战略与国际研究中心-PONARS-Policy-Memo-157_7页_147kb

Russia's Path to a New Regional Policy Summary

Core Content

This document explores the evolution of Russia's regional policy under President Vladimir Putin, analyzing the impact of his reforms on the relationship between the central government and the regions. It compares Putin's approach with that of his predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, and examines the political and economic motivations driving both leaders' policies.

Main Points

• Yeltsin's Legacy:
  Yeltsin's approach to regional relations was characterized by a lack of a coherent policy, leading to the development of asymmetric federalism. Regional leaders, especially in ethnic republics, were given significant autonomy in areas such as taxation, natural resource control, and foreign trade. This autonomy was used to secure personal power and economic benefits, often at the expense of central authority.

• Political and Economic Factors:
  Yeltsin's leniency towards regional leaders was driven by political expediency and economic necessity. He allowed regions to maintain their own laws and privileges to prevent further separatism and to ensure that wealthier regions would continue to support the central government. This system, however, created a fragmented and inefficient state structure.

• Putin's Reform Project:
  Upon taking office, Putin aimed to centralize power, align regional laws with federal legislation, and redistribute resources more equitably. His reforms included:

  • Imposing new federal districts to create an administrative layer between the central government and regions.
  • Proposing reforms to the Federation Council, aiming to reduce the political influence of regional leaders.
  • Seeking to remove regional leaders from the Federation Council and place them in the new State Council.
  • Introducing tax reforms that would reduce the special status of wealthier regions and redirect resources to poorer ones.

• Reactions from the Regions:
  Regional leaders responded to Putin's reforms with a mix of support and resistance. Some were concerned about losing political immunity and personal power, while others saw opportunities for reappointment or new roles. The reform process was complex and politically sensitive, with many leaders engaging in bilateral negotiations to protect their interests.

• Democracy vs. Order:
  Putin's emphasis on centralizing authority and imposing order has raised concerns about the erosion of democratic principles. His appointments of military and security officials to key regional roles suggest a preference for authoritarian control. However, public opinion polls indicate that a majority of Russians support order over freedom, which may justify his approach in the eyes of the populace.

Key Information

• Federal Districts:
  The seven federal districts created by Putin's 2000 decree are aligned with military and economic regions, not replacing the existing 89 federal subjects but adding an administrative layer.

• Federation Council Reforms:
  Putin proposed the creation of a State Council with consultative powers, but regional leaders like Shaimiev sought to expand its authority through constitutional amendments.

• Economic Impact:
  Wealthier regions such as Tatarstan and Bashkortostan were discontented with Putin's tax reforms, which threatened to reduce their autonomy and tax revenues. In contrast, poorer regions welcomed the changes as they expected more federal support.

• Authoritarian Tendencies:
  The appointment of former KGB and military officials to key roles in regional governance has led some observers to view Putin's reforms as a move towards an "enlightened autocracy", which may not be fully democratic but could bring stability and order.

• Public Opinion:
  Despite concerns about authoritarianism, public support for order remains strong, with over 81% of Russians favoring law and order even at the cost of some democratic freedoms.

Conclusion

Putin's regional policy represents a significant shift from Yeltsin's decentralized approach, aiming to create a stronger, more unified state. While the reforms may improve governance and economic redistribution, they also raise concerns about centralized control and the potential erosion of regional autonomy. The success of these reforms will depend on how effectively they address both political and economic challenges, and whether they can balance order with democratic principles.