User:57.190.1.18/sandbox

The region Kazan is populated roughly by even numbers of ethnic Tatars, whose primarily religion is Sunni Islam, and ethnic Russians, whose primarily religion is Eastern Orthodox Christianity.

Kazan is the capital of Tatarstan in the Russian Federation with a population estimate of [INSERT].

Historical background
Following the period of Kazan's 1552 defeat by Moscow, periods of forced Christianization occurred. The efforts of Russian nation-building changed the discourse of Kazan into one of primarily Orthodox status.

Then, for much of the twentieth century, forced atheism characterized the religious space in Kazan. This was influenced by the political discourses of the Soviet Union and the modernization efforts undertaken to shift attention away from religious bounds and towards a national identity.

Political institutions
One of the political institutions in Kazan are the discursive definitions of “in–out” group that determine the social construction of identity. The boundaries placed into the sociopolitical narrative of the territory of Kazan helped ascertain its autonomy and identity as ‘historically wronged’ and yet deeply similar in proximity both physically and psychologically to Russia .This both stabilizes the political strength of Tatars within Tatarstan while aligning ethnic Russians more closely to Tatars than to Volga Russians who are their ethnic counterparts.

Tatarstan’s government publications aim to stress the common territory and culture of those who have formed the ‘native land’ and have lived a specific lifestyle. The unifying discourse of in Tatar public messaging constitutes one of the political institutions that has served to created inclusive yet distinct urban environment in Kazan. Political focuses have been the protection, cohesion, and solidarity of the cultural identity of Tatarstan and proffering religious symbols from both major religious groups.

The multi-ethnic nature of modern Russian has been characterized by growth of nationalism and migration from neighboring areas.

Language use
Tatarstan is a dual-language environment that expresses both Tatar and Russian identity through the political institutions of official language policy. Street signs are one important marker of this in Kazan. In the 1990s, legislation passed ensuring the official status of both Russian and Tatar which led to the creation of bilingual street signs.

The Tatar language is a Turkic language closely related to Turkish and Azeri while the Russian language is a Slavic language more closely related to Ukrainian, Belarusian, and others. Around a decade after the creation of Tatar official language status, the decision was made to introduce a Latin alphabet in the urban environment of Kazan, which served to change the optics of Tatar more to that of other Turkic languages as well as European languages. The selection of official script is often employed in sociolinguistics societies to indicate political alignments towards a certain hegemonic tradition or culture. However, this choice showed little of the ‘walling’-type demarcation found in many other bilingual environments and instead operates on a more invisible spatial–political pattern that has generally promoted cooperative relations.

Social attitudes
Studies of the youth environment of Tatarstan indicate current attitudes about the interfaith relations of

An 84% majority of youth in Tatarstan indicated in a 2016 study that nationality was not a determining factor in communicating with other people and that the government has a crucial role in maintaining stable relations both internationally and within Tatarstan. Over 50% of the respondents

Conflict avoidance mechanisms
Socio-spatial borders are constructed through the use of narratives and symbols that constitute a ‘bordering process’ and establishes a sense of place for both ethnic Tatars and Russians. These borders provide a framework for understanding the mechanisms through which Tatarstan has been successful in mitigating strife through the organization of people, ideas, and power that comprises Kazan’s socioreligious plane.

The notion narratives and symbols are not immutable—that is, they are able to evolve and change—helps account for the relative non-division of the religious lifeworlds of Kazan. The reinterpretation and reconciliation of these symbols has happened when political leaders choose to initiate bridging efforts that can prevent brewing resentments from manifesting into larger-scale conflict.

The ebb and flow is seen through the construction of key architectural pieces that establish either Tatar Islamic or Russian Orthodox presence, such as in the construction of Kul Sharif Mosque inside of the Kazan Kremlin. Rather than seeing this as an accosting of ‘Russianness’, the Kazan environment recognizes this with a sense of normalcy and status-quo to the interfaith peace. Concurrent with this project, the Tatar government ordered the refurbishment of the Cathedral of the Annunciation. This act signified both the reaffirmation of Tatar statehood as well as the respect of Russian ethnic nation, distinct ‘from’ but not ‘against’ the other.

Pictured: the Grand Kul Sharif Mosque in Kazan.

Pictured: The dome of the Cathedral of the Annunciation.

The Temple of All Religions
In addition, architecture serves as a cohesive ground for integrating Kazan not only in distinct coexisting places but within one site. The Temple of All Religions is a religious complex in the Staroye Arakchino Microdistrict of Kazan which is notable in its cohesion of several types of religious architectural elements which include an Orthodox church, a mosque, a synagogue, and others [Temple of All Religions]. Construction began in 1992 by Kazan artist Ildar Khanov and it serves as a cultural hub and residence for Khanov.

The Temple’s mission is to depart from the traditional paradigm of housing only one religion and instead provide a ‘temple of culture and truth’ which peacefully combines the different cultural influences found in Kazan. The structure also serves as a center for the treatment of alcoholism, drug addiction, and other conditions and is attended by visitors both for these services and for experiencing its unique combination of religious symbols.

Global perspective
Examples of cities in a similar geographic and historic position often exhibit characteristics traditionally associated with division. Among these characteristics are disputes over sovereignty, the issue of political legitimacy, and active unrest and conflict in the public space.

Frontier cities exist along the ‘fault lines’ of ethnic and religious division and are often the place of dispute because they represent the ideal zone of power afforded to discrete territories of one group over another[Derrick 2].

Issues of cultural and religious identity through the ascertainment of certain lands may trump a focus on merely the acquisition of new resources or greater sovereign control. In other words, the meaning placed on the indivisible nature of a city may instigate opposing groups’ collective action against any perceived incursion on that space. These discourses which are heavily present in the case of Jerusalem are largely absent in modern-day Kazan where the urban space is interpreted in a more spatially integrated system.

Kazan’s trajectory is often contrasted with histories of cities of major religious contact which can be identified as ‘religious frontier cities’. Major among these are Jerusalem, which has long been the nexus of the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict, as well as Sarajevo, where tensions between Muslim and Christian groups wrought violent ethnic conflict in the 1990s, or Belfast, where ethno-nationalist conflicts spurred riots across Northern Ireland throughout the late 20th century [Derrick 2]. Whereas, for instance, in the case of the bridge separating the Catholics and Muslims in Mostar, Bosnia—or the Berlin Wall characterizing political divide in Germany—the focus was on spatial segregation and clear lines of demarcation, Kazan’s methodology has reduced antagonism by focusing on the social and economic benefits of peace[Derrick 5].

Hillary Clinton’s October [YEAR] visit to Kazan also indicated the US Department of State’s recognition of Kazan as a case study of productive interfaith relations[Derrick 5].