The Perestroika of Demokratizatsiya

Abstract

The twentieth anniversary of Mikhail Gorbachev's rise to power approaches and Demokratizatsiya prepares two issues that will reflect on this topic. Behind the scenes, Demokratizatsiya has decided to carry out a little perestroika of its own. To better carry out its mission and serve its constituency of scholars and policymakers, Demokratizatsiya is enhancing its editorial structure and board, and also increasing its Internet presence to make it more interactive and accessible. The journal's merger with the East European Constitutional Review has further enhanced these changes. These changes cannot be understood in isolation, which makes for a good opportunity to remind our readers of Demokratizatsiya's unique editorial heritage. Our Editorial Heritage Demokratizatsiya was the first journal of its kind dedicated exclusively to the study of the sociopolitical transformation in the newly independent states (NIS) of the former Soviet Union. The journal is readily identified as distinct for many reasons and retains the aura of policy-relevant scholarship and of the fresh (and ultimately very successful) crowd of specialists--both Western and post-Soviet--that formed it. It was meant as a service to both the Sovietologists as well as to policymakers, both of whom lacked fora for discussing the issues underway in the new states. At that time, there was no Internet, the long-running journal Problems of Communism had ceased publication, and other journals were dedicated mostly to the study of the Soviet economy, ancient history, or literature. Although famously (or perhaps infamously) founded not in the hallowed halls of academe but in the undergraduate dormitories of American University between 1990 and 1992, five groups shaped the editorial style of Demokratizatsiya: (1) emerging Western Sovietologists, (2) scholars from the NIS, (3) architects of reforms, (4) scholars from other fields coming in contact with the NIS, and (5) Western policymakers and analysts. To avoid being identified with any one person or ideology, Demokratizatsiya's editorial structure ensured diversity, balance, and excellence. The journal has traditionally been led by three or four executive editors who agree only on their commitment to study the transitions in the NIS in depth. The original executive editors-Louise Shelley, Nikolai Zlobin, and J. Michael Waller--nonetheless left their indelible mark on the journal, which has proved to be fortuitious since these original editors and other scholars invited by the founding students to run the journal turned out to be such an unusually remarkable group. Demokratizatsiya also aligns with the mission of Heldref Publications, the publishing arm of the nonprofit Helen Dwight Reid Educational Foundation, which became the journal's publisher in 1994. Founded in the 1970s under the leadership of Evron M. Kirkpatrick to assist respected publications achieve financial and organizational viability, Heldref and its forty-seven publications provide new ideas, information, and means of communication to scholars, teachers, students, and interested readers. Heldref achieves this with the cooperation of hundreds of scholars and teachers who contribute their time and expertise as editors and advisors. Demokratizatsiya's editorial restructuring, inviting new and leading experts, and its merger with another leading journal, further position it as a centrepiece in this turbulent yet key field. Compared to its peers, Demokratizatsiya is unique in additional ways: mainly in the way that it took the independence of the new republics seriously from the beginning, engaged scholars from the region as a fundamental part of its mission, and fostered a genuine democracy inside the journal--which sometimes makes its management more challenging than in other journals. Additionally, Demokratizatsiya explored, from the beginning, controversial issues that others shunned, namely organized crime, corruption, and the lingering power of the KGB. …