Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Kind of Political Regime Does Russia Have?

  • Chapter
Politics and the Ruling Group in Putin’s Russia

Part of the book series: Studies in Central and Eastern Europe ((SCEE))

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A., ed. 2001. Contemporary Russian Politics. A Reader, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunce, V. 1995a. ‘Should Transitologists be Grounded?’, Slavic Review, 54(1): 111–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunce, V. 1995b. ‘Paper Curtains and Paper Tigers’, Slavic Review, 54(4): 979–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carothers, T. 2002a. ‘The End of the Transition Paradigm’, Journal of Democracy, 13(1): 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carothers, T. 2002b. ‘Debating the Transition Paradigm. A Reply to my Crititcs’, Journal of Democracy, 13(3): 33–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Keghel, I. 1999. ‘Die Moskauer Erlöserkathedrale als Konstrukt nationaler Identität. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des “patriotischen Konsenses”’, Osteuropa, 49(2): 145–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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).

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gel’man, V. 2000. ‘“Demokratizatsiya, strukturnyi plyuralizm i neustoichivyi tsentrizm: Volgogradskaya oblast”’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, 2: 111–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gel’man, V. 2001a. ‘“Stolknovenie s aisbergom”: Formirovanie kontseptov v izuchenii rossiiskoi politiki’, Politicheskie issledovaniya, 6: 6–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gel’man, V. 2001b. ‘Postsovetskie politicheskie transformatsii: nabroski k teorii’, Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, 1: 55–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorshkov, M. K., N. E. Tikhonova and A. Yu. Chepurenko, eds 1999. Srednii klass v sovremennom rossiiskom obshchestve, Moscow: RNISiNP/ROSSPEN.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinemann-Grüder, A. 2000. Der heterogene Staat. Föderalismus und regionale Vielfalt in Rußland, Berlin: Berlin Verlag Arno Spitz GmbH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Institut kompleksnykh sotsial’nykh issledovanii Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk (IKSI RAN). 2003. Rossiiskii srednii klass: dinamika izmenenii (1999–2003 gg.) Analiticheskii doklad, Moscow: IKSI RAN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkow, P. 1998. Russia’s Provinces. Authoritarian Transformation versus Local Autonomy? Basingstoke: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuchins, A. C., ed. 2002. Russia after the Fall, Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S. and L. A. Way. 2002. ‘The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, 13(2): 51–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W. and Croissant, A. 2000. ‘Formale und informale Institutionen in defekten Demokratien’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 41: 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merkel, W. et al. 2003. Defekte Demokratie, Vol. 1: Theorie, Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Migranyan, A. 1997. Rossiya v poiskakh identichnosti (1985–1995), Moscow Mezhdunarodnye otnoshenia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mommsen, M. 2003. Wer herrscht in Rußland. Der Kreml und die Schatten der Macht, München: Verlag C.H. Beck.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, G. 1994. ‘Delegative Democracy’, Journal of Democracy, 5: 55–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perovic, J. 2001. Chancen und Gefahren des Regionalismus für Russland, Bern: Peter Lang. Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. 1993. Making Democracy Work. Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 1995. 1995. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 1997. 1997. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2000. 2000. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2003. 2004. Moscow Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2004. 2004. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiiskii Statisticheskii Ezhegodnik 2005. 2005. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiya v tsifrakh 1999. 1999. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiya v tsifrakh 2006. 2006. Moscow: Goskomstat Rossii.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Sakwa, R. 2004. Putin. Russia’s Choice, London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sakwa, R. 2005. ‘The 2003–2004 Russian Elections and Prospects for Democracy’, Europe-Asia Studies, 57(3): 369–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shevtsova, L. 2005. Putin’s Russia, Washington DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shlapentokh, Vladimir, R. Levita and M. Loibserg, eds 1997. From Submission to Rebellion. The Provinces versus the Center in Russia, Boulder CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tikhonova, N. E. 2000. ‘The Influence of Market Reforms on the Self-Identification of Russians’, paper presented to the 2000 BASEES Conference, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhlig, C. 1997. ‘Nationale Identitätskonstruktionen für prosowjetisches Rußland’, Osteuropa, 47(12): 1191–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Hans Henning Schröder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Glasgow, UK

    Stephen White (Professor of International Politics) (Professor of International Politics)

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation