A new Tatar organization has appeared in exile. Who stands behind the Tatar council?

A tatar council has appeared abroad. They will engage in anti-colonial policy in exile. The organizers call it a movement and state that first of all they will fight for Tatar rights.

The organizer of the tatar council is political scientist and public figure Ruslan Aysin, who has lived in exile for several years. He told Radio Azatlyk that he is neither the chairman nor the leader of the tatar council.

“There is no chairman in the tatar council, everyone has equal rights, each person defined their direction of work and will work along that path. There are already more than ten people in the tatar council. We set the goal of becoming a large movement,” he said.

On October 12, on the occasion of the event of the destruction of the Kazan Khanate, the tatar council held an online academic conference. On the Day of Remembrance, Tatar scholars living in different countries spoke. Among them was scholar Yulay Shamiloglu, well known to the Tatar public, as well as those who conveyed their opinion publicly for the first time. All openly declared themselves representatives of the tatar council, joining the new Tatar movement in exile.

The tatar council actively began work on social networks. They are present on almost every platform — Telegram, YouTube, TikTok, Instagram. Streams, short videos, explanatory texts are published everywhere. These days, for example, the tatar council sent an explanatory letter to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) about granting seats to national minorities, and an appeal about preserving the Tatar school in Moscow.

Azatlyk asked Ruslan Aysin how the tatar council was formed, what goals are set for the near and distant future, about possible conflicts with other Tatar organizations in exile, and about the likelihood of pressure on activists.

— You mentioned an initiative group and about fifteen people at the founding meeting. Do they all live abroad, and how is participation determined?

— One should not think that a fixed number of people are counted in the tatar council and each is strictly assigned to one direction. We are not a rigid or closed organization. If someone wants to join — welcome. At online meetings we will review candidates. A person may not become a member but can cooperate. There is no chairman, there is co-chairmanship and speakers — five or six people designated to give comments in media. The YouTube channel has begun active work, we organize streams. We agreed to hold an online meeting once a month. Next year we want to organize one offline gathering in Europe.

— Will the new organization fight for Tatars in exile? How do you see work with Tatars inside the country?

— We are an open organization. But we do not want to endanger those living in the Idel-Ural region. I believe many support us, but under the current political regime they cannot openly participate. The tatar council is not only an exile institution; we want to unite everyone. The goal of restoring Tatarstan’s sovereignty stands. At minimum, we will constantly raise this topic and not allow it to be buried. In Russia this is a dangerous subject. Active people are under surveillance; for an opinion one can be left to rot in prison. What they cannot say, we will voice.

— Those speaking about anti-colonial policy are quickly marginalized. Are you afraid of being labeled extremist?

— We understand everything and we are aware of the risks, but we are not afraid. The people involved in the tatar council clearly understand the reality we live in. Moreover, the members of the tatar council are respected and educated individuals in their professional fields, which makes it much harder to marginalize them.

Of course, labels will be attached — that is inevitable. But what we need is a serious platform for conceptual work. You cannot go far with slogans alone. We need to formulate a Tatar strategy and work consistently in that direction.

We are establishing contacts with decolonial organizations, and I believe we will cooperate with them. Over the past three years, the Tatar voice has somehow grown weaker, yet historically we have always been carriers of advanced political thought, and we must remain so.

Tatars have their own position, and we must make it heard. There are many of us — scholars, artists, journalists — who want to participate, but there was no platform for them. If we manage to unite them, we will become a serious force. It will be very difficult to call us marginal.

Russian liberals themselves are marginal — they do not have real popular support. We believe we are capable of mobilizing people. The issue of statehood and sovereignty has the potential to unite many.

— There is a group calling itself the “Government of Independent Tatarstan in Exile.” How does the tatar council differ from that organization? It may seem that another organization with similar ideas is emerging.

— We are in contact with them. There is no conflict, no dispute, no rivalry between us. Our activities do not overlap.

A government is an executive body. The tatar council, first and foremost, is a representative institution — a collective body that brings together Tatars from different professional and social spheres. And it does not deal only with the issue of Tatarstan.

The government in exile cannot represent all Tatars worldwide. In that sense, there is no contradiction between us.

— Regarding the name: is it a reference to the Milli Shura? Could it create confusion?

— That question was raised. Some said the Milli Shura and the tatar council might be confused. But the word “shura” does not belong exclusively to the Tatar Congress or anyone else. Anyone can use it. In our view, it is a strong and appropriate name.

Different names were considered, but “shura” best reflects the nature of our activity. A reasonable person will distinguish between the Milli Shura and the tatar council.

We did not intend any hidden reference or attempt to undermine anyone. I myself once worked at the Tatar Congress and know the people there. But under the current political regime, their hands are tied — they are unable to work effectively or independently.

— The most important resources for any organization are people and funding. How are you addressing these issues?

— There are people willing to speak openly — quite a few of them — and that makes me happy. They are sincere and offer their help. Some cannot act openly, and we understand that.

Everyone contributes in whatever way they can — just like in a real republic. Someone writes letters, someone translates, someone edits videos, someone provides financial support.

In the future, we would like to establish a fund. Those who are able may pay membership contributions. Perhaps we will work on the basis of crowdfunding. I am confident that sponsors will also be found. But we did not wait for that to begin our work — we started immediately because there is no time to waste.

Perhaps some people will be interested in financing specific projects. Tatars tend to act thoughtfully — they observe, analyze, and only then make decisions. There are also people who work sincerely for the sake of their nation and in good faith.

— Recently the issue of representation in PACE has intensified. The Russian liberal opposition has sharply criticized the allocation of seats to national minorities. What is your position?

— We sent a letter to PACE. The debate over quotas continues, and the tatar council expressed its position.

After Russia was expelled from PACE, seats previously allocated to the Russian delegation became vacant. There are proposals to give them to Russia’s democratic forces and opposition. Russian liberals would prefer to occupy those seats themselves and speak on behalf of all of Russia and its peoples in dealings with European institutions.

However, a justified protest emerged. Representatives of national minorities expressed dissatisfaction, and as a result PACE agreed that part of those seats should be allocated to representatives of Russia’s oppressed and small nations — including Tatars.

People like Khodorkovsky are not pleased with this, of course. Some Russian liberals attempt to ridicule representatives of smaller nations, calling them “decolonizers” and claiming they seek to dismantle Russia. They believe that only they have the right to determine Russia’s future.

But there are also indigenous peoples — Tatars, Bashkirs, Chechens, Yakuts — whose voices must be heard.

In our letter, we supported the platform provided by PACE for national minorities and stated that Russian liberals do not take into account the interests of all peoples. As a Tatar organization and as representatives of Tatars scattered around the world, we expressed hope that quotas would be distributed fairly.

There has been no response yet. We intend to continue raising this issue through various institutions and channels.

20.10.2025 https://www.azatliq.org/a/33564169.html