Modern Russia: A Burgeoning Democracy or a Returning Autocracy - Research Paper Example

? Modern Russia: A Burgeoning Democracy or a Returning Autocracy HIS 306 Larry Buenafe Ashford Introduction Russia, as a major nation still exhibits elements of autocracy as it struggles to set up and operate democratic structures. “Russia's major assets (including the media, natural resources and banks) had been gathered up by a handful of “oligarchs” who formed a clique around the president” (Berg, Krukones & Perry, 2011 p468). This statement suggests that there is a high level of autocracy that continues to exist in the country. This is because the oligarchic structures are still beaming in a nation which has had a long history of autocracy. Sakwa (2011) reports that Boris Yeltsin, who ruled the country from 1991 to 1999 showed so many signs of autocracy. Although he ascended into power under the pretext of promoting reforms in the post Soviet nation, Yeltsin is reported by Sakwa as maintaining a vast majority of the institutions and ruling strategies that were in vogue in the time of the Soviet dictators. On the other hand, some analysts also state that Vladmir Putin put Russia on a path of democracy and economic freedom (Marples, 2004 p21). Putin “has been a bridge from postcommunist chaos and hardship to national stability, freer markets, individual economic choice and the possibility of democracy” (Berg, Krukones & Perry, 2001 p469). This shows that Vladmir Putin put in a lot of effort to ensure that the post-Soviet nation would get closer to democracy and practice ideals of a Western styled democracy that is consistent with Samuel Houghton's description of the Third Wave of Democracy. In the time of Dmitri Medvedev, we can see that the varying degrees of efforts made by Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin are on the verge of being consolidated to make Russia a democratic nation. However, in spite of all the attempts, the tradition of autocracy and dictatorship has been sown so deep into the Russian society that there remains an awful lot of effort to be put into this drive to institutionalize democracy adequately. The cause of this swing from democracy to autocracy as it exists in Russia and other Soviet states is steeped in the history of this country that spans over the past century. These historic trends links the Czarist regime with the Communist control and the re-constituted Soviet Union as well as the collapse of the Soviet Union under Mikhail Gorbachev. This paper attempts to identify the main features of the transition from autocracy to democracy and trace it to various aspects of Russian history. Final Days of the Czar At the turn of the 20th Century, the Russian economy was reliant on manufactured goods from Western Europe. Most of the economy was based on agricultural products. Sergei Witte's report to the last Czar in the late 1800s suggested that the ruling class (landed nobles) were at the head of affairs and they controlled everything (Berg & Perry, 2011 p86). In the report, Sergei Witte, a major statesman sought to encourage to Czar to undertake reforms that would transform the country's economy from one based on agricultural production to one that would be industrialized and advanced to stand neck-to-neck with other contemporary economies in Western Europe and United States. Unfortunately, the ruling class did not accept it because such a move would deprive them of the luxuries they enjoyed and this would also make them lose their hold on the control of the masses. The history of the ruling class of Russia could be traced to the Middle Ages where the Russian monarchy maintained a feudal system whereby the nobles were to collect rents from peasants with little or no control by the Czar (Sakwa, 2011 p112). Up until 1900, the ruling class was still influential and they kept the masses under very harsh conditions which needed to be addressed. Elsewhere in Europe the Enlightenment had already occurred and this had broken down feudal systems and absolute monarchies. Revolutions had successfully addressed the situation of economic and social discrimination in France and America. The Czar on the other hand had always supported any action that would favor the nobles rather than the masses (Petro, 1995 p130). This laid the foundation for autocracy in modern Russia and the Czar had institutionalized this and carried it through to the 20th Century. Peasant poverty, poor state administration structures, class antagonism in the countryside continued to exist throughout Russia (Berg & Perry, 2011 p89). In 1905, peasants, workers, soldiers, sailors, liberals, intelligentsia and non-Russian minorities had cause to complain against the administration (Bergy & Perry, 2011 p92). The 1905 revolution came during the heights of the Russo-Japanese war. Amongst other things, the classes of Russia were requesting for freely elected officials and this would limit the Czar's absolute powers. Instead of listening to the demonstrators or making adjustments that would accommodate their demands, the Czar instituted a military dictatorship from the Russo-Japanese war and this crashed the protests (Marples, 2004 p53). During the crashing of the protests, numerous Russians were killed. This led to the formation of the Workers Party which covertly sought to identify ways through which the masses could be liberated from the struggles and problems that Czarist Russia had. The lessons learnt from the final years of the Czar's reign is that the tradition of autocracy was strongly steeped in the Russian society. The Czar was an institution that represented several centuries of rule that sought to appease the ruling class of nobles and barons who were poorly controlled. This entrenched the concept of autocracy in a huge country that had little representation from the masses and thus people of noble birth controlled all the power and authority. The Soviet Union After the 1905 revolution was crushed, many elements of the revolution moved into exile. Amongst them was Lenin who had a strong connection with the theories of Karl Marx which sought to create a socialist model where there would be a classless society and people would be given opportunities irrespective of their status in society. This was in direct contrast with the elements of the Czarist government. World War I broke out in 1913 and the Czarist government invested a lot in the war (Sakwa 2011, p31). Due to this, the Russian economy was in shambles and the masses began a new revolution in early 1917. By March 1917, the Czar abdicated and the provisional government was formed. However, the Army was divided and the Workers Party under the leadership of Lenin known as the Bolsheviks (Communists) emerged and took over power by October, 1917. The Bolsheviks formed the Soviet Union and announced that it would establish a society free of exploitation. Perry et al (2011 p104) announce that the new Communist nation relied on force and compulsion, limiting individual rights and outlawed political parties. This show that there was a high degree of autocracy in the new regime of the Communists. The Communist party continued to rule the country until the Second World War broke out. Towards the end of the Second World War, Lenin handed over power to Stalin and after the Germans invaded Russia, Stalin joined the Allies (Marples, 2004 p18). At the end of 1944, it became apparent that Germany would lose the war. So the Anglo-American troops entered mainland Europe (which was under the control of Germany) through France whilst the Soviets were to break through German positions in the East. Whilst the conquests began, it became apparent that what anyone conquered from the Germans would be his portion so the Anglo-Americans invested a lot of troops and resources to take over more territory. However, the Soviets managed to conquer most of Eastern Europe enter Germany. Eventually, the Anglo-Americans and Soviet forces met in Berlin and the city was divided amongst the conquering powers. The inclusion of Eastern Europe led to the extensive expansion of the Soviet Union. This increased the Soviet Union's economic and military power and encouraged further conquests. Stalin had mobilized industrial managers earlier in his political career and thought them nationalism (Perry & Berg, 2011 p114). Stalin preached collectivism which was based on the creation of collective farms or kolkbozniks (Perry & Berg, 2011 p114). However, Stalin was reputed to be ruthless and he achieved his ends by purging rural barons and the upper class with the promise of eliminating class differences (Perry & Berg, 2011 p114). He also seized industries and expropriated a lot of businesses in the name of furthering Lenin's conception of a classless society. The lesson learnt from this aspect of the Soviet Union is that autocracy was entrenched in the system. This is because the concept of the 'democratization of violence' was not good enough. Instead, it sought to promote the ends of the ruling class who claimed to be building a classless society. Cold War After the inclusion of Eastern Europe in the Soviet Union, several neighboring nations came under Soviet domination and this created a multiethnic union that was under Russian domination (Marples, 2004 p71). This is because most of these nations had non-Russian populations which were suppressed by the influence of Russia. This, we will later discover was not so positive for the democratization of the country years after the breakup of the Soviet Union. The Union was kept together by a blend of indoctrination, propaganda, cult-personality of leaders, purges and the forced labor system (Perry et al, 2004 p121) The educational system was boosted under Stalin and it sought to indoctrinate children with the values of the Communist Party, the only party in the Soviet Union. Also, there was a cult-personality created around Stalin. Numerous propaganda was shared and this made the party stand out as invincible. Additionally, the KGB which was the secret service of the Soviet Union engineered so many purges and disappearances of political opponents not only of Stalin by opponents of major officials in the Communist Party. These were designed to ensure that the leaders of the communist party were unquestioned autocrats whose word was final. Other enemies of these leaders were put into forced labor camps where they were worked to death.. After the death of Stalin in 1956, the successors of the Soviet Union's leadership continued to use these systems and concepts to promote autocracy in the Union. Break Up of the Soviet Union Under Mikhail Gorbachev, there were serious problems and challenges in the economy of the Soviet Union and people began to demand reforms. Critics like Andrei Sakharov began to demand an end to the arms race between USSR and the Untied States (Adler and Pouwels, 2010 p707) In 1989, Gorbachev signed treaties with USA limiting military capabilities and made a pact with China (Sakwa, 2011 p31). In 1989, there was the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Afghanistan. Between 1988 and 1991, Gorbachev gradually separated the Communist Party from the State, ending a 72 year monopoly (Adler and Pouwels, 2010, p707). This was followed by the election of officials to parliament. This included both Communist and anti-Communist representatives. The Communist representatives attempted a coup in 1991 and this was foiled by reformists led by Boris Yeltsin. Within the ensuing chaos, assets of the Soviet Union was either seized by the new Russian government led by Boris Yeltsin or they passed to private individuals (Adler and Pouwels, 2010 p707). This marked the beginning of the transformation from Soviet autocracy to democracy. Due to the challenges that surrounded the transition, a lot of the communist and autocratic institutions survived the transition. Complete democracy could not be attained because of the entrenched nature of autocracy. Multi-ethnic break ups followed as Russia, the main component of the Soviet Union broke away from the Union (Darraj, 2009 p101). Turkic and Mongol-Asians were seen as second class citizens under Russian dominated Soviet control, this was an opportunity for them to demand a degree of recognition. Muslim fundamentalists that had been suppressed for generations sought to get some kind of equality. Ukranian and Baltic states often sought to Europeanize (Darraj, 2009 p101). Most of these nations joined NATO and a large number of these Eastern European nations are now members of the European Union. Conclusions There is a lot of effort being made by Russia to set up and maintain institutions of democracy and economic freedom. However, generations of autocracy stands in the way of this transition, making it difficult for the nation to become fully democratized. Autocracy in Russia traces its root back to the feudalism practiced under Czar. Although the Communists promised classless society for Russians, they never attained democracy. Rather, they sought to promote the fair distribution of wealth but under very autocratic conditions. This was done through purges and the use of very tough measures. During the collapse of the Soviet Union, many institutions of the autocratic past of Russia continue to survive into the future. These institutions and some political traditions makes it difficult for the transition to be complete. Nonetheless the Vladmir Putin and Dmitri Medvedev governments have achieved some successes in democratic terms. References Adler, P. J, Pouwels, R. L. (2010) World Civilizations. Mason OH: Cengage. Berg, M., Krukones, J., Perry, M. (2011). Sources of European History Since 1900, Second edition. Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Darraj, M. S. (2009) The Collapse of the Soviet Union .Infobase Publishing. Marples, D. R. (2004) The Collapse of the Soviet Union 1985 – 1991 Pearson, University of Alberta Press. Petro, N. N. (1995) The Rebirth of Russian Democracy Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Sakwa, R. (2011) The Crisis of Russian Democracy. Second Edition. London: Sage Publication Read More