Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparing Legitimation Strategies in Post-Soviet Countries

  • Chapter
Politics and Legitimacy in Post-Soviet Eurasia

Abstract

In contrast to hopes that the post-Soviet countries would liberalize politically as part of ‘democracy’s third wave’ (Huntington, 1991), various regimes in the region have regressed into authoritarianism, while others have remained in a hybrid state between democracy and authoritarian rule or have never undergone any form of democratization. Over the course of changes in rulers, socioeconomic crises and even so-called color revolutions, non-democratic arrangements of political rule have emerged and persisted — a phenomenon by no means limited to the post-Soviet space (Schedler, 2006; Levitsky and Way, 2010; Bunce and Wolchik, 2011). Recent research on authoritarian regimes seeking to account for these developments has provided new insights into the inner workings of non-democratic polities (for recent overviews, see Köllner and Kailitz, 2013; Pepinsky, 2014). However, despite widely held views that a regime s claim to legitimacy is an important factor in explaining its means of rule, and ultimately its persistence (Easton, 1965; Weber, 1980; Wintrobe, 1998), current studies have largely overlooked the effect of different legitimation strategies on authoritarian power relations (Burnell, 2006; Gerschewski, 2013; Kailitz, 2013).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Alagappa, M. (1995) Political Legitimacy in Southeast Asia: The Quest for Moral Authority (Palo Alta, CA: Stanford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Almond, G. and S. Verba (1989) The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations (Newbury Park, CA: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, B. (2006) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London/New York, NY: Verso Books).

    Google Scholar 

  • Backes, U. (2009) ‘Geschichtspolitik als Kernelement der Herrschaftslegitimation autokratischer Systeme’, Totalitarismus und Demokratie, 6(2), 271–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beetham, D. (1991) The Legitimation of Power (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, A.-M. (2009) ‘Mass Persuasion as a Means of Legitimation and China’s Popular Authoritarianism’, American Behavioral Scientist, 53(3), 434–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brusis, M. (2015) ‘The Politics of Legitimation in Post-Soviet Eurasia’, in Brusis, M., J. Ahrens and M. Schulze Wessel (eds) Politics and Legitimacy in Post-Soviet Eurasia (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunce, V. J. and S. L. Wolchik (2011) Defeating Authoritarian Leaders in Postcommunist Countries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burnell, P. (2006) ‘Autocratic Opening to Democracy: Why Legitimacy Matters’, Third World Quarterly, 27(4), 545–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, C. (2012) From Liberation Movement to Government: Past Legacies and the Challenge of Transition in Africa (Johannesburg: Brenthurst Foundation).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, S. N. and O. Nørgaard (2004) ‘Conceptualizing State Capacity: Comparing Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan’, Political Studies, 52(4), 685–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimitrov, M. K. (2009) ‘Popular Autocrats’, Journal of Democracy, 20(1), 78–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodlova, M., J. Grauvogel and C. von Soest (2014) How Do Autocrats Legitimate Their Rule? First Findings from a New Regime Legitimation Survey. Chicago, IL. Paper prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association (MPSA), 3–6 April 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dzhuraev, S. (2012) Governance Challenges in Post-Soviet Kyrgyzstan: The Externalization and Parochialization of Political Legitimacy (Oslo: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs Working Paper).

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1965) A Systems Analysis of Political Life (New York, NY: Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Easton, D. (1975) ‘A Reassessment of the Concept of Political Support, British Journal of Political Science, 5, 435–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagen, R. (1965) ‘Charismatic Authority and the Leadership of Fidel Castro’, Western Political Quarterly, 18(2), 275–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feklyunina, V. and S. White (2011) ‘Discourses of “Krizis”: Economic Crisis in Russia and Regime Legitimacy’, Journal of Communist Studies & Transition Politics, 27(3–4), 385–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franke, A., A. Gawrich and G. Alakbarov (2009) ‘Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan as Post-Soviet Rentier States: Resource Incomes and Autocracy as a Double “Curse” in Post-Soviet Regimes’, Europe-Asia Studies, 61(1), 109–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gasiorowski, M. J. (1995) ‘Economic Crisis and Political Regime Change: An Event History Analysis’, American Political Science Review, 89(4), 882–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerschewski, J. (2013) ‘The Three Pillars of Stability: Legitimation, Repression, and Cooptation in Autocratic Regimes’, Democratization, 20(1), 13–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilley, B. (2009) The Right to Rule: How States Win and Lose Legitimacy (New York, NY: Columbia University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf Kielmansegg, P. (1971) ‘Legitimität als analytische Kategorie’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 12(3), 360–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grauvogel, J. and C. von Soest (2014) ‘Claims to Legitimacy Count: Why Sanctions Fail to Instigate Democratisation in Authoritarian Regimes’, European Journal of Political Research, 53(4), 635–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, H. E. (2005) ‘Regime Cycles. Democracy, Autocracy, and Revolution in Post-Soviet Eurasia’, World Politics, 58(2), 133–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, L. (2010) ‘Legitimation and Legitimacy in Russia Revisited’, in Fortescue, S. (ed.) Russian Politics. From Lenin to Putin (Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan), 101–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horák, S. and J. Šir (2009) Dismantling Totalitarianism? Turkmenistan under Berdimuhamedow (Washington, DC: Central Asia-Caucasus Institute).

    Google Scholar 

  • Huntington, S. P. (1991) The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hyde, S. D. (2007) ‘The Observer Effect in International Politics: Evidence from a Natural Experiment’, World Politics, 60(1), 37–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart, R. F. and C. Welzel (2005) Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy: The Human Development Sequence (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs, R. (2010) ‘“Papa”-Nursultan Nazarbayev and the Discourse of Charismatic Leadership and Nation-Building in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan’, Studies in Ethnicity and Nationalism, 10(3), 435–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, R. H. and C. G. Rosberg (1982) ‘Why Africa’s Weak States Persist: The Empirical and the Juridical in Statehood’, World Politics, 35(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kailitz, S. (2013) ‘Classifying Political Regimes Revisited: Legitimation and Durability’, Democratization, 20(1), 39–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaya, R. and M. Bernhard (2013) ‘Are Elections Mechanisms of Authoritarian Stability or Democratization? Evidence from Postcommunist Eurasia’, Perspectives on Politics, 11(3), 734–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kneuer, M. (2013) ‘Die Suche nach Legitimität. Außenpolitik als Legitimationsstrategie autokratischer Regime’, Politische Vierteljahresschrift, special issue (47), 205–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koesel, K. (2014) Religion and Authoritarianism: Cooperation, Conflict, and the Consequences (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Koesel, K. and V. J. Bunce (2012) ‘Putin, Popular Protests, and Political Trajectories in Russia: A Comparative Perspective’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 28(4), 403–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koesel, K. and V. J. Bunce (2013) ‘Diffusion-Proofing: Russian and Chinese Responses to Waves of Popular Mobilizations against Authoritarian Rulers’, Perspectives on Politics, 11(3), 753–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Köllner, P. and S. Kailitz (2013) ‘Comparing Autocracies: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Analyses’, Democratization, 20(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolstø, P. and H. Blakkisrud (2012) ‘De Facto States and Democracy: The Case of Nagorno-Karabakh’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 45(1–2), 141–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krastev, I. (2011) ‘The Paradoxes of New Authoritarianism’, Journal of Democracy, 22(2), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuran, T. (1991) ‘Now Out of Never: The Element of Surprise in the East European Revolution of 1989’, World Politics, 44(1), 7–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuran, T. (1995) Private Truths, Public Lies. The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuzio, T. (2010) ‘State-Led Violence in Ukraine’s 2004 Elections and Orange Revolution’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 43(4), 383–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S. and L. A. Way (2010) Competitive Authoritarianism. Hybrid Regimes after the Cold War (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levitsky, S. and L. A. Way (2013) ‘The Durability of Revolutionary Regimes’, Journal of Democracy, 24(3), 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linz, J. J. (2000) Totalitarian and Authoritarian Regimes (Boulder, CO/London: Lynne Rienner).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipset, S. M. (1959) ‘Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Development’, American Political Science Review, 53(1), 69–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M. Y. (2005) ‘Hierarchies of Place, Hierarchies of Empowerment: Geographies of Talk about Postsocialist Change in Uzbekistan’, Nationalities Papers, 33(3), 423–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, M. (2002) Recognizing the Khan: Authority, Space, and Political Imagination Among Uzbek Men in Post-Soviet Osh, Kyrgyzstan (Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. D. and J. L. Snyder (2005) Electing to Fight: Why Emerging Democracies Go to War (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • March, A. F. (2003) ‘From Leninism to Karimovism: Hegemony, Ideology, and Authoritarian Legitimation’, Post-Soviet Affairs, 19(4), 307–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonagh, E. (2008) ‘Is Democracy Promotion Effective in Moldova? The Impact of European Institutions on Development of Civil and Political Rights in Moldova’, Democratization, 15(1), 142–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McFaul, M. (2007) ‘Ukraine Imports Democracy: External Influences on the Orange Revolution’, International Security, 32(2), 45–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellon, J. G. (2010) ‘Myth, Legitimacy and Nationalism in Central Asia’, Ethnopolitics, 9(2), 137–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murzakulova, A. and J. Schoeberlein (2009) ‘The Invention of Legitimacy: Struggles in Kyrgyzstan to Craft an Effective Nation-State Ideology’, Europe-Asia Studies, 61(7), 1229–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nazar, N (2010) ‘Window Dressing’, Transitions Online, http://www.tol.org/client/article/21056-window-dressing.html (4 June 2015).

  • Nelson, D. (1984) ‘Charisma, Control, and Coercion: The Dilemma of Communist Leadership’, Comparative Politics, 17(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ó Beacháin, D. and R. Kevlihan (2013) ‘Threading a Needle: Kazakhstan between Civic and Ethno-Nationalist State-Building’, Nations and Nationalism, 19(2), 337–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olcott, M. B. (1997) ‘Kazakhstan: Nursultan Nazarbaev as Strong President’, in Taras, R. (ed.) Postcommunist Presidents (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 106–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pepinsky, T. (2014) ‘The Institutional Turn in Comparative Authoritarianism’, British Journal of Political Science, 44(3), 631–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radnitz, S. (2012) ‘Oil in the Family: Managing Presidential Succession in Azerbaijan’, Democratization, 19(1), 60–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasanayagam, J. (2014) ‘The Politics of Culture and the Space for Islam: Soviet and Post-Soviet Imaginaries in Uzbekistan’, Central Asian Survey, 33(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruziev, K., D. Ghosh and S. C. Dow (2007) ‘The Uzbek Puzzle Revisited: An Analysis of Economic Performance in Uzbekistan since 1991’, Central Asian Survey, 26(1), 7–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saidazimova, G. (2008) ‘Turkmenistan: Take Down The Portraits! Niyazov’s Personality Cult Being Dismantled’, EurasiaNet, http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/insight/articles/pp022708.shtml (16 December 2014).

  • Scharpf, F. W. (1999) Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schatz, E. (2006) ‘Access by Accident: Legitimacy Claims and Democracy Promotion in Authoritarian Central Asia’, International Political Science Review, 27(3), 263–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, A. (2002) ‘The Menu of Manipulation’, Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 36–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, A. (ed.) (2006) Electoral Authoritarianism: The Dynamics of Unfree Competition (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schedler, A., L. Diamond and M. F. Plattner (eds) (1999) The Self-Restraining State: Power and Accountability in New Democracies (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, S. (2003) ‘Theoretische Überlegungen zum Konzept “Politische Stabilität”’, in Faath, S. (ed.) Stabilitätsprobleme zentraler Staaten: Ägypten, Algerien, Saudi-Arabien, Iran, Pakistan und die regionalen Auswirkungen (Hamburg: Deutsches Orient-Institut), 9–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz, A. (2004) ‘Turkmenistan: Der privatisierte Staat’, in Schneckener, U. (ed.) States at Risk: Fragile Staaten als Sicherheits-und Entwicklungsproblem (Berlin: SWP Studie), 67–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silitski, V. (2005) ‘Preempting Democracy: The Case of Belarus’, Journal of Democracy, 16(4), 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silitski, V. (2010) ‘Survival of the Fittest:’ Domestic and International Dimensions of the Authoritarian Reaction in the Former Soviet Union Following the Colored Revolutions’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 43(4), 339–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sil, R. and C. Chen (2004) ‘State Legitimacy and the (In)significance of Democracy in Post-Communist Russia’, Europe-Asia Studies, 56(3), 347–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siroky, D. S. and D. Aprasidze (2011) ‘Guns, Roses and Democratization: Huntington’s Secret Admirer in the Caucasus’, Democratization, 18(6), 1227–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smolnik, F. (2012) ‘Political Rule and Violent Conflict: Elections as “Institutional Mutation” in Nagorno-Karabakh’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 45(1–2), 153–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Del Sordi, A. (2015) ‘Legitimation and the Party of Power in Kazakhstan’, in Brusis, M., J. Ahrens and M. Schulze Wessel (eds) Politics and Legitimacy in Post-Soviet Eurasia (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 72–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, B. D. (2011) State Building in Putin’s Russia: Policing and Coercion after Communism (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Timm, C. (2015) ‘Legitimacy and State-Led Economic Policy in Georgia’, in Brusis, M., J. Ahrens and M. Schulze Wessel (eds) Politics and Legitimacy in Post-Soviet Eurasia (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 97–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulfelder, J. and M. Lustik (2007) ‘Modelling Transitions to and from Democracy’, Democratization, 14(3), 351–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wahman, M., J. Teorell and A. Hadenius (2013) ‘Authoritarian Regime Types Revisited: Updated Data in Comparative Perspective’, Contemporary Politics, 19(1), 19–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Way, L. A. (2005) ‘Authoritarian State Building and the Sources of Regime Competitiveness in the Fourth Wave: The Cases of Belarus, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine’, World Politics, 57(2), 231–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1968) ‘Freiheit und Zwang in der Rechtsgemeinschaft’, in Weber, M. (ed.) Soziologie — Weltgeschichtliche Analysen — Politik (Stuttgart: Alfred Kröner), 76–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1980) Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (2004) The Vocation Lectures (Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing).

    Google Scholar 

  • Welt, C. and I. Bremmer (1997) ‘Armenia’s New Autocrats’, Journal of Democracy, 8(3), 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A. (2012) Belarus: The Last European Dictatorship (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wintrobe, R. (1998) The Political Economy of Dictatorship (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, J. (2014) ‘A Rock and a Hard Place: Azerbaijan’s Precarious Foreign Policy Position’, Foreign Affairs, http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/141993/james-yan/a-rock-and-a-hard-place (3 March 2015).

Download references

Authors
  1. Christian von Soest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julia Grauvogel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institutions and Institutional Change in Postsocialism, Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany

    Martin Brusis (Director, Competence Network) (Director, Competence Network)

  2. Private University of Applied Sciences, Göttingen, Germany

    Joachim Ahrens (Professor of International Economics) (Professor of International Economics)

  3. Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany

    Martin Schulze Wessel (Chair for the History of East and Southeast Europe) (Chair for the History of East and Southeast Europe)

Copyright information

© 2016 Christian von Soest and Julia Grauvogel

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

von Soest, C., Grauvogel, J. (2016). Comparing Legitimation Strategies in Post-Soviet Countries. In: Brusis, M., Ahrens, J., Wessel, M.S. (eds) Politics and Legitimacy in Post-Soviet Eurasia. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137489449_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation