Russian Politics: Challenges of Democratization by Zoltan s> Barany Robert G. Moser (review)

Abstract

182 SEER, 8i, I, 2003 well be right:while oil prices were high, Putin and the government'sliberals had to make exceptional effortsto maintain a sense of urgency about reform, while fallingpricesundoubtedlyadded to the reformers'argumentsforfurther change. Shearman'sexcellent chapter on foreignpolicy standsup particularlywell. Unlike many observersin early 2000, Shearman recognized that, despite his use of nationalist themes and his 'anti-unipolarism'in particular,Putin was keen to develop a closer relationshipwith the West in general and the United States in particular.By the summer of 200 I, this processwas well under way and it acceleratedafter iI September.As Shearmanargues,Putin'spersonality and style have changed the tone of Russian policy but the substance continues to reflect Russia's need to adapt to a structure of power in the internationalsystemthathas not changed much. If Putin'sdiplomacyis 'more assertive, dynamic and active' (p. 240) than his predecessor's, its essentials remainvery much the same. School ofPolitics&Sociology BILL ToMPSON Birkbeck College, University ofLondon Barany, Zoltan, and Moser, Robert G. (eds). RussianPolitics. Challenges of Democratization. CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridgeand New York, 200I. Xiii + 260 pp. Notes. Tables. Figures.Index. ?37.50; ?I3*95 WHY has Russia's market and democratic transitionbeen such a shattering disappointment, with success seemingly no closer than when it began? This question weaves together a set of long essays on the chief themes in Russia's dalliance with democracy from some of North America's leading younger scholars. In an introduction which is a masterpiece of clarity, Robert G. Moser stressesthe volume's flexibilityof theoreticalapproach. With that proviso, he outlines three approaches to the most important factors responsible for Russia's'low-caliberdemocracy'.Firstare structuralapproaches,highlighting the constraints of pre-existing communist legacies and political culture; second, institutional approaches highlighting the feedback loop between institutional choices and the institutions which may thereafter structure political choices; finally,the author highlightselite-drivenapproaches,which illuminate the often baleful effects of contingent elite decisions taken during the transitionalperiod. Although each contributor takes a slightly different stance, the general argument is that institutionaland 6lite-drivenapproaches explain more than embedded structuralconstraints. Michael McFaul'sfirstchapter,an update of his excellent workon the I996 elections, concentrates on Russia's electoral development. He stresses the protracted but stable bipolarity of the Russian electorate between reformist and regressive camps until the communists' I996 defeat. The end of this polarization (and by implication, transition)by the 1999-2000 electoral cycle is possibly, McFaul believes, going to lead to greater coherence of policy makingand partyconsolidation (p. 63). This point apparentlycontradictsthe authors'view about increased party incoherence in I999 expressed on page REVIEWS I83 58, and the focus on presidentialelections means that there is little attention paid to partybuildingwhich, if addressed,might lead to a less sanguineview. Moser's chapter (two)on executive-legislativerelationsis equally stimulating and challenging, arguingforsignificantmodificationsto theview of Russia as a super-presidential'delegativedemocracy'.Instead,Moserfindssignificant constraints on presidential power caused by the need to court both public opinion and elite consensus,in which parliamentis a keyarbiter.Moserwould not lay many faultsof Russiancentralgovernance at the door of a presidential system per se, but sees them as the result of a vicious circle of underpartification and reliance on executive decree. He argues that a movement towardsa more parliamentaryrepublic is no panacea, and statesthat a more purely presidential system with a clearer division of powers might be the answer. This is an intriguing idea, but seems to underestimate the huge dangers of a strongerpresidency backed by public opinion in the absence of an embedded legal system. Very strong chapters buttress the centrepiece of this volume. Kathryn Stoner-Weiss deals with centre-regional relations with customary insight, arguing that the centre's concessions to regional autonomy throughout the nineties were a reactive measure leading to results often contrary to the intentions of central policy makers, and which in the absence of integrating structuressuchas a partysystemhave made even Putin'sfederalreformslikely to founder. YoshikoM. Herrera then addressesthe failureof marketreforms in a superb analysis,arguingthat it was not the programme of shock therapy persethat was at fault,but almost complete disregardfor the relevantpolitical and market infrastructurein a country which lacked them almost entirely. 'We gravely misunderstood the patient', she laments (p. I37), and what resultedwas destatizationnot...