskaya participated the raid. The «inspectors» entered houses without permission, took away passports and reference notes on temporary residence, people were moved to Militia point of settlement Kholmsky. Up to 100 arrestees accumulated at the yard secured by Cossacks and Militia men. They were brought individually to the office of local Militia department where checking was performed with the registration book after which the passports were returned. Reference notes were not returned on the grounds that new type of certificates shall be introduced signed by Cossack ataman. The following evidences of residents of settlement Kholmsky demonstrate the situation that occurred on June 9.

Lomidze Mudir, born in 1922, invalid of the Great Patriotic War (lost his arm). He lives at Kholmsky from 1989, was not receiving pension these years. He was registered temporarily in 1995 for a one-year period. 3 Cossacks and a Militia man came on June 9 at 5 a.m. Everyboby in the house were awaken. The passports of Mudir and the women who were not at home were confiscated.

Izzatov Arthur, pensioner, was registered at the end of 1994 through the Krai administration (refused at the district), is Russian citizen (citizenship was executed in Uzbekistan through the consulate of the Russian Federation). His passport was taken away on June 9. Militia has not returned the passport because of intervention of ataman N.N.Pugachenko: «We shall check who registered him, what kind of citizenship it is».

Beridze Sarvar, army invalid 1st group (lost two arms). At 6 a.m. three Cossacks and one Militia man came, took away the passports, Sarvar and his people were brought to the Militia point.

Akhmedov Nazim, 23 year old, unemployed (graduated from economic technical school in Krasnodar). Somebody knocked strongly at the gate at 5.30. Four Cossacks came in and a Militia man, ordered to leave the house. The elder brother asked, what a right they have to enter the house being intoxicated (there was an alcoholic odor). The Militia man ordered to take hand-cuffs on the brother’s hands. The brother was taken away. Then 30 men came by a GAZ truck, 5 or 6 among them were Militia men. Nazim had his hands wrung, he was pushed and beaten. Nazim’s mother, an ill woman who was subject to three surgical operations, lost consciousness having seen that her son is beaten. Nazim’s sister, a pregnant woman, told the Militia man: «What are you doing, you have mother, too», and he answered: «My mother is Russian, and you are Turks, go to Turkey». Sister was pushed and hardly preserved the balance. The mother had a bad heart attack. Nazim was pushed to truck and moved to the Militia department. Ataman promised him that he will be subject to birching as he spoke too much. He was permitted to go home at about one o’clock.

Mekhtiyev Khamid. 12 Cossacks without Militia men came at five a.m. One of them produced his document: I am the senior, ataman. They took away all the documents, all reference notes permitting residence. «Get into the car». Among the documents that were taken away were also the property certificates for a «Zhiguli» car and a truck. The «Zhiguli» car was taken away, and the truck was carried away later as it was faulty. As it was revealed later, the cars were delivered to the district penalty site. They had to pay for «Zhiguli» 20 thousand roubles, and a fine amounting to 100 thousand roubles for the truck. The officers of the State Traffic Inspectorate told, they do not know who drove the cars to the site, and the truck was left at the gate of the site.

Shakhmanovs. On June 9 Mardan Shakhmanov got up early in the morning and went to the hayfield. The women, 8 children and one of the elder sons of Mardan — Israpil stayed at home. At 6 o’clock, when everybody were sleeping, they heard a knocking noise, and his daughter-in-law opened the gate. The Cossacks pushed her and rushed into the yard and then entered the house. The mother, Tyutar Shakhmanova, prevented them from entering the children’s room. They grasped her and dragged out to the yard. The daughter-in-law tried to defend the mother. A Cossack struck her by his fist at her back and ordered to take both of them. Selima was badly struck herself by an iron stick. The Militia man took a pistol from the holster. The children got up. Sabina, a 6-year old girl, cried. A bearded Cossack shouted: «Shut up!» and grasped the girl with his hand at her face. Her face was scratched, blood appeared. All children shouted, cried. Israpil, who was ill, went out hearing the cry. He had a high temperature, he had to stay in bed and was subject to an injection treatment. They wrung his hands, pushed him to UAZ car and moved to Kholmsk Militia department. The Cossacks who brought him told ataman Pugachenko that Israpil threatened him with an automatic rifle. When male were absent, the Cossacks searched the house. They searched the entire house, basement, scattered hay and fell down the fence. They tried to start up the car, but could not, and took away the number plate.

Regular round-ups are performed by Cossacks at market places of Krymsk and Abinsk districts (in Abinsk district they are performed from spring 1995 when N.N.Pugachenko became the district ataman). Documents are taken away from «Caucasians», first of all Meskheti Turks, sometimes their goods are thrown about or taken away. Those who are arrested are treated in an extremely rude and humiliating manner. According to chief accountant of Abinsk market place V.A.Novak, in the middle of May, in course of one of such inspections, Cossacks brought to their headquarters and beat there Mamed Aslanov who traded at the market place, an old man, invalid who lost his leg.

Besides, we have some evidences that in Krymsk and Abinsk Cossacks extort money from arrested people. 25 to 50 thousand roubles are usually extorted from an arrestee, who is forced to write a note with his sign, such as: «I am transferring voluntarily (sum is specified) for development of the Cossack movement».

Meskheti Turks themselves think that the Cossacks’ aggressive activities are inspired and directed in many aspects by the authorities; the latter pursue an aim in this case of provoking violating conflicts in which Turks would play an active role. Should a serious conflict occur, it would prove expediency of strict repressive measures: the responsibility for such violence would be distributed at least uniformly between both parties.

One may establish that the relations between Turks and their environment and the authorities are determined by several factors. The main of them is the fact that Meskheti Turks are deprived of civil rights and their status is indefinite; so they are vulnerable in all aspects. Any conflicts of domestic nature are not wide-spread, and the direct relationships between Turks and local population are not assisting, at least, in growth of tenseness. But nationalist stereotypes and anti-migrant campaign that is conducted in the Krai for a number of years, are creating a factor of permanent psychologic pressure at refugees and a general background favorable for implementation of discriminating policy and restrictive measures.

The actions taken by representatives of authorities of different levels are first guided by «anti-migrant» directions and instructions of higher authorities but are not restricted by it. The elements of a «soft ethnic clean-up», that is a deliberate creating different obstacles to certain groups, particularly Meskheti Turks, are seen to certain extent. Such initiatives are taken, first of all, by the administration of Krasnodarski Krai and the administration of Krymsk district.

No doubts, Cossacks are interested in rousing national hatred. Their claims against «non-Slavs» are responded, first of all, by a part of the population having socialist mentality (who dislike entrepreneurs and businessmen, whose habit is to count money in other’s pocket), nationalist mood and sympathies to populist slogans, such as «regional sovereignty». The authorities considering Cossacks as a real force to rely upon as necessary, conflicts with which would be dangerous, are trying to meet their needs almost in all. The understanding and support of Cossacks’ demands emphasized by the administration is aggravating the situation seriously.