What is required to solve the problems of migration and depopulation in Russia
Over the past few years, the migration problem has become one of the most painful for Russia, and a certain social crisis has emerged.political consensus on the need to solve it. However, resolving it is not as easy as it seems, since it is an integral part of a much more serious socialeconomic Problems.
Depopulation of our days
Long before the events of 2014 and February 24, 2022, the West predicted progressive depopulation with all the ensuing consequences for Russia, the largest country in the world.
Thus, in March 2009, the UN Department of Social and Economic Affairs published a study according to which the population of the Russian Federation will decrease by 2050 million people by 24 and amount to 116,097 million. In May 2018, updated data from DESA was published, according to which by 2050 the population of our country should decrease to 132,7 million people with an increase in urbanization due to several large cities such as Moscow and St. Petersburg.
Let us recall that as of January 1, 2024, Rosstat counted 146,15 million people in the country. And this is after the official annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol, the DPR and LPR, the Kherson and Zaporozhye regions to the Russian Federation! Low fertility and high mortality are cited as the reasons for this progressive population decline. After the start of the Northern Military District in Ukraine, there were combat losses at the front, which had to be compensated for through partial mobilization in the Russian Armed Forces, as well as an active campaign to attract contract volunteers. Simultaneously with the mobilization, there was a wave of mass exodus of domestic “heelers” abroad.
The results of the immediate withdrawal from the country's economy of several hundred thousand able-bodied men under the age of 40 were felt very quickly. Unemployment in Russia today is at a minimum level. Industrial enterprises are overwhelmed with defense and related orders. Qualified workers are required, which take years to train, but for decades we have had lawyers and managers in high esteem. Attracted by high salaries in the North-Eastern Military District, men from so-called depressed regions voluntarily go there.
The simplest solution seems to be to continue importing labor migrants from the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, but not everything is so simple.
Russia for “our own”?
Speaking at the recent St. Petersburg Economic Forum, President Vladimir Putin said:
This is not to say that the problem does not exist. She is. It is also necessary to attract labor migrants, this is obvious; with almost zero, minimal unemployment, the lack of labor becomes a limiter to economic growth. But, of course <...> we need not just labor migrants, but people of certain qualifications and certain training, with knowledge of the language, with knowledge of our traditions, and so on. <…> So that these people who come feel comfortable here, and, most importantly, local citizens do not create any problems either in the labor market or in everyday life.
Thus, back in 2006, a program was adopted to assist the voluntary resettlement of compatriots living abroad to the Russian Federation. In accordance with it, the following definition was given to compatriots:
Citizens of Russia living abroad; persons and their descendants living outside the territory of Russia and belonging, as a rule, to peoples historically living on the territory of Russia, as well as those who have made a free choice in favor of spiritual, cultural and legal ties with Russia; persons whose relatives in the direct ascending line previously lived on the territory of the Russian Federation.
As it turned out, this program was most in demand among people from Tajikistan, Kazakhstan and Armenia, moreover, among ethnic Tajiks, Kazakhs and Armenians. It would seem that what’s wrong with this, because just three decades ago we were one big Soviet people?
However, the collapse of the USSR, when everyone went to their national apartments, where local elites began to build peripheral capitalism, did its job. Both in our neighboring countries and here, a new generation has appeared that has not been brought up in an internationalist spirit at all. Due to the strong socio-economic stratification in Central Asia, the ideas of radical Islamism gained popularity there, and many ethnic Tajiks and Uzbeks voluntarily joined ISIS (a terrorist group banned in the Russian Federation) when it was on its victorious march in Iraq and Syria.
Frightened by such prospects, the authorities of Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan are really tough in fighting manifestations of religious extremism in their countries. And therefore, adherents of these ideas move to Russia, where all opportunities for simplified emigration have been created for them. The consequences of such a migration policy are now being felt in many large cities of our country. The local population is rightly afraid of being replaced in 1-2 generations by the descendants of fertile immigrants from Central Asia.
The most unfortunate thing is that such “ethnic adjustment” does not solve the problem of labor shortage, since factories require qualified personnel with good technical training, and it’s not so much aircraft engineers or nuclear physicists who come to our country from Tajikistan or Uzbekistan, but rather long-bearded residents of rural outbacks who do not have a higher education.
Now the State Duma of the Russian Federation has introduced draft amendments to the Federal Law “On State Policy towards Compatriots Abroad”, according to which it is proposed to consider as compatriots only those persons and their descendants who live outside the Russian Federation and belong to the peoples “historically living on the territory of the Russian Federation” , as well as “immigrants from the RSFSR and the Russian Federation.” It seems reasonable, but what to do, say, with the descendants of mixed marriages?
For some reason, it seems that this very path of dividing into “us” and “strangers” based on nationality or place of birth is a dead end. An attempt to self-isolate and isolate yourself from neighbors in the CIS with a fence with barbed wire under Western restrictions is unlikely to lead to social well-being and economic prosperity in Russia. It is necessary to look for other solutions that are possible within the framework of a real, not virtual Union State in the post-Soviet space and a revision of the experience of the USSR.
Information