Complex and ambiguous relations between state officials and civilians in Russia in general, and in Tatarstan in particular, are best reflected by daily communications between traffic police officers and motorists and pedestrians. These short interactions bring up issues of violence and minority discrimination, bribing, and dominant political values. In this paper based on my field research, I explore the practice of ethnic profiling employed by police officers and analyze its effects. I focus on identity construction and its “quality measurement.” Unlike a standardized system of weights or “brute facts,” law enforcement involves the creation of identities, including selective and sanctioned usage of, and manipulation by, ethnic traits. I conclude that ethnic profiling exists in Tatarstan, but stems not from nationalist inspirations of the controlling agents, but rather as an effect of rational economic decision-making. I also argue that despite its haphazard nature, ethnic minorities in Tatarstan are able to interact with controlling agencies more effectively than the majority, partially due to their alleged ability to employ collective action and partially because of the specific ethnic policy of the Republic.

Jaroslav Durych, a popular Czech Catholic poet and essayist, began his weekly column in Lidové listy's (People's News) 10 May 1923 issue with the following proclamation: “The Czech Nation must be Catholic!” What did Durych mean by this puzzling statement? The majority of Czechs in the new Czechoslovak state considered themselves at least nominally Catholic. Yet Durych's article did not address the confessional status of Czechoslovakia's population, nor did it address religious differences between Czechs and Slovaks. Instead, Durych concerned himself with the representation of the Czech nation in popular mythology and official symbolism. He demanded that the Czech national symbols reflect the country's majority religion and not the Protestant experiment of the late Middle Ages.

Instead of thinking about “national identity,” scholars of nationalism would do well to study nationalism as a process of classification, treating national conflict as disputes over nationalized categories. Disputes over national classification take various forms: patriots argue over which category applies, which categories exist, and which categories have which status. Techniques for imposing classificatory categories also deserve attention. The contributors to this themed issue of Nationalities Papers illustrate the power of analysis based on classification.

This paper combines two sources of qualitative data, focus group interviews and ethnographic research, to discuss gender as a factor in changes to work and identity in a rural Ukrainian village. Analyzing data from focus groups I conducted in the winter and fall of 1997 at my dissertation field site in Transcarpathia, I argue that in this community gender differences are as important as generational differences in shaping participants' evaluation of work opportunities before, during and in particular after the Soviet period. The important relationship between gender and work opportunities in this village stems both from traditional divisions of labor and the loss of professional jobs, such as teaching and administrative positions, available to women during the Soviet period.

In the twentieth century, and particularly under the influence of the Second World War, the international community, in the interests of normal relations, has considered it necessary to agree on certain fundamental principles, such as the observance of universal human rights, the right of nations to self-determination, the equality of the rights of big and small nations, impermissibility of aggression, and liberation from the yoke of colonialism. These principles are written in international conventions, the UN charter and several of its resolutions, and recognized by the majority of states.