Until a method is found in Russia for generating a non-Soviet (different from the restoration of the pre-Soviet) central system of values, democratic institutions and practices will remain weak. Moreover, the vectors of movement for post-Soviet polities, which twenty years ago were labeled as a “democratic transition” in a burst of overly audacious hope, will remain forking paths.
The issue of capital city relocation is a topic of debate for more than forty countries around the world. In this first book to discuss the issue, Vadim Rossman offers an in-depth analysis of the subject, highlighting the global trends and the key factors that motivate different countries to consider such projects, analyzing the outcomes and drawing lessons from recent capital city transfers worldwide for governments and policy-makers.
A comparative study of the course of development of Ukraine and Belorussia can contribute greatly to understanding the regularities of historical evolution of the Eastern part of Europe, in particular to the alternatives of nation-building. It’s necessary to consider Ukrainian-Belorussian parallels in the regional context, taking into account the influence of various factors. Comparative approach is also fruitful in researching the past and present state of historical science of the two neighboring countries.
The January uprising, 1863-1864 was estimated by its contemporaries as a turning point not only in the Polish history and Russian-Polish relations, but also in the fate of the Russian Empire and nation-building. Though Russian evaluations varied dramatically depending on political and ideological preferences of conservatives, liberals and revolutionaries, they had some common features. In Soviet period many old approaches to the history of uprising were forgotten, it was examining in the narrow framework of formational and class paradigm and progressive international revolutionary cooperation. In post-Soviet period transformation of theoretical basis of historical studies in spirit of pluralism was accompanied by rebirth of the old approaches with both positive and negative consequences.
The durability of authoritarianism in Belarus is an anomaly by world standards. Various studies have noted that Belarus’s regime has significantly exceeded the average lifespan of comparable authoritarian regime types elsewhere around the globe. In July 2014, the Belarusian political regime had outlived the average comparable political regime by between 1 and 17 years, depending on the definition of such regimes.1 This stability is particularly puzzling in the regional post-communist context, where electoral protests toppled authoritarian incumbents in Slovakia, Croatia, Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan (see Bunce and Wolchik, 2011; Hale, 2015).2 Belarus too has experienced conditions apparently advantageous for democratization, including an opposition that has tried to imitate successful mobilization strategies from other countries, popular support for democracy, a relatively high level of economic development, a skilled workforce and geographical proximity to Europe. Despite circumstances similar to those in countries that have overthrown authoritarian regimes, Belarus’ trajectory has diverged from that taken in Ukraine (Burant, 1995; Kuzio and Nordberg, 1999; Korosteleva, 2004; Way, 2010).
The post-Soviet period in Russia has seen the emergence of strong identities shaped around ethnicity issues. The current Putin presidency is marked by a political concern for the 'national question' with strong traditionalist connotations. State dominated politics of identity promoting an encompassing Russian (rossiyskaya) identity aim to become a game changer in nation-building. This agenda has to take in different repertioires of contention, and bridging cleavages within Russian society is not only and primarily a question of elite-tailored politics of identity. It is about the assertion of inclusive identities innate both to the cultural tradition and to the needs of a community confronting modernization challenges.
The contentious politics paradigm provides a general framework for assessing conflict potential in transforming institutional environments that goes beyond institutionalism. However, the territorial dimension of ethnicity historically rooted in Russia and the complex nature of nationalism call for additional theoretical framing. The paper explores the interaction of policy and identity factors to assess the resource capacities of politics of identity for promoting nation-building in a multiethnic society. It uses research and expert sources, poll data and personal expert experience to contribute to 'upgrading' theoretical approaches and public discourse on the future of the Russian nation.
Narratives are instrumental in constructing both national and regional identities. A divided Europe produces conflicting narratives that are constructed to lay claim over privileged, if not exclusive, dominion of the shared neighbourhood. The profoundly polarized historical narratives about the Ukraine are heavily influenced by divergent accounts of its relationship with Russia, ranging from Kievan Rus to the Soviet Union. Both the West and Russia seek to encourage a particular historical narrative in Ukraine that is compatible with their interests in the region. The West emphasizes a binary division of values on the continent, endowing it with a civilizing mission to cement collective hegemony in an exclusive ‘Europe’. Russia, meanwhile, embraces a historical narrative centred on a shared ‘Russian world’ based implicitly on sovereign inequality, in which Moscow holds a privileged position.
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.