What went wrong in Russias decade-old post-communist transition? A group of leading young scholars answer this question by offering assessments of five crucial political arenas during the Yeltsin era: elections, executive-legislative relations, interactions between the central state and the regions, economic reforms, and civil-military relations. All of the contributors recognize that adverse historical legacies have complicated Russian democratization. They challenge structural explanations that emphasize constraints of the pre-existing system, however, and concentrate instead on the importance of elite decisions and institution-building. The authors agree that elites failure to develop robust political institutions has been a central problem of Russias post-communist transition. The weakness of the state and its institutions has contributed to a number of serious problems threatening democratic consolidation. These include the tensions between the executive and the legislature, the frail infrastructure for successful market reform, and the absence of proper civilian control over the armed forces.

Drawn from outstanding articles published in the Journal of Democracy, The Global Divergence of Democracies follows the enthusiastically received earlier volume, The Global Resurgence of Democracy.

The tremendous momentum of democratic expansion that characterized the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s has drawn to a halt. Significantly, this halt has not yet been followed by a "reverse wave"of democratic breakdowns, and democracy remains unchallenged as a global model and ideal of governance. The values of freedom, human rights, and popular sovereignty have continued to gain strength in the world. The first section of The Global Divergence of Democracies presents a few outstanding examples of the accumulating body of argument and evidence in favor of the universality of democratic principles and their basic compatibility with diverse religious and cultural traditions.

Nonetheless, in practice, the performance of the world's newer democracies has become increasingly varied, a trend reflected in the title of this volume: The Global Divergence of Democracies. The divergence in the quality or depth of democracy is matched by a parallel divergence in progress toward the consolidation of democracy. The second section of this volume is devoted to the hotly contested debate among leading scholars of comparative democracy of the utility and meaning of the concept of consolidation.

A third section examines some of the key building blocks of successful democracy, including political party systems, elections, federalism, the rule of law, a market economy, an independent judiciary, and civilian control of the military. The volume concludes with a series of appraisals of the divergent paths that democracy is taking both among and within various regions of the world, as well as in such key countries as Russia and China. With contributions by more than thirty of the world's leading scholars of democracy, this volume presents the most comprehensive assessment available of the state of democracy in the world at the beginning of the new millennium.

The authoritarian Chinese regimes governing Taiwan, Mainland China, and Hong Kong allowed limited electoral competition during the last half century. In Taiwan that process evolved over more than three decades before leading to the formation of an opposition party under martial law in late September 1986 and the blossoming of full democracy In March 2000 when that opposition party replaced the ruling party. In Mainland China and Hong Kong, limited electoral competition has only evolved over the last fifteen years or so. This volume examines why and how limited electoral competition developed in Greater China.

The editors use a typology and different concepts to analyse how the political centre in these three Chinese societies historically interacted with society and how different regime change took place. Their analysis attributes Taiwan's robust electoral competition under martial law to political breakthroughs in the political, ideological, economic, and organizational marketplaces. Without similar political breakthroughs in Mainland China and Hong Kong, their limited electoral processes are not likely to lead to the election of one or more opposition parties in Mainland China and the direct election of a Hong Kong governor and parliament.

These two authoritarian regimes have adopted different institutions, or rules, to limit electoral competition. Moreover, different changes have been taking place in their political, ideological, economic, and organizational marketplaces than occurred in Taiwan. Therefore, whether these two Chinese societies can mimic the Taiwan democratization path remains problematic. Only the passage of time will reveal whether their limited electoral competitive processes can transform into full democracy.

The first-ever encyclopedic examination of elections and electoral concepts worldwide. Written by a distinguished international team of scholars.

Elections are of fundamental importance in countries around the world, especially as democracy continues to spread. As more and more of the world's people are winning the right to select their leaders in free and competitive elections, many elections are poorly understood by the electorate, as well as by the world at large and electoral institutions vary greatly from country to country.

The International Encyclopedia of Elections is the first and only definitive work to survey elections in independent nations and describe the varied systems and processes in clear language understandable to any interested reader. The encyclopedia will be most useful to undergraduate and graduate students, journalists, political activists, and scholars seeking information outside their specialties or their own countries.

Written in clear, concise language by 70 international scholars in the field, the volume contains more than 150 articles (from Absentee voting to Women: Enfranchisement) ranging in length from a few hundred to several thousand words. The encyclopedia covers each of the more than 170 countries that have held direct elections or national referendums in this decade.

The first product of the Carnegie Moscow Center's research on the 1999 Duma elections. It includes an analysis of the political situation and allignment of electoral forces on the eve of the elections, descriptions of the campaigns and policy platforms of the main electoral associations and blocs, and analysis of the electorate's fluctuating political preferences. Separate chapters are devoted to the electoral campaigns in the following regions: Saint Petersburg, Altai and Stavropol Krais, and the Samara and Tverskoi regions.

Russia's March 2000 presidential election represents one step forward and two steps back for Russian democracy. For the first time in Russia's history, power within the Kremlin has changed hands through an electoral process. The election not only took place but was conducted as constitutionally prescribed, no small achievement for a country with Russia's authoritarian history. More than two-thirds of the eligible voters participated, and they appeared to make informed choices among a range of candidates who offered competing platforms, policies, and leadership styles. The election, however, was not contested on a level playing field. The winner, acting president Vladimir Putin, enjoyed tremendous advantages that tainted the process. Although weak in some arenas, the Russian state still enjoys too much power with respect to the electoral process, while nongovernmental forces--political parties, civic organizations, trade unions, and independent business groups--remain too weak to shape the outcomes of elections.

A party system is an essential attribute of a democratic policy. No parties, no democracy. Despite the erosion of the influence of parties in old democracies and the difficulties of establishing new parties in new democracies, theorists still agree that parties and a party system are necessary evils for the functioning of representative government. In liberal democracies, parties perform several tasks. During elections, they provide voters with distinctive choices, be they ideological, social, or even ethnic. After elections, parties then represent the interests of their constituents in the formulation (and sometimes implementation) of state policy. The degree of party penetration of state institutions need not correlate directly with a given party?s power over policy outcomes. Empowered by expertise or connections to key decision makers, small parties can have inordinate influence over policy debates, while large parties may suffer the opposite: no expertise, no personal networks, and therefore, little influence over policy. Yet, some degree of representation within the state is usually necessary for a party to influence policy outcomes. In polities with highly developed party systems, parties also perform other functions that can include everything from organizing social life to social welfare.

Russia today is an electoral democracy. Political leaders come to power through the ballot box. They are not appointed by the Central Committee of the Communist Party. They do not take office by seizing power through the use of force. Most elites in Russia and the vast majority of the Russian population now recognize elections as the only legitimate means to power. Leaders and parties that espouse authoritarian practices--be they fascists or neocommunists--have moved to the margins of Russia's political stage. Given Russia's thousand-year history of autocratic rule, the emergence of electoral democracy must be recognized as a revolutionary achievement of the last decade.