Transition in Post-Communist States: Triple or Quadruple?

Abstract

When the study of transitions moved from Latin America and southern Europe scholars initially assumed that transition in these two regions would be regime-based ‘double transitions’ of democratisation and marketisation. Gradually, it was accepted by scholars that many post-communist states inherited weak states and institutions, thereby adding a third factor to the transition process of stateness. This ‘triple transition’ has been largely accepted as sufficient to understand post-communist transitions and, in some cases, includes nationality questions. This article builds on the ‘triple transition’ by separating the national and stateness questions within its third aspect and argues that although both processes are interlinked they should be nevertheless separated into separate components (democratisation and marketisation are treated separately but are also closely related phenomena). This article argues two points. First, stateness and the nationality question were until recently ignored by scholars because these were not factors in earlier transitions. Secondly, they were ignored because the relationship of nationhood to the civic state is still under-theorised.