Wie russische Regionen in der Wirtschaftskrise zurechtkommen: Der Fall Tatarstan

Russlands Regionalregierungen spielen eine entscheidende Rolle bei der Aufrechterhaltung der sozialen und wirtschaftlichen Stabilität des Landes. Dieser Beitrag untersucht die wichtigsten Strategien der Regierung der Republik Tatarstan, mit denen die Auswirkungen der Wirtschafts- und Finanzkrise auf die verschiedenen Industrien und Branchen der Republik abgefedert werden sollen

Pandemic Politics in Eurasia:Roadmap for a New Research Subfield

The sudden onset of the coronavirus pandemic has challenged many scholars of the social sciences to proceed in the absence of a robust theoretical research foundation upon which to build. This article seeks to help scholars meet this challenge, particularly as it pertains to Eurasia, through bringing together a multinational group of scholars in order to develop the roadmap for a new pandemic politics research subfield. It begins with a discussion of how states are responding to COVID-19 before moving into an exploration of reciprocal interactions between the pandemic and society, political economy, regime type, center-periphery relations, and international security. Finally, it discusses the potential novel contributions of a theoretical foundation rooted in the Foucauldian concept of “biopolitics.” Ultimately, we hope to spark an ongoing conversation regarding how political science and the social sciences more broadly can be used to understand the impacts of the pandemic and inform policymaking amidst the current and potential future pandemics

Pandemic Politics in Eurasia:Roadmap for a New Research Subfield

© 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. The sudden onset of COVID-19 has challenged many social scientists to proceed without a robust theoretical and empirical foundation upon which to build. Addressing this challenge, particularly as it pertains to Eurasia, our multinational group of scholars draws on past and ongoing research to suggest a roadmap for a new pandemic politics research subfield. Key research questions include not only how states are responding to the new coronavirus, but also reciprocal interactions between the pandemic and society, political economy, regime type, center-periphery relations, and international security. The Foucauldian concept of “biopolitics” holds out particular promise as a theoretical framework

The Escape from Institution-Building in a Globalized World:Lessons from Russia

Strong institutions and accountable governments are imperative for any country’s long-term prosperity. Yet the development of such institutions has presented a continuous challenge for many countries around the world. Using Russia as a case, this study brings attention to the unexpected negative impact of global interdependence and shows that institutional arbitrage opportunities have enabled economic actors to solve for institutional weaknesses and constraints in the domestic realm by using foreign institutions, thereby limiting the emergence of a domestic rule of law regime. We argue that such opportunities lower the propensity of asset-holders, normally interested in strong institutions at home, to organize collective action to lobby for better institutions. We demonstrate the main ways through which Russia’s capital-owners make use of foreign legal and financial infrastructures such as capital flight, the use of foreign corporate structures, offshore financial centers, real estate markets, the round-tripping of foreign direct investment, and reliance on foreign law in contract-writing and foreign courts in dispute-resolution.</jats:p

Elite Management in Electoral Authoritarian Regimes: A View from Bashkortostan and Tatarstan

Contributing to the literature on authoritarian elite management, this study explores a puzzle concerned with the elite evolution in Russia’s two ethnic republics, Tatarstan and Bashkortostan. The variation of political legacies left by these two republics’ first presidents cannot be addressed using mainstream explanations that are usually considered principal for the Kremlin’s decisionmaking on gubernatorial cadres in Russia. Both Rakhimov and Shaimiev were very successful as political bosses who could effectively deliver electoral votes to the Kremlin and maintain relative social and economic stability within their republics. Yet, toward the end of their political careers, they faced different degrees of freedom in their negotiations with federal elites and had varying degrees of success in ensuring political and economic continuity within their republics. The study instead focuses on the legacies of republican privatization and the institutional dynamics of patronal presidentialism as two alternative explanations for their divergent political outcomes.</jats:p