Russia after Yeltsin by Vladimir s> Tikhomirov (review)

Abstract

i8o SEER, 8i, I, 2003 might say, classicexample of a revolutionthe element of subjectivejudgement is very great. Miller does not pretend to supply solutions to the questions he raises, but he believes that the extracts he has collected will go some way towardsdoing so. The selection of readings is thematic rather than chronological. The February and October revolutions are covered by extracts from E. N. Burdzhalov and Alexander Rabinowitch respectively. Apart from these the chapters deal with social class (essaysby William Rosenberg, Orlando Figes and Sheila Fitzpatrick),gender (theessayby BarbaraClements)and ethnicity (theessayby Ronald Suny). Obviouslyin his choice of readingsthe editorhas been trying to escape from the framework that would be imposed by adherence to a chronological framework.Significantly,the approach he has taken is one advocated by Steve Smith in the concluding essay of the collection, in which he sets out an agenda for how the Russian revolution should be studiedin the future.It is an essayin which Smith also deploresthe fact that many historiansof Russia display a general distrustof theory and a reluctance to generalize which would bring theory into substantivehistorical research. This, he believes, is at the root of the malaise which besets the historical field (p. 265). This is an interesting idea, but in view of what has been saidabove, one founded on the mistakenbelief thathistoricalgeneralizations have an objectivestatus. Though historians would inevitably disagree on which texts should be considered 'essential', Miller's book provides on the whole a reasonable collection of readings on the subject. The extracts from Burdzhalov's and Rabinowitch'sbooks are particularlyto be welcomed. What is to be regretted is that the editor did not put more emphasis on showing that on every topic alternative interpretations are possible. The passages devoted to historiography are unsatisfactory from this point of view. After all, it is an appreciationof the varietiesof history,its infiniteadaptability,that bringsthe recognition that originalityin approachispossible. Department ofCentral andEastEuropean Studies JAMES D. WHITE University ofGlasgow Tikhomirov, Vladimir (ed.). Russia after reltsin. Ashgate, Aldershot and Burlington,VT, 200I. XiV + 267 pp. Notes. Tables. Figures./42.50. THISwide-rangingcollection of essaysmightbetterbe titledRussiaattheEndof theYeltsin Era.Writtenin the firstmonths of Vladimir Putin'spresidency, the papers compiled here provide a good overview of the Russia Putin inherited. The discussionof Putin and of Russia'slikelydirectionunder his leadershipis necessarily tentative and, in many cases, has been overtaken by events. However, most of the book is given not to speculation about Putin but to a seriousanalysisof BorisYeltsin'spresidencyand of his legacy to his successor. Broadly speaking, the book is divided into three major sections. Leslie Holmes's introduction is followed by four chapters on aspects of Russian politics:Graeme Gill'son the futureof the Russianpresidency,David Lovell's on nationalismand democratizationin Russia,Anthony Phillips'son the 'new REVIEWS i8i planning' in the politics of Yeltsin's Russia, and Yuri Tsyganov's on the relationshipbetween the Kremlin and the 'oligarchs'.The next four chapters examine the variousfacets of economic policy and performance.These cover industrialprivatization under Yeltsin (Stephen Fortescue),external debt and financialconstraintson reform(VladimirTikhomirov),'vegetativeadaptation' and post-Soviet economic performance (Gennadi Kazakevitch), and a comparison of Russia's socio-economic condition with Soviet and international standards (Geoffrey Jukes). Finally, two chapters are given over to Russia'srelationswith the outside world the first,by Alexey Muraviev, on Russian military power, and the second, by Peter Shearman, on foreign policy. The political chapters are not generally optimistic about prospects for the consolidation of a more accountable democratic order in Russia. Gill examines Putin'sprospectsas leader, highlightingthe extent to which Putinis in a position both to make more vigorous use of the powers he inheritedfrom Yeltsinthan Yeltsinhimself did and to extend even furtherthe powers of an alreadystrongpresidency. Lovell'schapter on nationalism and democratization stresses the dangers for democracy of the illiberal brand of ethnonationalism which he finds to be prevalent in Russia, while Tsyganov's chapter on the presidency and the tycoons begins with a fierce indictment of the Yeltsinregime and goes on to emphasize their continuing influence over Putinand the dangersoligarchicpower continues to pose in Russia.Yetwhile there remain good reasons for concern about Russian democracy, the evidence of Putin's first two years would suggest that the dangers of ethnonationalismand...