Tell us about yourself: who are you, where do you come from and what should people know about you?  

My name is Marat Iliyasov and originally I am from the Chechen Republic. Same as Lithuania and some other former Soviet entities, the Chechen Republic declared its independence and sought its recognition. However, it was not successful. After the first war with Russia (1994-1996), I arrived in Lithuania and after a several-month course of the Lithuanian language, I started my studies at the TSPMI.  

You completed your bachelor’s and master’s studies at the Institute. Why did you choose to study at the Institute? What are the most vivid memories of your study years at the Institute?  

TSPMI seemed to be the right choice for me. I enjoyed political analysis and saw my career in international relations. The quality of the studies was also more than satisfactory. I had outstanding professors, whose lectures I still remember even without looking at notes. I will be always grateful to Professors Psibiliskis, Dumbliauskas, Motieka, Lopata, who provided me with a very strong basis on which I could build my knowledge further. 

You received your PhD from the University of St Andrews in Scotland. What was the problem you addressed in your thesis, and what were its conclusions? How did you become interested in this field? 

My PhD focuses on Political Demography. I became interested in demographic factors of conflicts still in Lithuania. I could observe different patterns of family and was curious about the reasons behind people procreative choices. I noticed that the Chechen pattern of large family could not be explained by the usual economic reasons, especially that it was valid even during the times of hardship. So I wondered why, which became my PhD research question. In my thesis I argue that the reason behind this procreative choice of the Chechens is a feeling of existential threat and desire to survive as a nation. This is not to diminish many other reasons that demographers have identified before. Usually, they work altogether.  

You are currently working on a postdoctoral fellowship project on “Memories of war and their implications for conflict: the case of Chechnya”. Could you tell us about your project and its implementation? 

After my PhD, I got interested in collective memory and its importance. I could see that many nations try to rewrite their history to emphasize their own greatness. This process, which is common for democracies and autocracies still differs under different regimes and circumstances. It also depends on the goals of the authorities. In Chechnya, due to the radical change of the situation, it acquired radical forms, which was the reason for choosing the Chechen case again. Through it, I intend to demonstrate how and why collective memory becomes so important, especially after conflict. Indeed, collective memory can be a driver of another conflict and it can be a pacifier. What it will be in Chechnya depends on the political situation, success or failure of the current political regime that tries to change the collective memory that was dominant before.      

You recently completed an internship at the Institute for European, Russian, and Eurasian Studies (IERES) at George Washington University, Elliott School of International Affairs. Could you share how it went and what you did during your internship?  

The Elliott School of International Relations is a great place to be. Many outstanding scholars work there. Among them, I would want to mention Professor Henry Hale and Professor Marlene Laruelle. I benefited greatly from communicating with them, from learning about their research, their methods, and foci. I am really grateful that I had this opportunity and used it.  

What would you recommend for the Institute and its community to see, read or try? 

I believe that many TSPMI students would benefit a lot from the very recent books that already earned well-deserved positions in literature. Very enlightening among them are “Educated” (2018) by Tara Westover, and “There is nothing for you here” by Fiona Hill. Both books talk about the incredible life trajectories of two outstanding women, who made it to the top from the very bottom. I think both are inspiring and teaching. As for the trials, I would dare TSPMI to dedicate some resources to conducting experiments in IR that could bring it to the list of the top-100 universities. Lithuania and the Baltic States have unique experiences and can be a great laboratory for understanding many burning issues in IR. I would also encourage interdisciplinary research that the western universities benefit from so much.