Quote Originally Posted by Husar View Post
Yes, but at that point it seems to tell us little about the relation of ethnicity and conflict since a whole lot of these ethnicities seem to get along well enough.
And a whole lot of different ethnicities, many of which somehow learned to live together, so?
One could actually even dispute the claim of one culture, if Russia has >100 ethnicities, then Germany has several cultures, unless you want to change the level of abstraction.
The picture is complex. Several of these ethnicities form the majority population in their own republic, as is the case in Kalmykia, Chechnya, Tuva, North Osseita and perhaps a few more. Additionally, it's typically ethnic Russians that make up the second largest ethnicity in such republics. So then you have many republics where most of the population belongs to a majority population in some sense.

In addition to this, many of the ethnicities have 'their own' republic without forming a majority of its population (such as Altai).

Then there is the perspective: out of the most violent places Russia, how many are homogeneous; and of these, in how many them are ethnic Russians (the majority population of the country as a whole) forming this homogeneous population?

Yes, but why single out ethnicity as the factor to act on?
Because we don't need (extra) intranational ethnic diversity. There is no point in dividing the population of a country into more fractions that those that already exist (and that may often be more or less unavoidable).