Should Russia Be Considered a Democratic State - Case Study Example

Russia a Democratic Country According to experts, it is pertinent to note that political system for the Russian has recently embraced democracy. Despite of the Russians embracing technology, the worst thing is that they are deep in flaws in terms of democratic credentials, they also have overwhelming corruption that is tainted. Further, the governing system is massively influenced by personality and power of a man Vladimir Putin. This essay will exhaustively analyze the structure of the Russian government in the aim of answering whether Russia is a democratic state as from the governance of the year 1991 to 2012 (Remington, 2012.p.14). It makes sense to note that the largest nation that broke up from the Soviet Union was Russia by the year 1991. Russia adopted new constitution after the constitutional crises dated 1993. The adoption of the constitution was as per the 1993 referendum. Primarily, it is wise to note that the country now, is referred to us central presidential republic. It is worth to analyze the structural nature of the Russian government (Fish, 2005.p.7). Here the structure of the federal presidential republic of the Russia is described as follows: first, there is the presidency, the executive, the state Dumas, the federation council and lastly the political parties. Having put that across, it is now important to analyze the structure of the Russian country systematically, commencing with the president. President, according to the constitution of 1993, it is pertinent to realize that strong powers have been provided to the president to the extent that he is capable of issuing directives and decrees that possess the authority of law without necessarily the review from legislation. However, president carries the above even thought according to the constitution, it is that the law document should not be contravened. According to the law, it is required that those who are competing for presidency to win at least 50% of the total votes cast. If the above is not attained, then the two tops should face each other in a run-off election. Unlike the 1993 constitution of a four-year term for presidency, the constitution was amended in 2008, and so it is clear that president goes on power for a six-year term. Consequently, president is eligible for a second term but according to the constitution, a third term is not recognized. On the other hand, the president has the mandate of appointing the prime minister with the Duma approval. Again, the role of the prime minister is subservient to the role of the president historically. It is notable that the above situation changed from the year 2008, after the stepping down of Vladimir as president, and deputy prime minister by then Dmitry stepping up as president consecutively. It is important to outline further the state of Duma in Russian system of governance. State of Duma is a lower house in the assembly of Russian. Here is where all bills, including those proposed by the council of federal are firstly considered. On other hand, the authority of the resignation by government is limited as per the Duma. The president has the authority to disregard a vote of no confidence even if it is of majority in the Duma house. Meaning the president has the power and authority of the either approving or disregarding any vote even if it is the majority vote. Notably, the above shade light to the undemocratic situation in the Russian system of governance The federal council on other hand has its own function. First, it is the upper house in the federal assembly of the Russian council. It is pertinent to note that the council constitutes of 168 members known as senators. According to the territorial nature of the upper house, it is evident that the council terms are not nationally fixed. Due to the above, the regional bodies represented by the senators determine the terms (Wesselitsky, 2009.p. 23). Political party, it is true as per the experts that united Russia is the name for the main political party. This is a more recent body founded in 2001 due to the merger between some political parties. Considerably, the above represents the position and the stability of the party in the Russian system of governance. Apparently, it is noted that the judiciary of the federal of the Russian consists of 19 judges; here one judge is the chair whilst one of the remaining 18 will be the deputy. Judges according to the study are presidential appointees and the federal council. The more important issue to note here is that a constitutional court is a court limited with jurisdiction matter. The court has the mandate of examining various bodies’ appeals and ruling over the violations of the constitution, the body further participates in the proceedings of the presidential impeachment (Remington, 2012.p. 5). Even though the judiciary is an independent body, it is connected to some extent with the ruling that takes place in the country. After the analysis of the above structure of the Russian government, it is vital to realize that the democracy of the Russian is not a total oxymoron, since it is a progression work of the Vladimir. Here, the system exercises a massive effect on the exercise and acquisition of power. According to the experts and observers, they affirm that the current state of system in the Russian politics is a sovereign democracy or managed democracy or it can be viewed as the Putinism. It is called Putism because under his rule he did many unbearable things including the killing, dismissal, and violation of rights. Accordingly, it is wise to note that sovereign democracy remains a growth business throughout the Asian countries. It is not of great concern whether it is a nationalist democracy, a management democracy or called something else it is a top to down system of governance. With the above type of governance, it is noticed that government gives its citizens a monopolized power in politics but it allows increasing social and economic liberties. Thus, arguments assure that full democracy is not a local condition suit and so loosing the monopoly of a government on key and power sectors of economy can be a start of chaos, as well as set backing the progress of economy without a national interest. It is apparent from the the study that the Russian affairs have been assessed by the Moscow embassy. One of the pertinent factors for the universal democracy is implementation of the humanistic ideas and values that are legal. Accordingly, it is alleged that Russia has become a state that believes in virtue mafia. It is pertinent to note that Russia democracy is not a vivid phenomena and that is why several leaked cables have their own suggestions on the democracy of the Russia. Quotes from the U.K leaked cables argues that Russia is a corrupt autocracy, on contrary another leaked cable Robert Gates, demonstrates the fact that Russian democracy has disappeared. Here, the pertinent issue is that all of the above suggestions are a twisted democracy definition. It follows that the above leaks are authoritarian regimes that does not allow a discussion that is meaningful on pertinent political issues, political competition, or even judicial independence, what they are expressing is an abuse to the society. The democratic nature of the Russia is demonstrated as per several different issues, some of the issues are investments (Eckstein, 2008.p. 12). For instance, during the Ukraine revolution of the orange, the Russian did invest quite a lot into the idea of sovereign democracy. Fortunately, in the past recent years, it is noted that Russia is painting its picture of being a variant of western democracy. The above is being done as per the claim they have that they have an alternative model for democracy. According to the Russian leaders, it is evident that they find it easy to run a state that is beneath the rhetoric, of authority although they claim that they are democratic. The above issue acts as a dis-arm to critics by holding on the fact that, in the near future the promises of democracy may not have become a reality. Russian democracy lies in the governance by the leaders. In addition, it is evident that the leaders are doing their best to talk about democracy in the whole region of central Asia. They express their feelings of democracy in a less complementary but in a more spontaneous way by saying if the authority fails to impose order, then it is likely that the parliamentary republic would work and look. One factor that pulls back the step to the democracy is the fear of uncertainty. Here, the leaders argue that democracy will lead to eternal chain of problems. For instance, there will be a frequent reshuffle of the parliament; alternations of power by political parties, continuously pass the authority from one authority to the other. The above will be a source of views to power by extremist. With the above worries, it is obvious that the authoritarian will only voice when they are confronted by the idea to build democracy. Notably, significantly the battle for democracy in the Russian country is not against corruption or democracy. It is clearly noted that all the parties work by the insinuations of democracy, but still the democracy itself do not exist. The above is because, all the parties are opposing corruption or rather are against corruption but literally, they are doing nothing to stop it. Here, according to the experts, it is evident that the real battle line is between regionalism and centralization. More so, the above will only come true if all the meaningful power be shared or reside with the major cities and regions. The above are some factors that should be considered for the effect embracing of the democracy. According to Ryzhkov, he argues that the 2008 change in reign where the terms of rule experienced a shift from four to six, is clear evidence that the regime will be autocratic and more authoritative and so president will control everything. Thus, aristocracy constrained tsar, while the general secretary controls the bureaucracy of the party (Wagner 2009.p.24). It is pertinent to realist that now days, the control of the senate, the parliament, regions security services and bureaucracy not forgetting gas and oil is by the president. A remarks by the former soviet union Gorbachev to the current system of governance in Russia is that Russia has everything including the courts, prime minister and president just to mention but a few shows that Russian is a democratic country. On contrary, the proceedings in the government itself is what negates the above statement since many are political parties that obeys corruption and power other than following the acts of a democratic country. According to the study of the elections in Russian nation outlines the capability of the voter turn out to the signal of democracy. Here, it is pertinent that all the election carried out by the Russian country, had their own share of fraud, analyzed from 1991 to 2012. The worst part was the 1996 runoff, when the communist party presidential aspirant was knocked down by President Yeltsin. Notably according to the study, it is evident from the Russian elections that democracy supporters do not cherish authoritarian leaders, when they get on bragging for the deeds that reduce the freedom of the citizens. To some extent, the above issue is what the Russian country is experiencing up to date, and that is why democracy in the Russian state is only a spoken issue and not a fact on the ground (Bradley, 1996. p.45). As per the modern history, the defense order usually slump and the breakdown of the USSR a rose a new search for the conversion productions. Some of the goods that increased in the period are the equipment of the Medicare, the system of UOMZ equipment were increased to India and china. All of the above is a significant of the democratic shift by the Russian country. Only democracy is what will brig about the success of international products, since the industry need to get the quality of admission in an official manner. Without democracy, then they will be no quality admission as expected by the international markets. Summary, according to the above message it is wise to note that Russian is not a fully democratic country as the leaders claim (Sakwa, 2011, p.129). Despite of the organized structures of the governance, still corruption and autocracy is a determinant factor. It is evident that although political parties are against the corruption they tent to do nothing in the eradication of the same. Further, the change in regime from four years per term to six year, paved way for extra authority to the president, and thus, he has the authority to control everything including oil. It means that president has a lot of authority than any other member party. Therefore, one person controls the idea of democracy and so to some extent equal rights cannot be exercised. To crown it all, Russia is not a democratic country due to the centralization of the governance. The issue of democracy has exhaustively been analyzed with accordance of the structure of the Russian government in the aim of answering whether Russia is a democratic state as from the governance of the year 1991 to 2012. Significantly, the battle for democracy in the Russian country is not against corruption or democracy. It is clearly noted that all the parties work by the insinuations of democracy, but still the democracy itself do not exist References Bradley, J 1996, Russia: building democracy. Special ed. Austin, Tex.: Raintree Steck-Vaughn. Eckstein, H 1998, Can democracy take root in post-Soviet Russia? explorations in state-society relations, Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, Md. Fish, M 2005, Democracy derailed in Russia: the failure of open politics, Cambridge University Press, New York. Keep, J2007, The rise of social democracy in Russia, Clarendon, Oxford. Politkovskai, A 2005, Putin's Russia: life in a failing democracy, Metropolitan Books, New York. Remington, T 2012, Politics in Russia, 7th ed. Longman, Boston. Sakwa, R 2011, The crisis of Russian Democracy: The Dual State,Factionalism and the Medvedev succession, Cambridge University Press. Sutela, P 2012, The political economy of Putin's Russia, Routledge, London. Wagner, V 2009, Russia, Greenhaven Press, Detroit, MI. Walkin, J 2008, The rise of democracy in pre-revolutionary Russia; political and social institutions under the last three Czars, Praeger, New York. Wesselitsky, G 2010, Russia & democracy: the German canker in Russia, Pub. for the Central committee for national patriotic organizations, New York. Read More