Suchergebnisse

Denna bok lyfter frågan om hur vilka planer som finns i Ryssland för tiden efter Putin som president. Huvudargumentet är att de strategier för att bygga politisk legitimitet nästan helt har fokuserats på Putin som Rysslands räddare och beskyddare. Därmed har också möjliga efterträdare svårt att bygga upp en egen plattform. Den nya konstitutionen som möjliggör för Putin att sitta kvar fram till 2036 visar att man inte har någon lösning på detta dilemma. Kvar finns en åldrande president och ett politiskt system som i övrigt hyser lågt förtroende hos befolkningen.
This book raises the question of Russia's plans for the time after Putin as Russia's president. The main argument is that the strategies for political legitimacy in Russia has focused almost entirely on Putin himself as the saviour and protector of the Russian nation. Consequently, any potential successor has a difficult task in building up his/her own platform. The new constitution, which makes it possible for Putin to continue as president until 2036 demonstrates that this dilemma has yet no solution. What remains is an aging president and a political system with a very low level of popular trust.

Da president Vladimir Putin kom til makten i Russland på tidlig 2000-tallet, var en viktig del av hans statsbygging å skaffe seg kontroll over medielandskapet hjemme. Evnen til å forme egne innbyggeres oppfatning av virkeligheten har stått sentralt siden, og utover 2010-tallet har dette også inkludert et internasjonalt publikum. Irina Grigor gir oss i sin doktorgradsavhandling i kommunikasjon fra Universitetet i Helsinki, et nærmere innblikk i russisk bruk av media og strategiske narrativer, med et særlig fokus på bruk av visuelle virkemidler i russiske medier i ulike case i løpet av perioden 2012–2016.
Since President Putin came to power in the early 2000s, he has increasingly seized control of the domestic media landscape. In addition to Moscow's focus on shaping Russian domestic opinion, there have been similar control attempts aimed at an international audience. In her doctoral dissertation in communications from the University of Helsinki, Irina Grigor provides valuable insights into Russia's use of the media and strategic narratives. Using a case-study approach, Grigor devotes particular attention to the application of visual tools by the Russian media in the 2012–2016 period.

March 2018 – and then what? The issue of political succession in Putin's Russia
As president of Russia and a prominent political leader, Vladimir Putin has consistently endeavoredto legitimize his rule by appealing to central political myths and taken-for-granted truths inRussian society. In rhetoric and official communication, he emerges as the guarantor of domesticorder and stability, the protector of traditional values, and a staunch advocate of Russia'sstatus and position as a great power in a world often depicted as hostile. What is being communicatedhere, and apparently finds resonance among broad segments of public opinion, is thaton all these parameters Putin is uniquely qualified to lead Russia. Four times in the course of18 years, Putin has been elected president in the first round of elections, and throughout thisperiod he has received high rankings in regular monthly opinion polls. However, his legitimationstrategies have been so firmly linked to the persona of Putin that we may speak of an emergingdilemma with his fourth presidency. Who could fill his shoes as his successor? The articleanalyzes this dilemma, taking its point of departure in Weber's seminal theorizing on types oflegitimate authority and the routinization of charisma. It discusses the evident dearth of crediblesuccessor candidates, and concludes by discussing possible actions for dealing with or postponingthe issue of succession.

Abstract: "Even if it didn't happen, it's true" – Houston, We Have a Problem!Houston, We Have a Problem! (director: Žiga Virc, 2016) is a mockumentary film from Slovenia that stirred up controversy in the former Yugoslavia. The film deals with the Yugoslav space program, which Josip Broz Tito sells to the United States under President Kennedy for $2.5 billion. However, it turns out that the Yugoslavs have nothing to sell: their space program is utterly useless. The payment is then converted into a loan, forcing Yugoslavia into an economic crisis. Tito dies, and with more or less direct involvement from the US side, Yugoslavia dies with him. The content of this film, and the debate surrounding it, show that popular culture dealing with the past has inherited traces of the ideologizations of the past. This article presents interpretations of public reactions to the film, but also analyzes what it seeks to convey regarding Yugoslav historiography, through this fable of Yugoslavia, its purported space program, and US involvement.

Armenia's Velvet Revolution - Why So Overdue? In early April 2018 Armenia completed the transition from semi-presidential rule to a parliamentary republic. Under the slogan 'More power to the people', the ruling Republican Party had paved the way for the incumbent president, Serzh Sargsyan, to continue in power, now as prime minister as his second and final term of presidency was drawing to an end. However, the ensuing events ended with popular protests, the 'Velvet Revolution', which forced Sargsyan and the Republicans out of office. The new administration, led by the former opposition leader Nikol Pashinyan, has ousted several influential leaders and initiated an ambitious anti-corruption programme. Nonetheless, one significant issue remains: early elections that are supposed not only to reflect the prevailing political landscape in Armenia but also reform the country's election laws. What triggered the spring 2018 uprising, when corruption and social discontent have been both well-known and prevalent in Armenia over the past two decades? This article offers insights into the background to the popular uprising, and the relation between Armenia and its large and influential diaspora, citing two main factors for the delay since independence in 1991 – the historical legacy of the perils of internal disunity, together with the effects of the unresolved Karabakh conflict. It concludes with some reflections on the way forward.