How Putin''s Russia embraces authoritarianism: The case of Yegor Gaidar

The ability of an Orwellian society to bend the will of individuals and force them to change their minds is well known. Putin's Russia, however, has proved that not only a harsh totalitarian state, such as the Soviet Union, but also a somewhat milder, authoritarian regime is able to achieve almost the same result. Such a regime can threaten to diminish the income, privileges or social status of prominent people. By murdering or jailing only a few active people (businesspeople, journalists and politicians), the regime can show its potential opponents that everyone in the country is vulnerable. Looking back on Stalin's time, one cannot help but think that he could have achieved his goals and stayed in power until his death without using such horrendous acts of violence. The ideological evolution of Yegor Gaidar represents a strong piece of evidence in support of this thesis.     

Between 'Common Values' and Competing Universals—The Promotion of the EU's Common Values through the European Neighbourhood Policy

The aim of this article is to discuss the position of common values in defining the EU's identity by using the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) as an example. It is argued that the notion 'common values' is used by the EU institutions as both a universal and as an EU concept, which highlights the abstract nature of these values. This abstraction is also reflected in the way in which Russia has recently aimed to develop its own set of values which could be adopted by its neighbouring countries. The abstraction of values means that, in practice, their meaning in the context of ENP is decided by the European Commission through the implementation of Action Plans. The central position given to the promotion of common values requires that the ENP be reformulated so as to guarantee a stronger degree of participation of the neighbouring countries in the formulation and implementation of the ENP objectives.     

Modernising social service delivery in Russia: evolving government support for non-profit organisations

Russia has recently cracked down on politically active civil society, increasing regulation and undercutting foreign support. However, apolitical, service-oriented parts of civil society have not been subject to these restrictive policies. In contrast, since 2009 Russia has introduced a set of government tools to support socially oriented non-profit organisations. These tools present a framework akin to concepts of ‘third-party government’ and collaborative governance that have come to dominate Western public administration discourse. This article discusses the Russian government’s divergent positions towards civil society, the nature and extent of the supportive tool kit, and its prospects.     

The Slovenian Armed Forces and Patriotism

Patriotism needs understanding as a positive feeling that in its narrowest sense determines the relationship towards one’s country as basic living space of family members and, at the same time, represents the foundation for a variety of actions by individuals. A high level of patriotism amongst members of a state’s security system who are consequently providers of national safety is to be expected, and the members of the armed forces have perhaps the highest level of patriotism. Since its beginnings in June 1991, the Slovenian Armed Forces have been going through various reform processes and transformations. These developments have included changes in staffing the armed forces and a simultaneous constant reduction of the defence budget, both of which undoubtedly affect the satisfaction of each service member about their attitude towards the motherland and the system to which the service belongs. This analysis offers the results of a study of the members of the Slovenian Armed Forces that, first, identifies the level of patriotism amongst those members and, second, establishes their attitudes towards patriotism.     

Crimea

The accelerated integration of Crimea into Russia's state system illuminates the overall sociopolitical process in Russia. The process was largely improved, with various agencies each pursuing its own course of action. Some were formed on the basis of existing Ukrainian institutions, while others were created de novo. In some cases, locals were given senior positions, while in others the top posts were assigned to appointees from other regions who had no previous ties to Crimea. Overall, Moscow was careful to take into account local factors, such as the role of the Crimean Tatar population. The situation remains fluid, with many state institutions still subject to modification.