Edited by two of the world's leading analysts of postcommunist politics, this 1997 book brings together distinguished specialists on the former communist countries of Russia and the Western Newly Independent States. Chapters on Belarus, Moldova, and Ukraine, plus three chapters on Russia's regional politics, its political parties, and the overall process of democratization, provide an in-depth analysis of the uneven pattern of political change in these four countries. Karen Dawisha and Bruce Parrott contribute theoretical and comparative chapters on postcommunist political development across the region. This book will provide students and scholars with detailed analysis by leading authorities, plus research data on political and economic developments in each country.

here ofexchange, and borrowing in debates between these disciplines, all the more so, as we shall see a little further on, as the analysis of the Central and East European transformations has also contributed to introduce into political science and sociology theoretical systematizations first formulated in economics. In addition to this opening up to the objects and theories of economics, the pseudo-"dilemma" ofsimultaneity produced, by a kind of feedback, another series of effects on transitology and the related research domains. Contrary to most expectations and predictions in the wake ofthe 1989 upheavals - affirmations that the "dilemmas", "problems" or "challenges" of the transitions in Central and Eastern Europe ought to have been dealt with and resolved one after the other in sequence, in the manner of the more or less idealized trajectories of Great Britain or Spain (trajectories significantly enough promoted, far beyond the circles of scholars, as a "model" of transition), and above all, contrary to the assumption that superposing a radical economic transformation upon a transition to democracy would make the whole edifice thoroughly unworkable, unstable or dangerous - it must be stated clearly out that the two processes, in their "simultaneity", are not necessarily incompatible. This is one of the main findings stressed upon in several chapters of this book.

As the Ukrainian Crisis shows both political regimes and national borders in Eurasia are still in a state of flux. Bringing together literatures on the external influences of democratization, the post-Soviet space and support for autocracy Autocratic and Democratic External influences in Post-Soviet Eurasia provides a comprehensive overview of the interaction of domestic and international politics during times of regime transition. Demonstrating the interplay of these forces the book explores the rich variation in motives and channels of autocratic and democratic influences. International scholars consider two channels of external influence on regime transition; the role of supranational organizations established by non-democracies and the role of non-governmental organizations and through a set of carefully chosen case studies offer a new theoretical discussion on the phenomenon of multi-level regime transition.

The collapse of communism was widely heralded as the dawn of democracy across the former Soviet region. However, the political outcome has been much less uniform. The post-communist states have developed political systems from democracy to dictatorship. Using examples and empirical data collected from twenty-six former Soviet states, Graeme Gill provides a detailed comparative analysis of the core issues of regime change, the creation of civil society, economic reform and the changing nature of post-communism. Within these individual cases, it becomes clear that political outcomes have not been arbitrary, but directly reflect the circumstances surrounding the birth of independence. Students of Comparative Politics, International Relations and Russian and Post-Soviet Studies should find this book essential reading.

Authoritarian capitalism is rapidly evolving, intensifying and spreading across the globe. This updated second edition book demonstrates that the recent resurgence of fascism and repressive democracies are connected to and symptomatic of the fundamental authoritarianism of capitalism.

Research and analysis of the post-Soviet Russian experience of political, economic and social change have generally focused attention on the complications and influences of the Soviet legacy on the transition process with most early main stream studies emphasizing the difficulties of the adoption of the institutions of democracy and a free market economy to the centralized command and control legacy structures carried over from that adjacent system to the more recent analyses that have attempted to explain why the Putinist hybrid authoritarian democracy emerged to take control of the Russian state. The complex nature of the Russian experience of political, social and economic change had yet to be explained as a long-term legacy analysis until now with the linkages presented in this study of the legacies and structures that have defied attempts at reform by the Bolsheviks, the Soviets and the modern Republicans. The political geography of Russia represents a districting system that defines the people and places and represents an influential legacy structure that has had a long reach from the Russia of Imperialism to the Russia of Putinism and the twenty first century. A clearer understanding of the influences the Imperial legacy brings to the Russian transformation enables the student of post-Soviet Russian transition an opportunity to contextualize the strong linkages of historical governance structures with the one hundred years of Bolshevik and Soviet system capture and the struggles of transformation faced by the government and people of Russia today.