Is the Russian federation becoming more democratic? Moscow‐regional relations and the development of the post‐Soviet Russian State

This article addresses the condition of Russian democracy by focusing on the developing political relations between the central government and regional governments. A situation of profound ambivalence and ambiguity has evolved since ratification of the Russian Federation Constitution in December 1993. Regional governments have found it possible to gain a degree of political autonomy uncharacteristic of Russia's long historical experience, yet increasingly in line with global trends toward decentralization of governmental authority. Two political patterns in the current Russian Federation are explored, both of them promising broad and enduring significance. First, the political ambiguity of relations between the national government and regional authorities may provide the context in which divided government serves to enable democracy, despite the appearance of authoritarian rule in many regions themselves. Second, the nature of the interaction between the centre and regional authorities may be breaking new ground, in terms of flexible solutions to intra‐state relations among different levels of government. Because certain aspects of centre‐regional relations in the Russian Federation replicate comparable issues elsewhere (particularly regarding the ethnic‐territorial dimension of politics), the Federation's approaches and solutions to this aspect of state‐formation could suggest useful lessons for other parts of the world.     

Development and political legitimacy: the cases of Iraq and Afghanistan

Development's policies are based on a set of premises: state‐building, state of law, democratisation, accountability and privatisation. The idea is that the Western concept of democracy could be implemented through the development of a ‘civil society’ of the building from scratch of new institutions. Such a model works when there is political will from the local political authorities and the society to adopt such a model (as was the case in Poland and Hungary after the collapse of the Soviet Union). But in any case a policy of development should be based on political legitimacy. In Iraq, as well as Afghanistan, political legitimacy means abiding with nationalism, Islam and local political culture (often based on clan‐ism and networks). In Iraq, the US policy has deliberately ignored the issue of legitimacy. In Afghanistan, because the US intervention was not part of a great design, it relied more on local constraints and thus has been more effective, or at least, less disruptive. The issue is not opposing a Western model of democracy to a national authoritarian political culture, but to root democracy into the local political culture. If not the policy of strengthening civil society, through political and military pressure as well as NGO's, has a disruptive effect and may lead to a conservative, nationalist and religious backlash.     

State of the world 2017: autocratization and exclusion?

This article presents evidence of a global trend of autocratization. The most visible feature of democracy – elections – remains strong and is even improving in some places. Autocratization mainly affects non-electoral aspects of democracy such as media freedom, freedom of expression, and the rule of law, yet these in turn threaten to undermine the meaningfulness of elections. While the majority of the world’s population lives under democratic rule, 2.5 billion people were subjected to autocratization in 2017. Last year, democratic qualities were in decline in 24 countries across the world, many of which are populous such as India and the United States. This article also presents evidence testifying that men and wealthy groups tend to have a strong hold on political power in countries where 86% of the world population reside. Further, we show that political exclusion based on socio-economic status in particular is becoming increasingly severe. For instance, the wealthy have gained significantly more power in countries home to 1.9 billion of the world’s population over the past decade.     

俄罗斯人的社会政治价值取向

俄罗斯社会基本上摆脱了苏联时期意识形态的束缚.受经济自由化等因素影响,消费社会价值观和实用主义原则日渐深入人心,民众社会政治价值取向发生深刻变化.民主价值观的认识与践行民主的形式之间存在差距,导致社会与政权关系疏远.实现俄罗斯社会的团结,必须坚持社会公正,加强法制和国家组织建设,提高行政和社会管理水平.     

What is democracy? A reconceptualization of the quality of democracy

Works on the quality of democracy propose standards for evaluating politics beyond those encompassed by a minimal definition of democracy. Yet, what is the quality of democracy? This article first reconstructs and assesses current conceptualizations of the quality of democracy. Thereafter, it reconceptualizes the quality of democracy by equating it with democracy pure and simple, positing that democracy is a synthesis of political freedom and political equality, and spelling out the implications of this substantive assumption. The proposal is to broaden the concept of democracy to address two additional spheres: government decision-making – political institutions are democratic inasmuch as a majority of citizens can change the status quo – and the social environment of politics – the social context cannot turn the principles of political freedom and equality into mere formalities. Alternative specifications of democratic standards are considered and reasons for discarding them are provided.     

The Challenge of Revolutionary Terrorism to Turkish Democracy 1960-80

After the dramatic failure of the socialist Turkish Labour Party in the election of 1969 many extremist left-wing ideologists seemed to regard terrorism as a legitimate method of achieving their objectives. Cayan, for instance, made it clear early in the 1970s that he considered that there was no alternative and that political power had to be obtained through the methods of armed violence. Although one of the main factors responsible for political violence was the autocratic state tradition and the rigid understanding about prevention of political terrorism and violence, the major political parties also failed to play a constructive role in protecting democracy in Turkey. The left in the period of 1960-80 claimed that parliamentary democracy in Turkey was a device to perpetuate social injustice and backwardness, allowing the upper classes to enrich themselves by maintaining semi-feudal relations in society while the right-wing groups considered that democracy had destroyed the traditional social order and its values, allowing the left the freedom to subvert and undermine the national integrity and character. In this framework, this article assumes that these bloody years in Turkey have many lessons for preventing revolutionary terrorism in a pluralistic environment.     

Marketization,Class Structure,and Democracy in China: Contrasting Regional Experiences

After two and half decades of market reforms in China, the question of whether reforms have created favourable social conditions for democracy and whether the country's emerging entrepreneurial class will serve as the democratic social base have become hotly debated issues in both academic and policy circles. Based upon an analysis of two regions – Sunan and Wenzhou, the two prototypical local development patterns in China – the article argues that different patterns of economic development have produced distinct local level social and political configurations, only one of which is likely to foster the growth of democratic practices. It suggests that China's political future is largely dependent upon the emerging class structure and class relations that reform and development have produced. If the market reforms and economic development only enrich a few (like the Sunan case), then the possibility of democratic transition will likely be very bleak. Nonetheless, the possibility of a brighter alternative exists, as demonstrated by the Wenzhou case. These arguments thus link China's political transition to critical social conditions, echoing Barrington Moore's influential work on the social origins of democracy and dictatorship.     

戈尔巴乔夫“新思维”背景下苏联对宗教问题认识的转向

戈尔巴乔夫上台以后,形成了以"民主化"和"公开性"为标志的"新思维"。但是在宗教领域,他及其所领导的苏联党和政府忽略了对社会主义条件下宗教问题的理论思考,在对宗教本质问题缺乏认识的前提下,单纯地将宗教政策的调整当作是营造良好社会氛围、提升国家声誉以及谋求与西方建立共同价值基础的工具,最终导致宗教矛盾激化,宗教问题延烧到社会政治领域、民族关系领域,演变成为推倒苏联大厦的重要推手之一。     

Democratization and Civilian Control of the Military in Taiwan

Over the last 20 years, Taiwan has witnessed an impressive transition from authoritarian one-party rule to liberal democracy. This included considerable changes in the relations between the civilian political elites and the armed forces. While under the emergency laws of the authoritarian regime the military had been a powerful political force, during democratization the elected civilians have managed to curb military political power and have successively widened their influence over former exclusively military prerogatives. This article argues that the development of Taiwan's civil–military relations can be explained as the result of civilians using increasingly robust strategies to enhance their influence over the military. This was made possible by a highly beneficial combination of historical conditions and factors inside and outside the military that strengthened the political power of the civilian elites and weakened the military's bargaining power. The article finds that even though partisan exploitation of civilian control instruments could potentially arouse civil–military conflict in the future, civil–military relations in general will most likely remain supportive of the further consolidation of Taiwan's democracy.     

Civil society,political stability,and state power in Central Asia: cooperation and contestation

This article develops a concept of civil society in Central Asia distinct from that which emerged from the East European communist societies of the late 1980s. Kazakhstan presents a case study of a civil society that conceptually can be located between the vibrant civil society of the Baltic democracies and the civil society of the strongly repressive environments of Belarus or Uzbekistan. Kazakhstan's authoritarian structures and cultural traditions make it difficult to develop strong independent civic organizations – cooperation tends to mark state-civil society relations more than contestation, which shaped much of Eastern Europe's experience. Even in a context of relative affluence where civil society organizations are allowed some space to engage in critical activities, contestation tends to be minimized. This is only partially related to state suppression and cooptation; a political culture that views democratic processes as potentially destabilizing is also a significant factor. Kazakhstan represents a distinct Central Asian model of civil society, comparable to Russia but qualitatively different from that found in either Eastern or Western Europe, where civil society is less willing to confront the state, more cooperative with the authoritarian system, and wary of the potential for civic activism to degenerate into instability. Differentiating types of civil society is important because a key component of Western democracy assistance programmes has been providing assistance to build and strengthen civil societies. By refining our understanding of distinct civil society patterns in Central Asia, we can enhance our knowledge of political processes in this critical region, and we may improve the effectiveness of democracy assistance programmes. The study is grounded in field research, interviews, civil society workshops, survey research, and government documents.     

Governance in Central Asia: national in form,Soviet in content

American policy toward Central Asia is based on a serious misperception of the region's problems and potential for non‐violent political change. The reality is that the five Central Asian states are not post‐Soviet but neo‐Soviet. The former Communist Party bosses retain the nomenklatura system of centralised and hierarchical rule. The regimes also resemble the clan‐based autocracies of post‐colonial Africa, but with the mechanisms of the modern police state. These countries face all the challenges common to the Third World, but are less amenable to positive external influences or to the development of pluralist politics and civil society. While the regimes have mixed prospects for retaining power, none is likely to succeed in economic development or in responding to social change.     

The Kurdistan Referendum Movement: Political Opportunity Structures and National Identity

This article examines the lack of mass mobilization by Iraqi Kurds to establish an independent Kurdistan. It argues that while the outcome of an unofficial January 2005 referendum – in which 98 per cent of Kurds supported independence – was a clear expression of their will, the political opportunity structures within which the Kurdistan Referendum Movement operates are closed to the formation of a mass-based social movement. Utilizing data from a survey of Kurdish elites and activists, as well as follow-up interviews, this analysis provides insights into the future of democracy in Iraq and the value of political opportunity theory in understanding mass mobilization.     

Democratic theory,the courts and the press

Powerful social forces block the transition from authoritarianism to democracy. Economic, political and social stability has not yet been achieved. The corporatist political and social structures have not been transformed to allow the vast majority to enjoy the basic necessities that ensure a life of dignity. Institutional structures of government, such as an independent judiciary, must be developed and stabilized. The rule of law and the guarantees of due process have to be consolidated and become an accepted, basic requirement of social interaction. Creating a specific kind of deliberative democracy based on the epistemic value of democratic decision making and discussion is the only way forward. This justificatory theory is more likely to allow for equal participation and rational discourse among all segments of the population. Objective information on important societal issues is a necessary prerequisite for such participation. This requires an independent press that adequately performs its democratic functions. Moreover, an independent judiciary has an indispensable role to play in this process, particularly in protecting the free flow of information to the people so that they can make informed choices on issues crucial to a democracy.     

From local government to local governance: Re‐casting British local democracy

The traditional debate about local government and local democracy has focused almost exclusively upon elected local authorities. The advent of local governance (the division of decision‐making authority and service provision between local authorities and a range of non‐elected organizations) necessitates a move away from this obsession with elections. It requires an evaluation of the diversity of local organizations; the elected element is but one part of a complex mosaic of bodies operating locally. Partnerships, networks and contracts have become integral features of the local political scene. Studies of local democracy can no longer simply dismiss the non‐elected elements as non‐democratic and unaccountable; their diverse patterns of accountability require scrutiny not blanket dismissal. This article explores contemporary local democracy in Britain and argues that the complexities of governance necessitate a re‐casting of British local democracy and its limits.     

A new turn to authoritarian Rule in Russia?

Many observers have pointed to the increasingly authoritarian nature of President Putin's regime in Russia. This apparent turn away from democracy has generally been attributed either to Russian political culture or to the security background of Putin himself and many of those he has brought to office. However, analysis of the democratization literature suggests that the sources of Russia's authoritarianism may lie in the nature of the initial transition from Soviet rule, and in particular the way in which elites were able to act with significant independence from civil society forces because of the weakness of such forces. This weakness enabled successive elites led by Mikhail Gorbachev, Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin to construct a political system in which popularly based involvement and participation were severely restricted. In this sense, Putin is merely building on what went before, not changing the regime's basic trajectory.     

National democratization theory and global governance: civil society and the liberalization of the Asian Development Bank

Contributing to a growing literature on democracy beyond the nation-state, this article draws on aspects of national democratization theory in order to analyse empirical processes of democracy. By combining insights from transition theory and the theory of political opportunity structures, the article examines the case of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). While the ADB for a long time has been described as a closed, unresponsive and unaccountable international organization, a recent evaluation praised the Bank for its good practices concerning transparency, participation and accountability. The article uses the analytical framework to highlight the interaction between hard-liners and soft-liners within the ADB and explores the role of different transnational civil society actors in the processes that seem to have strengthened the democratic credentials of the ADB. While finding significant divisions within the ADB as well as amongst civil society actors targeting the bank, overall the article argues that transnational civil society actors, interacting with soft-liners within the ADB, have contributed to the implementation of reforms, which in turn create political opportunities for further civil society activism. The reform processes, however, are best described as processes of liberalization – rather than democratization.     

Beyond the fallacy of coup-ism: conceptualizing civilian control of the military in emerging democracies

It is consensus in the democratization literature that civilian control of the military is a necessary ingredient for democracy and democratic consolidation. However, there is considerable disagreement on what civilian control of the military exactly entails and there is a lack of solid theoretical arguments for how weak or absent civilian control affects democratic governance. Furthermore, a considerable portion of the research literature is captured by the fallacy of coup-ism, ignoring the many other forms in which military officers can constrain the authority of democratically elected political leaders to make political decisions and get them implemented. This article addresses these lacunae by providing a new conceptual framework for the analysis of civil–military relations in emerging democracies. From democracy theory it derives a definition of civilian control as a certain distribution of decision-making power between civilian leaders and military officers. Based on this definition, the authors develop a five-dimensional concept of civilian control, discuss the effects of weakly institutionalized civilian control on the quality of democracy and address the chances for democratic consolidation.     

Why monarchy persists in small states: the cases of Tonga,Bhutan and Liechtenstein

Monarchical rule is said to have become anachronistic in a modern age of legal rational orders and representative institutions. And yet, despite successive waves of democratization having usurped their authority across much of the globe, a select few monarchs remain defiant, especially in small states. This stubborn persistence raises questions about the application of Huntington’s “King’s Dilemma” in which modern monarchs are apparently trapped in a historical cycle that will ultimately strip them of meaningful power. Drawing on in-depth historical research in three small states that have sought to combine democratic and monarchical rule – Tonga, Bhutan, and Liechtenstein – we argue that, contra Huntington, monarchs in small states are neither doomed to disappear nor are they likely to be overwhelmed by the dilemma posed by modernist development. The lesson is that the size of political units is a critical variable too often overlooked in existing studies.     

The legislature and agenda politics of social welfare: a comparative analysis of authoritarian and democratic regimes in South Korea

The article mainly seeks to explain the legislature’s preferences in social welfare before and after democratization using South Korea as a case study. Based on an original dataset that consists of all executive and of legislative branch-submitted bills between 1948 and 2016 – roughly 60,000– legislative priority on social welfare is compared over time, and tested using logistic regressions. The key focus of analysis is whether and how the level of democracy affected the degree and universality of social welfare priority. The findings show that the promotion of social welfare is positively related to higher levels of democracy in a continuous fashion, which clearly points to the need to avoid applying a simple regime dichotomy – authoritarian or democratic – when seeking to understand social welfare development. Going further, the article examines the legislature's priority in welfare issues within a presidential structure and under majoritarian electoral rule, at different levels of democracy. The result shows that the higher levels of democracy are, the more the legislative branch contributes to the overall salience of social welfare legislative initiatives as compared to the executive branch. Moreover, the legislative branch itself prioritizes a social welfare agenda – alongside democratic deepening – over other issues.     

法律移植与印度近代的社会转型

英国政治结构独具的法治主义传统使得由英国殖民统治所引领的近代印度社会转型与法律移植密切相关。英国法的输入奠定了"英—印法"体系的基础,法律移植通过为印度注入民主、自由、平等、权利等现代理念促进印度社会转型的同时,在解决社会陋习等方面问题上显得有些力不从心,传统文化的许多消极因素仍然困扰着印度社会及其诸多民众,贫穷和压迫并不罕见,全面实现社会平等、自由仍然任重而道远。