Praetorians or professionals? Democratization and the military in communist and post-communist Russia

Why has the Russian military not intervened in politics since the advent of democracy in Russia? This question is particularly germane in so far as post-communist Russia exhibits all of the classic indicators of a society ripe for a military takeover. Not only have the institutional interests of the Russian officer corps been gravely threatened, but surveys conducted within it have found a general lack of sympathy for democracy. Furthermore, Russia's weak civil society is accompanied by high-level corruption, rampant crime, secessionist movements, a significant terrorist threat, and a general disrespect for the rule of law. Even further augmenting the chances of a military coup d'etat, public opinion polls of Russian civilians have found that the military is one of the most trusted institutions in Russian society. In fact, the military is so trusted that many Russian citizens have expressed support for a military takeover.;The fact that the Russian military has not intervened has compelled many scholars of civil-military relations to revisit several fundamental hypotheses of civil-military relations theory. This research seeks to test the most fundamental of these hypotheses, one which argues that there is an indirect correlation between the level of military professionalism and the degree to which the military intervenes in politics. In other words, this hypothesis assumes that the lower the level of military professionalism, the higher the level of political intervention, and conversely, the higher the level of professionalism, the lower the level of intervention.;In testing this hypothesis in communist and post-communist Russia, this research has found that the Russian case-study presents evidence counter to the assumptions of this widely-accepted hypothesis. In short, overall levels of Russian military intervention have declined in the post-communist period in spite of declining levels of military professionalism.;As militaries are traditionally considered among the greatest of threats to newly emerging democracies, these findings potentially have ramifications far beyond Russia's borders. We must therefore either revise or reject the theoretical approach which emphasizes professionalism as the key causal variable leading to military intervention.