Putin's struggle for federalism: Structures, operation, and the commitment problem

Abstract

This article provides an analysis of the institutional mechanisms that are required to ensure the effective functioning of federalism in Russian politics. A common contention in the literature on federalism is that, in addition to fundamental requirements such as the constitutionally defined division of powers between the federation and its constituent units, and the supremacy of the federal constitution, some ancillary structures are necessary. Of particular importance are institutions of inter-governmental co-operation, transparent means for the mobility of officials between the centre and the regions, and integrated systems of national parties. The functioning of these institutions must also reflect the culture and ethic of federalism. This article examines how well these three factors have been implemented in Russia in the course of Putin's reforms. It is shown that a preliminary network of such institutions has been created. However, their operational ethic, and in particular the lack of commitment to federal values, it is argued, could act as an impediment to the successful evolution of the federal state in Russia.

Notes

⁵⁰I am very grateful to Dr J. D. Barber, Dr D. S. Lane, Professor C. Weissert, and two anonymous referees for helpful suggestions.

¹J. Perovic, ‘Regionalization Under Putin: Old Models and New Trends’, Davis Center for Russian Studies, Harvard University, 2002, available at: http://daviscenter.fas.harvard.edu/seminars_conferences/perovic_03_19_02.pdf, accessed 2 November 2006.

²See also D. Oreshkin, ‘Virtual'nyi absolutizm’, 19 March 2004, available at: http://www.gazeta.ru/comments/tendency/96949.shtml, accessed 2 November 2006.

³See also FOM, ‘Ugorza raspada Rossii: real'naya ili mnimaya?’, 21 April 2005, available at: http://bd.fom.ru/report/map/d051627, accessed 2 November 2006; ROMIR Monitoring, ‘Chto volnuet rossiiskikh grazhdan?’, December 2003, available at: http://rmh.ru/news/res_results/84.html, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁴See also Kramer (1994).

⁵Significant academic attention, both theoretical and related to specific area studies, has already been paid to the fundamental requirements. A wide range of studies have examined how Putin's federal reforms have clarified, or otherwise, the balance of power between the centre and the regions and enforced compliance with the federal constitution (Hahn 2003; Sakwa 2004, pp. 130 – 161; Ross 2004, pp. 157 – 163; Reddaway & Orttung 2004, pp. 19 – 35; Chebankova 2005). The Constitutional Court, and the judicial system in general, is another important element of this discussion. These structures serve as a means of ensuring that the centre and the regions comply with the rules of a ‘federal bargain’ outlined in the constitution and supporting legislation. The role of these institutions has been examined by a number of scholars specialising in both formal and applied political analysis (Bednar 2004; Kramer 2004; Filipov et al. 2003, pp. 151 – 157; Hahn 2003, pp. 134 – 144). A detailed examination of such issues, and their application to the Russian case, is a matter of a separate account, and falls beyond the scope of this article which focuses on the three aforementioned institutional pillars.

⁶ Gosudarstvennyi Sovet, 2005, available at: http://president.kremlin.ru/stc/2005.shtml, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁷‘Putin uspokoil Sovet Zakonodatelei’, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 19 February 2003.

⁸Pravitel'stvo Rossiiskoi Federatsii, ‘Perechen’ Federal'nykh Tselevykh Programm i Federal'nykh Programm Razvitiya Regionov na 2005 god’, 2005, available at: http://www.programs-gov.ru/cgi-bin/fcp_list.cgi, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁹‘Gossovet Budet Borot'sya S Korruptsiei’, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 19 December 2002.

¹⁰‘Gubernatorov budut snimat’ izyashchno', 21 November 2002, available at: http://www.gazeta.ru/2002/11/21/gubernatorov.shtml, accessed 2 November 2006.

¹¹Pravitel'stvo Rossiiskoi Federatsii, ‘Resheniya Soveta Zakonodatelei’, 2005, available at: http://council.gov.ru/lmc/resolutions_council/2005/index.html, accessed 2 November 2006.

¹²‘Sibirskii polpred zanyalsya ekonomikoi’, Kommersant Daily, 9 February 2001; ‘Mezhregional'naya assotsiatsiya “Sibirskoe Soglashenie” i Sibirskii Federal'nyi Okrug schitayut neobkhodimym postroit’ AES v regione', Delovoi Novosibirsk, 3 March 2003.

¹³ Sobranie Zakonodatel'stva Rossiiskoi Federatsii (2001). The membership requirement was increased to 50,000 in late 2004, following the Beslan events. This policy, as well as the reconstitution of gubernatorial elections, had no apparent connection to the problem of terrorism. Thus, a number of commentators (Colton et al. 2005) observed that Putin's administration employed the Beslan attack as a means of expanding its political authority.

¹⁴In many regions local financial and political elites formed ‘spontaneous’ parties during gubernatorial and legislative elections in order to secure executive offices and seats within the regional legislatures. These parties disintegrated shortly after the elections had taken place (Ol'shanskii 2000, pp. 45 – 46).

¹⁵I. Borisov, ‘Razvitie mnogopartiinosti v Rossii’, Nezavisimyi Institut Vyborov, 2004, available at: http://www.vibory.ru/discussion/borisov-p.ht, accessed 2 November 2006.

¹⁶R. Turovskii & A. Titkov, ‘Liberal'nyi populizm zavoevyvaet krasnye regiony’, gazeta.ru, March 30 2005, available at: http://www.gazeta.ru/comments/2005/03/30_x_261025.shtml, accessed 2 November 2006.

¹⁷‘Reiting Edinoi Rossii nemnogo velikovat’, Vedomosti, 16 October 2002.

¹⁸Central Electoral Commission of the Russian Federation, Rezul'taty vyborov deputatov Federal'nogo Sobraniya Gosudarstvennoi Dumy Rossiiskoi Federatsii, 2004, available at: http://gd2003.cikrf.ru/WAY/76799135/sx/art/76805049/cp/1/br/76799124, accessed 2 November 2006.

¹⁹‘Semero gubernatorov sokhranili svoi posty’, Izvestiya, 8 December 2003.

²⁰I. Bunin, ‘Politicheskii rezhim Vladimira Putina v nachale vtorogo goda pravleniya’, Moskovskii Tsentr Politicheskikh Tekhnologii, 10 October 2002, available at: http://www.cpt.ru/statint.php, accessed 2 November 2006.

²¹‘Regiony Trebuyut Zemli i Voli’, Vremya Novostei, 9 September 2004; ‘Revolyutsiya v Dume’, Vremya Novostei, 16 January 2004.

²²‘Shaimiev—Putin Nich'ya s Prodolzheniem’, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 12 March 2002.

²³‘Gref Pokusilsya na Sviatoe’, Vedomosti, 8 June 2005.

²⁴Pravitel'stvo Rossiiskoi Federatsii, ‘Koordintasionnye i Soveshchatel'nye Organy pri Pravitel'stve Rossiiskoi Federatsii’, available at: http://www.government.ru/government/coordinatingauthority/, accessed 2 November 2006.

²⁵‘Kreml’ Pognalsya za Dvumya Vertikalyami', Kommersant Daily, 5 October 2005.

²⁶‘Zhenshchine ne Udobno Otkazat’ Spikeru', Izvestiya, 14 January 2002.

²⁷‘Vtoraya Popytka Al'freda Kokha’, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 28 May 2002.

²⁸‘Ne Byvat’ Kokhu Senatorom', Kommersant Daily, 28 March 2002; ‘Ten’ Skuratova', Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 16 January 2002.

²⁹ Sobranie Zakonodatel'stva Rossiiskoi Federatsii (2004, pp. 11643 – 11645); Sobranie Zakonodatel'stva Rossiiskoi Federatsii (2000); ‘Federal'nyi zakon ‘O vnesenii izmenenii v federal'nyi zakon ‘O statuse chlena Soveta Federatsii i statuse deputata Gosudarstvennoi Dumy Federal'nogo Sobraniya Rossiiskoi Federatsii’, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 12 May 2005.

³⁰R. Turovskii, ‘Novaya i khorosho zabytaya staraya elektoral'naya geografiya’, Moskovskii Tsentr Politicheskikh Tekhnologii, 14 January 2004, available at: http://www.politcom.ru/2004/obsh_vibor11.php, accessed 2 November 2006.

³¹‘Smena vetvi’, Vedomosti, 8 October 2003.

³² RIA Novosti, 2005.

³³‘Rezul'taty vyborov deputatov Federal'nogo Sobraniya Gosudarstvennoi Dumy Rossiiskoi Federatsii’, Tsentral'naya Izbiratel'naya Kommissiya Rossiiskoi Federatsii, 2004, available at: http://gd2003.cikrf.ru/WAY/76799135/sx/art/76805049/cp/1/br/76799124, accessed 2 November 2006.

³⁴Federal'nyi Zakon, ‘O Vyborakh Deputatov Gosudarstvennoi Dumy Federal'nogo Sobraniya Rosiiskoi Federatsii Ot 18 May 2005’, Rossiiskaya Gazeta, 25 May 2005.

³⁵‘Krasnyi poyas raskalilsya dobela’, Nezavisimaya Gazeta, 21 March 2005; ‘Plach Yaroslavlya’, Vedomosti, 6 October 2005.

³⁶‘Aushev Says the Kremlin did not Push him Out’, The Moscow Times, 25 January 2002.

³⁷‘Vertikal’ vlasti protknula Sovet Federatsii', 31 January 2002, available at: http://www.gazeta.ru/2002/01/30/vertikaljvla.shtml, accessed 2 November 2006.

³⁸‘Koloda Rossiiskoi Federatsii’, Kommersant Vlast', 1 December 2003.

³⁹G. Seleznev, interview to Svoboda Slova TV programme, NTV, 30 May 2003, available at: http://www.ntv.ru/programs/publicistics/svbslv/index.jsp?part=Transcript&iid=901, accessed 12 March 2006.

⁴⁰‘Gubernatory starozhily’, 25 April 2005, available at: http://www.gazeta.ru/2005/04/25/oa_155826.shtml, accessed 2 November 2002.

⁴¹‘Ves’ Sovet Federatsii', Kommersant Vlast', 7, 26 February 2002.

⁴²‘Tsena Senatorskogo Kresla’, Saratov GTRK, 24 October 2002, available at: http://saratov.rfn.ru/region/rnews.html?id=2125&rid=387, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁴³‘Nikto ne Khotel Ustupat’, Kommersant Vlast', 17, 386, 28 May 2000.

⁴⁴Russian State Service Academy, ‘Mneniya predstavitelei regional'noi administrativnoi elity o rezhime vlasti’, October 2001, available at: http://www.rags.ru/s_center/opros/polit_elita/index.htm, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁴⁵FOM, ‘Ugorza raspada rossii: real'naya ili mnimaya?’, 21 April 2005, available at: http://bd.fom.ru/report/map/d051627, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁴⁶‘Gubernator—Eto Nadolgo’, Vedomosti, 21 February 2005.

⁴⁷ROMIR Monitoring, ‘Chto volnuet rossiiskikh grazhdan?’, December 2003, available at: http://rmh.ru/news/res_results/84.html, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁴⁸Russian State Service Academy, ‘Rossiya: ee nastoyashchee i budushchee v obshchestvennom mnenii’, 21 – 27 June 2005, available at: http://www.rags.ru/content.php?id=280, accessed 2 November 2006.

⁴⁹‘Rossii nedaleko do Kirgizii’, 11 April 2005, available at: http://www.gazeta.ru/2005/04/11/oa_154279.shtml, accessed 2 November 2006.