"The Second Transition" And Russia's Re-rising

Since the independence in the early 1990s, Russia has experienced a devious and roily period of transition for up to 10 years. After 2000, the development of post-communism Russia seems to present two different visages: in Yeltsin's era, Russia suffered almost one of the dimmest periods in its history. Confronted with the profound crisis, Russia always tried to find out how to conquer its interior confusions and how to identify ways to become a great power; but after Putin came into power, who believed in 'using strict law in troubled times', he changed Russia into a politically controlled, economically developed and socially steadied country, and drew the whole world's attention to Russia's re-rising again. Either from the up-to-date perspective or from the historical perspective, the comparative power and absolute power of today's Russia have enjoyed great development in comparison with the beginning of its independence. Russia has returned to the international arena and become an important factor affecting international situation and the relations of great powers.Why can Russia in Putin's era rise again? Is it a replay of the historical logic-'rising- declining-re-rising' which lasts thousands of years? Or does it result from a special habitude of Russian gene? Or something else? Because of different study models, theoretical backgrounds and so on, researchers inside and outside our country haven't achieved accordant ideas about this issue. Some scholars even oppugn Russia's re-rising.This thesis explains Russia's re-rising in Putin's era from the perspective of 'the second transition'. This is an issue which is being deeply studied in both domestic and international academic world.The academic definition of 'the second transition' is still undecided, but the core of this theory is making the constructed system more efficient through a new round of transition on the basis of accomplishing key tasks of institutional transition.If the main targets of Russia's transition in Yeltsin's era can be said as changing an almighty creed system into a liberal and democratic system politically as well as changing planned economy into market economy economically, the transition of Russia in Putin's era presents an absolutely different route and characteristic. If the former can be called as 'the first transition', the latter then is 'the second transition' with main reform targets of conquering a series of 'systematic traps' of Yeltsin's era, rather than changing the old system into a new system. In this sense, Putin's transition behaves more and more differently in comparison with Yeltsin's in his early period, which adopted a systematic path oriented by Neoliberalism. The main conclusions of this thesis are as follows:Firstly, in the field of politics, 'the second transition' in Putin's era behaves mainly as the transformation from 'liberal democracy' to 'illiberalism-oriented democracy'. Strictly speaking, this democracy can't be called as authoritarianism. It is in the process of being developed and its emergence was forced by circumstance. Russia has the basic characteristics of democracy. Both 'sovereignty democracy' and 'controlled democracy' are achievements of Putin's efforts to explore a particular democratic road with Russian characteristics; and its essence is liberalism-oriented democracy in non-western style, which can step into more advanced democracy.Secondly, in the field of economy, 'the second transition' in Putin's era behaves mainly as the transformation from 'neo-liberalism' to 'private-national capitalism'. Both Putin and Yeltsin's economic attitudes are partly inclined to be liberalism. The formation of Putin's economic model is based on the idea of liberal economy and constitutional framework. Both private capital and national capital gain great growth. National intervention, whose logical position is being seeked by the model, has left space for private capital's development.Thirdly, in the field of ideology, 'the second transition' in Putin's era behaves mainly as the transformation from pluralistic competition to subjective consciousness marked by neutralism. Russian people were not unified in the field of ideology in Yeltsin's era. Comparatively, Putin is constructing new subjective consciousness through conductions and actual effects of 'the second transition'.Fourthly, in the field of diplomacy, 'the second transition' in Putin's era behaves mainly as the transformation from post-imperialism to supra-imperialism. In Yeltsin's era, Russia's diplomacy represented the characteristic of post-imperialism. That is to say, as a traditional great power, Russia was experiencing a rather tough transition period in constantly weakened space. Integration into the international community became the main objective. In Putin's era, Russia's strategic contraction in foreign policies, which begun in the 1990s, has almost come to an end. Russia's diplomacy is becoming more and more powerful against the background of Russia's re-rising stimulated by 'the second transition'. Great changes have emerged, which mainly include the transformation from passiveness to initiative and from humility to resistance.Fifthly, fields mentioned above have encouraged Russia's re-rising. Interim success of 'the second transition' has helped Russia recovering the integrity of its interior policy and diplomatic policy which were breached and inconsistent in the 1990s. Russia's present interior policy and diplomatic policy are not perfect and have many flaws, but they are founded on the basis of Russia's real capacities and practical benefits, not on some kind of reveries and affections. Sixthly, 'the second transition' is a rather complex process and has many risks. It is no less difficult than 'the first transition'. The paradox here is that it is still a model based on the 'catch-up strategy' and conducted by Russia's historical transformation route of 'radicalness-steadiness-conservation'. On one hand, 'the second transition' accelerates Russia's development, and on the other, it roots factors which will hold up the rising of Russia one day. For Russia in the 21^st century, what's essential is how to find out the best route for development which best suits its condition .Studying Russia's re-rising has important theoretical and realistic significance. On one hand, studying this issue can enrich the theory of transition and bring some important theoretical issues into discussion, such as systematic construction and great power's rising issues, the harmonious development of a society after persistent economic growth, the continuable economic development whose background is political centralization, and the foreground issues of the international political center's transfer from west to east, and on the other, Russia's developmental pattern and the prospect of its re-rising have great influences on the general trend of international situation. Moreover, it has tremendous impacts on China's national interests. Studying the relativity between them will provide a new kind of perspective and thinking method as well as policymaking consultation to China's diplomatic issues concerning Russia.