Melville Andrei

Neoconservative Consensus in Russia? Main Components, Factors of Stability, Potential for Erosion

The article analyzes the main substantive components, factors of stability and the potential for erosion of the politico-ideological consensus established in the modern Russia. On the one hand, A.Melville documents the extraordinary strength of this consensus, buttressed by the powerful factors such as the long-term position of power holders, support from the elitist and bureaucratic circles, effective propaganda with a strong mobilizational impact, conservative orientation of the middle class and dominating mass attitudes. On the other hand, the author draws attention to a number of not-so-obvious factors that could turn the tide in the long term, such as volatility of mass sentiments, possible alterations within the elite groups, as well as the internal flaws of the modern neoconservative idea.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2017-84-1-29-47

2020: RUSSIAN ALTERNATIVES REVISITED

The authors in their article generalize the results of the new stage of the research project aiming at the construction of the alternative scenarios of Russia’s future and testing them through the method of focus groups. Four scenarios – “Kremlin Gambit”, “New Dream”, “Fortress Russia”, and “Russian Mosaic” – are being reviewed. The focus groups carried out in Moscow, Yekaterinburg, Voronezh, Kaliningrad, Novgorod, and Irkutsk at the end of 2009 not only proved again that respondents hold these scenarios for real ones rather than far-fetched or arbitrarily elaborated trajectories of the future development of Russia, but also revealed a range of additional important issues. For instance, the authors found that regional differences and electoral preferences have barely any influence on the perception of the alternative variants of the future. The research demonstrated the increasing dissatisfaction of the Russian citizens with the current dynamics and the clearly defined request for changes that combines feelings of patriotism and fear of the collapse of the country with the unambiguous pro-democratic choice.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2010-57-2-42-65

Problems of territorial reform in Russia exemplifying mutual relations between the Tyumen area and Khunty - Mansijsky and Yamal-Nenetsky autonomous regions

In the spotlight of the article are plans and projects on reducing of number of subjects within the Russian Federation with the aim of their integration which is considered initially through an example of the Tyumen area and two autonomous regions linked with it. In this connection the authors turn to a foreign experience, try to weigh up all positive and negative consequences of proposed changes in territorial division of the country.

The legal base of such kind of territorial reform, its immediate and postponed hazards (domestic, social, economical and geopolitical) are considered in the article. In particular, the authors draw up a conclusion that annexation of Khunty - Mansijsky and Yamal-Nenetsky autonomous regions to Tyumen area is unacceptable.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2004-33-2-78-105

Pages: 78-105

Political Science: the MGIMO School

Moscow State Institute (University) of International Relations of Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation has been actively involved in raising the political elite of both Russia and other countries for over fifty years now and boasts one of the well-known schools of political science. In the late 1980's MGIMO inaugurated a separate political science section which organically relied on the expertise accumulated during the preceding decades. In 1998 a new political science department was opened within MGIMO (of which Andrey Melvil is dean), originally oriented at international issues in the broadest sense of the term. Such bias was chosen because the international aspect is organic to modern comparative political science in general. The community of MGIMO political scientists is continually engaged in creative research, attracting gifted youth to their ranks and pursuing a harmonious combination of scientific tradition and innovation.

DOI: 10.30570/2078-5089-2000-16-2-192-200

Pages: 192-200