'Oligarchs', Business and Russian Foreign Policy: From El'tsin to Putin

The paper investigates the role of private and state-controlled business in the formation and implementation of Russian foreign policy since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The extent to which the 'oligarchs' and business more generally followed their own interests in their external relations or acted as tools of the Russian state is a particular focus. Under President Boris El'tsin, Boris Berezovskii was the only one of the oligarchs to have significant influence on Russian foreign policy. President Vladimir Putin's moves against the oligarchs were motivated partly by the desire to restrict political debate, including on foreign policy, and partly to prevent Mikhail Khodorkovskii from creating a private oil pipeline system which would have subverted Putin's foreign policy, but the main reason was probably the desire to restore state control over key industrial sectors. Under El'tsin, business had followed its own interests, which sometimes conflicted with Russian foreign policy and sometimes reinforced it; but after Putin's attacks on the oligarchs, business seemed more integrated into policy implementation, while still following its own interests where they did not conflict with those of the state, as is suggested by a discussion of Gazprom's foreign policy role

Contemporary Russian Identity between East and West

This is a review of recent English-language scholarship on the development of Russian identity since the collapse of the USSR in 1991. The first part examines literature on the economic and political changes in the Russian Federation, revealing how scholars became more sceptical about the possibility of Russia building a Western-type liberal democracy. The second part investigates approaches to the study of Russian national identity. The experience of empire, in both the tsarist and Soviet periods, gave Russians a weak sense of nationhood; ethnic Russians identified with the multinational Soviet Union. Seeking legitimacy for the new state, President El’tsin sought to create a civic identity focussed on the multinational Russian Federation. The Communist and nationalist opposition continued to promote an imperial identity, focused on restoring the USSR or creating some other formation including the Russian-speaking population in the former Soviet republics. The final section discusses accounts of the two Chechen wars, which scholars see as continuing Russia’s imperial policy and harming relations with Russia’s Muslim population. President Putin’s co-operation with the West against ‘terrorism’ has not led the West to accept Russia as one of its own, due to increasing domestic repression and authoritarianis

The ISCIP Analyst, Volume V, Issue 6

This repository item contains a single issue of The ISCIP Analyst, an analytical review journal published from 1996 to 2010 by the Boston University Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology, and Policy

The ISCIP Analyst, Volume V, Issue 5

This repository item contains a single issue of The ISCIP Analyst, an analytical review journal published from 1996 to 2010 by the Boston University Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology, and Policy

The ISCIP Analyst, Volume VIII, Issue 16

This repository item contains a single issue of The ISCIP Analyst, an analytical review journal published from 1996 to 2010 by the Boston University Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology, and Policy

The ISCIP Analyst, Volume V, Issue 7

This repository item contains a single issue of The ISCIP Analyst, an analytical review journal published from 1996 to 2010 by the Boston University Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology, and Policy

Privatization with Government Control: Evidence from the Russian Oil Sector

Governments that privatize state industries often retain control over key distribution assets. While there are many examples of this form of partial privatization, to our knowledge there are no substantial quantitative studies of how governments use their control under these circumstances. In this paper we argue that the Russian government privatization of the oil sector during 1994-2003 is a useful case study because the federal government privatized oil production but retained monopoly control rights over the transport of crude onto world markets. Based on a simple analysis of the costs and benefits of control and ownership, we argue that that in these circumstances the federal government would use its control over transport capacity to provide privileged access to those companies over which it has influence. We find that in 2003 this is indeed the case and that this system detracted from economic efficiency. In particular, private and regionally owned companies had to be much more productive than companies over which the federal government (the state) had influence to receive comparable access to world markets; state-influence companies had preferential access to routes with more capacity; and, the allocation of route capacity was sensitive to transport costs only in the state-influence sector.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/57206/1/wp826 .pd

Russia between transition and globalization

The research aims to understand the impact of the internal factors on the formulation of a policy of selective opening of the Russian economy since the beginning of the transition. We study the politico-economic configuration in Russia in terms of (i) its "vertical" dimension (relations federal centre - regions) and (ii) the "horizontal" one (relations between state and firms). We show the fragmentation of the central state as regards to both dimensions during the first period (1991-1999). During the second period (since 2000), the reforms aim to reinforce the "vertical of power" and to institutionalize the state-enterprises relations. Nevertheless, questions emerge as to the effectiveness and continuity of the state's return strength. This evolution also appears through the study of Russian trade policy, which has submitted to private interests in 1991-1998 and stabilized afterwards. Meanwhile, the economic (and hence political) equilibrium in Russia remains extremely dependent on hydrocarbons exports.globalization ; economic transition ; hydrocarbon ; trade policy ; Russia

Comparing and Inter-Relating the European Union and the Russian Federation : Viewpoints from an international and interdisciplinary students' project

Over the years Russia has become one of the most important partners of the European Union. Due to this fact a more democratic and modern Russia would have great benefits for the EU and might contribute to the stabilization of the European continent. But existing problems like terrorism, organized crime and environmental pollution are central challenges for the relationship and their solution demands for intensive cross-border cooperation. Therefore a clear strategy is needed in order to establish a successful cooperation. What strategy have the European politicians pursued and which influence have their plans exerted on the actual policy of the European Union? The European Union clearly accentuated the meaning of common values for the relationship towards the Russian Federation in the early and fundamental documents. However, it becomes more and more evident that in day-to-day policy there is a tendency to tolerate even substantial violations of the norms which originate from the concept of common values. One of the main causes for this behaviour is the strong economic interest of the EU towards Russia. For example, the Russian Federation supplies the EU with most of its energy resources, such as gas and oil. On the other hand the EU is the major trading partner of the Russian Federation. The notion of the common shared values is based – as stated in the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) and in the subsequent documents – on the principles of the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris. Because such principles are easily stated in a document their impact on the real policy has to be called into question and must be examined further in this essay. --