Government-organized yet scandal-stricken, Nashi inspires everything from broad support to a reluctance to accept all implications of Putin's political system. This volume shows how Nashi conceptualizes an "ideal youth" within the framework of an official national identity politics and as an attempt to mobilize apolitical youth.

This book analyzes the dubious role of the Democratic Antifascist Youth Movement "Nashi" in contemporary Russia. Part of the Putinist project of political stabilization, Nashi mobilizes young Russians through its emotional appeal, skillful use of symbolic politics, and promise of professional self-realization.

The so-called Democratic Antifascist Youth Movement “Nashi” represents a crucial case of a post-Orange government-organized formation whose values have broad support in Russian society. Yet, at the same time, in view of the movement’s public scandals, Nashi was also a phenomenon bringing to the fore public reluctance to accept all implications of Putin’s new system. The Russian people’s relatively widespread support for his patriotic policies and conservative values has been evident, but this support is not easily extended to political actors aligned to these values. Using discourse analysis, this book identifies socio-political factors that created obstacles to Nashi’s communication strategies. The book understands Nashi as anticipating an “ideal youth” within the framework of official national identity politics and as an attempt to mobilize largely apolitical youngsters in support of the powers that be. It demonstrates how Nashi’s ambivalent societal position was the result of a failed attempt to reconcile incompatible communicative demands of the authoritarian state and apolitical young.

Julie Hemment provides a fresh perspective on the controversial nationalist youth projects that have proliferated in Russia in the Putin era, examining them from the point of view of their participants and offering provocative insights into their origins and significance. The pro-Kremlin organization Nashi ("Ours") and other state-run initiatives to mobilize Russian youth have been widely reviled in the West, seen as Soviet throwbacks and evidence of Russia's authoritarian turn. By contrast, Hemment's detailed ethnographic analysis finds an astute global awareness and a paradoxical kinship with the international democracy-promoting interventions of the 1990s. Drawing on Soviet political forms but responding to 21st-century disenchantments with the neoliberal state, these projects seek to produce not only patriots, but also volunteers, entrepreneurs, and activists.

The failure of the attempts to create a Ukrainian state during the 1917-21 revolution created a large Ukrainian émigré community in Central Europe which, due to its experience of fighting the Bolsheviks, developed a decidedly anti-Communist ideology of integral nationalism. However, during the 1920s some in the Ukrainian emigration rejected this doctrine and began to advocate reconciliation with their former enemies and return to Soviet Ukraine. This included some of the most prominent figures in the Ukrainian governments set up after 1917, for example Mykhailo Hrushevskyi, Volodymyr Vynnychenko, and Yevhen Petrushevych. On the basis of published and unpublished writings of the Sovietophile émigrés, Christopher Gilley reconstructs and analyzes the arguments used to justify cooperation with the Bolsheviks. In particular, he contrasts those who supported the Soviet regime because they saw the Bolsheviks as leaders of the international revolution with those who stressed the apparent national achievements of the Soviet Ukrainian republic. In addition, Gilley examines Soviet policy towards pro-Soviet émigrés and the relationship between the émigrés and the Bolsheviks using documents from historical archives in Kyiv. The Ukrainian movement is compared to a similar phenomenon in the Russian emigration, "Smena vekh" ("Change of Signposts"). The book contributes to the study of the era of the New Economic Policy and Ukrainianization in the Soviet Union as well as to the histories of the Ukrainian emigration in the 1920s and of Ukrainian political thought.

Post-communist democratic revolutions have, so far, taken place in six countries: Slovakia (1998), Croatia (1999-2000), Serbia (2000), Georgia (2003), Ukraine (2004), and Kyrgyzstan (2005). The seven chapters in this volume situate these events within a theoretical and comparative perspective. The book draws upon extensive experience and field research conducted by political scientists specializing in comparative democratization, regime politics, political transitions, electoral studies, and the post-communist world. The papers by Valerie Bunce and Sharon Wolchik, Henry Hale, Paul D'Anieri, David R. Marples, Taras Kuzio, Lucan A. Way and Steven Levitsky as well as Anika Locke Binnendijk and Ivan Marovic explore different regime types and opposition strategies in post-communist states, the diffusion of opposition strategies between states in which democratic revolutions were attempted, the strategic importance of youth NGO's in mobilizing oppositions towards democratic revolutions, the use of non-violent strategies by the opposition, path dependent, theoretical and comparative explanations of the sources of successful and failed democratic revolutions, and the factors that lie behind divergent post-revolutionary trajectories.The volume represents a breakthrough in our understanding of why and how democratic revolutions take place in the post-communist world. It provides an integrated analysis of why such upheavals succeed in some, but fail in other states. The contributions point to, among other issues, why the post-revolutionary breakthroughs in Serbia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan have encountered obstacles, the ousted regime was never fully defeated and its representatives were able to launch counter-revolutions, as well as why, in Serbia and Ukraine, the political forces of the ousted regimes have returned to power in free elections held after democratic revolutions. "Post-Communist Democratic Revolutions in Comparative Perspective" is essential reading for scholars and policy makers alike.

Reports by international governmental and non-governmental organizations on the 2004 presidential elections in Ukraine constituted a significant factor in generating, facilitating, and completing the Orange Revolution. Ukrainian civil society, mass media, courts, and political parties were the main driving force behind the popular uprising that returned Ukraine to the path of democratization it had embarked on in 1991. Yet, the unambiguous stance and political weight of such institutions as the EU, PACE, NATO, and, above all, OSCE played their role too. The democratic movement benefited from the menace of international isolation and stigmatization of the Ukrainian state, which was expected in case President Leonid Kuchma had decided to prevent a repetition of the second round of the voting.The volume collects not all, but some of the most widely discussed reports, including English translations of selected sections of the three reports produced by the CIS International Observers Mission. The latter as well as a report by an Israeli institute depart from the assessments of the other organizations represented here, allowing for comparison of diverging evaluations of the same events. The volume assembles full or excerpted official reports of the International Republican Institute, the Tel Aviv Institute for the Countries of Eastern Europe and CIS, the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, and the Commonwealth of Independent States. Contributions by Yevgen Shapoval and Roman Kupchinsky introduce and conclude the collection.