Abstract
In response to the US and European efforts to marginalize it, Russia made a comeback with important role in the negotiations and implementation of the nuclear deal with Iran, military action in Syria and the emerging situation in Afghanistan. Russia wants to remain a prominent player in the international politics. Russia’s annexation of Crimea and role Ukraine crisis, and its involvement in Syria, Iran and Afghanistan, provide a chance to Western scholars to compare Putin’s regime with earlier Soviet totalitarian system. The idea of democracy in Russia has been debated in the West since the breakdown of the Soviet Union. The transition from communism to democracy gave hope during the 1990s, which has been destroyed during Putin’s regime according to critics.
Ruling Russia: Authoritarianism from the Revolution to Putin is a comprehensive political history of transformation of leadership and the evolution of Russian politics. It gives rich historical details about how Russia is ruled. How the recent regime compares with its predecessor regimes? How a consolidated political system solidified with each passing generation of leaders? William Zimmerman, the author, answers the question ‘Is Russia, was it, or will it ever be, a “normal” country?’ (p. 1). He struggles to situate this term within his historical–political description. He argues that it was Russian leadership that chose to purposefully redefine the idea of normalcy according to their own political framework.
The book provides the historical context from Bolsheviks to 2011 protest (from 1917 to 2013). It evaluates the complex progress of communist regime after Bolshevik revolution and post-Soviet regimes from the point of democratization in political science. Russia, with largely non-democratic governance in the past, is struggling to implement lasting democratic reforms. After the disintegration of the Soviet Union, many expected that the long history of autocratic regime in Russia might come to an end. But today democracy seems to be losing ground in Russia.
The author argues that after the Bolshevik revolution, the Soviet Union (1930s) was totalitarian and step by step evolved into a common authoritarian system. Similarly, after the disintegration of Soviet Union, Russia evolved from a competitive authoritarian to a common authoritarian system in the first decade of the twenty-first century. Zimmerman provides a lens for evaluating his centre of attention on the ‘selectorate’, the term which he borrowed from Philip Roeder. He traces with historical analysis how the ‘selectorate’ (the group of the people who are empowered to select the decision makers) has changed across various regimes since the Bolshevik revolution and the end of Tsarist rule. The number of the selectors was narrow in the phase after the revolution and contracted still further during Stalin’s dictatorship, only to increase somewhat after end of his rule. The author used the concept of the ‘selectorate’, who were limited after Bolshevik revolution and later decrease to a single person during Stalin’s totalitarian system. After the death of Stalin, a system of ‘welfare authoritarianism’ developed under the Khrushchev and Brezhnev regime. Since the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation has evolved from a ‘competitive authoritarian regime’ to a ‘full authoritarian regime’ in the first decade of the twenty-first century. The control of the state continues to increase over media, opposition and also the competitiveness in elections dissipates. There was some electoral uncertainty in the 2012 election because the people of Russia protested against Putin and
Medvedev swapping positions.
By evaluating the ups and down within the ‘selectorate’, the author gives a clear picture of the evolution of authoritarianism through Soviet and post-Soviet history. He provides a methodical tool to predict Russia’s future. The author predicts that while a return to totalitarianism in the coming decade in doubtful, so too is the prospect of democracy. He believes that Putin will win the 2018 presidential election and Russia will continue on the path of authoritarianism. The lesson we can learn from the Russian history is that the change will come sudden and unexpected. The results of the change come with greater transformation.
He emphasizes the different aspects of power-sharing, political strategy and personal charisma to evaluate Soviet and post-Soviet regimes. On the basis of these, he clarifies the difference between the democratic, ‘comparative authoritarian’, ‘full authoritarian’ and totalitarian system, which have been part of Russian politics. He labels totalitarian regime as ‘mobilization’ (p. 4).
The starting chapters gave analysis of the normalization of revolutionary totalitarianism. The ‘selectorate’ were decreasing after the revolution and slowly the whole system was controlled by one person, Stalin. Totalitarianism was normalized. Chapter 1 discusses the Russian elite decision-making during 3–4 year after
Bolshevik revolution. Chapters 2, 3 and 4 examine the efforts of the leadership to implement mass mobilization of the citizenry, during War Communism and the Civil War, between revolution and World War II, the gradual decline of the key party organs and the Central Committee. The distance among party members, even Politburo members and the Soviet population has lost all connections. Everyone had become disenfranchised resident (p. 10). Under the Khrushchev and Brezhnev regimes, more open forms of authoritarianism were accepted.
Chapter 6 explains the role of Mikhail Gorbachev as a ‘system changing’ leader. A new ‘selectorate’ paradigm was developed by Gorbachev. The author provides exclusive perspective on the process of democratization and normalcy in autocratic Russia. Chapters 7, 8 and 9 discuss the politics of post-Soviet era. Chapters 7 and 8 are focused on the 1990s and two terms of Vladimir Putin. The last one describes the extraordinary developments on the electoral cycle of 2011–2012. Interesting transition diagrams from ‘competitive authoritarianism’ with its nearly democratic openness (through Gorbachev reforms of Perestroika and Glasnost) to ‘full authoritarianism’ in the subsequent years are provided.
To understand the recent conflict among Russia, its neighbours and the other world super power, the author talks about democratic decline from the Yeltsin and Putin. The role of personal charisma in the national politics can be understood by the Putin–Madvedev switch-off in 2008 and again in 2012. Still, author falters to some extent in his second to last chapters as he struggles to place the farcical election of 2012 into the larger context of democratic devolution and nationalist discourse in Russia under Putin. The author interprets the 2012 elections and following events in the context of Putin’s come back to a kind of authoritarian normalcy. He argues that Putin will possibly not go back to its totalitarian past, but he will also not promote genuine democracy in future.
The Western scholars often observe that Russian political system is not ‘normal’. Author peels the Western idea and methodologically analyses Russian political history from Bolshevik revolution to Vladimir Putin. This book is rich in historical details with appropriate methodology to understand Russian political system from 1917 to the present. It is important for anyone who wants to know why Russia struggles to develop democratic political system and become a ‘normal’ country. Because of the historical–political mix-up and long time-frame, the text may fail to connect with less-informed readers. The book initiates serious debate and provides strategic prediction. The author’s other fundamental aim is to create a mechanism to predict Russia’s future, both under Putin in the foreseeable future. The books give its reader with insight into decision-making process by which Russian leadership gain and uphold authority.