2PL223 Evropsk politika v komparativn perspektiv

utorok 12:45, KH on ISIS 2 homeworks, not an essay, not paper; read and answer several question, 20% each final test, grading period, combination of multiple choice, 5 sentences/ answers, not before the Christmas, 50% activity/oral exam: 10 % Content of lecture: comparism: GB, Germany, France typical political systems e.g. Czech rep. influenced by Germany, Romania influenced by France Transition to democracy: models of transition, countries in progress, transition 1975 in Spains, transition in post-communist countries (Czechoslovakia, Czech Rep., Poland, Russia) social and ecnonomic aspects of transition

Course schedule and content

1. Introduction to the course (21.9.2010) Introduction to politics: 2. Presidential, semipresidential and parliamentary system, political parties (October 5) 3. Electoral systems, party systems (October 12)

Old democracies 4. Great Britain (October 19) 5. Germany (October 26) 6. France (November 2)

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Transitions to democracy Is there any precondition for democracy? Models of transition; (November 9) Transition to democracy in southern Europe: The case of Spain (November 16) Social and Economic Aspects of Transition: Petr Vymtal (November 23) Transition to democracy in CEE: The case of Czechoslovakia (November 30) Transition to democracy in CEE: The case of Poland Petr Vymtal (December 7) Transition to democracy in CEE: The case of Russia (December 14)

Introduction to politics
What are the differences between the presidential system, parliamentary system and semi presidential system? (Democratic systems)

Il y a dans chaque Etat trois sortes de pouvoirs : la puissance lgislative, la puissance excutrice des choses qui dpendent du droit des gens, et la puissance excutrice des choses qui dpendent du droit civil. Par la premire, le prince ou le magistrat fait des lois pour un temps ou pour toujours, et corrige ou abroge celles qui sont faites. (=pouvoir lgislatif, confi un parlement (ou lgislateur), savoir, en France, l'Assemble Nationale ainsi que le Snat ) Par la seconde, il fait la paix ou la guerre, envoie ou reoit des ambassades, tablit la sret, prvient les invasions. (= pouvoir excutif, confi un gouvernement compos d'un Premier ministre et des ministres, la tte duquel se trouve un chef d'tat) Par la troisime, il punit les crimes ou juge les diffrents des particuliers. On appellera cette dernire la puissance de juger, et lautre simplement la puissance excutrice de lEtat. (= pouvoir judiciaire, confi aux juges) [] Lorsque dans la mme personne ou dans le mme corps de magistrature, la puissance lgislative est runie la puissance excutrice, i l ny a point de libert ; parce quon peut craindre que le mme monarque ou le mme snat ne fasse des lois tyranniques pour les excuter tyranniquement. Il ny a point encore de libert si la puissance de juger nest pas spare de la puissance lgislative et de lexcutrice. Si elle tait jointe la puissance lgislative, le pouvoir sur la vie et la libert des citoyens serait arbitraire : car le juge serait lgislateur. Si elle tait jointe la puissance excutrice, le juge pourrait avoir la force dun oppresseur. Tout serait perdu si le mme homme, ou le mme corps des principaux, ou des nobles ou du peuple exeraient ces trois pouvoirs : celui de faire les lois, celui dexcuter les rsolutions publiques, et celui de juger les crimes ou les diffrents des particuliers.

Montesquieu, De lesprit des lois (1748), Editions du Seuil, 1964, p.586.

Presidential system

Presidential republics with a full presidential system are denoted in Blue. Countries with a semi-presidential system are denoted in Yellow. Presidential republics with an executive presidency chosen by the parliament are denoted inLight green.

directly elected president, public vote is deciding about the president (executive power) parliament/congress is also elected directly the same legitimacy, the same positions, they do not affect each other, no one can dismiss the parliament total autonomy president cannot dissolve the parliament, the parliament cannot dismiss president president vetoes the law, 2/3 of vote in chamber over vote the veto this can work only with deep political countries, strong constitution in the case of conflict it is very difficult to say who is stronger-conflict of 2 legitimacies another actor would solve the problem: army USA: 1995, president Bill Clinton-democrat (year before elections, discussion on budget) Clinton prepared very socially oriented budget, Congress (republicans) changed, passed very restricted, Clinton vetoed, republicans did not have 2/3 majority to overpass never-ending circle started; beginning of December: no budget, no money, all institutions were closed (federal) embassies, immigrant offices no people in White House, only Monica Lewinski took several days, Clinton accepted the proposal president cannot do item veto (accept just law as a whole) governors in partial states can do item veto Nixon: opposite situation(republican)-very restrictive, Congress: very social not recommended model for young democracies no presidential system in Europe only president is executive power, ministers are just advisors

Parliamentary system

Constitutional monarchies in which authority is vested in a parliament are denoted in red. Parliamentary republics where parliaments are effectively supreme over a separate head of state are denoted in orange. Parliamentary republics where the role of the head of government and head of state are combined are denoted inturquoise.

all the legitimacy is derived from the parliament directly elected parliament prime minister/chancellor + cabinet: key executive, is to get vote of confidence by the parliament (in Italy both chambers are voting) and they can be dismissed by the vote of no confidence monarch: authority (not elected, traditions) in Europe mostly only a symbol, with no real power at all (Spain, Denmark, Sweden, Netherlands, Norway, Monaco, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein, GB) president is supposed to be a symbol, he is irresponsible to run parliament, all the responsibility has the prime minister CZ: strong power of president, appoint chief of The Central Bank should be independent president is mostly elected by one or two chambers key executive are prime minister and the cabinet

Vote of confidence:
La motion de censure est un moyen d'exprimer au Gouvernement le fait qu'il n'a plus la confiance qui lui avait permis d'agir jusque l. Dans ce cas, il se doit de dmissionner. Dans certains pays, le systme est dit de motion de censure constructive . En clair, la motion doit prvoir le nom d'un remplaant au Chef de gouvernement renvers. C'est le cas de l'Allemagne, de l'Espagne et de la Belgique. D'autres pays prvoient le principe de la double censure : l'adoption d'une motion de censure entrane la dissolution de la chambre, ce qui peut freiner les ardeurs de certains dputs.

5. 10. 2010

Semi presidential system

model: directly elected president, directly elected parliament (one or two chambers) at the same time we do have prime minister/chancellor + cabinet vote of confidence, they do not ask for confidence, at any time parliament can dismiss the prime minister and the cabinet directly elected president has much more power and legitimacy than the one voted by the parliament Slovakia: directly elected president, without signature of prime minister president cannot decide more less like parliamentary system (derives from the constitution) Poland: very weak position of president, polish political tradition low position in foreign affairs; other countries: Iceland, Ireland, Finland: strong president, but not a member of any political party Russia, post-soviet republic: president has such power supra-presidentialism: parliament is very teak, president decides about everything; Russia: constitution: president can pass an order that is immediately valid over the country without any permission of parliament, the veto power of parliament cannot chase the decision of the president; in the case the parliament is dissolved, the president still has this power (Jelcin: very weak, afraid of strong prime minister, disown own smissed old prime minister; new: very loyal to Putin, not able to run own policy, Jelcin: ask for confidence in Dumas did not want new prime minister; according to constitution, the president has to come with the second proposal (Mr. Kyrilenko) Jelcin came to Dumas with 3.rd proposal; if the third proposal is not accepted, the president can dismiss the parliament, Jelcin came with the proposal with the new vote system therefore MPs ved for Mr. Kyrilenko) Orange revolution: Ukraine the role of president is weakened W Europe: position of president depends on current political situation France: 5.th republic: French president: strongest president in democratic countries in the field of foreign affairs the president can send troops anywhere, parliament approves only budget; general De Gaulle (personal experience): wanted these competencies due to war in Algeria; internal policy depends on the majority in the parliament, if he has (he is the leader of this majority compared to Louis XIV The state is me) no real vote against the president: majority in parliament;

if the president does not have majority in the parliament: leader of the opposition, he has to appoint prime minister that would decide about internal policy(with the majority in the parliament) Cohabitation: happened during the presidency of Mitterrand (had minority in the parliament), 1986, socialist, had to ask Jacques Chirac (prime minister) J. Chirac (elected 1995, for 7 years): tried to make position of president very teak, cut the president from any informatics, did not last long time, Mitterrand renewed majority, 1993, lost majority, again cohabitation with prime minister; last cohabitation 1997, president Jacques Chirac, right-wing; 1998: supposed to be regular elections, problem: starting financial reforms, fulfilling Copenhagen criteria to accept euro; socialists were in very deep crisispoor socialists not prepared for reforms, people voted against Chirac, 5 years of cohabitation followed till 2002; 2000: referendum to limit presidential mandatory to 5 years; 2 months break between presidential and parliamentary elections: the winner wins twice.

Party and electoral system

party: from latin pars, means part; they do represent a part of society, each party represent different interest conflict is a consequence; the only system that has procedures to solve the conflict Ballots (kandidtka), bullets Definition: o voluntary organization; o members have the same view of solving problems sparing of ideas and values; o goal: get/share power to fulfill the program o to get the power: usage of political competition civic forum: very broad movement, parties are for partisans, civic forum is for everyone Vladimr elezn historically: 4 types o cadre party of notables: party of elite, aristocracy; formed in 18.th century; almost no contact with the society; GB: liberals, conservatives; the election: family background o mass parties: late 19th century, general suffrage of men; broad possibility to vote; strong: lot of members, social democratic and Christian democratic parties were borne; chuder had organized free time, common organized family holidays; to leave the party ment to change the church; families voted the same way for long years; common behavior; Italy: white and red regions still today, based on tradition, very strong between wars o Catch-all-parties: to get those in the middle (employed workers, small entrepreneurs), what are the problems inside the society, looking for demands, trying to put those problems in the program, what are the alternatives? possible solutions; high level of volatility: high percentage of voters voting according to previous results; get as much as possible; prevailing form of political party now o cartel parties: inside the establishment; supporting sponsors; trying to prevent the others to come, connection state-party: experts (paid much more than regular employees) have some tasks to solve

12.10.2010
4. prednka = Lecture (conferences)

left-wing parties: more orientated on role of the state in economy, paternalistic approach right-wing parties: individual-total responsibility; conservatives: value questions, more thinking about the role of state formed during the 19th century, due to cleavages in the society, due to modernization, industrialization, social classes; cleavage between city and countryside; agrarian parties formed countryside; cleavage in church connection between church and the throne: e.g. Christian democrats strengthened the role of church nationalist parties: core vs. periphery; lot of small nations trying to get political importance, national revolutions Rokkan: swedish political scientist, the basic political parties were formed as a reset of cleavages formed during the modernization of society, then the system was frozen, parties changed their profile but continued, existed till 60s new parties and movements were born the Greens The Greens: o like a water melon: green right wing, but then cut, then red left; o Post-materialistic: no interest in taxes, social welfare o quality of life is the most important, no more traditional cleavages in the modern society o these parties concentrate on quality of life, environment, question of war and peace, disarmament, tender equality, tolerance Western countries, USA

silent revolution: financial crisis, standard of living

ITALY: o o o Forca Italia:go Italy go!, nowadays modified, now conservative party was formed by man without need of sponsors, party as s business, organized from the top enterprise Berlusconi: hned all private TVs, controlled most printed media

How to study political parties: other criteria: organization of the party, leadership

PARTY SYSTEMS
What are the parties like, what are the relations among them Maurice Duverger: the first who addressed the question of party system o two party system: bipartism: there are only two parties to from executive power e.g. GB (conservative and labor party, only two parties able to form a cabinet), there is a tendency to be stabilized and supported in plurality majoritarian system o multi party system: multipartism lot of parties able to participate in the cabinet, strongly supported by proportions o prefered 2 party system: effective, the voter knows who is responsible for positive and negative decisions Jean Blondel: came with a concept of 2 and half party system o model described on Germany, late 70s till 1994 o 2 parties: Christian democratic union vs social democrats o last elections, both gain 38,5% o needed a partner, about 10, 11% - free democrats could choose were in the centre kingmaker it was on them from which party the chancellor would be o great opportunity for blackmail; all the time had the minister of foreign affairs o Czech Republic: attempt to form this model; attempt to form a small party to have this role o 2 and half party system cannot last long: 2 or 3 elections, then there is a problem, big parties are trying to show differences among them; small parties do not have exact opinion (eg fees, abortions) they do not know with whom to form coalition; loosing ideas, many back doors, showering their influence: e.g. Germany, them more small parties have approximately 8%, unable to decide o Germany: CDU + FDP vs. SPD + Greens later great coalition; no more 2 and half political party system Giovanni Sartori: started to think on party system in different way, what are the ideological differences? o moderate pluralism: many parties; in fact all the parties are based more or less on the same values, they have common ideas, do not want to do a revolutions, radical change of political system; result is just on negotiation o polarized pluralism: many parties, but at the same time you have strong ideological poles that are not acceptable to form a coalition there are parties with which no coalition is possible e.g. communists, Nazis German party system before Hitler came to power; extremely dangerous, if one party is able to get 30% votes: opposition; 70%: 50% in the cabinet, 20% the opposition lot of small parties no alternative inside the system; there is the tendency to vote the pole party Germany before the Hitler Italy: since 1946 till 1992, Christian democrats all the time gained plurality in the elections, formed the cabinet, till 1996, at that time no interest in prime minister - co control over stg.; small parties with 2,5 MPs, started to vote with the opposition vote of no confidence; average life of Italian cabinet since 1964: 8 months, average life on minister: 12, 15 years; no one supposed there would be a alternative total collapse: 600 politicians imprisoned, accused of bribery (corruption), leadership survived, Berlusconis enterprise was very successful in this stet of collapse o Atomic pluralism: lot of political parties, characteristics are very complicated, beg. of 90s: Russia very difficult to find the relations among the state, parties and each other, strange names of parties, only Communists and Liberal democrats (neither liberal, nor democrats V. Zilinovskij, propose to use napalm on villages) had normal names o the probable outcome: not democratic, dictatorship. nowadays looks like Russia

Majoritarian system: tendency to form clear majority in the parliament, cabinet plurality system: mostly used in GB, USA, country is divided in many constituencies, in each people are competing to get plurality in each no one else is better than you you are getting the post; problem is that most of the votes are lost, Tony Blair: 42%, 66% of seats Advantage: easily understandable, no extreme groups would be able to enter the parliament naturally excluded true only to some extent only a party whose support is almost equal in all the regions th Gerrymandering: used since 19 century, to explain mainly in plurality system
The plurality voting system is a single-winner voting system often used to elect executive officers or to elect members of a legislative assembly which is based on single-member constituencies. This voting method is also used in multi-member constituencies in what is referred to as an exhaustive counting system where one member is elected at a time and the process repeated until the number of vacancies is filled.

2 round system: means that if no one gets more than 50%, the next round organized, 2 best ones are competing CZ elections to the Senate can help to moderate political/party system
The two-round system (also known as the second ballot, runoff voting or ballotage) is a voting system used to elect a single winner. Under runoff voting, the voter casts a single vote for their chosen candidate. However, if no candidate receives an absolute majority of votes, then those candidates having less than a certain proportion of the votes, or all but the two candidates receiving the most votes, are eliminated, and a second round of voting occurs.

proportional system: parliament has to be the mirror of the society 5% threshold/clause: limit of 5% of votes to get to the parliament

19.10.2010

Great Britain
1215: Magna Charta Libertatum, limited powers of monarchs th 17 century: strong conflict with the king taxation Revolution: Oliver Cromwell, dictatorship 1640-1660, the only constitution restoration of the Stuarts dynasty 1689 glorious revolution: William III Orange: before the coronation: had to sight Bill of Rights; since then constitutional monarchy 1707: decision of the Scottish parliament to be included to England, until then, personal union 1707: integration, country renamed to Great Britain 1911: House of Lords lost the ability to vote confidence against the parliament Great Britain: NO FEDERATION!, not equal position of states, strong decentralization separation of powers: very interconnected, queen is a part executive, legislative: in fact no power; legislative power: house of lords: 9 members all judges of Highest court of Repeal everything based on common law, precedence, changes based on consensus all the laws have to be accepted by the present MPs (=Members of Parliament = usually it is members of the lower chambre) (dput) sovereignty of the Parliament: no judicial review, court cannot decide about political decisions, only if the case the law is not in correspondence with Acquits Communitarian

Executive power
monarch: head of the British Church, symbol of the state, unity; no power all the powers monarchs historically has had are now the powers of the Prime minister, cannot be a supporter of a political party prime minister: president of the party that has majority in the parliament; if he loses the position of the party president has to resign from the post of prime minister - new prime minister named (conservatives: 1979-1997, with Margaret Thatcher: had to resign was unable to gain other period in the parliament lost the post of party president, new prime minister (John Mayor), Gordon Brown did not repeat the success, prime minister cannot be a member of House of Lords cabinet: appointed by the prime minister, everybody has to be a member of parliament, obligatory government: all the chiefs of the less important ministries, agencies, whips historical position in parliament, before the voting: responsible to have all the MPs in the hall; now are responsible for all the materials to be prepared, would be in the house, prepared to be discussed responsible for the communication of government and the parliament Civil servants: high level of independence, bureaucrats, non-political, mostly describing how ang. can be applied, to somehow predict, conclude, influence how the law will work, Oxbridge grandaunts; quangos quasi nongovernmental organizations; about 10 000 quangos, question if it is really effective

Legislative
2 chambers: o House of Commons: lower chamber, cabinet and PM are connected o House of Lords: LORDS: 800 hereditary peers: because of the family tradition had the right, choose 92 peers out of them, not any longer 200 lifetime lords: queen could appoint lord during his/her lifetime spiritual lords: bishops, from anglican church, question now: whether other can be also spiritual lords lord judges: form Highest Court of Appeal Two chambers reflect the model of mixed government: since middle ages the idea: all the social groups included in the government House of Lords: lords, aristocracy; House of Commons: other; after 1990: reform in House of Lords, principle ended, British aristocrats gained the voting right for the first time

Party system
=> Bipartism - traditional system has finished this year Conservative party and Liberal Democrats 2010 Conservative party - Tory (1832- reforms - from village to the city) Leader of the party was chosen by the members of Parliament Labor Party - was formed in 1906, individual and collective membership, Trade Union, 1979 - Margaret Thatcher was strongly against the Trade Union, reforms 1994 - Tony Blair accepted non liberal policy 2010 - Labor party has lost its position Liberal party - Whigs - traditionally 17%, it means 3-7% seats Plaid Cymru Cleavage - Sinn Fein - catholic radical party, are against the monarchy, they want Northern Ireland be part of the rest of Ireland, IRA (Irish Republic of Army) - Social democrats and Labour party - Democratic Unionist Party - republicans - Unionist Party - republicans Devolution = decentralization - 1979 - referendum - not successful, 1999 - Scottish Parliament and Welsh assembly was formed - Scotland can have differences in fees, taxes (+/- 3%), Welsh does not have such power Stormont - party? In Northern Ireland 1916 - Ulster - referendum, Ulster is still the part of Great Britain, rest of the country got Independence

Germany
1848 - Revolution, project of unification with Austria -> defeated Unified from above, centre of unification Prussia with political culture based on army, which was connected with aristocracy Bismarck (1870) change content of the telegram from France and publish and provoke the war -> victorious-> unification of Germany signed in Versailles WWI. France wanted to weaken Germany - lost of territory, paying reparation WWII. Germany lost, divided into 4 regions, federal republic of Germany
A federation (Latin: foedus, foederis, 'covenant'), also known as a federal state, is a type of sovereign state characterized by a union of partially self-governing states or regions united by a central (federal) government. In a federation, the self-governing status of the component states is typically constitutionally entrenched and may not be altered by a unilateral decision of the central government. The opposite: A unitary state is a sovereign state governed as one single unit in which the central government is supreme and any administrative divisions(subnational units) exercise only powers that the central governmentchooses to delegate. Many states in the world have a unitary system of government.

GB + USA - Marshall plan to include Germany

The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) was the primary program, 194751, of the United States for rebuilding and creating a stronger economic foundation for the countries of Europe.

Germany had new constitution with civil rights need for referendum, guarantee of human rights, socially orientated market economy, constitution -> Grundgesetz
The political system is laid out in the 1949 constitution, the Grundgesetz (Basic Law), which remained in effect with minor amendments after 1990's German reunification.

1948 legal way how to integrate 2.11.2010

Germany
Soviet zone: German Democratic Republic was formed Berlin wall: built in 1961: West Berlin: controlled by three powers, East Berlin divided, became the symbol of iron curtain; division of W and E unification: end of DDR: 1989: communist regimes collapsed, (DDR was formed in September 1949 anniversary planned) summer 1989: most of east German trying to emigrate via Czechoslovakia to Hungary and then to Austria (boundaries to Austria were open only for Hungarians); embassies in Prague, Warsaw: semi-free elections; Prague: more complicated, late summer, beginning of September: lot of trabants left in Lesser Town (Mal strana), more than 2000 people living in the gardens, negotiations started, due to big pressure of w media those people were permitted to go to west Germany with guarantee of no re-transport to east Germany almost no experts in E. Germany lack of qualified population reformers: would accept demands of E.G. inhabitants: e.g. opening of borders, permission was declared people th started to go away few days after Berlin Wall was broken 9 November 1989 the real revolution: very symbolic costs of unification: analysis in half 80s: very high, bad economic impact, politically: impossible, political suicide to declare stg about the unification East Germany (EG): member of Warsaw pact, West Germany (WG): member of NATO proposal: no membership at all

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization French: Organisation du trait de l'Atlantique Nord (OTAN)), also called the(North) Atlantic Alliance, is an intergovernmental military alliance based on the North Atlantic Treaty which was signed on 4 April 1949. The NATO headquarters are in Brussels, Belgium, and the organization constitutes a system of collective defence whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party.

The Warsaw Treaty (195591) is the informal name for the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance, commonly known as the Warsaw Pact, creating the Warsaw Treaty Organization. The treaty was a mutual defense treaty subscribed to by eight communist states in Eastern Europe. It was established at the USSRs initiative and realized on 14 May 1955, in Warsaw, Poland.

proposal: whole country member of NATO, but demilitarization of the whole zone, not acceptable for the inhabitant

later: accepted as a member of NATO Russia needed support and help of western countries final results of 2+4 negotiations: Russian troops left EG, WG paid for the transport, social programs for soldiers Germany as a whole became a member of EEC no protectionist measures for EG industry: competition with WG and the whole European market, extreme collapse, EG unemployment of about 40 %, the level of productivity was very low, financial support from W to E, nowadays still the gap: unemployment, vote: E voting for communists, ostalgy, osis vs. wesis very problematic, hard to say whether it is still one nation (after 40 years of separation) very difficult transition: E had to accept the whole legal system of W; people did not participate in discussion; lawyers from E totally useless lost their qualification; very low competition abilities: historical approach to education, practice, lack of English language skills; but not as high cultural differences (as eg. S Korea vs. N. Korea)

Political system:
prevent from instability parliamentary system with the weak president, strong chancellor key person in executive power, elected by the parliament (Federal assembly Bundestag) chancellor: it is difficult to fire/dismiss, the only possibility: the constructive vote of no confidence: only in the moment in the case of agreement of the majority on new chancellor one leaving, other coming stabilizing the system, no long periods of negotiations cabinet: not a collective body, ministers are responsible for their departments officers

Executive power: president: elected by specific org. members of Bundestag, representatives of 16 federal lands(13 lands and 3 free cities) Legislative power: Bundesrat: 2 chamber, no one is elected, present are representatives of lands, each land has from 3 to 6 members, depending on the surface of the land, everybody has to vote according to the will of his/her land has to accept a according to recommendations of the state: not independent in voting imperative mandate: hard to say whether it is the second chamber, can veto laws passed in Bundestag, some laws accepted by both; representation of lands (similar to Senate in USA) advocate: imperative mandate: cannot act without my permission Bundestag: representative mandate: deciding according to own opinion Judicial power: high authority Electoral system: proportional system: strictly proportional logics, seats are divided according to proportions strong personification: enables to choose some personalities officially 598MPs, additional seats according to directly elected MPs; more than 600 MPs: : elected like in GB jednokolovm jednomandtovm systmem 2 votes: party and his own candidate eg. Social democrats: 40% of votes, gain 40% of seats = 240, 120 from first , the rest according to the list of names( polka poda 1 hlasu, druh polku poda kandidtky) Theshold: 5%(hranica zvolitenosti, ak ho zvolia priamo, dostane ten mandt, ak vyhr v priamom hlasovan aspo v troch obvodoch, dostane pomern poet kresiel aj ked nem 5%)

Party system and political parties

today: CDU/CSU+ FDP o CDU/CSU: Christian democtratic union: almost all lands, except Bavoria, conservative values, CSU: Christian Social Union: operates in Bavoria very strong religious identity, based on Christian values, not directly connected with church o SPD: Social democtrats

FDP: free domocrats, intellectuals, appeal on liberals, personal freedom, personal responsibility, even liberals have socially oriented ideas: due to the socially orientated economy o Greens: the only party unifying E and W: both green parties unified o Linke: base from post-communist party of democratic socialism, was able to get 20% of support in EG; unified with group of people who left SPD Germans are forced to find consensus the whole system is to find consensus Bundesrat: each year: change of composition due to elections in 3-5 lands grand coalition state: different coalitions, changing every year, deep negotiations new coalition: CDU/CSU+FDP

France
sytsem of fifth republic start 1958: De Gaulle political culture: government prepares documents and waits / activists protest in the streets / government starts to negotiate laws politicians have lot of mandates strong centralization semi-presidential system president has strong position in foreign policy national assembly can vote for non-confidence to PM has to support parliament president: has majority in n. assembly can appoint PM has majority in opposition cannot influence internal policy cohabitation Sarkozy has majority

Senate: weak position _ 6 years _ senators are voted by electoral college (zoskupenie) member od national assembly National Assembly: 2 round electoral system 1. more than 50% 2. not only 2 candidates, exception: number of three is possible This system cannot prevent from extremist groups to get to the parliament eg.: communists have strong support in industry that enables them to get to the second round and to the parliament

Parties:
Left: social party: more traditional _ concurrence with communists communists, greens: often coalition with social party Right: neo-Gaullists: strong support in 1.st round of election, but problem with second round UDF: strong in 2.nd round, interest in common problems

Transition to democracy
Is there any precondition for democracy? Models of transition
1. based on individuals preconditions: political culture, economy, will of people, religion economic + social stream: 50s, 60s Lipset, Barington, Moore: only states with strong economic development and economy as a whole can be democratized, necessary to be national bourgeoisie: entrepreneurs; modernization, democratization; problem with the strong class of peasants (Modern slaves) political culture: S.Verba, G.Almond Comparison with the family culture Participation, decision making Subcultures: school open discussions, opinions family - father culture and authority church - what is your position Rustow: in any country, democratization as a process can start national unity: acceptance of state no conflict about national unity rule of law, procedures (used to solve problems)

2.

3.

16.11.2010 Path dependency: difficult to move in other direction due to the previous path you have made

Spanish transition to democracy

reconquista: = reconquer, the Spanish king and queen signed the permission to C. Columbus to sail - 1492: city of Granda was controlled by Muslims attitude towards the others, base of the culture formed at that time, those who are Spaniards no work, no commercial activity (Jews, maors Muslims who officially took Christianity to be in Spain) colonial empire: when became a further movement, in Spain everything was taken from the colonies, but no investments th th crisis: since 18 , 19 ; loose of Latin America, fight for independence started; only Cuba and Puertorico rest 1898 Spain lost of Cuba and Puertorico due to the war; generation of 1898: frustration... th very complicated development in 19 century, 5 revolutions pronunciamiento: some generals/colonels criticism towards the government, if more supporting this idea leads to the government change if not, PM and the government survives strong influence of the army not active basic political tradition 1873: republic, 1875: go back to dynasty king several attempts to modernization by non-democratic 1922: Primo de Riviera nd 1930: municipal elections, the groups of young liberals decided to declare republic left wing socialists, communists, 2 republic, against the influence of catholic church (99% of Catholics), modernization 1936: uprising organized by general Franco; troops going from Morocco; civil war, supported by German and Italian Nazis 1939: end of civil war, Franco became caudillo=leader of the state, centralization of power, went against any national/ethnic minorities- persecution (eg. basques... ) national emancipation punished strongly, last execution in 1975

Don Francisco Franco (1892-1975)

WW2: neutral state, no defeat, no change in regime in 1945 Franco supported by monarchists, but did not want monarch, fighting against republicans therefore no republic question what the form of state will be Juan, Duke of Barcelona, sent son Juan Carlos to be educated Franco controlled his education (army, navy, air force)

Juan Carlos I

monarchy without monarch, caudillo as a regent, F. governing till his death, would declare next king paternalistic state: till 60s, state took all the guarantee of all the enterprises late 60s: Opus Dei: technocrats prepared economic reforms, opening of Spain towards the market, but no political opening, liberalization of Spanish economy 1969: Juan Carlos is a successor ,; falanga ideology: based on fascist ideology was a part of the F. system coronation: 2 days after F. death, Juan Carlos - speech: mentioned F., father, he would like to be king of all Spaniards nov 1975: JC even as a king could do nothing no troops to support him, but later dismantled the F. regime (rozmontova) opposition was illegal, JC started to organized meetings with them; started to prepare the transition from authoritarian regime to democracy
Restoration of the monarchy:
After dictator Franco's death, King Juan Carlos I quickly instituted reforms, to the great displeasure of Falangist and conservative (monarchist) elements, especially in the military, who had expected him to maintain the authoritarian state. He appointed Adolfo Surez, a former leader of the Movimiento Nacional, as Prime Minister of Spain. On 15 June 1977, Spain held its first post-Franco democratic elections. In 1978, a new Constitution was promulgated that acknowledged Juan Carlos as rightful heir of the Spanish dynasty and King. Impatient with the pace of democratic political reforms in 1976 and 1977, Spain's new King Juan Carlos, known for his formidable personality, dismissed Carlos Arias Navarro and appointed the reformer Adolfo Surez as Prime Minister. After a national referendum on 6 December 1978, 88% of voters approved of the new constitution. The

Spanish Constitution of 1978 is the culmination of the Spanish transition to democracy.

The Duke of Surez

visit to USA: press conference: declaration: change of political regime in Spain PM blackmail, resignation; accepted the resignation, Suarez: communication inside the parliament Suarez became new PM cabinet prepared the law on political reform, very gently written; elections will be, legalization of political party parliament was francoist, approved the law on political reform opposition was very radical: no step-by-step; single break, against monarchy, do not realized JC as a competent JC: referendum, ,opposition concentrated to go against: do not go and vote most of them supported the law on political change Suarez formed own political party won the elections, formed a commission for the new constitutions, all the relevant political troops included Basques: the only troop that rejected socialists, communists: republish Suarez, post-francoists: monarchy final form: king as a symbol, limited responsibilities, JC accepted 1981: party of Suarez lost influence, next elections in 1982 would be gained by socialists last pronocianmiento: done by colonel Fejero, one troop with guns going to the parliament; declared: in the name of king, asking for absolute rule of the king, Fejero: big authority 1981: S. entered NATO socialists campaign in early 1982: strongly criticizing the membership in NATO Solana: campaign against sp. participation, later the chief of NATO

 1982: socialists came to power, new system was accepted, long socialist government till 1996 1996: change, Popular Party (peoples party in fact post-francoists, leader Asar), lost power in 2004 march 2004: terrorist attack in Madrid, 2 weeks before the elections, PP supposed to be winner made a mistake started to argue that this attack was done by Basques (in fact it was the Muslims who made the attack) resolution against the Basques
PSOE=Partido
governing party Socialista Obrero Espaol (=The Spanish Socialist Workers' Party: Since the Spanish legislative election, 2004 on March 14, 2004 it has been the

ETA basque = Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (=Basque Homeland and Freedom: is an armed Basque nationalist and separatist organisation)

mobilization of public: PP totally lost the elections, socialists came to power again PM Zapatero: more women than men in the cabinet Spain: passed the law of autonomies 2 levels: strong autonomy for Galicia, Catalonia... other regions will have lower level of autonomy
The basic institutional law of the autonomous community is the Statute of Autonomy. The Statutes of Autonomy establish the denomination of the community according to its historical identity, the limits of their territories, the name and organization of the institutions of government and the rights they enjoy according the constitution.

17 parliaments, 17 governments, central government has to negotiate with them successful transition experience from past: o no one wanted to repeat the civil war; o carnation revolution in Portugal: similar regime than F.s totally collapsed looking across the border; strong mobilization in public the only party communist party radical attempt to change the regime into communist one o no investigation from the past, last execution happened in September 1975 o files of secret police, given to national archive as a national heritage no political misuse
Currently Head of State: King Juan Carlos I, since 22 November 1975 Currently Head of Government: Prime Minister of Spain (Spanish Presidente del Gobierno literally President of the Government): Jos Luis Rodrguez Zapatero, elected 14 March 2004.

Jos Luis Rodrguez Zapatero

23.11.2010

Transition of CEE
Starting point underdevelopment and low economic growth low competitiveness of the economy high official and hidden deficits and indebtedness hidden inflation orientation towards heavy industry almost no income differences distorted prices and the structure of economy (plans for 5 years) low rate of modernization, big state monopolies high burden to environment due to preference of heavy industry low level of both political and economic freedom orientation to East and soft uncompetitive markets lagging the W world

 1989: collapse of communist regimes in Europe, velvet revolution Problem: transition to what? only democracy?; market economy Are we at the end of history? Why to transit? From who to learn? Latin America??? How costly it would be? What methods and tools to use? Who should be competent to do it? Assistance of western countries? Prediction of results? o Klaus Offe: the end of 1980s, German sociologist, 3 processes: redefinition of state political transformation economic transformation Reformulation after the collapse of the communist regime How could work capitalism without capitalists? use the assistance of western countries... o Ralf Dahrendorf: transformation would take some time area of creating law: 6 months area of economic transformation: 6 years area of establishing civil society: 3 generations transition and consequences: o political changes: taken relatively quickly freedom and liberty new political parties free elections new parliaments impact of interest groups (nomenclature) very strong position, political connections, able to start privatisation quickly tunneling to steal very liquid assets from companies, not broad dialogue, less political experience and almost no political culture o Economic transition no blueprint for transition recommendations from international organizations IMF, US government o macroeconomic stabilization o liberalization and deregulation (prices, inner and foreign trade) o privatization missed the target of creating institutional and legal framework (structure) Two different scenarios: o shock therapy: radical change o gradualism: slow change Economic transition: complicated and long-run problem overemphasizing of spontaneous development and neo-liberalization o underestimated: complexity of change important role of time long run of social adaptations heritage of the past and the role of nomenclature institutional framework the process of privatization was not clear clientelism financing of pension system unresolved property claims of church unfinished restitution claims of nationalized property different type of capitalism

o Civil society differentiation: communists x dissidents x rest of the society

The term dissident was used in the Soviet Union during the period of 19651985. It was attached to citizens who criticized the practices or the authority of the Communist party. The people who used to write and distribute non-censored, non-conformist samizdat literature were criticized in the official newspapers. Soon, many of those who were dissatisfied with the Soviet Bloc began to self-identify as dissidents.

social capital (contacts, networks, nomenclature, dissidents) x economic capital (high communists, shadow economy) x political capital (dissidents, negative political capital: communists) x skills income differentiation: some became rich very quickly social status: changing due to the qualification, education optimisms (young people) x pessimism (old communist generation) belief in any hierarchies high level of bureaucracy until now opening the market, democratization of countries, within the region, within the country, freedom of choice Doubts about the success dissatisfaction high bureaucracy, slow decision processes, courts complicated rule of law disparity between income and social status minorities and their problems formation of minimum government coalitions Increase in preferences of post-communist parties coalition potential? extremism: Nazism, anarchy two crucial problems: corruption and civil society
Civil society space between the family and the state in which citizens come together for the purpose of initiation independent actions to uphold civil liberties, a bill of rights, freedom, and justice; it serves as an informal system of checks and balances on the regime

before 1948: 40 000 organizations, in 1989: 2 000, mostly hobbies ecological org.: not a threat to communist regime, due to the heavy industry orientation, opposition to the regime repair of what the party did Totalitarian state power of the state: local autonomy total monopoly of one party everyone member of something duality: glorification of private family life and devaluation of public sphere and politics (immoral, stigmatising), active private life; the opposite in public sphere, work culture, recreation - holidays, housing, education and environmental associations prevail Transition period civil society not established from above atomization of civil society 2 roots of civil society: o originating from the dissident movement o radical opposition: Charta 77, Solidarity(Poland) - incompetent in the field of democratic and capitalistic reform democratic derivate: reinforcing the civil society reestablished or still reestablishing civil society is flat and infant: mistrust towards communist organization persistence of informal friendship networks disillusion, disappointment, frustration cultural and civilization barrier deeply rooted stereotypes, infant democratic society A. Giddens: Access point destroyed

30.11.2010

The case of Czechoslovakia

Czechoslovakia: almost no processes of liberalization before the collapse of regime normalization: formed in 1969 (after Pragues spring), gerontocracy: the same people for 20 years
The Prague Spring (Czech: Prask jaro, Slovak: Prask jar) was a period of political liberalization in Czechoslovakia during the era of its domination by the Soviet Union after World War II. It began on 5 January 1968, when reformist Slovak Alexander

Dubek came to power, and continued until 21 August when the Soviet Union and members of its Warsaw Pact allies invaded the country to halt the reforms. The Prague Spring reforms were an attempt by Dubek to grant additional rights to the citizens in an act of partial decentralization of the economy and democratization. The freedoms granted included a loosening of restrictions on the media, speech and travel. After national discussion of separating the country into a federation of three republics, Bohemia, Moravia and Slovakia, Dubek oversaw the decision for two, the Czech Republic and Slovakia.This was the only change that survived the end of the Prague Spring.

unable to do something; reforms not acceptable; no criticism towards perestroika govern of legitimacy doctrine society: waiting for something, leaders did nothing very fast collapse very weak regime in fact no defense East Germany: 10 weeks, we did in 10 days very dangerous according the theory the collapse of one regime is very bad staring position for building the new one forms power vacuum those criticizing are taking power - taking responsibility - question whether those people are capable of governing new apparatus not enough competencies, experience due to the total exchange of powers taking power without completed program big problems due to big expectations not successful transition new type of authoritarian regime founding elections: giving legitimacy of new regime, June 1990 enough time to form program, prepare candidates December 1989 V. Havel was elected president (by communist parliament); understood as the guarantee of all the changes in politics, society

Vclav Havel
He was the tenth and last President of Czechoslovakia (198992) and the first President of the Czech Republic (19932003) On 29 December 1989, while leader of the Civic Forum, he became president by a unanimous vote of the Federal Assembly. This was an ironic turn of fate for a man who had long insisted that he was uninterested in politics.

CZ: Civic Forum SK: Public Against Violence

The Civic Forum (Czech: Obansk frum - OF) was a political movement in the Czech part of Czechoslovakia, established during the Velvet Revolution in 1989. The corresponding movement in Slovakia was called Public Against Violence (Slovak: Verejnos proti nsiliu - VPN). The Velvet Revolution (Czech: sametov revoluce) or Gentle Revolution (Slovak: nen revolcia) (November 17 December 29, 1989) was a non-violent revolution in Czechoslovakia that saw the overthrow of the communist government. On November 17, 1989, a Friday, riot police suppressed a peaceful student demonstration in Prague. That event sparked a series of popular demonstrations from November 19 to late December. By November 20 the number of peaceful protesters assembled in Prague had swollen from 200,000 the previous day to an estimated half-million. A two-hour general strike, involving all citizens of Czechoslovakia, was held on November 27. With the collapse of other Warsaw Pact governments and increasing street protests, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia announced on November 28 that it would relinquish power and dismantle the single-party state. Barbed wire and other obstructions were removed from the border with West Germany and Austria in early December. On December 10, President Gustv Husk appointed the first largely non-communist government in Czechoslovakia since 1948, and resigned. Alexander Dubek was elected speaker of the federal parliament on December 28 and Vclav Havel the President of Czechoslovakia on December 29, 1989.

from the beginning of the transition, two party systems, no single party that would be accepted both in CZ an SK possible reason of split (scission) of Czechoslovakia very brought, similar movements, tried to unify all the people against the communist regime; central coordination centre, not like a typical political party elections early after the collapse of regime: old leaders having structure 1990: it was decided that founding elections only for 2 years considered as very democratic decisions to give time to form new political parties, time to prepare federal constitution reasons of disintegration: 1990-1992: disintegration of Civic Forum, Public Against Violence, unity could not existed any more Slovakia, Bohemia, Moravia. totally different results Civic Forum: ODS (Klaus, conservative, noble in economic sense, Tacher party, close to British conservatives) VPN: HZDS with Meiar formed; more populist, more left-wing orientated, mostly thinking about the role of the state in the economic development, impact on the economic reforms, non-liberal approach) SK: 13% unemployment in 1993, industrialised after WW2 soviet model heavy industry difficult to orientate such industry towards the markets th Bohemia, Moravia: highly industrialised in 19 century, 3% unemployment, possible transformation to market orientation

nationalism present: SNS gained 10% in 1992, wanted independence of SK; national question much more important for SK, Czech: not many problems with statehood only Christian democrats were little possibility to unify CZ: wanted federation with strong federal government, not connected with language, economic policy SK: confederation, even demand for two national banks disintegration in very peaceful way, velvet divorce elections: ODS vs. HZDS: totally impossible to govern together: 2 strong leaders, totally different program, 2 weeks after elections disintegration Klaus PM, Meiar PM problem: constitution, any change of borders... has to be approved by referendum BUT majority was for the old system, not the split lead to change in constitution federal assembly decided in November 1992, in one vote constitutional law passed - disintegration 1993: separate CZ and SK, question of division of state property (central bank) problem with borders Further development problem: no single law connected with private property, entrepreneurship privatization: only old management of socialist enterprises know how wanted to use it; no single capitalist, no capital 1) oligarchs: typical feature of post-communist politics: mainly Russia 2) corruption: paradox in system; less regulation, less corruption lead to opening space for corruption; 1997: crucial moment, right-wing coalition with Klaus lost position due to corruption scandal (sponsors: someone from Mauritius (never heard of Czech Republic), Hungarian (address cemetery Budapest, died 10 years before) actually one sponsor privatisor; end of basic period of transformation legal framework: connection of politics and economics political affiliation 2006: deep crisis, 100 MPs right-wing, 100 MPs for left-wing 2010: attempt to go against some corrupted politicians

07/12/2010

The case of Poland Polish political system

- Chaos, political instability, comlicated wy to democracy 3 institutional changes 3 laws on election Semipresidential (close to parliamentary) Two chambers Sejm 4 years trerm Proportional electoral system

5% treshold (460MPs) Vote of confidence or constructive vote of non confidence to the cabinet

Senate 4 years term majoritarian logic in each constituency 2-4 senators, voter has 2-4 votes, those getting plurality get the seats week position of the Senate

Both elections: simultaneosly, at the same date

President 5 years term directly elected can dissolve parliament can veto the laws (can be overridden by 2/3 majority) most of his decisions need signature of PM Development 1947-1956: Stalinism, communists did not win elections,

since : emancipation of church (important rule of church), emancipation of peasants (after WW2: almost 40% of population: peasants) 1960s: emancipation of intellectuals no continuance in communists ideology in Poland very relaxed regime, regime was restored, one of the most liberal communist regimes ever 1979/1980: Solidarity established - independent trade union, connection to church, to be independent in civil society area, free associations, freedom of speech, freedom ...???, 1/3 of population, even the communists 1970s: emancipation of workers connections to catholic church, Karol Wojtyla pope 1981: Martial law, founder of Solidarity sent to jail, to calm down the situation prevet from Warsaw pact army 1988: strikes, communists started to negotiate with Lech Walesa founder of Solidarity Jarusalsky asked for second martial law, refused, Breznev dead, Gorbacov perestrojka -open dialogue with western countries you can follow own way of socialism reasons of refusal Since 1989: round-table discussions Spring 1989: negotiations: Communist Party leaders, Solidarity leaders, representatives of Church Conclusions: legalization of Solidarity, semi-free elections (Senate: 100 senators, free elections; Sejm: 1/3 of seats free, 2/3 from the Communist party; president: pre-negotiated to be only one candidate, if the Russians have problems with the situation, the only person able to negotiate was Jaruzelski, by both chambers Elections: June 1989, results: total failure of communists; Senate: 99 seats for Solidarity, 1 independent; only 2/3 seats in Sejm; Only 53% majority: representatives of communist, lot of liberal communists changed the affiliation no majority of communists September 1989: Mazowiecki: PM + 15 ministers(12+3) first non-communist cabinet in E. Europe December 1990: presidential elections: Lech Walesa October 1991: parliamentary elections, proportional system with no treshold, fragmented parliament 29 political parties, Solidarity split into many parties (S. was not a party, just movement) due to the change of electoral law done of purpose to ensure the Solidarity parties would win elections Conflict between Walesa and Mazowiecki, Walesa if elected president: would veto all laws proposed by Mazowiecki Tyminski: populist politicians, finally 15% support, stared his campaign, if you vote for me, than in 5 years we would reach the economic level of Japan PM: resigned after few months, unable to pass a single law if possible Walesa would veto (very conservative, old school) 1993: preterm elections: proportional system, 5% threshold (seuil), cabinet: Post-communists and People s party; many post-solidarity lost the possibility to get to the parliament 1995: regular presidential elections, Alexander Kwasniewksi member of post-communist party, opponent to Walesa, no one elected in first round, second round: Walesa found out that Kwasniewski had never passed an university (few days before the defention of thesis named as minister of tourism), Kwasniewski won, Walesa asked the constitutional court not to accept the results 1997: parliamentary elections, post-solidarity cabinet AWS: Electoral Action System 2000: A. Kwasniewski: elected president, beat Walesa in first round 2001: parliamentary elections, economic problems, cabinet: Party of Democratic Left + Union of Labor (post solidarity) Decrease in GDP, problems with privatization, Rywin affair: popular polish film producer, 2002 journalists found out that he offered 75mil USD to change the media law Government: resignation, corruption affairs everywhere, deep crisis, party system/construction: unstable situation, growth of radical political parties anti-European (Party of Polish Families- very conservative; Self Defense A.Lepper xenophobic, populist, leave EU structures) September 2005: parliamentary elections, victory of right-wing: Law and Justice, Civic Platforms and radical right Minority government, resignation October: presidential elections, R. Tusk 36%, Lech Kaczynski 33%, A. Lepper 14% July 2006: Jaroslaw Kaczynski PM 2007: constant crisis of coalition cabinet, low style of political debate, populist and very conservative, Samoobrana?

1956

The case of Russia

Vladimir Lenin La rvolution dOctobre en Russie, aussi connue sous le nom de rvolution bolchevique, fait rfrence la rvolution qui a commenc par le coup d'tat men par Lnine et les bolcheviks le 25 octobre 1917 C'est la seconde phase de la Rvolution russe dans son ensemble, aprs la rvolution de Fvrier de la mme anne. La rvolution d'Octobre a renvers le gouvernement provisoire et a donn le pouvoir aux bolcheviks. Elle a t suivie par la guerre civile russe, puis par la cration de l'URSSen 1922. The February Revolution forced Nicholas II to abdicate; he and his family were imprisoned and later executed during the Russian Civil War. The monarchy was replaced by a shaky coalition of political parties that declared itself the Provisional Government. The rule of the new authorities only aggravated the crisis in the country, instead of resolving it. Eventually, the October Revolution, led by Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, overthrew the Provisional Government and created the worlds first socialist state. The Bolsheviks were the majority faction in a crucial vote, hence their name. They ultimately became the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.[4] The Bolsheviks came to power in Russia during the October Revolution phase of the Russian Revolution of 1917, and founded the Soviet Union. Show trials developed by Stalin The Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic together with three other Soviet republics formed the Soviet Union, or USSR, on 30 December 1922.

Joseph Stalin Following Lenin's death in 1924, Joseph Stalin, an elected General Secretary of the Communist Party, managed to put down all opposition groups within the party and consolidate much power in his hands. The continued internal struggle in the Bolshevik party culminated in the Great Purge, a period of mass repressions in 193738, in which hundreds of thousands of people were executed, including military leaders convicted in coup d'tat plots. The government launched a planned economy, industrialisation of the largely rural country, and collectivization of its agriculture. During this period of rapid economical and social changes, millions of people were sent to penal labor camps (or Gulag) including many political convicts, and millions were deported and exiled to remote areas of the Soviet Union. WWII The Red Army occupied Eastern Europe after the war, including East Germany. Dependent socialist governments were installed in the Eastern bloc satellite states. Becoming the world's second nuclear weapons power, the USSR established the Warsaw Pact alliance and entered into a struggle for global dominance with the United States and NATO, which became known as the Cold War.

Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev After Stalin's death in 1953 and a short period of collective rule, new leader Nikita Khrushchev denounced the cult of personality of Stalin and launched the policy of de-Stalinization. =>Secret speech // the XXth congress At a speech On the Personality Cult and its Consequences to the closed session of the Twentieth Party Congress of the CPSU, February 25,

1956, Khrushchev shocked his listeners by denouncing Stalin's dictatorial rule and cult of personality.
Given momentum by these public renamings, the process of de-Stalinization peaked in 1961 during the 22nd Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In the same moment => Suez crisis => The Hungarian Revolution => The Berlin Wall => The Cuban Missile Crisis

The conspirators, led by Brezhnev, Aleksandr Shelepin, and KGB Chairman Vladimir Semichastny, struck in October 1964, while Khrushchev was on vacation at Pitsunda, Abkhazia. On October 14, 1964, the Presidium and the Central Committee each voted to accept Khrushchev's "voluntary" retirement from his offices. Brezhnev was elected First Secretary (later General Secretary), while Alexei Kosygin succeeded Khrushchev as premier. Following the ousting of Khrushchev in 1964, another period of collective rule ensued, until Leonid Brezhnev became the leader. Kosygin reform, aimed into partialdecentralization of the Soviet economy and shifting the emphasis from heavy industry and weapons to light industry and consumer goods, was stifled by the conservative Communist leadership. The era of 1970s and the early 1980s became known as Brezhnev stagnation. => Nomenclature Perestroika meaning "restructuring" was a political movement within the Communist Party of Soviet Union widely associated with the Soviet leaderMikhail Gorbachev. "Sinatra Doctrine" was the name that the Soviet government of Mikhail Gorbachev used jokingly to describe its policy of allowing neighboring Warsaw Pact nations to determine their own internal affairs. The name alluded to the Frank Sinatra song "My Way"the Soviet Union was allowing these nations to go their own way. The New Economic Policy (NEP): economic policy proposed by Leninto prevent the Russian economy from collapsing. Allowing some private ventures, the NEP allowed small businesses or shops, for instance, to reopen for private profit while the state continued to control banks, foreign trade, and large industries. There were also disputes between Leon Trotsky and Stalin as Trotsky believed in a more internationalist approach when revamping the economy. Stalin, on the other hand, believed that the NEP was a patriotic and nationalizing mission which would further Soviet grandeur in the international system.

Mikhail Gorbachev

Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin

In August 1991, an unsuccessful military coup, directed against Gorbachev and aimed at preserving the Soviet Union, instead led to its collapse and the end of socialist rule. The USSR was dissolved into 15 post-Soviet states in December 1991. Boris Yeltsin was elected the President of Russia in June 1991

Vladimir Putin

He became acting President on 31 December 1999, when president Boris Yeltsin resigned in a surprising move. Putin won the 2000 presidential election and in 2004 he was re-elected for a second term lasting until 7 May 2008.