Abstract
As the Soviet Union collapsed at the end of 1991 and the new Russian government proclaimed their programme of reform, it seemed that the new state was on the way to joining the democratic world. For, after the fall of the USSR and the clear failure of the Soviet political and economic model, most contemporaries could not see an alternative to democracy and the market economy. The governments of Western states accepted the Yeltsin administration as democratic without equivocation. In the discourse among social scientists, a swift transition to a functioning democracy was expected. The theory of ‘transformation’ — the dominant interpretative concept of these years — seemed to prescribe the processes of the implementation of democracy and the market economy.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Balzer, H. 2003. ‘Managed Pluralism: Vladimir Putin’s Emerging Regime’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 19(3): 189–227.
Brown, A., ed. 2001. Contemporary Russian Politics. A Reader, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bunce, V. 1995a. ‘Should Transitologists be Grounded?’, Slavic Review, 54(1): 111–27.
Bunce, V. 1995b. ‘Paper Curtains and Paper Tigers’, Slavic Review, 54(4): 979–87.
Carothers, T. 2002a. ‘The End of the Transition Paradigm’, Journal of Democracy, 13(1): 5–21.
Carothers, T. 2002b. ‘Debating the Transition Paradigm. A Reply to my Crititcs’, Journal of Democracy, 13(3): 33–8.
de Keghel, I. 1999. ‘Die Moskauer Erlöserkathedrale als Konstrukt nationaler Identität. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des “patriotischen Konsenses”’, Osteuropa, 49(2): 145–59.
de Keghel , I. 2003. Die Staatssymbolik des neuen Russland im Wandel. Vom antisowjetischen Impetus zur russlänsich-sowjetischen Mischidentität, Bremen, Decembers(Forschungsstelle Osteuropa an der Universität Bremen. Arbeitspapiere und Materialien. No. 53).
Ezhegodnoe Poslanie Prezidenta Rossiiskoi Federatsii Federal’nomu Sobraniyu Rossiiskoi Federatsii. 2001, president.kremlin.ru/appears/2001/04/03/0000type6337228514.shtml, 7 July 2005.
Gans-Morse, J. 2004. ‘Post-Communist Transitions and the Myth of a Dominant Paradigm’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 20(4): 320–49.
Gel’man, V. 2000. ‘“Demokratizatsiya, strukturnyi plyuralizm i neustoichivyi tsentrizm: Volgogradskaya oblast”’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, 2: 111–32.
Gel’man, V. 2001a. ‘“Stolknovenie s aisbergom”: Formirovanie kontseptov v izuchenii rossiiskoi politiki’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, 6: 6–17.
Gel’man, V. 2001b. ‘Postsovetskie politicheskie transformatsii: nabroski k teorii’, Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, 1: 55–69.
Gorshkov, M. K., N. E. Tikhonova and A. Yu. Chepurenko, eds 1999. Srednii klass v sovremennom rossiiskom obshchestve, Moscow: RNISiNP/ROSSPEN.
Hanson, P. 1997. ‘How Many Russias? Russia’s Regions and their Adjustment to Economic Change’, in L’Evoluzione della Russia e i suoi rapporti con alcuni paesi Europei, ed. Istituto Affari Internazionali. Laboratorio di Politico Internazionale, Gruppo Russia, Rome, pp. 35–44.
Heinemann-Grüder, A. 2000. Der heterogene Staat. Föderalismus und regionale Vielfalt in Rußland, Berlin: Berlin Verlag Arno Spitz GmbH.
Institut kompleksnykh sotsial’nykh issledovanii Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk (IKSI RAN). 2003. Rossiiskii srednii klass: dinamika izmenenii (1999–2003 gg.) Analiticheskii doklad, Moscow: IKSI RAN.
Kirkow, P. 1998. Russia’s Provinces. Authoritarian Transformation versus Local Autonomy? Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Kuchins, A. C., ed. 2002. Russia after the Fall, Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Levitsky, S. and L. A. Way. 2002. ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, 13(2): 51–65.
Merkel, W. 1999. ‘Defekte Demokratien’, in Demokratie in Ost und West. Für Klaus von Beyme, ed. W. Merkel and A. Busch, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Verlag, pp. 361–81.
Merkel, W. and Croissant, A. 2000. ‘Formale und informale Institutionen in defekten Demokratien’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 41: 3–30.
Merkel, W. et al. 2003. Defekte Demokratie, Vol. 1: Theorie, Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
Migranyan, A. 1997. Rossiya v poiskakh identichnosti (1985–1995), Moscow Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia.
Mommsen, M. 2003. Wer herrscht in Rußland. Der Kreml und die Schatten der Macht, München: Verlag C.H. Beck.
O’Donnell, G. 1994. ‘Delegative Democracy’, Journal of Democracy, 5: 55–69.
Perovic, J. 2001. Chancen und Gefahren des Regionalismus für Russland, Bern: Peter Lang. Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften.
Poslanie Federal’nomu Sobraniyu Rossiiskoi Federatsii. 2002, president.kremlin.ru/appears/2002/04/18/0000type6337228876.shtml 7 July 2005.
Poslanie Federal’nomu Sobraniyu Rossiiskoi Federatsii. 2003, president.kremlin.ru/appears/2003/05/16/1259type6337244623.shtml 7 July 2005.
Poslanie Federal’nomu Sobraniyu Rossiiskoi Federatsii. 2004, president. kremlin.ru/appears/2004/05/26/2003type6337271501.shtml 7 July 2005.
Poslanie Federal’nomu Sobraniyu Rossiiskoi Federatsii. 2005, president.kremlin.ru/appears/2005/04/25/1223type63372type8263487049.shtml 7 July 2005.
Poslanie Federal’nomu Sobraniyu Rossiiskoi Federatsii. 2000, president.kremlin.ru/appears/2000/07/08/0000type6337228782.shtml 7 July 2005.
Przeworski, A. 1988. ‘Democracy as a Contingent Outcome of Conflicts’, in J. Elster and R. Slagstag, eds, Constitutionalism and Democracy, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Putnam, R. D. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rose, R., N. Munro and W. Mishler. 2004. ‘Resigned Acceptance of an Incomplete Democracy: Russia’s Political Equilibrium’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 20(3): 195–218.
Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 1995. 1995. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 1997. 1997. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2000. 2000. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2003. 2004. Moscow Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2004. 2004. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2005. 2005. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiya v tsifrakh 1999. 1999. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rossiya v tsifrakh 2006. 2006. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.
Rüb, F. W. 2002. ‘Hybride Regime—Politikwissenschaftliches Chamäleon oder neuer Regimetypus? Begriffliche und konzeptionelle Überlegungen zum neuen Pessimismus in der Transitologie’, in Zwischen Demokratie und Diktatur. Zur Konzeption und Empirie demokratischer Grauzonen, ed. P. Bendel, A. Croissant and F. W. Rüb, Opladen: Leske + Budrich, pp. 93–118.
Sakwa, R. 2004. Putin. Russia’s Choice, London and New York: Routledge.
Sakwa, R. 2005. ‘The 2003–2004 Russian Elections and Prospects for Democracy’, Europe-Asia Studies, 57(3): 369–98.
Shevtsova, L. 2005. Putin’s Russia, Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Sieber, B. 1998. ‘Russische Idee und Identität’. ‘Philosophisches Erbe’ und Selbstthematisierung der Russen in der öffentlichen Diskussion 1985–1995. Studien zur russischen Konservatismus, Vol. 1, Bochum: Projekt Verlag.
Sil, R. and Ch. Chen. 2004. ‘State Legitimacy and the (In)Significance of Democracy in Post-Communist Russia’, Europe-Asia Studies, 56(3): 347–68.
Shlapentokh, Vladimir, R. Levita and M. Loibserg, eds 1997. From Submission to Rebellion. The Provinces versus the Center in Russia, Boulder CO: Westview Press.
Solzhenitsyn, A. 2005. TV Interview with Alexander Solzhenitsyn, TV Russia, 5 June, www.fednews.ru, quoted in Johnson’s Russia List No. 9174, 10 June, item 1.
Stoner-Weiss, K. 1997. Local Heroes. The Political Economy of Russian Regional Governance, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tikhonova, N. E. 2000. ‘The Influence of Market Reforms on the Self-Identification of Russians’, paper presented to the 2000 BASEES Conference, Cambridge.
Uhlig, C. 1997. ‘Nationale Identitätskonstruktionen für prosowjetisches Rußland’, Osteuropa, 47(12): 1191–206.
Vujacic, V. 2004. ‘Perceptions of the State in Russia and Serbia: the Role of Ideas in the Soviet and Yugoslav Collapse’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 20(2): 164–94.
Way, L. A. 2004. ‘The Sources and Dynamics of Competitive Authoritarianism in Ukraine’, The Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 20(1): 143–61.
Yasin, E. 2005. ‘Al’ternativy i perspektivy. Glavy iz novoi knigi Evgeniya Yasina “Prizhivetsya li demokratiya v Rossii”’, 28 June, www.polit.ru/research/ 2005/06/28/alternatives.html.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2008 Hans-Henning Schröder
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schröder, H.H. (2008). What Kind of Political Regime Does Russia Have?. In: White, S. (eds) Politics and the Ruling Group in Putin’s Russia. Studies in Central and Eastern Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230583061_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230583061_1
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-35726-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-58306-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)