Russian Governance in the Twenty-First Century: Geo-Strategy, Geopolitics and Governance by Irina s> Isakova (review)

Abstract

REVIEWS 377 anothervoice intrudes.O'Shea repeatedlyendorsesthe essentialist,sound-bite judgement beloved of his political masters that the 'Balkans'is uniquely a stranger to truth and morality. Isn't this the kind of lazy propaganda he objectsto? The book also suffersfrom a very limp and improbableconclusion. It states that Milo'sevic' was chiefly to blame for the violent disintegrationof Yugoslaviaby subvertingthe YugoslavPeople'sArmy,which alone couldhave saved the country.The rest of the book says otherwise,and even at this price it is worth it for the humane and scholarlyaccount it presentsof a brutaland brutalizingwar. Department ofPolitics LESLIE BENSON University ofNorthampton Isakova,Irina. RussianGovernance in theTwenty-First Centu?y: Geo-strategy, Geopolitics and Governance. Cass Contemporary Security Studies Series. Frank Cass, London and New York, 2005. xii + 354 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index.?70.00. THE subjectof thisoriginalbookis the strategy of VladimirPutin'sRussiato ensureitssurvival andmodernization inthecontemporary worldofglobalization , separatism and terrorism. Such studieswhichsuccessfully analysethe interaction of Russiandomesticpoliticsand foreignpolicyare scarce.Irina Isakovapaystributeto the seminalvolumeby Neil Malcolmet al., Internal Factors inRussian Forez'gn Policy (Oxford,I996)and the morerecentbooksby BoboLo. Thisbookin factgoesratherfurther, sinceaswellas investigating Putin'simpacton Russianforeignpolicyshealsoanalyses howPutin'sdesire forRussiato playtheroleof a greatpowerin theworldhasshapedhisvision of the internalorganizationof Russia,throughthe strengthening of the Presidential vertikal' (hierarchical chainof command). The firstpartofthebookfocuseson geopolitics andRussianforeignpolicy. Isakovaseesgeopolitics as an ideology,expressed in Russiaas Eurasianism. This ideologycame to the forewith the appointment of EvgeniiPrimakov as ForeignMinisterin I996, in reactionto the unsuccessful Westernism of theearlypost-Soviet years.The authorseesPutinpursuing a morepragmatic form of Eurasianism than Primakov,recognizingRussia'sdependenceon Westerninvestmentand, particularly after ii September200I, pursuing co-operation with the United Statesagainst'terrorism'. She highlightsthe priorityof economicgoals in Putin'sforeignpolicy,which sees economic progress asessential toRussia's survival asa stateanditsrestoration asa great power. The NATO-RussiaCouncil,formedin 2002, has raisedrelations betweenthe twosidesto a 'qualitatively newlevel'(p.42). At the sametime Isakovarightlyhighlights the dangersto thisrelationship resulting fromthe accessionof the BalticStatesto NATO in 2004 withouthavingratifiedthe Conventional Forcesin Europetreaty,whichleadsto fearsin Moscowabout NATO deploymentson Russia'sborders;and the continuedpresenceof Russiantroopsin GeorgiaandMoldova,againstthewishesof the respective governments.The authorgives prominenceto anti-terrorist co-operation 378 SEER, 84, 2, 2006 within the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization and the Shanghai Co-operation Organization. The second part of the book is concerned with Putin's domestic reforms and focusesparticularlyon the role of the seven federal districts(FDs),which Putin introduced in 2000. Isakova shows that even in the perestroika period, there were plans to reduce the numberof regionswithin the Russianrepublic. Putin's creation of the FDs was not only to counteract the disintegrative tendencieswithin the countryunderBorisEl'tsin, and to combat international terrorism,but also to promote the economic integration of the regions with neighbouringcountries,under conditionswhich did not threatenthe survival of the Russian state. In this way Russia can gain from globalization rather than be marginalizedby it. Isakovaconcentratesnot on the effortsof the presidential envoys to influenceor change the elected governorsof the regions,but on the co-ordinationof the securityservices,including the border troops, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Armed Forces within the FDs. She attributesparticularsignificanceto the fact that the FDs closely coincide with Russia'sMilitaryDistricts.It would have been worth consideringthe reasons why they do not fully coincide; why, for example, Nizhnii Novgorod region is included in the Volga FD, although it is in the Moscow Military District. Isakovaoutlinesthe FDs' role in militaryreformand in co-operationwith the armed forces of neighbouringCIS states. More considerationmight have been given as to whether these seven FDs might themselves become the basis for the disintegration of the Russian Federation,as some specialistshave suggested.This is probablyunlikely,consideringthat the Armed Forces and the Federal SecurityService (FSB)retain their vertical subordination to Moscow and the FDs lack revenue-raising capacities. The book was completed before the Beslan hostage-takingcatastropheof September2004, which demonstratedthe continuedweaknessof the securityservicesand of Russian state structuresin general. Putin'sannouncement afterBeslan of the decision to abandon the popular election of regional governorsatteststo the failureof the presidentialenvoys to succeed in implementing the plans of the centre, and was derided in the West as evidence of the decline of Russian democracy. The near-monopolyexerted by the centre over national television and the moves against those oligarchswho criticized Putin'spolicies,followedby the Kremlin'sincreasingcontrolover the electoral process, have transformedRussia's image in the West from...