State >Legitimacy and the (In)significance of Democracy in Post‐Communist Russia

Abstract

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Notes Ken Jowitt, New World Disorder: The Leninist Extinction (Berkeley, University of California Press, 1992), p. 301. Just a few examples include Jeffrey Hahn, ‘Continuity and Change in Russian Political Culture’, British Journal of Political Science, 21, 4, October 1991, pp. 393–421; Arthur Miller, William Reisinger & Vicki Hesli (eds), Public Opinion and Regime Change: The New Politics of Post‐Soviet Societies (Boulder, Westview, 1993); M. Steven Fish, Democracy from Scratch (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1994); and James L. Gibson, ‘The Resilience of Mass Support for Democratic Institutions and Processes in the Nascent Russian and Ukrainian Democracies’, in Vladimir Tismaneanu (ed), Political Culture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia (Armonk, NY, M. E. Sharpe, 1995). On ‘possibilism’ as a fruitful approach to studying democratisation in post‐communist regions see George Breslauer, ‘Introduction’, in Richard Anderson, M. Steven Fish, Stephen E. Hanson & Philip G. Roeder, Post‐communism and the Theory of Democracy (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2001). On democratic discourse and politically conscious social networks see, respectively, Richard Anderson, ‘The Discursive Origins of Russian Democratic Politics’, in Anderson et al., Post‐communism; and James L. Gibson, ‘Social Networks, Civil Society, and the Prospects for Consolidating Russia's Democratic Transition’, American Journal of Political Science, 45, 1, 2001, pp. 51–68. For positive assessments of the prospects for civil society under Putin see George Hudson, ‘Civil Society in Russia: Models and Prospects for Development’, Russian Review, 62, 2, April 2003, pp. 212–222; Thomas M. Nichols, ‘Putin's First Two Years: Democracy or Authoritarianism?’, Current History, October 2002, pp. 307–312; and Marcia Weigle, ‘On the Road to the Civic Forum: State and Civil Society from Yeltsin to Putin’, Demokratizatsiya, 10, 2, Spring 2002, pp. 117–146. Graeme Gill & Roger Markwich, Russia's Stillborn Democracy?: From Gorbachev to Yeltsin (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2000); Peter Reddaway & Dmitri Glinski, The Tragedy of Russia's Reforms: Market Bolshevism Against Democracy (Washington, DC, United States Institute of Peace Press, 2001); Marc Morjé Howard, The Weakness of Civil Society in Post‐communist Europe (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2003); Alfred B. Evans, ‘Recent Assessments of Social Organizations in Russia’, Demokratizatsiya 10, 3, Summer 2002, pp. 322–342; and Harley Balzer, ‘Demography and Democracy in Russia: Human Capital Challenges to Democratic Consolidation’, Demokratizatsiya, 11, 1, Winter 2003, pp. 95–109. M. Steven Fish, ‘When More is Less: Superexecutive Power and Political Underdevelopment in Russia’, in Victoria E. Bonnell & George W. Breslauer (eds), Russia in the New Century: Stability or Disorder? (Boulder, Westview Press, 2001). Ibid., p. 27. Erik P. Hoffmann, ‘The Dynamics of State–Society Relations’, in Harry Eckstein, Frederic Fleron, Erik Hoffmann & William Reisinger, Can Democracy Take Root in Post‐Soviet Russia? Explorations in State–Society Relations (Lanham, MD, Rowman and Littlefield, 1998), pp. 97, 95. Gerard Alexander, ‘Institutionalized Uncertainty, the Rule of Law, and the Sources of Democratic Stability’, Comparative Political Studies, 35, 10, December 2002, pp. 1145–1170. The ‘institutionalised uncertainty’ thesis, although acknowledging the possibility of future winning as a positive feature of democracy that dissuades losers from challenging outcomes, generally emphasises the problematic effects of uncertainty created by changing leadership and policy in transitional democracies; see for example Adam Przeworski, Democracy and the Market (New York, Cambridge University Press, 1991). The ‘rule of law’ thesis suggests that democratic procedures reduce ex ante uncertainty over decision rules, methods of political contestation and the rights of citizens; see for example Scott Mainwaring, ‘Transitions to Democracy and Democratic Consolidation’, in Scott Mainwaring, Guillermo O'Donnell & J. Samuel Valenzuela (eds), Issues in Democratic Consolidation (Notre Dame, IN, University of Notre Dame Press, 1992). Stephen White & Ian McAllister, ‘Putin and His Supporters’, Europe‐Asia Studies, 55, 3, May 2003, p. 384. See for example the critique of traditional quantitative methods in gauging Russian cultural orientations in James Alexander, Political Culture in Post‐Communist Russia: Formlessness and Recreation in a Traumatic Transition (New York, St. Martin's, 2000). The general significance of trust in determining governmental legitimacy has been well established. In the context of post‐communist societies see for example William Mishler & Richard Rose, ‘What are the Origins of Political Trust? Testing Institutional and Cultural Theories in Post‐Communist Societies’, Comparative Political Studies, 34, 1, February 2001, pp. 30–62. Stephen White, Russia's New Politics: The Management of a Post‐communist Society (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 270 (Table 8.1). Richard Rose & Neil Munro, Elections Without Order: Russia's Challenge to Vladimir Putin (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 226. The survey was based on 1,601 responses, see http://www.russiavotes.org/rvwhatsnew.htm, accessed 18 July 2003. See Ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny, various issues, as adapted in White, Russia's New Politics, p. 270; and Yuri Levada, ‘Homo Praevaricatus: Russian Doublethink’, in Archie Brown (ed.), Contemporary Russian Politics (New York, Oxford University Press, 2001), p. 312. Anton Steen, ‘The Question of Legitimacy: Elites and Political Support in Russia’, Europe‐Asia Studies, 53, 5, July 2001, p. 697. Centre for Labour Market Studies, Formation of Social Partnership in the Russian Federation (Moscow, Institute of Economics, Russian Academy of Sciences, 1995), pp. 13–14; and J. E. M. Thirkell, K. Petkov & S. A. Vickerstaff, The Transformation of Labour Relations: Restructuring and Privatization in Eastern Europe and Russia (New York, Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 106. See Richard Rose, A Decade of New Russian Barometer Survey (Glasgow, Centre for the Study of Public Policy, University of Strathclyde, 2002); and White & McAllister, ‘Putin and His Supporters’, p. 390. Mishler & Rose, ‘What are the Origins of Political Trust?’, p. 57 (Appendix A). Lev Gudkov, ‘Russia—A Society in Transition?’, Telos, Summer 2001, p. 23. This survey of 2,107 respondents is reported at http://www.russiavotes.org/rvwhatsnew.htm, accessed 18 July 2003. Timothy Colton & Michael McFaul, ‘Are Russians Undemocratic?’, Post‐Soviet Affairs, 18, 2, April–June 2002, p. 96. White, Russia's New Politics, pp. 192–193, based on a February–March 1998 national representative survey of 1,500 respondents reported in Ekonomicheskie i sotsial'nye peremeny, 1998, 3, pp. 57, 76–77. Henry E. Hale, ‘Civil Society From Above? Statist and Liberal Models of State‐Building in Russia’, Demokratizatsiya, 10, 3, Summer 2002, pp. 313–317. White, Russia's New Politics, p. 270 (Table 8.1). Kathryn Stoner‐Weiss, ‘The Russian Central State in Crisis’, in Zoltan Barany & Robert Moser (eds), Russian Politics: Challenges of Democratization (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2001), p. 132, based on a 1996 panel survey of voting‐age respondents coordinated and reported by Timothy Colton. Ibid., p. 133. Daniel Treisman, ‘Russia Renewed?’, Foreign Affairs, 81, November/December 2002, pp. 58–72; and ‘How Free is Free?’, The Economist (Special), 25 November 2000, p. 1. Debra Javeline, Protest and the Politics of Blame: The Russian Response to Unpaid Wages (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2003). On the low trust in unions see White, Russia's New Politics, p. 270; and Mishler & Rose, (eds), Russia in the New Century p. 57. The courts initially struck down the election results on shaky grounds at the behest of Norilsk Nickel officials, but the Norilsk union's candidate, Valerii Melnikov, went on to decisively win the rescheduled elections anyway; see Boris Kagarlitsky, ‘Norilsk—A Landmark Victory’, Moscow Times, 6 May 2003. Rudra Sil, interview with Aleksandr Nikolaevich Shepel, President of the Confederation of Labour of Russia (Konfederatsiya Truda Rossii, KTR), 8 June 2002. Gordon M. Hahn, ‘Growing Middle Class Reinforces Civil Society’, The Russia Journal, 26 April–2 May 2002. The social tax requires organisations of all types and sizes (including non‐profit organisations) to pay a 22.8% tax on self‐produced goods or a 35.6% tax on payments made to any individual who can be considered to be ‘hired labour’. According to a key trade union leader, this law has already been used to send the tax police to investigate a number of unco‐operative unions (Rudra Sil, interview with Sergei Khramov, President of Sotsprof, Moscow, 5 June 2002). Albert Hirschman, Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Organizations, and States (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1970). Victor M. Sergeyev, ‘Organized Crime and Social Instability in Russia: The Alternative State, Deviant Bureaucracy, and Social Black Holes’, in Bonnell & Breslauer (eds), Russia in the New Century, p. 169. See also Richard Lindberg & Vesna Markovic, ‘Organized Crime Outlook in the New Russia’, Search International, 2001, http://www.search‐international.com/Articles/crime/russiacrime.htm. ‘Russia is on the Top Ten List of Most Corrupted Countries’, Pravda, 31 January 2002, see http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/01/31/26135.html. Cited in Alexander N. Domrin, ‘Ten Years Later: Society, “Civil Society,” and the Russian State’, The Russian Review, 62, April 2003, pp. 205–206. Rose, A Decade of New Russian Barometer Survey, p. 302; and Domrin, ‘Ten Years Later’, p. 205. M. A. Shabanova, ‘Institutsional'nye izmeneniya i nepravovye praktiki’, in Kto i kuda stremitsya vesti Rossiyu? … (Moscow, Moskovskaya vysshaya shkola sotsial'nykh i ekonomicheskikh nauk, Intertsentr, 2001), pp. 319–327. Colton & McFaul, ‘Are Russians Undemocratic?’, p. 101. New Russia Barometer X, cited in Rose, A Decade of New Russian Barometer, p. 27. Colton & McFaul, ‘Are Russians Undemocratic?’, p. 99. New Russia Barometer IX, as reported on http://www.russiavotes.org/rvwhatsnew.htm. (Table 1, ‘State of the Nation’), accessed 18 July 2003. Office of Research of the USIA, ‘Russians Link Democracy to Prosperity and Equal Justice’, USIA Opinion Research Memorandum, 16 October 1992, as cited in James Millar & Sharon Wolchik, ‘The Social Legacies and the Aftermath of Communism’, in James Millar & Sharon Wolchik (eds), The Social Legacy of Communism (Washington, DC, Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1994), pp. 8, 16. Judith Kullberg & William Zimmerman, ‘Liberal Elites, Socialist Masses, and the Problems of Russian Democracy’, World Politics, 51, April 1999, pp. 323–358 at p. 336. See also Domrin, ‘Ten Year's Later’, p. 204; Robert Brym, ‘Re‐evaluating Mass Support for Political and Economic Change in Russia’, Europe‐Asia Studies, 48, 5, 1996, pp. 751–766; and William Miller, Stephen White & Paul Heywood, Values and Political Change in Post‐communist Europe (New York, St. Martin's Press, 1998). New Russia Barometer VIII, 19–29 January 2000, as reported on http://www.russiavotes.org/rvwhatsnew.htm, accessed 18 July 2003. In addition to Nikolai Petro, The Rebirth of Russian Democracy (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1995) and Sergei Pushkarev, Self‐Government and Freedom in Russia (Boulder, Westview, 1988) see also Russell Bova, ‘Political Culture, Authority Patterns, and the Architecture of the New Russian Democracy’, in Eckstein et al. (eds), Can Democracy Take Root in Post‐Soviet Russia?, pp. 177–200; Frederic Fleron, ‘Congruence Theory Applied: Democratization in Russia’, in Eckstein et al. (eds), Can Democracy Take Root in Post‐Soviet Russia?, pp. 58–67; and Victor Sergeyev & Nikolai Biryukov, Russia's Road to Democracy: Parliament, Communism and Traditional Culture (Brookfield, VT, Elgar, 1993). Stephen White, Political Culture and Soviet Politics (New York, St. Martin's Press, 1979), p. 58. On the ‘alternative’ tradition of local democracy and self‐government see also Petro, The Rebirth of Russian Democracy and Pushkarev, Self‐government and Freedom in Russia. For detailed discussions of collective decision making and the low level of socioeconomic stratification in the mir see Edward Keenan, ‘Muscovite Political Folkways’, Russian Review, 45, 2, April 1986, pp. 115–181, esp. p. 128; Moshe Lewin, Making of the Soviet System (New York, Pantheon, 1985), pp. 76–82; Theodor Shanin, Russia as a ‘Developing Society’ (London, Macmillan, 1985), pp. 76–77, 94–102; and Christine Worobec, Peasant Russia: Family and Community in the Post‐Emancipation Period (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1991), pp. 20–41. On the distinctiveness and resilience of the mir compared to rural institutions elsewhere see Rudra Sil, Managing ‘Modernity’: Work, Community, and Authority in Late‐Industrializing Japan and Russia (Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press, 2002), pp. 200–210. On this point see ibid., pp. 215–221. Stephen Crowley, Hot Coal, Cold Steel: Russian and Ukrainian Workers from the End of the Soviet Union to the Post‐Communist Transformations (University of Michigan Press, 1997), p. 143. On the linkage between democracy and economic outcomes across much of the post‐communist world see Janos Simon, ‘Popular Conceptions of Democracy in Postcommunist Europe’, in S. H. Barnes & J. Simon (eds), The Postcommunist Citizen (Budapest: Erasmus Foundation and the Institute for Political Science of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1998), pp. 79–116. The survey of 2,107 respondents is reported on http://www.russiavotes.org/rvwhatsnew.htm, accessed 18 July 2003. Branko Milanovic, Income, Inequality and Poverty During the Transition from Planned to Market Economy (Washington, DC, World Bank, 1998), p. 77; and Erzo F.P. Luttmer, Measuring Poverty Dynamics and Inequality in Transition Economics: Disentangling Real Events from Noisy Data (Washington, DC, World Bank, 2001), p. 31. United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2003, as noted at http://www.undp.org/hdr2003/indicator/cty_f_RUS.html, accessed 21 July 2003. Ellen Carnaghan, Have Your Cake and Eat it Too: Tensions between Democracy and Order Among Russian Citizens (Glasgow, Centre for the Study of Public Policy, University of Strathclyde, 2001), pp. 4–7; and Elena Bashkirova, ‘Value Change and Survival of Democracy in Russia (1995–2000)’, Russian Public Opinion and Market Research (ROMIR), 2002, at http://www.romir.ru/eng/value‐change.htm, accessed 1 August 2002. Balzer, ‘Demography and Democracy in Russia’, p. 109. World Bank, Making Transition Work for Everyone: Poverty and Inequality in Europe and Central Asia (Washington, DC, World Bank, 2000), esp. pp. 367–377. Sergeyev ‘Organized Crime and Social Instability in Russia’; and Fred Weir, ‘In Russia, A “Creeping Coup”?’, Special to Christian Science Monitor, 18 June 2003. On the size and diversity of the nomenklatura and the structure of their patronage networks see Grey Hodnett, ‘The Pattern of Leadership Politics’, in Seweryn Bialer (ed.), The Domestic Context of Soviet Foreign Policy (Boulder, Westview Press, 1981), p. 108; and T. H. Rigby, ‘Introduction’, in Bohdan Harasymiw & T. H. Rigby (eds), Leadership Selection and Patron–Client Relations in the USSR and Yugoslavia (London, Allen & Unwin, 1981), p. 6. Richard Rose, ‘Russia as an Hour‐Glass Society: A Constitution without Citizens’, East European Constitutional Review, 4, 3, Summer 1995, pp. 34–42. It may be true, as Gibson argues, that private social networks in Russia are composed of ‘weak ties’ and feature high levels of political discussion as in the West, but such similarities cannot be assumed to be spurring the growth of civil society or consolidation of democracy in Russia as Gibson assumes (p. 66), if we consider the growing distance between elite and local networks. Bertram Silverman & Murray Yanowitch, New Rich, New Poor, New Russia: Winners and Losers on the Russian Road to Capitalism (Armonk; M. E. Sharpe, 1997), p. 129. New Russia Barometer IX, as reported at http://www.russiavotes.org/rvwhatsnew.htm, accessed 18 July 2003. ‘About 85 Percent of Russians Regret USSR Dissolution’, Interfax, Moscow, 28 January 2000; and ‘Poll: Majority of Russians Lament for Brezhnev's “Golden Age” ’, Agence France Press, 29 January 1999. Fish, ‘Dynamics of Democratic Erosion’, p. 64. White & McAllister, ‘Putin and His Supporters’, p. 386. Bova, ‘Political Culture’, pp. 185–186. Vladimir Putin, ‘Inaugural State of the Nation Address to the Russian Parliament’, 8 July 2000. Neil Chatterjee, ‘Interview—Russian Opposition Leaders Say No Free Speech’, Reuters, 12 February 2002, see http://www.eng.yabloko.ru/Publ/2002/agency/reuters‐120202.html. Quoted in Jonathan Thatcher, ‘As Russian Election Nears, TV Independence Goes’, Reuters, 26 June 2003. Freedom House, Freedom of the Press 2003: A Global Survey of Media Independence, 30 April 2003, as reported at http://www.freedomhouse.org/pfs2003/pfs2003.pdf, accessed 15 July 2003. Yuri Levada, ‘Sotsvopros’, Novaya gazeta, 30 July 2001, as cited in Domrin, ‘Ten Year's Later’, p. 206. Hudson, ‘Civil Society in Russia’, p. 221; see also Weigle ‘On the Road to the Civic Forum’. John Squier, ‘Civil Society and the Challenge of Russian “Gosudarstvennost” ’, Demokratizatsiya, 10, 2, 2002, pp. 166–182, esp. p. 169. See also Hale, ‘Civil Society from Above’; and Alexander Nikitin & Jane Buchanan, ‘The Kremlin's Civic Forum: Cooperation or Co‐optation for Civil Society in Russia?’, Demokratizatsiya, 10,2, Spring 2002, pp. 179–197. Rudra Sil, interviews with Evgeniya Gvozhdeva, Director, Assotsiyatsiya Sotsial'noi i Trudovoi Informatsii (ASTI), 9 June 2002; Sergei Khramov, President, Sotsprof, 5 June 2002; Aleksandr Shepel, President, Konfederatsiya Truda Rossii (KTR), 8 June 2002; and Irene Stevenson, American Center for International Labor Solidarity, Moscow, 4 June 2002. Andrei Piontkovsky, Director of the Moscow Centre for Strategic Research, argues that Putin ‘can throw one or two people out of the country, but he can't do anything to change the political and economic power structure that developed under El'tsin and that over the past two years has showed itself to be quite strong’; quoted in Francesca Mereu, ‘Russia: Putin Presidency at Two‐Year Mark—Do Oligarchs Still Have a Role? (Part 1)’, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Moscow, 19 April 2002. Similar scepticism is also expressed in Treisman, ‘Russia Renewed?’ See ibid.; Neil Robinson, ‘The Economy and the Prospects for Anti‐Democratic Development in Russia’, Europe‐Asia Studies, 52, 8, December 2000, pp. 1391–1416; and Neil Robinson, ‘Mr. Putin and the Oligarchs’, Washington Post, 22 July 2000. The draft law was to declare all mineral deposits to be state‐owned and require privatised oil companies to sign concessions and share revenues with the government; see Stanislav Menshikov, ‘Dancing With the Oligarchs: Privatisation or Nationalisation?’, Moscow Tribune, 2 August 2002. The opposition to Russia's policy on Iraq is evident in the comments of Yukos chief Mikhail Khodorkovsky; see ‘Die Welt: Khodorkovsky vs. Putin’, Pravda.Ru, 15 April 2003, as printed at http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/88/351/9714_Khodorkovsky.html, accessed 15 July 2003. Putin, ‘Inaugural State of the Nation Address to the Russian Parliament’. ‘Russia's Seven New Super‐Regions’, Reuters, 31 May 2001. See Robinson, ‘The Economy and the Prospects for Anti‐Democractic Development of Russia’, p. 1391. Putin, ‘Inaugural State of the Nation Address to the Russian Parliament’. Vladimir Putin, ‘State of the Nation Address to the Russian Parliament’, 18 April 2002. ‘Anatomiya Russkoi Dushi: Desyatiletie otechestvennykh reform v rasshifrovke sotsiologov’, Izvestiya, 16 April 2002, cited in Domrin, ‘Ten Years Later’, p. 202. Note that, adding the 48% favouring Russia's revival as a ‘mighty global power’ to the 15.3% who named a ‘return to socialist ideals and values’ and the 8% who named Russia's ‘uniqueness as a nation, special historical mission of Russian people’, over 70% would subscribe to themes that are far removed from the kind of liberal democratic orientation many expected to find over the course of the post‐Soviet transition. Theodore Karasik, ‘Putin and Shoigu: Reversing Russia's Decline’, Demokratizatsiya, 8, 2, Spring 2000, p. 178; and ‘Russia's Growing Religious Repression’, Washington Post, 5 May 2002. Vladimir Shlapentokh, ‘Putin's First Year in Office: The New Regime's Uniqueness in Russian History’, Communist and Post‐Communist Studies, 34, 2, 2001, pp. 371–399 at p. 374. Alexander Motyl, ‘Why Empires Re‐emerge: Imperial Collapse and Imperial Revival in Comparative Perspective’, Comparative Politics, 31, 2, January 1999, p. 137. See also Dmitry Shlapentokh, ‘The Illusions and Realities of Russian Nationalism’, The Washington Quarterly, 23, 1, Winter 2000, pp. 174–177, 182–186. Balzer, ‘Demography and Democracy in Russia’, p. 100. Since May 2000 racist attacks have injured more than 100 foreigners. The most extremist fascist organisation, the People's National Party, claims that its membership includes 10,000 members from across the country and has been growing rapidly since 2000; see ‘Russia's Culture of Racism’, Los Angeles Times, 19 July 2002; and Peter Baker, ‘Attacks on Foreigners Rising in Russia: Frequency of Violence, Recruiting by Fascist Groups Alarm Kremlin’, Washington Post, 11 August 2002. White & McAllister, ‘Putin and His Supporters’, p. 388. On this point see ibid., p. 384; and Richard Rose, Neil Munro & Stephen White, ‘How Strong is Vladimir Putin's Support?’, Post‐Soviet Affairs, 16, 4, October–December 2000, p. 304. Bova, ‘Political Culture’, p. 186; and V. Shlapentokh, ‘Putin's First Year in Office’, pp. 378–379. White & McAllister, ‘Putin and His Supporters’, p. 390; quote from p. 397. Ron Popeski, ‘Putin Sets High Growth Target, Wages War on Poverty’, Reuters, Moscow, 16 May 2003. Richard Rose & Don Chull Shin, ‘Democratization Backwards: The Problem of Third‐Wave Democracies’, British Journal of Political Science, 31, 2, April 2001, p. 331. Rose & Shin use this phrase to describe the fact that third‐wave democracies have introduced competitive elections before consolidating such basic institutions as the rule of law and civil society. Kazimierz Poznanski, ‘Transition and Its Dissenters: An Introduction’, East European Politics and Society, 15, 2, Spring 2001, pp. 207–221. Colton & McFaul, ‘Are Russians Undemocratic?’, p. 118.