In contemporary armies, violence among soldiers seems to be a universal phenomenon found in both professional and drafted armies. However, the comparison of violent practices in various armies around the world allows us to identify specific features linked to those countries' sociological, political or anthropological contexts. Hazing, for example, seems to be more violent in the armies of transitional societies (Russia, Eastern Europe, Latin America), where social tensions encountered by citizens in their daily lives are carried over to, and sometimes intensified in, the military. The comparison of Russian dedovshchina with the situation in other countries makes it possible to identify universal, transitional and national characteristics of military violence.Contents: Konstantin Bannikov on the consequences of the spread throughout society of archaic violence produced by the Russian army; Anna Colin Lebedev on the perception of military violence in Russian society; Anton Oleynik on informal relationships among prisoners and conscripts; Kirill Podrabinek on the reasons of the prevalence of dedovshchina in the post-Soviet context; Igor Obraztsov on the historical roots of dedovshchina; Vadim Mikhailin on the role of language in the military milieu; Julie Elkner on the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers; Bakit Katchekeyev on hazing in the Kyrgyz army; Irakli Sesiashvili on hazing in the Georgian army; Hana Cervinkova on hazing in the Czech army; James Wither on bullying in the British army; Eduardo Paes-Machado & Carlos Linhares de Albuquerque on hazing in the Brazilian police; Joris Van Bladel on dedovshchina and the all-volunteer force.

This volume includes five case studies on war and the military in the USSR, Russia and Yugoslavia. It argues that the armed forces were at the core of socialist statehood and that their role and their change in late socialism and post-Communism are thus far understudied. Discussing the similarities as well as the differences between the Soviet, the Russian, and the Yugoslav case, the introduction seeks new explanations for war and military violence in these countries. Rather than pointing exclusively to ethnic mobilization and nationalism, it views the transformation and collapse of the Communist party-state and its army as a precondition for violence and civil war. It places these cases using innovative methodological approaches to the research on physical violence, war, and military. These studies explore the experience and the representation of violence, army service, combat, and war in late socialism and scrutinize individual actors and their behaviour within violent spaces. In retrospect the emerging wars in the post-Soviet space – from Chechnya to the Donbas – and in Yugoslavia are at least as crucial for the region as Gorbachev's reforms. They help to better understand the conflicts of the present in the post-Soviet space. This book was originally published as a special issue of Nationalities Papers.

Much has been written on the 1917-20 revolution in Ukrainian, on the national movement, the Makhnovists and the struggle of the Bolsheviks. Yet there were others with a mass following whose role has faded from history. One such party was the Borotbisty, an inde-pendent party of Ukrainian revolutionary socialists seeking to achieve national liberation and social emancipation. Though widely known in revolutionary Europe in their day, the Borotbisty were decimated during the Stalinist holocaust in Ukraine. Out of print for over half a century this lost text by Ivan Maistrenko, the last survivor of this party provides a unique account. Part memoir and part history this is a thought provoking study which chal-lenges previous approaches to the revolution and shows how events in Ukraine decided the fate not only of the Russian Revolution but the upheavals in Europe at the time. Ivan Maistrenko’s Borotbism is more than just a historical document. The debates during and after the ‘Ukrainian revolution’ of 1917 still have a contemporary relevance - and Ukrainian debate was especially rich because if extended beyond the ranks of the Bolsheviks to the ‘national communist’ parties, the Borotbisty and Ukapisty. Ukrainian ‘national communism’ proved ephemeral when reborn in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but ar-guably because it failed to reconnect with earlier polemics, being, as Maistrenko predicted in the 1950s, little more than a cover story for the nomenklatura to pursue its self-enrichment.The debate about the relative importance of national and/or social liberation is still of great importance, however, especially as Ukrainians arguably now have the former without the latter. In Putin’s Russia, market capitalism has to struggle with the state, and the left has often been prisoner to imperial nostalgia. The popular hatred of ‘oligarchs’ is as visceral in Ukraine as it is in Russia, but these sentiments are currently better tapped by opposition politicians like Yuliia Tymoshenko and Yurii Lutsenko. Both are often dismissed as ‘populists’, but building a non-communist Ukrainian left remains as important a task today as it was in 1917 or 1954.Andrew Wilson, Senior Lecturer in Ukrainian Studies at the School of Slavonic & East European Studies, University College London

This easy-to-use reference explores the people and events that shaped Russian military history—and impacted Europe, Asia, and the world—over the past eight centuries. Russian military history is an often-overlooked field. Yet Russia is and has long been an important player in global politics, and its military exploits have been central to its role on the world stage. This study of Russia's military past provides insights into European and U.S. history, including the conduct of the two World Wars and the Cold War, and will help readers better appreciate the current geopolitical situation. This work covers major events and figures in Russian military history from the end of Mongol domination in the 14th century to the present day. More than 650 entries by scores of expert contributors detail events, individuals, organizations, and ideas that have influenced Russian warfare over 800 years. Two alphabetically arranged volumes explore such conflicts as the Russo-Polish Wars, the Great Northern War, the Russo-Turkish Wars, the Napoleonic Wars, the Crimean War, the Russo-Japanese War, World War I, World War II, and the Cold War, including the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Cross references and further readings in each entry serve as jumping-off points for further exploration.

Russia’s country estates were fulcrums of culture, learning and socio-administration under the imperial state. Only a fraction of the original numbers of these structures survives today, and yet even today several of the most famous of these buildings have uncertain futures. At risk is the survival of this fascinating remnant of Russia’s cultural history. This matter is especially salient as post-Soviet Russia has participated in a struggle over means of its own self-representation. Historic landmarks enter the political arena during periods of drastic change. The struggle over monuments reveals notable adjustments and continuities over a nation’s historical narrative; the study of the treatment of certain monuments provides insight to the language, symbols and memory of a people in transition. This book examines links between two seemingly divergent spheres of human interaction, those of politics and culture. The aim of this book is not to analyse the artistic and architectural merits of Russia’s country estates, as a plethora of works already address this subject. Rather, the objective is to look at the underlying attitudes and circumstances which affect the survival of this integral feature of Russia’s pre-revolutionary secular past. A variety of factors come into play in estate preservation, such as: privatization, restitution, taxation, legislation, actions of governmental and non-government organizations, tourism, and others. This book analyzes Russia’s institutions and actors that continually compete for shifting and scarce resources in the sphere of culture, often to the detriment of physical cultural artefacts themselves. More than just Russia’s estates are subject to these forces although estates serve as an excellent lens with which to view these destructive processes at work.

In today’s world where other cultures are being tapped to a greater extent than ever before, the processes of mixing and matching are especially relevant in making sense of Russia. Not only do borrowing and assimilation, interaction between the familiar and the alien, constitute a venerable tradition in Russian culture, but during the two last post-Soviet decades a notable Western influence has become apparent. This book provides means for understanding Russianness in this new situation. By bringing together Russian and Western, eminent and younger scholars it provides insights both from inside and outside. By extending its perspectives to three fields – linguistics, cultural studies, and social sciences – it covers different dimensions of creative misunderstandings , hybrids, tensions and other modes of adaptation in the Russian culture. By offering concrete case studies it avoids easy stereotypes, deconstructs clichés, problematizes accepted truths, and identifies points of interaction between Russia and the West.

Anatolii Fomenko is a distinguished Russian mathematician turned popular history writer, founder of the so-called New Chronology school, and part of the explosion of alternative historical writing that has emerged in Russia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Among his more startling claims are that the Old Testament was written after the New Testament, that Russia is older than Greece and Rome, and that the medieval Mongol Empire was in fact a Slav-Turk world empire, a Russian Horde, to which Western and Eastern powers paid tribute. While academic historians dismiss Fomenko as a dangerous ethno-nationalist or post-modern clown, Fomenko’s publications invariably outsell his conventional rivals. Just as Putin has restored Russia’s faith in its future, Fomenko and an army of fellow alternative historians are determined to restore Russia’s faith in its past. For Fomenko, the key to Russia’s greatness in the future lies in ensuring that Russians understand the true greatness of their past. Fomenko and other pseudo-historians have built upon existing Russian notions of identity, specifically the widespread belief in the positive qualities of empire and the special mission of Russia. He has drawn upon previous attempts to establish a Russian identity, ranging from Slavophilism through Stalinism to Eurasianism. While fantastic, Fomenko’s pseudo-history strikes many Russian readers as no less legitimate than the lies and distortions peddled by Communist propagandists, Tsarist historians and church chroniclers.