From time to time, La Russophobe forwards us links to what they are publishing.  This posting on subnational authoritarianism in particular is quite interesting.  Writing in the Russian Analytical Digest, Vladimir Gelman argues that the processes of political recentralization of the regions initiated in the Putin era has a certain character which is more similar to that of Southern Italy  (1950s to 1980s) and PRI-era Mexico (an argument we have heard before) than it is to the authoritarian bureaucracies of Central Asia.  In this bargaining system of loyalty rewarded by non-intervention (which goes miles in explaining how the Kremlin can’t seem to stop murders in Chechnya), Gelman argues that we aren’t likely to see any pluralistic opening up of these structures locally without the total collapse of the national party structure.  Bummer.  As it has been pointed out before, there are many self-perpetuating qualities to the Russian political model which stand in the way of reform.

The Center, as in the Soviet period, seeks to minimize the loss of its control over the local elites, rushing to redistribute rents among the local lobby groups and selectively repress those who fall under the dispensation of mid level bureaucrats. Therefore again, as in Soviet times, there is a spontaneous transfer of powers and resources from the Center to local leaders (especially in the republics) within the framework of an informal contract exchanging loyalty for non-interference.