Social Welfare in the Mid-Transition, 1995–2000

Abstract

In an early transition from authoritarianism, hopes are high for social improvement. New elites promise to bring about a more equitable, more inclusive form of government. Incoming leaders may expect, that when incumbent leaders are swept from power, resources will become available, which can be redistributed to citizens through social policies. As we saw in Chapter 2, reformers can be highly optimistic that a government based on expertise, rather than political loyalty, can bring about economic recovery. By the middle of the transition, hope can yield to disillusionment if prosperity proves to be elusive. Reformers may now find themselves facing harsh criticism from emergent political rivals. With rule of law still in its fledgling stages, and policy directions still lacking detail and cohesion, the mid-transition can be a difficult time for a new government. The Yeltsin team did not initiate a broad-based public consultation on the direction of post-communist social policy. What role should the state play in providing for social well-being? How should that role differ from the arrangements of Soviet times? In the absence of an open conversation, Yeltsin’s social policy reform efforts were piecemeal, inconsistent, and half-hearted. Since the Yeltsin government missed the opportunity for dialogue with the citizenry on a new social contract, they left the topic of social citizenship open for various opposition groups to take initiative.