The Putin Era in Historical Perspective (PDF; 312 KB)
Source: National Intelligence Council (via Federation of American Scientists)

Participants in a November 15, 2006 conference sponsored by the National Intelligence Council broadly agreed that Russia has never developed a capitalist culture or the institutional structure of a modern capitalist state; that Russians historically have believed that autocracy is the only viable system for their country because it is too large and ethnically diverse to survive intact under any other form of rule; and that being a great power is a central part of Russia’s historical identity. Given the continuity of these long-held attitudes, change in Russia probably will come only when a leader is willing to confront and transcend the roots of this historical legacy, which the Putin administration is unlikely to do.

• Russia has never had legally enforceable property rights, an essential feature of a functioning capitalist society. For centuries, property rights and business associations have existed in limbo, enjoying no legal status or protection. Instead, the principle of kormleniye—currying favor with the leaders to protect one’s property—has prevailed.
• The continuation of these practices under Putin presents an impediment to economic development. A small group of Putin’s close allies occupy the commanding heights of the economy, driving growth through natural resource extraction and enjoying privileges through kormleniye. The lack of a firm dividing line between public and private, and the symbiosis of state and organized crime elements, are a real danger to long-term prosperity.
• Most Russians fear the disorder that many believe would result from a more open, pluralistic system. The system historically has been stable because some form of authoritarianism is the default mode, and opportunistic attempts to introduce more freedom have been the exception.
• Compared to other imperial collapses, the Soviet disintegration was relatively orderly and non-violent. Bereft of its former empire, Russia still aspires to be a great power and to be respected as such.
• Participants disagreed over whether Russia had developed an identity as a post-imperial power. They did agree, however, that Russia is increasingly is using tougher forms of “soft power” in dealing with its neighbors.

This entry was posted on Saturday, February 17th, 2007 at 10:34 pm and is filed under Russia. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.