¹ 1, 2006
The authors doubt a wide-spread opinion that a regime is just a number of formal power institutions. In their opinion in the transition period institutions in themselves are not only and not that much a framework for cooperation and the system of generally accepted legitimate rules but also the subject of agreements, trade and struggle. The interaction between the ruling class and the society as well as inside the ruling class is based on informal institutions. Using modern Ukraine as an example the authors address the problem of the power legitimacy and government under regimes where the “grey zone” has in a certain sense received its legal regulations.
¹ 1, 2000
Proclaiming formally in 1990s the renunciation to the soviet model of state and the socialist values, the beginning of democratization, the ruling elites did not formulate the meaning of this process. The actual regime had no responses to the most of that challenges. The country wasn't stable in the political aspect. The legitimacy of this regime is very uncertain. It is still difficult to define what legal tradition the present regime inherited and whether it proceeded from the Russian empire, or the Soviet Union or the state formed in 1991. Russia didn't react to the challenges of the modernization and of the multipolar world. The actual key tasks should be the purposes determination and the restoration of the non-totalitarian statehood. The reinforcement of the civil society could lead to the broadening of the supreme power resources.
¹ 1, 1996
The abstract is not found
Main Page ~ Authors ~ Kuzmin Aleksei