140 Tanja Penter
processes about who could be considered victims in the post-Soviet social
orders and which victims were at the top of the new victim hierarchies. The
forms of legal and public recognition were quite similar for all three groups
of victims. Thus, I will argue that in the post-Soviet context, it makes sense
to combine approaches of transitional justice and environmental justice.
Looking at the different compensation policies, laws, and practices in
post-Soviet Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, I will develop several
comparative perspectives on the ways in which these new states dealt with
victims of radioactive contamination and how the societies constructed victims’ identities. To what extent did these compensation and social protection
laws promote a new understanding of citizenship, including a range of civil
rights of the citizens toward the state? How were the laws implemented in
practice? Did they improve the situation of those affected? What role did
environmental victims play in the cultures of memory of the post-Soviet
states? Did these laws, moreover, contribute to the “visibility” of the zones
of radioactive contamination and in general to the awareness of radiation
dangers among the population? I will argue that the ways in which the successor states of the Soviet Union dealt with the victims of the Soviet era also
reveal different pathways of political and social development that these states
took. In other words, post-Soviet compensation programs can also serve as a
“window” into transformation societies. In all successor states of the Soviet
Union, processes of recognizing and compensating victims of the past overlaid with general political, economic, and social processes of change and the
emergence of a new social order and post-Soviet cultures of remembrance.
Concepts of Victims, Transitional Justice,
and Environmental Justice
Allow me to start with a few general reflections on the concepts of victim,
transitional justice, and environmental justice: victim concepts and discourses
have a socially constructed and historically variable character. The term “victim” is ambiguous and contains different semantics that are actualized in
different ways in different historical contexts. Victim narratives provide a
powerful tool for justifying moral, social, and political claims in the present
from past suffering. 1
The increase in victim narratives since the 1990s also reflects a general
trend in Western countries, characterized by social upgrading and a changed
attention economy (Aufmerksamkeitsökonomie) toward passive victims. 2 The
sociologist Michel Wieviorka therefore speaks of an “age of victims,” 3 while
Jean Michel Chaumont (philosopher and sociologist) sees increasing competition among victims for recognition. 4 In her study, Svenja Goltermann
pointed out the importance of new knowledge in medicine and law for the
perception of victims. In her opinion, concepts of psychological trauma have
contributed to the popularization of the speech of victims in the late twentieth century. 5
processes about who could be considered victims in the post-Soviet social
orders and which victims were at the top of the new victim hierarchies. The
forms of legal and public recognition were quite similar for all three groups
of victims. Thus, I will argue that in the post-Soviet context, it makes sense
to combine approaches of transitional justice and environmental justice.
Looking at the different compensation policies, laws, and practices in
post-Soviet Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan, I will develop several
comparative perspectives on the ways in which these new states dealt with
victims of radioactive contamination and how the societies constructed victims’ identities. To what extent did these compensation and social protection
laws promote a new understanding of citizenship, including a range of civil
rights of the citizens toward the state? How were the laws implemented in
practice? Did they improve the situation of those affected? What role did
environmental victims play in the cultures of memory of the post-Soviet
states? Did these laws, moreover, contribute to the “visibility” of the zones
of radioactive contamination and in general to the awareness of radiation
dangers among the population? I will argue that the ways in which the successor states of the Soviet Union dealt with the victims of the Soviet era also
reveal different pathways of political and social development that these states
took. In other words, post-Soviet compensation programs can also serve as a
“window” into transformation societies. In all successor states of the Soviet
Union, processes of recognizing and compensating victims of the past overlaid with general political, economic, and social processes of change and the
emergence of a new social order and post-Soviet cultures of remembrance.
Concepts of Victims, Transitional Justice,
and Environmental Justice
Allow me to start with a few general reflections on the concepts of victim,
transitional justice, and environmental justice: victim concepts and discourses
have a socially constructed and historically variable character. The term “victim” is ambiguous and contains different semantics that are actualized in
different ways in different historical contexts. Victim narratives provide a
powerful tool for justifying moral, social, and political claims in the present
from past suffering. 1
The increase in victim narratives since the 1990s also reflects a general
trend in Western countries, characterized by social upgrading and a changed
attention economy (Aufmerksamkeitsökonomie) toward passive victims. 2 The
sociologist Michel Wieviorka therefore speaks of an “age of victims,” 3 while
Jean Michel Chaumont (philosopher and sociologist) sees increasing competition among victims for recognition. 4 In her study, Svenja Goltermann
pointed out the importance of new knowledge in medicine and law for the
perception of victims. In her opinion, concepts of psychological trauma have
contributed to the popularization of the speech of victims in the late twentieth century. 5