Executive Power in Post-Soviet States (With Russia, Estonia, and Kyrgyzstan as Instances)

DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2003.03.08
For citation:

Samonova Ye.A. Executive Power in Post-Soviet States (With Russia, Estonia, and Kyrgyzstan as Instances) . – Polis. Political Studies. 2003. No. 3. P. 78-88. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2003.03.08


The article presents an attempt to examine post-communist political transformations as manifested on the touchstone of executive power. The analysis was carried out in the institutional-political context of three post- Soviet countries - Russia, Estonia, and Kyrgyzstan - with instruments of comparative political science, as well as quantification methods applied. It was central state structures that figured as the objects investigated. The place of the executive power in the political systems of the chosen countries; the inward structure of their organs of executive power; and, finally, the interaction of the executive power and society - all this having been analyzed, the researcher found out that in spite of certain concurrences arising from sameness of the historical heritage, the trajectories of Russia's, Estonia's, and Kyrgyzstan's development essentially diverge. According to her conclusion, these divergences, to a large extent, result from particular features of the respective constitutional systems of the countries in question. Parliamentary order proper to Estonia is conducive to the domination of legislative power in the country's political system and to the relatively liberal organization of society. In its turn, the likeness between Russia and Kyrgyzstan is essentially preconditioned by their presidential-parliamentary systems. A fairly strong role of executive power and a considerable degree of regulation of the social relations are characteristic of both these states.


 Full Text (электронная версия)

Content No. 3, 2003

See also:

Streltzina M.M.,
Institutional Conditions of Setting Up Governmental Departments in Russia and in the USA (With Russia’s Emergency Situations Ministry and the U.S. Homeland Security Department as Example). – Polis. Political Studies. 2004. No4

Khlopin A.D.,
Deformalization of Rules: Cause or Consequence of Institutional Traps?. – Polis. Political Studies. 2004. No6

Panov P.V.,
Alteration of Electoral Institutions in Russia (Cross-Regional Analysis). – Polis. Political Studies. 2004. No6

Panov P.V., Punina K.A.,
Conflicts and the “Order” in a Regional Parliament (With the Perm Oblast Legislative Assembly as Example). – Polis. Political Studies. 2003. No6

Pavlova T.V.,
Patterns of the Development of Industrial Relations Management under Globalization. – Polis. Political Studies. 2004. No6



   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991