Search for the causes of ethnic conflicts, the factors of influence and the types of ethnic stratification is based among the Baltic expert on classical models of explanation by J. Rothschild and J. Horowitz. However, the borders of application and interpretation look quite problematic and not always fit into frame case. We may well agree with the finding of the Latvian researchers led by B.Zepa that it would be wrong to consider the ethnic situation in Latvia stable and unchanging. This finding made by them as a result of the study “ethno-political tensions in Latvia: the search for ways to resolve the conflict” (Zepa, 2005).
Objection may cause ascription of reticular mixed model towards Latvian ethnic stratification, whereby the general conclusions about the ethno-political situation in Latvia shifted from conflict potential and vertical ethno-stratification to slurred asymmetric form of the Latvian society with the prerequisites for a “gradual and peaceful resolution of ethnic conflicts”.
The empirical basis for these conclusions is general demographic data, the study of labor based on the CSB and data polls. According to the authors, in Latvia there are certain areas where more busy Latvians (public administration, education, agriculture), and there are areas where a higher proportion of non-Latvians (transport, industry, construction). However, significant differences in the incomes of Latvians, Russians and other nationalities are not observed. By attenuating the risk factors of ethnic conflict, as suggested by Zepa should be attributed the fact that in Latvia ethnic groups are not concentrated homogeneously in concrete regions and economic industries. These groups are represented in various fields and scattered across different regions, forming a reticular mixed model.
The final conclusion the research team of B.Zepa is that in the case of Latvia, the situation where every ethnic group is represented in various activities and there are no significant differences in income by ethnicity, is estimated as a factor that reduces the possibility of an escalation of the ethnic conflict. Recognition of ethnic conflict and its inclusion into scientific and political rhetoric in most cases cause extremely hostile reactions, criticisms of being unscientific and lack of loyalty to the regime. It seems that the above estimate (and reticulation mixed ethno-stratificational model by Rothschild) rather justified in relation to the middle and lower strata of the pyramid of Latvian society. There is no default the most important in terms of sources and risk of ethnic conflict – the analysis of power and, in particular, mono-ethnic political elite, concentrated in its hands the power and economic resources (Stan A., 1997, 2003; Rodins M. 2012). Latvian political elite, demographically, socially and intellectually not representing the Latvian society is only less than one percent of the total population, possessing all the resource capabilities of ethnic mobilization, and building a dominant policy of ethnic renaissance and ethno-political revenge. Absolute ethnic hegemony (over 90 %) characterizes the bureaucratic class, national authorities and regional government. For the maintenance of the Latvian bureaucracy allocated not comparable to other socio-professional groups, a significant portion of the national budget. The lack of political representation of ethnic minorities in power and control are not only a barrier to expression and the protection of their interests, but also is the reason for the deficit of representative democracy in Latvia.
The existence of vertical ethnic stratification in Latvia, as well as having a close and cohesive elite and corporate composition of the Latvian society allows coming to a conclusion about imitative and functionality for the ruling circles of ethno-political conflicts as instruments of cohesion and reproduction of the Latvian ethno-democracy.
National identity as a conflict-generating resource in Latvia
At the first approach to the phenomenon of ethnic and cultural identity in Latvia, there is confusion about the need for any new empirical data, the detection and assessment of what is happening. At the same time, the need for constant monitoring of the Latvian ethno-political relations and dynamics of growing ethno-conflicts in intensive European territorial mobility and the crisis of European multiculturalism is clearly relevant and needs.
“Sleeping” conflicts and ethnic “frozen” ethnic relations, with their inherent oppositional oral historical memory in Soviet Latvia, transformed into an open confrontation in the post-Soviet period. At present Latvia steadily formed the dominant ethno-cultural identity of the titular nationality and ethnic minorities. Intense and painful period of searching and finding new regime identities to the mid-90s is over, but the political formula of Latvian statehood has become – “ethno-cultural and ethnic plurality in a single whole.” However, these multicultural and ethnic communities, and the practice of their relationship did not turn the liberalization of ethnic relations. None of the existing democratic institutions of the Republic of Latvia and could not lead to any noticeable leveling socially significant cultural differences and ethnic boundaries, as well as connecting the rich experience of the relationships of previous generations.
Russian ethno-cultural continuity and other Latvian ethnic minorities, which proceeded the period of Awakening, uniquely treated as junk, pro-Soviet and causing various forms of ostracism. The image of “matryoshka, dried fish and vodka” studiously “affixed” for ethno-cultural component of the ethnic Russian, the most quantitatively represented in the Latvian society. Despite the proclaimed democratic principles and the public rhetoric of ethno-cultural tolerance and integration of the power elite, ethnic minorities have been effectively “deduced” from the role of policy-making positions. Tracking content and the regulatory changes in the Latvian ethnic policies, one can argue about their introduction and implementation as a result of the expectations and influences (and sometimes sanctions) external structures and political actors, in particular the European Union and Russia. Counteraction to the recommendations of the OSCE and other international human rights organizations about protecting and expanding individual rights and freedoms of ethnic minorities are systematically ran into pathos of their unfitness due to the existence of “national specific”.
According to the Canadian political scientist W. Kymlicka, the problem of ethnic discriminated groups against is the requirement is larger than the individual rights and freedoms. Ethno-cultural minorities in modern communities not only want civil rights, but also of the special rights that would allow them to recognize specific ethno-cultural practices and identity (Kymlicka, 2004). Ignoring the rights of ethnic minorities, discriminatory policies against their claims, as well as the idea of the identity of minorities as a zone of cultural anomalies becomes a hot issue and a catalyst for the revision of democratic norms and values.
In the case of the Baltic countries, the existence of the Baltic Russians and other ethnic groups, and established their particular ethno-cultural identities are sufficient reason for a recognition of their special rights, as well as a natural condition for the democratic development of these political regimes.
A major finding of our study is that ethnic majority and subordinated ethnic minorities in Latvia identify themselves with the identities of “different worlds” that the resulting in the ethno-political and cultural conflict. On the basis of factor analysis have been identified the existence of a sustainable and high correlations between the variables of ethnicity, language, culture and national symbols. High ethno-cultural self-identity of national and ethnic groups in Latvia is also characterized by stable ethnic relations and group cohesion. Survey data generally show a decline of ethnic bias and prejudice, hostile attitudes towards ethnic minorities. Respondents’ perceptions about the disappearance of the Latvian nation, culture and language, as well as national revenge as commonplaces of stereotypes are not statistically significant, and contrary to the assertions of the power elite.
Despite the presence of positive conditions for national consolidation, the Latvian state is not interested and does not have effective tools for solving ethnic and cultural conflicts and develop their political, ethnic and cultural identity.
Conclusion
The general conclusion as the result of conceptual approaches and empirical findings of our study, as well as in the detection of civil involvement in social and political life, gives evidence of the existence of two fundamentally divided political and ethno-cultural communities in the institutional dominance of the titular nation.
Integrative