It has passed over a quarter of a century from the collapse of the Soviet Union
and the political systems of the new states that have emerged in 1991 demonstrate
own features which can not be classified as a ‘third wave of democratization’. The
paper discusses main features of the transformation of post-Soviet political systems
and pays particular attention to the case of Belarus. The author argues that some
problems in investigation of that matter can be overcome by a neopatrimonial paradigm. From such point of view, thus leading roles in the politic of Belarus play
not oligarchy but state officials, it is classified as a bureaucratic regime.
PEER REVIEW INFORMATION
Article has been screened for originality
ЛИТЕРАТУРА(26)
1.
A. Agh, Globalization and Central-East European Countries’ Democratization: The Fourth Wave, [w:] R. Markowski, E. Wnuk-Lipinski (red.), Transformative Paths in Central and Eastern Europe, Warszawa 2001.
S.M. Eke, T. Kuzio, Sultanism in Eastern Europe: The Socio-Political Roots of Authoritarian Populism in Belarus, „Europe-Asia Studies” 2000, vol. 52, nr 3.
G. Ekiert, J. Kubik, M.A. Vachudova, Democracy in the Post-Communist World:An Unending Quest?, „East European Politics and Societies” 2007, vol. 7, nr 21.
A. Ilkhamov, Neopatrimonialism, factionalism and patronage in post-Soviet Uzbekistan, [w:] D.C. Bach, M. Gazibo (red.), Neopatrimonialism in Africa and Beyond, London 2012.
А.Г. Лукашенко, Стратегия будущего, [w:] А.Г. Косинец и др. (red.), Первый съезд ученых Республики Беларусь: сборник материалов. Минск 1–2 нояб. 2007 г., Минск 2007.
Мы используем файлы cookies для улучшения пользовательского интерфейса и анализа трафика. Данные собираются и обрабатываются нами и Google Analytics (more). Вы можете изменить настройки cookies в своем браузере. Продолжая использовать сайт, вы соглашаетесь с этими условиями.