Russia 's Presidential System Of Russia

Throughout its long history, Russia has been trapped in a continuous cycle of authoritarian regimes; only interrupted briefly with periods of tumultuous democratic transitions that were plagued by poor bureaucracy and weak institutions. Therefore, time and time again, Russia has turned towards authoritarianism. In the late 1900’s to early 2000’s, Russia again saw the fall of democracy coincide with the rise of a competitive authoritarian regime. This rise of competitive authoritarianism in Russia in the late 1900’s to early 2000’s was largely the result of the resource curse which granted Putin’s Administration false economic performance legitimacy. This in turn reinvigorated past strongman ideals, while at the same time solidified negative

The December of 1991 marked the end of the Soviet Union—and with it, an entire era. Like the February Revolution of 1917 that ended tsardom, the events leading up to August 1991 took place in rapid succession, with both spontaneity and, to some degree, retrospective inevitability. To understand the demise of Soviet Union is to understand the communist party-state system itself. Although the particular happenings of the Gorbachev years undoubtedly accelerated its ruin, there existed fundamental flaws within the Soviet system that would be had been proven ultimately fatal. The USSR became a past chapter of history because it was impossible to significantly reform the administrative

The democratization, economic liberalization, and eventual collapse of the Soviet Union is commonly attributed to Mikhail Gorbachev's Perestroika and Glasnost reforms during the period of 1985-1991. This purpose of these reforms is still a trenchant question as the countries of the old Soviet Union, particular Russia, are being pressured to further liberalize their economies.

A comparison between the U.S. constitution and Russian constitution is interesting due to the fact that America is often regarded (at least from the view of most Americans) as the pinnacle of freedom and democracy. The Russian Federation on the other hand has a much more complex image. The Russian Federation was formerly a country known as the Soviet Union, which was the pinnacle of communism throughout the 1900’s. Communism is a polar governmental structure compared to the U.S. The Russian Federation is today classified as a democracy, however, there are still remnants of the communist structure seen among leaders as a result of the way that the constitution is constructed.

One country is comparable to the United States of America in terms of world power and prominence. Russia makes their name known beginning in World War 2 (WW2), later in the Korean War, Cold War, and today’s proxy war in the Syria. Russia’s culture, environment, politics, military, and economy do not just make Russia a regional powerhouse, but slowly becoming a region of influential power to surrounding countries with the end state of a global superpower. All the factors that make Russia the powerhouse that it is slowly becoming, highlights the impressive trend that supersedes the previous Soviet Union and past leaders.

The government of the modern day Russian Federation must be traced back to the early 20th century in order to understand its current posture. In 1917, tired of the sequestering limits of a Tsarist system, a small revolutionary group called the Bolshevik Party gained control of Russia . The Bolshevik Party, led by Lenin and inspired by Marxist ideology, attempted to establish a Constitute Assembly. However, a post- revolutionary environment and an unsupportive public forced Lenin to abolish rival political parties and establish a dictatorship to retain The Bolshevik Party’s power. In 1919, the

The United States and Russia have been battling off pernicious factions menacing the stability of their democracies over the years. Russia has come a long way over the past century, enduring a number of different phases that have completely desecrated any power Russia may have had paralleled to the rest of the world. The United States, however, has been evolving into a prosperous world power that has led to new respect from many other nations. Both Russia and the United States have struggled in the past at maintaining a significant amount of cultural commitment to preservation of specific aspects of their respective democracies. Having a relatively new democracy, Russian citizens have different perceptions and expectations of government from those of United States citizens. With new liberties and freedoms, Russians are struggling to grasp the concept of capitalism and participation in government. In order to preserve strong features of democracy, such as the right to vote or freedom of speech, a country 's constituents must respect and positively view their government. They must have faith in that the government is working for their best interests. Physically, the United States and Russia have been impacted greatly by their geography. Historically, the backgrounds of Russia and the United States are of stark contrast. Traditionally, Russians have a difficult time believing in the stability of their government as it has changed a number of times.

The beginning of the 20th century brought radical changes to the social and political structure of autocratic Russia. It was a period of regression, reform, revolution and eradication. Eradication of a blood line that had remained in rule for over 300 years; the Romanov Dynasty. The central figure of this eradication was Tsar Nicholas II, often described as an incompetent leader, absent of the “commanding personality nor the strong character and prompt decision which are so essential to an autocratic ruler...” (Sir G. Buchman, British ambassador to Russia from 1910 in H. Seton-Watson, The

In order to improve and conduct a nation, new reforms and new implementation are essential to be addressed. Valdimir Putin, the current president of Russia, has diligently delegated and decided upon many proposals, and therefore assured the safety of his people. Putin has considerably secured Russia’s stability by founding a family holiday, influencing a decrease in poverty, and deciding upon opposing NATO.

The Russian state has been characterized by its strong heritage of powerful, autocratic leadership. This domination by small ruling elite has been seen throughout Russia's history and has transferred into its economic history. Throughout the Russian czarist period, to the legacy of seventy years of communism; Russia has been a country marked by strong central state planning, a strict command economy and an overall weak market infrastructure (Goldman, 2003). Self-interest, manipulation and corruption have all been present in the Russian economy, and have greatly helped the few as opposed to the many. To this day, Russia still struggles with creating a competitive and fair market.

Vladimir Putin is the current president of Russia who is either loved who hated across the globe. Not all agree with his political stances and foreign policy. Many of his decisions are constantly under the microscope of all other world leaders. Putin has now won three consecutive elections and has been in office since 2000. This paper will discuss Vladimir Putin's reign of power from 2000 to present day. From 2000-2004 Putin set out to reconstruction of the impoverished condition of

Russia has endured a long and substantial history of political regime changes from being a tsarist state, to adopting communism, to a post-communist transition era, and today may be in the process of democratic transition. Russia’s extensive political history is key to understanding the ever-changing political processes within the state. To understand the regime structure in Russia today we must assess and understand their political history, look at critical junctures in Soviet and Russian political developments, explore the post-war settlements of the Russian state, and finally explain the political regime of Russia through this analysis. The premise of this paper will be based on Thomas Carothers thesis on gray zone states. Vis-à-vis the typology Carothers uses to describe syndromes of a gray zone state, I shall attempt to generate a new thesis on the present Russian political system. By the end of the paper it will be clear as to how and why the political regime of Russia is one that actually presents a completely new type of regime development that can be dubbed a quasi-democracy.

Upon finding new employment at St. Petersburg’s City Hall, he became involved in Russia’s transformation from a centrally planned economy to a market economy, as well as the transition from a one-party state to a multi-party political system. Witnessing firsthand the disastrous effects of Russia’s isolation from the world economy, Putin decided that state management of Russia’s vast raw materials economy and oil sector was pivotal for the country’s economic recovery and future development. That very idea set the platform for Putin’s foreign policy and enabled him to save Russia’s collapsing economy. In terms of democracy, his preference has always been order over liberty, and the attempted integration of equality, freedom, and fairness did not sit well in his mind. Observing the way in which his mentor Anatoly Sobchak was treated in elections, he found them to be dangerous and distasteful, further increasing his animosity towards democracy and fueling his appetency for a strong central

In Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia?, Karen Dawisha relates Russian President Vladmir Putin’s rise to power. She overarchingly claims that Putin is an authoritarian leader who has obstructed and even reverted Russia’s path of democratization, citing, amongst many factors that enabled his ascension, his “interlocking web of personal connections in which he was the linchpin” (100), money-laundering to tax havens and personal projects, and the complicity of the West. With copious research, journalistic interviews, legal documents, and even sporadic informational diagrams, it is evident why her book is so popular amongst scholars and history enthusiasts. Unfortunately however, in spite of the grand yet oftentimes substantiated claims she generates, a more subtle yet noteworthy assumption is made: that the state is a protector, as Olson proffered. She employs this theoretical underpinning from the beginning, though is not representative of Putin’s actual authoritarian regime.

Oligarchy as it is known in Aristotle’s politics; is a government run by a small group of people, ‘elites’. However, the oligarchy which this essay addresses is currently referred to in Russia as “a very wealthy and politically well-connected businessman...one who is the main owner of a conglomerate of enterprises and has close ties with the president” (Aslund and Dabrowski, 2007; 144). In the 1990s Russia’s economic reforms are said to have created the rise of a small group of oligarchs who gained an overwhelming amount of power and control. By 1997, this small group of previously unknown businessmen and bankers, often with gangster ties, had acquired control of many of the key parts of the Russian economy. Why did they emerge? It is argued by David Satter that three processes facilitated the emergence of the oligarchs. The first was hyperinflation and the social, economic and political consequences. The second was the process of privatisation, and finally the third was criminalisation (Satter, 2003). However, were these powerful oligarchs just a phase during the transition from Soviet to Post-Soviet Russia? Even with Putin’s efforts and declaration to distance the oligarchs from politics and power, and start a war against them exemplified by the Khodorkovsky affair, are oligarchs still significantly powerful in contemporary Russia? What is the role they play in Russia? It seems that the power of those original oligarchs of the 1990s has decreased or been concealed in