the Only subject of the Federation, where the majority of residents who took part in the national vote, did not support amendments to the Constitution – Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Over here voted 43,78% of voters, against – of 55.25. The turnout was also relatively low of 58.28 percent. To explain the “anomaly Nenets” we asked the political scientist Marat Bashirov.

– are You surprised by these results?

on the one hand surprised and on the other there is a reasonable explanation. The majority of voters against those who are against Association with the Arkhangelsk region. In this scenario, they lose a lot of preferences.

With a very small population of the County is very considerable budget goes on administration of the state. And these people are tied to the budget, so they, of course, the protest mood. It was a vote not against the Constitution and against the merger.

In fact it is this eternal conflict of the elite and the common man. Because ordinary residents of the district need not state budget, but useful consequences of the merger.

But the theme of the Union seems to be closed. The process officially stopped. Isn’t that so?

– He could not be stopped officially, because officially not begun. Were the statements of the leaders of the two regions with the status of acting. Who then said that he still had to think about it.

I remember the Association, for example, the Irkutsk oblast and Agin-Buryat Autonomous Okrug. Or Perm region and Komi-Perm Autonomous district. There was a completely different procedure. It’s a little rushed, statements, frightened the local elites in the NAO.

I Think it’s a temporary respite. It is likely, the issue will be raised again. Well, the local elite including the results of the vote sends a signal that the process of unification will be difficult, they will obviously resist. At least hidden.

Although, in my opinion, it’s pointless. The office of the NAO from the Arkhangelsk region are actually artificially. It is very hinders the development of the district. There is very limited accessibility, there is not all good from the point of view of social guarantees.

All the same people, modern people, want much more – more social benefits, access to adequate health care and education. And not in the form in which they now get it – after a certain quota or on a commercial basis.

Experience of integration processes taking place in other regions, shows that ordinary people ultimately benefited from it.

So who voted against the amendments?

– People who depend on the state budget, make up about one third of the electorate. In the normal regionnot this group would not be very noticeable, would dissolve among the other residents. But in the area where I think, 30 thousand voters, it is, in fact, is dominant. Of course, these people do not want to lose neither their status nor the ability to dispose of state money.

What lessons, in your opinion, should be drawn from all this history the Federal government?

– Well, of course, before you declare the Union, it was necessary to conduct explanatory work among the population. To show how it is beneficial and appropriate. But now, of course, requires a strong demonstration of the Federal will. I think that now the security forces will be raised by the weight of material in respect of what previously were ignored.

This elite you need to beat the hand. Worthless when, these people, pursuing their narrow selfish goals, damage the image of the whole country. They should pay for your selfishness. That will be good for all of regional elites: we have no untouchables, no local warlords.