Abstract
‘We underestimated the importance of the opposition of institutions like the Duma during the Yel’tsin years’,1 Michael McFaul has admitted, and many people continue to do so. Although the focus of this book is on parliamentary power during the Yel’tsin era from 1994 to 1999, analysis of executive—legislative relations in Russia following Primakov’s dismissal by Yel’tsin is necessary. Contrary to reports since May 1999 that the Duma is weak, I demonstrate how the Duma’s power continued to grow. These events after May 1999 are not unimportant or outside my argument, but they occurred after this book was accepted for publication. The purpose of the postscript is to refute claims that events such as the dismissal of Primakov, the appointment of Stepashin and Putin as prime ministers, and Putin’s election to the presidency are counter to my argument that parliamentary power is increasing in Russia. Following a brief research trip at the beginning of 2001 I gained access to material and data enabling me to update the book up to 2001. In this postscript I will examine parliamentary power in Russia from May 1999 to January 2001 and explain how events during this time relate to my argument of parliamentary power in Russia.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Michael McFaul, ‘“The Thermidor Period”’ (135 Days Conference, Carnegie Center Moscow, transcript published by the Carnegie Center, 19 September 2000).
Since the main part of the book was written, several books have been published arguing that democracy does not exist in Russia. The political system has been characterized as ‘a hybrid — a mixture of arbitrariness, kleptocracy, and democracy’ by Archie Brown in ‘From Democratization to “Guided Democracy”’, Journal of Dernocracy 12, 4 (October 2001): 37. Also in Archie Brown, ‘Evaluating Russia’s Democratization’, in Archie Brown, Contemporary Russian Politics: A Reader (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 564. Others, such as Alexander Lukin, suggest that Russia has ‘electoral clanism … where elections are not a means of selecting public officials according to law … rather they are merely the means of settling disputes among posttotalitarian clans that generally operate outside the law or in a situation of legal confusion’ (Lukin, ‘Electoral Democracy or Clanism?’ in Brown, Contemporary Russian Politics, 544). Rather than dispute the validity of such claims, this book examines one factor in most commonly regarded definitions of democracy, that of the formation of political institutions. I do not argue that Russia is a democracy (because to do so I would have to consider civil society, economics, and so on), but that in the one aspect I study, democratic tendencies are apparent.
See n. 10 in Ch. 1 regarding Dumas in Russia prior to the Soviet Union.
IFES Election Guide (Moscow: International Foundation for Election Systems, December 1999).
Nikolai Petrov, ‘Parliamentary Elections in Russia: Disposition of Forces and Rules of the Game’, Carnegie Center Briefings (Moscow: Carnegie Center, October 1999), 1.
Brown, ‘From Democratization to “Guided Democracy” ‘, 39.
M. Steven Fish, ‘Putin’s Path’, Journal of Democracy 12, 4 (October 2001): 77.
Adam Przeworski and John Sprague, Paper Stones: A History of Electoral Socialism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986).
Sergey Stepashin, as stated in his talk attended by the author, ‘Russia’s Presidential Elections and the Battle against Corruption’, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 14 March 2000.
Valeriy Airapetov, quote from his talk, ‘Is Democracy Doomed in Russia? Views from Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces’, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University (21 September 2000).
Boris Mints, quote from his talk, ‘Can the Alliance of Russia’s Democrats Last?’, Harvard University (20 June 2000).
Yegor Gaidar, as quoted during his talk, ‘The Political and Economic Situation in Russia’ (Carnegie Endowment, Washington, DC, 29 January 2001).
Yulia Malysheva, quote from her talk attended by the author, ‘Is Democracy Doomed in Russia? Views from Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces’, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University (21 September 2000).
Irina Kuzmina, quote from her talk attended by the author, ‘Is Democracy Doomed in Russia? Views from Yabloko and the Union of Right Forces’, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University (21 September 2000).
Data on committee changes provided by the Records Department of the State Duma, January 2001.
Nikolai Petrov, ‘Parliamentary Elections in Russia: Disposition of Forces and Rules of the Game’, Carnegie Center Briefings (Moscow: Carnegie Center, October 1999), 3.
Roy Medvedev, Post-Soviet Russia: A Journey through the Yeltsin Era (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 359.
Vladimir Gelman, ‘The Bear (Unity) Rules the Forest’, Russian Election Watch, no. 7 (Harvard University, 4 February 2000): 12.
Steven Smith and Thomas Remington maintain that the effects of the Communist and Unity Party alliance were not lasting. The parties were at odds over the important land reform law and some of the Communists’ committee posts were later changed (Steven Smith and Thomas Remington, The Politics of Institutional Choice: The Formation of the Russian State Duma (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001), 152).
Regina Smyth, as quoted during her talk, ‘Evolution of Political Parties and the Party System in Comparative Perspective’, at the conference ‘Russia Votes: A Preview of Russia’s Duma Election’ (Harvard University, 29 November 1999).
Alexander Surikov, as quoted in Russia Watch, no. 2 (August 2000): 3.
Michael McFaul, as stated during his talk, ‘“The Thermidor Period”’ (135 Days Conference, Carnegie Endowment, Moscow Office, 19 September 2000).
Tiffany Troxel, ‘Former Russian Prime Minister Talks about Corruption’, BCSIA Publications (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, March 2000). The quote from Sergey Stepashin was from an interview with the author on 14 March 2000 in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Yeltsin took power illegally in December 1991, though he was legally elected President of the RSFSR in June 1991. One could dispute how democratic the 2001 Presidential Election was given Yeltsin’s sudden resignation and proclaimed choice of Putin as a successor, but he was democratically elected and his main competitors (Zyuganov, Yavlinskiy, and Zhirinovskiy) were all previously presidential candidates and were well-known party leaders.
Yavlinskiy thinks ‘the results of the [2001] elections were just as shamelessly manipulated to favor the “party of power” ’ (Grigory Yavlinskiy, ‘Going Backwards’, Journal ofDemocracy 12, 4 (October 2001): 80). He believes that Putin received closer to 45 percent of the vote in the first round. Even though the Moscow Times shortly after the 2001 Presidential Election checked election results in a number of regions, the data were not comprehensive and did not include all 89 republics. At present, there is no clear evidence that while there may have been some corruption the election results could have been vastly different and resulted in a run-off.
For additional writing on Putin’s character and how it compares with Yeltsin’s see Archie Brown and Lilia Shevtsova (eds), Gorbachev, Yeltsin, and Putin: Political Leadership in Russia’s Transition (Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment, 2001).
Financial Times (27 March 2000).
Sergey Stepashin, as quoted in Nezavisimaya Gazeta (14 January 2000).
Vladimir Putin, ‘State of the Nation Address’, Gosudarstvennaya Duma: Stenogramma zasedaniy (Moscow: Izvestiya, 8 July 2000).
Vladimir Putin, ‘State of the Nation Address’, Gosudarstvennaya Duma: Stenogramma zasedaniy (Moscow: Izvestiya, 8 July 2000).
Zoltan Barany and Robert Moser (eds), Russian Politics: Challenges of Democratization (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), 65.
Martha Olcott and Marina Ottaway, ‘The Challenge of Semi-Authoritarianism’ (working paper, published by the Carnegie Center Moscow, 2000).
Michael McFaul, ‘Russia’s 2000 Presidential Elections: Implications for Russian Democracy and U.S.—Russian Relations’, Testimony before the US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations (transcript published by the Carnegie Endowment, Washington, DC, 12 April 2000), 2.
Yegor Gaidar, as quoted during his talk, ‘The Political and Economic Situation in Russia’ (Carnegie Endowment, Washington, DC, 29 January 2001).
Lilia Shevtsova, as stated during her talk, ‘“Yel’tsin’s Terminator” or “Disciplined Yel’tsinism?” ’ (135 Days Conference, Carnegie Endowment, Moscow Office, 19 September 2000).
All-Russian Center for the Study of Public Opinion, survey of 1600 respondents (January to November 2000).
Thomas Remington, ‘Is There a Separation of Powers in Russia?’, Carnegie Center Report 3, 1 Uanuary 2001): 2.
Thomas Remington, The Russian Parliament: Institutional Evolution in a Transitional Regime, 1989–1999 (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001), 221–2.
Eugene Huskey, Presidential Power in Russia (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1999), 169.
Paul Chaisty and Jeffrey Gleisner, ‘The Consolidation of Russian Parliamentarism: The State Duma, 1993–8’ in Neil Robinson (ed), Institutions and Political Change in Russia (Basingstoke: Macmillan Press, 2000 — now Palgrave Macmillan), 66–7.
Thomas Remington, ‘Is There a Separation of Powers in Russia?’, Meeting Report of the Carnegie Endowment 3, 1 (9 January 2001): 1.
The evening before Stepashin’s confirmation Yel’tsin was reported as being ill. He cancelled a meeting with Prime Minister Jose Marie Aznar. ‘Stepashin Urges Reforms on the Eve of Russian PM Vote’, CNN Report (18 May 1999): 1.
Sergey Stepashin, ‘Address to the Duma’, Gosudarstvennaya Duma: Stenogramma zasedaniy (Moscow: Izvestiya, 19 May 2000).
‘Stepashin Sails through Confirmation Process’, RFE/RL Newsline (19 May 1999): 1.
‘Duma Confirms Putin’, RFE/RL Newsline (17 August 1999).
‘Kas’yanov Approved as Russian Prime Minister’, CNN Report (17 May 2000).
‘Two Putin Nominees Breeze by Legislators’, RFE/RL Newsline (17 May 2000).
Nikolai Kharitonov, as quoted in Leonid Sborov, ‘Kas’yanov Approved Despite Lack of Policy’, Rossiyskaya Gazeta (17 May 2000).
Eugene Huskey, Presidential Power in Russia (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1999), 168.
Mikhail Kas’yanov as stated during his Address to the State Duma, Gosudarstvennaya Duma: Stenogramma zasedaniy (Moscow: Izvestiya, 17 May 2000).
David Rekhviashvili, ‘Duma Strives for First Balanced Budget in Russia’s Post-Soviet History’, Russia Watch, no. 4 (December 2000): 2.
Stephen Cohen, Failed Crusade: America and the Tragedy of Post-Communist Russia (New York: W. W. Norton, 2000).
Mikhail Kas’yanov, ‘Address to the State Duma’, Duma: Stenograrnma zasedaniy (17 May 2000).
Michael McFaul, as stated during his talk, ‘“The Thermidor Period”’ (135 Days Conference, Carnegie Endowment, Moscow Office, 19 September 2000).
Copyright information
© 2003 Tiffany A. Troxel
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Troxel, T.A. (2003). Postscript: Parliamentary Power in Russia from May 1999 to January 2001. In: Parliamentary Power in Russia, 1994–2001. St Antony’s Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230505735_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230505735_9
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-43175-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-50573-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)