第五届国家杜马选举前的俄罗斯政党基本态势

普京总统第二任期内对政党法和选举法进行了修改，俄罗斯政党体制进一步法制化和规范化，政党数量减少。“统一俄罗斯”党、新组建的“公正俄罗斯”党、俄共和“自由民主党”最有可能进入第五届国家杜马。右翼自由主义政党四分五裂，但自由主义思潮在社会上仍有相当影响。俄罗斯政党体制仍处于转型过程之中，将在“主权民主”的框架内建立具有俄罗斯特色的政党体制。     

关于俄罗斯"可控民主"的若干思考

俄罗斯的“可控民主”并不是在普京上台后才形成的。它经历了叶利钦时期和普京时期两个不同阶段。叶利钦时期是“可控民主”的发轫阶段 ,那时还处于一种无序状态 ;普京时期则是“可控民主”的进一步巩固和发展阶段。叶利钦时期制定的俄罗斯现行宪法是“可控民主”的主要法律基础。“可控民主”保留了西方民主的若干外部特征 ,同时受到国家政权和统治机构的严格控制和限制。普京执政以来 ,采取了一系列措施加强“可控民主”。“可控民主”对于俄罗斯来说有其合理性和必要性 ,适应俄国的现实需要。但是它也有局限性 ,缺乏有效的制衡机制。目前 ,俄罗斯的“可控民主”只是一种过渡形式 ,它必须随着时代的发展而发展 ,把民主与国家的合理调控有机地结合起来。     

中俄经济政治转型对美国全球战略的制约

自由市场与西方民主是美国实施全球战略的两个主要制度依托。如果说冷战时期存在着苏联模式与西方模式两种现代化发展道路的话,那么,苏联的解体意味着苏联模式的历史终结,而美国主导的西方模式随之似乎成了通向现代化的唯一途径。中国和俄罗斯在1990年代初开始由计划经济向市场经济转型,俄罗斯一开始就将美国式民主和自由市场作为其经济政治转型的目标模式,中国则在摸着石头过河的战略下融入国际市场经济体系,并在此过程中实现经济政治体制的转型与改进。20年后,这一历史进程的结果已经显现,以市场化为目标的中俄经济政治转型走向了不同于美国模式、甚至某种程度上是与之背道而驰的经济政治体制——国家主导型市场经济与非西方式民主。     

关于俄罗斯文化“转型”几个问题的再认识

关于俄罗斯文化发展的演变问题 ,现在中国学者有一种较为普遍的看法 ,即 10 0 0多年的历史 ,5次的社会—文化转型。这 5次“转型”是一种钟摆式的、在东西两大文化磁场中有规律地“摆动”。但俄罗斯文化的发展演变趋势未必如此 ,俄罗斯接受基督教 ,未必是向西方的文化“摆动” ,因为拜占庭文化的实质并不是西方文化 ;蒙古—鞑靼文化的楔入 ,虽然大大加强了俄罗斯文化的“东方血液” ,但鞑靼文化实质上也代表不了真正的“东方文化”。俄罗斯文化的前两次“转型” ,实质上是从制度层面和精神层面上奠定了俄罗斯文化的“东方”类型基础。但这只是俄罗斯一种特有的“东方型”文化。     

俄罗斯市民社会发展的当代困境及其对法治进程的影响

苏联解体后,俄罗斯开始在快速转型中大力推进民主法治进程,并把市民社会看作法治国家建设的希望和动力。然而事实表明,俄罗斯的市民社会在发展中出现了诸多困境和问题,并对其民主法治进程产生了重要的影响,决定着俄罗斯的法治国家建设路径。     

俄罗斯的“主权民主”：由来、争议及前景

“主权民主”是俄罗斯从当今国际政治现实及俄国内政治需要出发而提出来的，它体现了普京的治国理念与政治哲学，折射出俄罗斯特有的历史传统和民族特性。但在俄国内，对“主权民主”的科学性、合法性及其价值定位，都还存在着争议。“主权民主”反映了俄罗斯一定社会发展时期的政治现实，但它毕竟是一种过渡性政治形式。从长远看，俄罗斯的政治体制仍将以民主为导向逐步健全与完善。作为一种理论，“主权民主”上升为俄罗斯国家意识形态的可能性不大。俄罗斯主权民主的适用性和有效性如何，有待世人进一步观察。     

普京之治:俄罗斯的复兴之路

普京执政第 1任期已满 ,4年来 ,俄罗斯彻底告别了“叶利钦之乱” ,迎来了“普京之治” ,俄罗斯的转型也进入到了一个理性的政治发展周期 ;在这 4年中 ,普京逐步形成了一种“适应”俄罗斯文化性格特征的执政理念 ,确立了强力政治与自由经济相结合的治国方略 ,在政治、经济、外交等各个方面都取得了令俄国人满意的成就 ,使俄罗斯看到了振兴大国地位的希望。但是 ,俄罗斯的民主政治和市场经济仍然是不成熟的 ,要真正重振俄罗斯大国地位的目标 ,普京还面临着诸多挑战 ,俄罗斯的复兴还有待观察     

“第二次转型”的理论向度与原社会主义国家转型的多样性——以普京时代的俄罗斯制度转型为例

对于俄罗斯而言，叶利钦时代与普京时代的转型既是一个延续的过程，但又呈现出截然不同的面貌，体现出一定的断裂性。自上个世纪90年代和本世纪初开始，俄罗斯改革的目标，至少在口头宣示上，与其说是从极权体制向民主制度以及从计划经济向市场经济转型，不如说是要从叶利钦时代转型形成的制度陷阱——非效率制度均衡中脱离开来，试图通过增加国家能力的途径建立新的效率制度均衡。运用“第二次转型”的理论范畴有助于全面认识发生在俄罗斯的由传统体制向现代民主政治和市场经济的转化以及与此相伴的社会转型进程，能够对叶利钦时代俄罗斯之所以败、普京时代俄罗斯之所以兴提供一种新的解释，同时，这也表明原社会主义国家转型具有丰富的多样性。     

论俄罗斯新制度安排及其特点

现阶段，俄罗斯基本上完成了大规模的制度变迁，正在努力构建一种与俄罗斯本土价值观念相适应的制度安排。这种制度安排的基本特点体现在“可控的民主”与“可控的市场”，它们被认为是俄罗斯“可控式”制度安排的主要内容。这一制度安排的产生基于以下社会背景：第一，叶利钦时期所推行的“自由式”的制度安排，被俄罗斯转型10多年的实践证明在俄罗斯行不通；第二，普京治理国家的理念及普京政府的政策措施的推动；第三，“可控式”制度安排是俄罗斯民族价值观的体现，并成为俄罗斯经济增长及其未来崛起的一个重要推动因素。在这种推断的基础上，本文对俄罗斯“可控式”制度安排及其主要内容和具体表现，以及它对于拉动俄罗斯经济增长、促进俄罗斯崛起的作用进行了分析，试图给出一个结论：俄经济发展将有可能沿着具有俄罗斯特征的“可控式”制度安排的方向演进。     

论转型时期俄罗斯公民社会：兴起、现状与展望

苏联解体后俄罗斯进入转型时期。转型时期所有制结构的多元化、民主政治制度的发展、社会思潮的多元化,成为俄罗斯公民社会兴起的经济、政治和文化因素。其中存在的问题主要有：非政府组织作用有限、中产阶级不成熟、公民政治参与意识淡漠。推进俄罗斯公民社会的对策有：大力培育中产阶级、培育公民文化、发挥非政府组织的作用、积极转变政府职能、发展市场经济同时重视解决社会问题。俄罗斯公民社会仍处于发展的初级阶段,对其培育是一个长期的渐进过程。     

Long-term outlook for China’s political reform

China’s post-1978 economic reform is generally acclaimed as success, for the Chinese economy has expanded nine-fold in a matter of 25 years and the country rose from the world’s 34th largest trading nation in 1978 to the third largest in 2004 ahead of Japan. Interestingly, the Chinese experiment is often described in the West as “economic reform without political reform”. This begets the question: how could a politically un-reformed system be able to deliver such an economic miracle? In reality, China has conducted, by its own standards, major political reforms since 1978. Though far short of the Western expectations, the Chinese experience since 1978 should better be described as “great economic reforms with lesser political reforms”, without which China’s economic success would be inconceivable. China’s “lesser political reforms” have reduced country’s opportunities for greater political change, thus alienating many reform-minded intellectuals. Nevertheless, it may also have helped China avert the possible economic and social upheavals which could have resulted from rushing too fast into a radically different economic and political system. There is a strongly held belief, especially among the more ‘ideological’ observers of Chinese affairs that unless there were a radical political reform, perhaps tantamount to a revolution, to rid China of its “oppressive” Communist Party, the Chinese system would inevitably collapse just like what had happened in the USSR and Eastern Europe. As the party has been in power, China had been predicted to face collapse in the aftermath of the Tiananmen crisis of 1989, the Soviet Union’s disintegration of 1990, the death of Deng Xiaoping in 1996, and the Asian financial crisis of 1997 and the 2003 outbreak of SARS. Yet all these forecasts turned out to be wrong and the track record of the China doomsayers over the past 20 years is indeed poor. Will China become a democracy through its political reform in 20 years? Indeed, a full democracy could be the best scenario for China, the region and beyond, but it is difficult to give a definitive answer, which will, to a great extent, depend on how to achieve democracy in China, i.e. the costs/risks involved, as well as what kind of ultimate shape such a democracy will take. If full-fledged democratisation will take more time, the pressure for a more accountable government and more democratic society is growing, and this trend will continue with the rise of China’s middle class and civil society. Therefore, the most likely scenario for China in the coming two decades is that China will continue its own approach to political reform, and the relative successful experience of China’s economic reform may well set a pattern for China’s political reform in the years to come. As part of Europe’s general approach towards China’s political change, it is in Europe’s interest to assist, in line with the view of most Chinese, gradual reform rather than revolution or ‘regime change’, which could produce hugely negative consequences for China itself, Sino–European relations and European interests in China and even East Asia.     

News,Talk, Opinion,Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy

Deliberative democracy can be defined as a political system based on citizens' free discussion of public issues. While most scholars have discussed deliberative democracy normatively, this study attempts to test the validity of a model of deliberative democracy through examining the interrelationships among its four components: newsmedia use, political conversation, opinion formation, and political participation. Sufficient empirical evidence was found to support the hypotheses that (a) news-media use is closely associated with the frequency of political conversation in daily life both at general and issue-specific levels; (b) willingness to argue with those who have different opinions is influenced by majority perceptions and by news-media use and political talk; (c) news-media use and political conversation have positive effects on certain measures of the quality of opinions (argument quality, consideredness, and opinionation) and perhaps on opinion consistency; and (d) news-media use and political conversation are closely associated also with participatory activities, but more so with "campaigning" than "complaining."     

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.     

Inclusive institutions and stability of transition toward democracy in post-civil war states

This article attempts to bring together research on democratization and democratic consolidation with research on civil war termination. The post-civil war environment is contentious and the transition toward democracy achieved after a civil war is susceptible to failure. The side that wins the democratic elections in a post-war state may use its democratically won power to dismantle the institutions of democracy and repress the opposition. The fear of constant marginalization in the political processes as well as the fear of being repressed might create incentives for the defeated party to return to civil war. By utilizing the expected utility framework, this article suggests that former rivals would support democratic transition if they were confident that inclusive institutions ensured that they could achieve their political interests through the democratic processes. After analysing the data on post-civil war transitions toward democracy (TTD) from 1946–2005, I found that the proportional representation system and the parliamentary system are the most important institutions that help sustain the post-civil war TTD.     

东北亚国际秩序的转型与大国的角色定位

从世界发展趋势看,所谓国际体系的转型期即指目前的国际体系向世界体系转换的过渡期。这一转型期客观地要求各个大国的正确的角色定位,即由以往的霸权模式向主导型大国模式的转换。中国欲成为引领世界发展方向的主导型大国,不仅要从文化深层确立"类本位"意识体系,而且也要建构以"和谐世界"为核心并由正义、公正、合理、民主、共赢、和平为其结构的理念体系。     

Popular understanding of democracy in contemporary China

By taking the official state ideology into consideration, this article seeks to contribute to the study of public opinion of democracy under non-democratic regimes by analysing both qualitative and quantitative evidence collected in China. An examination of the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s discourse on democracy reveals that the CCP endorses popular sovereignty and political participation while denying political contestation. Meanwhile, the concept of democracy can have three distinctive meanings among ordinary Chinese: democracy as freedom, democracy as political participation to ensure government accountability, and democracy as good socio-economic performance. Survey data show that the majority of informed Chinese respondents treat democracy as political participation to ensure government accountability, which indicates that Chinese understanding of democracy has reached to a certain degree of consensus that is closer to universally-shared idea of democracy rather than being culturally distinctive.     

Post-civil war democratization: promotion of democracy in post-civil war states, 1946–2005

Post-civil war democratization is a critical element of building sustainable peace in post-civil war states. Yet studies of democratic transition and survival suggest that the post-civil war environment is not hospitable to either the transition toward or the survival of democracy. This inhospitality may be due to the fact that post-civil war environments are contentious. After a civil war, the former protagonists fear for their security and also want to protect their political and economic interests. The central argument of this study is that former rivals can agree to a transition toward democracy to the extent that a stable balance of power exists between the government and rebel groups; a balance that eliminates the sort of security dilemma that would encourage one or both parties to resume armed conflict. Such a balance should ensure access to political power and economic resources. This study identifies factors that contribute to the establishment of a balance of power between former protagonists and factors that affect its stability. The presence of these factors should affect the decision of former protagonists on whether or not they can achieve their political and economic interests if they agree to a transition toward democracy once the civil war ends. Based on this theoretical argument, I have derived empirically testable hypotheses. In the survival analysis performed, I find support for the theoretical arguments. The findings of this study have some policy implications.     

Elections and political change in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina

This article examines attempts to use electoral politics to promote substantive political change in post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina. Since 1990 elections have been a key part of virtually all negotiated agreements to end civil wars. The utility of democracy for building peace is often asserted but rarely backed with long-term commitment and resources on the ground. Bosnia since 1996 is a rare exception. There, international actors sought not only to establish a democratic political system but to use electoral democracy as a tool with which to transform the nature of politics in Bosnia in short order. This article focuses on efforts to shape the development of political parties and the party system, assesses the degree to which it has succeeded and examines the broader implications of Bosnia's experience for other state-building efforts of its kind.     

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.