Whatever the Duma’s composition as a result of the vote in the December 19 parliamentary elections, the current electoral campaign is by itself indicative of Russia’s wrenching economic and social change. Officially kicked off on November 19, the campaign has already been marked by extensive use of the language of hate, ultra-nationalist and chauvinistic theories. While none of the parties seeking election have included overt anti-Semitic slogans in their electoral campaign on the federal level, ultra-nationalism and xenophobia figure prominently in the pre-election propaganda of a number of blocs. Here are some quotes from these blocs' live televised appeals and campaign advertisements aired on thee national television channels.

• Russia is a mono-ethnic country… We are in favor of civil equality for the indigenous peoples of Russia... Russian markets should belong to [ethnic] Russian peasants. Non[ethnic]-Russian migration to Russia should be limited.
     . . . . .Alexander Sevastyanov of Spas (Savior) in a live TV address.
  
  
• We call indigenous those peoples that have Russia as their permanent home and do not have their own states outside Russia.
  . . . . .Boris Mironov of Spas in several live TV addresses.



• [Ethnic] Russians are the state-forming nation [in Russia.] … When we come to the Duma we will carry out… the forcible deportation of foreigners who are illegally residing in Russia. [Russia must] introduce visa regulations for the citizens from Central Asia and Transcaucasus, except for [those who are] ethnic Russians. A five-minute campaign advertisement of the Russia’s All-National Union, shown daily on national television.
  
  
• There is no Tatar question or Jewish question in Russia. There is only a Russian question… All these abstract talks about human rights lead to all kinds of things anti-Russian. . . . . .Natalya Narochnitzkaya of the Russia’s All-Nation Union in a live TV debate.
  
  
• There is no multi-ethnic nation in Russia, nor can there be. The great Russian nations lives in Russia, and also its friends representing other peoples of Russia… There are people who speak Russian but don’t think Russian and don’t act Russian… They don’t know Russian history, their mentality is not Russian, they are not of Russian blood, they are alien to us, they are alien to the country.
  
  . . . . .Andrey Savelyev of the Congress of Russian Communities and Yuriy Boldyrev’s Movement bloc, arguing in a live TV debate with Gasan Mirzoyev representing the Union of Right Forces. Mirzoyev, president of the Russian Guild of Defense Lawyers, is Jewish and an active member of the Moscow Jewish community.

After a month-long controversy that received wide media coverage, Spas, the front organization for Russian National Unity (RNU), a neo-Nazi group, was ruled ineligible to participate in the Duma elections. Alexander Barkashov, who headed the bloc’s federal list, is also leader of RNU, which openly uses Nazi-like symbols and professes anti-Semitism. In addition to Barkashov, the movement’s federal party list included people like a leader of the Russian Nazi skinheads, Semyon Tokmakov, who gained notoriety when he beat up a U.S. marine at a Moscow open-air market last year. About 80 percent of the Spas federal list were RNU activists.

Whereas the controversy around Spas has turned a spotlight on the issue of extremism in Russia, all the other proponents of ultra-nationalism remained in the shadow of pre-election debate in the Russian media. Indeed, none of the above-quoted remarks from ultra-nationalist politicians has triggered a single comment, even in the liberal-oriented media. Russian public figures also remain silent until today.

While Spas and RNU are viewed by the Kremlin and many leading politicians and public figures as equivalent to Russian neo-Nazism, similar ideas propagated by other parties pass unnoticed. The presence of RNU makes many other proponents of chauvinism look almost politically mainstream. The statements such parties and politicians make seem not enough to alert Russia’s ruling elite and public opinion. The situation testifies to a very high level of tolerance to hate speech and exclusive ethnic theories in Russia.

The situation can be partially explained by a difference between the campaigns of 1999 and 1995. The previous campaign was characterized by a clear wish of all major party strategists to create a strong positive image for their respective parties. This year’s campaign is overwhelmed by numerous attempts from all sides to incite voters to loathe the competition so much that they will vote instead for their rivals. The dirty ad war is likely to reconcile voters to hearing the language of hate, the further into the race the more.

In 1996, when Russian President Boris Yeltsin was seeking re-election, his campaign strategists managed to rally a significant part of society around the incumbent by drawing a dark portrait of the revenge-seeking Communists. This year, the Kremlin was obviously trying to present what it termed as political extremism as another threat to Russia’s future in order to enlist a wide popular support for the ruling political circles. The strategy seems to have failed as Spas turned out to be a weak enemy. Other groups that subscribe to extremism in various forms managed to escape close public attention proving that the Kremlin had been less sincere and consistent when initiating its drive against extremism than one could have thought earlier.

Nevertheless, the Duma campaign, with its free access to airwaves for candidates, is giving an unprecedented level of legitimacy to hate-mongers. Whatever the actual outcome of December 19 vote, the message of ethnic intolerance is being spread freely and constantly to Russian households to an extent never witnessed in any of previous campaigns.

The Communist Party, Russia’s largest and best organized political organization, has avoided including anti-Semitic and ultra-nationalist language in its electoral campaign on the federal level. Yet reports from some of the Russian regions as well as the analyses of the party press indicate that Communists often resort to anti-Semitic slurs similar to those used in the campaigns in 1995 (Duma elections) and 1996 (presidential elections.) According to press reports, party leader Gennady Zyuganov is casually using thinly-veiled anti-Semitic remarks when addressing smaller audiences during his pre-election tour of the country.

On the national level, the Communist Party avoids using anti-Semitic language. Yet the party leaves it to its rank-and-file members and supporters to express anti-Semitic views in advance of the election. In one such example, the party mouthpiece, the Sovyetskaya Rossia daily newspaper published the text of the leaflet created by a reader who warned Russians not let themselves be cheated by "Masonic lodges" (Soveytskaya Rossia, Nov.23.)

It should be noted that few of the parties that spout ultra-nationalism in the election campaign can boast a wide support base among Russian voters. Only the Communists and Vladimir Zhirinovsky’s inappropriately named Liberal Democrats have plausible chances of winning seats in the next Duma on party lists. Communists take the lead in pre-election opinion polls with 20 to 25 percent (22.3 % in 1995 elections) while Liberal Democrats are struggling to win parliamentary representation with 4 percent of voters’ sympathies as of this week (11.2 % in 1995.)

Several reputed ultra-nationalists are likely to win Duma seats in single-mandate constituencies. One is the retired army general Albert Makashov who gained notoriety for a series of openly anti-Semitic statements he made a year ago. Makashov, who currently holds a Duma seat from an industrial district in the city of Samara, is again running in the same constituency. In the absence of strong opponents running against him, he is believed to have an easy task on December 19.

In the meantime, there is little indication that the composition of the next State Duma will be much different from the current one in terms of representation of ultra-nationalists and Russian chauvinists. However, one must keep in mind the lesson of the last general elections in 1995. Four years ago, parties that exploited ultra-nationalism received 21.7% of the vote (15,043,274 votes.) If we add to this figure the 22.3% received by the Communist Party, which before last year’s anti-Semitic attacks from Albert Makashov and Viktor Ilyukhin was not widely associated with anti-Semitism, we come up with a little less than one-half of the Russian electorate easily buying into chauvinism and intolerance in various political wrappings. Of this nearly one-half of the vote, only 33.5% (including 22.3% of support garnered by Communists) was counted in the final distribution of the Duma seats. The clarion signal of the previous elections was not heard to a degree it should have been heard.

It should also be remembered that this campaign is taking place amidst the military operation in the south of Russia which, with the help of the Kremlin, has echoes with clear nationalist and anti-Western sentiments in the souls of many Russians.

Ultimately, the goal of watching the current campaign is not that much about calculating the feasibility of this or that party’s chances to win parliamentary seats. It is more about being evaluating the extent to which Russian society is sensitive to hate propaganda and other issues of concern to the nation’s many minorities.