Guest Editor’s Note
| Published date | 01 July 2016 |
| Date | 01 July 2016 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020881718779724 |
| Author | Sanjay Kumar Pandey |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
Guest Editor’s Note
The formation and the dissolution of Soviet Union were momentous events of the
last century. The Soviet Union represented an alternative model of socio-economic
development. It was able to turn a largely agrarian, backward, illiterate society
into an industrialized, highly skilled, socially advanced military superpower,
which posed an existential threat to the West and its way of life. It lifted millions
out of poverty, provided them decent life, and gave an entirely new dimension to
the concept of rights, by including right to work and leisure. It was a remarkable
experiment, an epic effort, which ended in a Shakespearean tragedy, where the
protagonist, possessing exceptional qualities, meets tragic end because of some fatal
flaw(s). Its legacy is a matter of debate.
The collapse of Soviet Union twenty-five years ago changed the political and
social landscape of Eurasia. The fifteen new states that emerged faced immediate
challenge of establishing democratic political systems and market economy. Other
tasks included redefining national identity and creating an independent foreign
policy. Nation-building process in these states had to contend with competing ideas
of majoritarian ethno-linguistic nationalism, multiculturalism and civic nationalism.
The ruling elites in these states sought to construct nationhood around the majority
ethnic groups through state policies aimed at promoting their culture, language
and demography. At the same time they tried to maintain the delicate interethnic
balance of the past, and avoid social conflicts. Most of these states achieved relative
success in maintaining social harmony and political stability, and in containing
extremism/radicalization.
Democratization in these states has been complex. At the time of independence
most of these states declared multi-party democracy as their political ideal. Some
have relative success in this regard, e.g. the Baltic States. Others experimented
with different political models of liberal and guided democracy, leader centric
authoritarianism, presidential and parliamentary polities, single party and multiparty
systems etc. Though expectations about transition towards a competitive demo-
cratic polity have not come true, the leadership in these countries gets political
legitimacy due to two reasons: espousal of majoritarian nation-building and success
in containing challenges of radical extremism and terrorism.
Different paths and speed of economic transition have been adopted by various
states. The stabilization and structural reforms have produced mixed results.
There are challenges, such as those relating to competition policy, banking reforms
and overall infrastructure reforms, which unless addressed will retard the progress
in these states. Persistence of socio-economic disparities and problems, and
Editorial
International Studies
53(3–4) 174–175
2018 Jawaharlal Nehru University
SAGE Publications
sagepub.in/home.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0020881718779724
http://journals.sagepub.com/home/isq
To continue reading
Request your trial