This book challenges the common perception of authoritarian regimes as incompatible with federalism and decentralization. It examines how the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan have managed to exploit federalism and decentralization as useful instruments to help them preserve control, avoid political instability, and to shift blame to the regional authorities in times of crises and policy failures. The authors explain how post-Soviet authoritarian regimes balance the advantages and risks and emphasize the contradictory role of external influences and threats to the institutional design of federalism and decentralization. Advancing our understanding of how the institutions of federalism and decentralization are skillfully constrained, but at the same time used by authoritarian incumbents, they show that federalism and decentralization matter in non-democracies, though the nondemocratic character of the political systems greatly modifies their effects. The authors show the implication of the COVID-19 crisis and current Russian war against Ukraine for the center-regional relations in Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan. This book will be of interest to scholars and students of post-Soviet politics, decentralization, federalism, and modern authoritarianism.

This book provides an insightful analysis and holistic account of the process of the formation of de facto states in the post-Soviet area. Looking beyond the stereotype of mere puppet subjects, the author explores the contemporary operation of separatist regions in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Donbas to understand the motives and mechanisms for their emergence and their instrumentalization in the politics of great powers. Using policy documents, quantitative data, and political statements, she explores the historical origins of the area and its operation during the Soviet era, armed separatist conflicts and their implications, and the actions of the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the European Union, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and the role of powers such as the Russian Federation and the US. The research contributes to the debate on the significance of de facto states for regional security and their potential for national identity building. It will be of interest to scholars and students of Russia and the Post-Soviet Area in International Relations and Nation-Building.

The collapse of the Soviet empire in 1991 removed a decades-long system of successful control of potential ethnic and regional conflict . The result was the eruption of numerous conflicts over state-building, some of which degenerated into violence and some of which were resolved or prevented by strategies of accommodation. This volume explores the common trends and differences in the responses of the new post-Soviet states to the problems of state-building in ethnically and regionally divided societies, focusing on the impact of ethnic and regional conflicts on post-communist transition and institutional development. The book will be essential reading for specialists and students alike who are interested in conflict regulation and post-Soviet politics.

Liberation Technology brings together cutting-edge scholarship from scholars and practitioners at the forefront of this burgeoning field of study. An introductory section defines the debate with a foundational piece on liberation technology and is then followed by essays discussing the popular dichotomy of liberation'' versus "control" with regard to the Internet and the sociopolitical dimensions of such controls. Additional chapters delve into the cases of individual countries: China, Egypt, Iran, and Tunisia.

Nearly all countries worldwide are now experimenting with decentralization. Their motivation are diverse. Many countries are decentralizing because they believe this can help stimulate economic growth or reduce rural poverty, goals central government interventions have failed to achieve. Some countries see it as a way to strengthen civil society and deepen democracy. Some perceive it as a way to off-load expensive responsibilities onto lower level governments. Thus, decentralization is seen as a solution to many different kinds of problems. This report examines the origins and implications decentralization from a political economy perspective, with a focus on its promise and limitations. It explores why countries have often chosen not to decentralize, even when evidence suggests that doing so would be in the interests of the government. It seeks to explain why since the early 1980s many countries have undertaken some form of decentralization. This report also evaluates the evidence to understand where decentralization has considerable promise and where it does not. It identifies conditions needed for decentralization to succeed. It identifies the ways in which decentralization can promote rural development. And it names the goals which decentralization will probably not help achieve.

This edited volume focuses on the links between the ongoing crisis in and around Ukraine, regional diversity, and the reform of decentralization. It provides in-depth insights into the historical constitution of regional diversity and the evolution of center-periphery relationships in Ukraine, the legal qualification of the conflict in Eastern Ukraine, and the role of the decentralization reform in promoting conflict resolution, as well as modernization, democratization and European integration of Ukraine. Particular emphasis lies on the securitization of both regional diversity issues and territorial self-government arrangements in terms of Russia’s support for self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics. The volume captures the complexity of contemporary “hybrid” conflicts, involving both internal and external aspects, and the hybridization and securitization of territorial self-governance solutions. It thus provides an important contribution to the debate on territorial self-government and conflict resolution.

The Soviet Union is often characterised as nominally a federation, but really an empire, liable to break up when individual federal units, which were allegedly really subordinate colonial units, sought independence. This book questions this interpretation, revisiting the theory of federation, and discussing actual examples of federations such as the United States, arguing that many federal unions, including the United States, are really centralised polities. It also discusses the nature of empires, nations and how they relate to nation states and empires, and the right of secession, highlighting the importance of the fact that this was written in to the Soviet constitution. It examines the attitude of successive Soviet leaders towards nationalities, and the changing attitudes of nationalists towards the Soviet Union. Overall, it demonstrates that the Soviet attitude to nationalities and federal units was complicated, wrestling, in a similar way to many other states, with difficult questions of how ethno-cultural justice can best be delivered in a political unit which is bigger than the national state.