574 SEER, 84, 3, JULY 2006 part - the latter two based on compulsory lifetime contributions - does seem closer to evolving Western systems. And as in Western systems, the Duma is reluctantto vote for the taxes necessaryto provide a substantialbase block. But veterans have retained some special advantages over non-veteran pensioners, which signals some continuitywith the Soviet past. The key findings are important. The pensions crisis, from Gorbachev to Putin, was not just an economic crisis,but also in part reflected the struggle between the presidency and the parliament that delayed decisive reform. In additionthere was a failureto develop effectiveinstitutionsto manage pension issues and a linked failureby the executive to give the issue the prioritythat arguablyit merited. The funding crisishad become criticalby 2000, and that criticalitypushed the issues up the agenda, and out into the legislativesea. Chandler is concerned to fix the blame for this long-delayed resolution on the key actors, and on the defining problems of Russia in its first postCommunist decade: the Duma - for promoting 'pension legislation that either could not be realized in practice, or that contained contradictionswith existing policies, thus renderingthe system increasinglyconvoluted and incoherent ' (p. I59); and the executive -for failingto give the issue priority,and for failing to create a coherent and effectivedivision of powers and resources across the regions. The lessons she drawsfrom this analysisare worth noting. First,a malfunctioning system can create as much disaffectionas one that radicallyreassigns rightsand resources.Secondly, a well functioningsystemrequireseffectiveand agreed laws and other institutions.Thirdly, an effectivereformrequiresthat it addressesthe electorate'sviews on and attachmentto the old system- which even if malfunctioningmay contain an admired statement of social cohesion. The fate of the new system will reflect its framers' performance on these criteria,as well as changing views on what a pensions system can and should deliver. This stimulating,carefullyresearchedand well-writtenbook can be recommended to social policy and politicsstudents,and contains materialof interest to a much wider audience. UniversitofBath COLIN LAWSON Primakov,Yevgeny. RussianCrossroads: Toward theNewMillennium. Translated by Felix Rosenthal. Yale UniversityPress,New Haven, CT and London, 2004. x + 337 pp. Notes. Index. J22.50. EVGENII PIMmAKov has been one of the leading figuresin late Soviet and postSoviet Russian politics:a former member of the USSR PresidentialCouncil, intelligence chief, diplomatic envoy, Foreign Minister, and Prime Minister. Additionally,Primakovis also a respectedacademic:a formermember of the USSR Academy of Sciences, and former director of the Institute of World Economics and International Relations (IMEMO). These credentials and experiences serve as an excellent basis from which to comment on Russia during the firstturbulentdecade of its transformation. REVIEWS 575 Primakovclaims his purpose in writing the book is to present an unknown Russia to Americans. This, he hopes, will enable them to understand more fully their new partners in the war against terrorism(p. viii). He intends to provide Russian perspectiveson world events to demonstratethat in general the government and citizens of his country and the US have the same objectives regardingissuesin world politics and economics, but that each country's political, historical and socio-economic circumstances may often find them differing on methods for resolution. Primakov held significant positions at times when the US was in conflict situations(Iraqduring the I99os, Kosovo) and he articulateshow he thinksthe US and internationalcommunity could have worked more closely with Russia (and the USSR) as a more equal partner in striving towards peaceful conflict resolution. He suggests that Russia was a seriouslyunder-utilizedresource. He also states that he did not write 'a biographical book. But it is not a memoir either, although I took part in many of the events I describe'(p.viii). However, in making such a claim, particularlyin light of his intention to provide insight into Russia, Primakovcreates a dilemma for himself. For all intents and purposes, this is a set of memoirs. This is especially the case because the book often lackssufficientcontext and backgroundinformationto claimjustifiablythat it is a broad overviewof Russianconcerns.Indeed, one of the book's weaknessesis that readersmay requirea fairlydetailed knowledge of Soviet and Russian history and politics of the period to comprehend the events, institutionsand political processes Primakovdiscusses.In this respect, the editor and translatorcould have provided far more detailed notes, a foreword , introductory chapter or glossary...