The Limits of Managing Russia’s Party System
The article is devoted to the peculiarities of the Russian State Duma elections on September 18, 2016. It is noted differences from the previous parliamentary elections in Russia associated primarily with a much more stringent admission rules for participation in the elections, a radical strengthening of the various electoral constraints and minimize public scrutiny.
the anti-modrenization trend will become the main feature of the country's political regime for the immediate future - this trend dooms the regime for stagnation, making any attempts at technocratic renewal futile. In order to keep the situation under control, the regime will inevitably resort to greater, most likely pre-emptive, and therefore disproportional repression, which will further exacerabate political conflict.
Russian regional policy in 2015 was focused on the continued dismantling of the modest political reforms introduced during the Medvedev presidency. These changes were implemented in order to minimize the possibility of the emergence and strengthening of new independent political players, and the resultant institutional imbalance toward centralization at the regional level was merely a side effect of this effort. The net effect has been a major strengthening of the power of governors at the expense of all other political actors at the regional level. The governors' power will now only be checked by federal oversight
The chapter is devoted to the peculiarities of the Russian system of political parties. Russia has unique but exceedingly weak party system. The system is weak in terms of the political influence of the parties and the general absence of “thick” local party organisational networks. In the majority of the country’s 85 regions, there are few local, active party organisations, with the exception of the short periods of election campaigning. Instead, the parties are very dependent on the state organs. Moreover, the federal and regional parliaments have little effective power Russia has unique but exceedingly weak party system. The system is weak in terms of the political influence of the parties and the general absence of “thick” local party organisational networks. In the majority of the country’s 85 regions, there are few local, active party organisations, with the exception of the short periods of election campaigning. Instead, the parties are very dependent on the state organs. Moreover, the federal and regional parliaments have little effective power
The article deals with the processes of building the information society and security in the CIS in accordance with modern conditions. The main objective is to review existing mechanisms for the formation of a common information space in the Eurasian region, regarded as one of the essential aspects of international integration. The theoretical significance of the work is to determine the main controls of the regional information infrastructure, improved by the development of communication features in a rapid process.The practical component consists in determining the future policies of the region under consideration in building the information society. The study authors used historical-descriptive approach and factual analysis of events having to do with drawing the contours of today's global information society in the regional refraction.
The main result is the fact that the development of information and communication technologies, and network resources leads to increased threats of destabilization of the socio-political situation in view of the emergence of multiple centers that generate the ideological and psychological background. Keeping focused information policy can not be conceived without the collective participation of States in the first place, members of the group leaders of integration - Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan. Currently, only produced a comprehensive approach to security in the information field in the Eurasian region, but the events in the world, largely thanks to modern technology, make the search for an exit strategy with a much higher speed. The article contributes to the science of international relations, engaging in interdisciplinary thinking that is associated with a transition period in the development of society. A study of current conditions in their relation to the current socio-political patterns of the authors leads to conclusions about the need for cooperation with the network centers of power in the modern information environment, the formation of alternative models of networking, especially in innovation and scientific and technical areas of information policy, and expanding the integration of the field in this region on the information content.
This special publication for the 2012 New Delhi Summit is a collection of articles by government officials from BRICS countries, representatives of international organizations, businessmen and leading researchers.
The list of Russian contributors includes Sergei Lavrov, Foreign Minister of Russia, Maxim Medvedkov, Director of the Trade Negotiations Department of the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, Vladimir Dmitriev, Vnesheconombank Chairman, Alexander Bedritsky, advisor to the Russian President, VadimLukov, Ambassador-at-large of the Russian Foreign Affairs Ministry, and representatives of the academic community.
The publication also features articles by the President of Kazakhstan NursultanNazarbayev and internationally respected economist Jim O’Neil, who coined the term “BRIC”. In his article Jim O’Neil speculates about the future of the BRICS countries and the institution as a whole.
The publication addresses important issues of the global agenda, the priorities of BRICS and the Indian Presidency, the policies and competitive advantages of the participants, as well as BRICS institutionalization, enhancing efficiency and accountability of the forum.