Rose, Orange, and Tulip: The failed post-Soviet revolutions

Abstract

In 2003–2005, democratic revolutions overthrew the Georgian, Ukrainian, and Kyrgyz post-Soviet authoritarian regimes. However, disillusioned citizens witness today their new leaders creating a Bonapartist regime, entering into open conflict with former revolutionary allies or being forced to accept cohabitation with leaders of the previous regime. This article argues that despite internationally acclaimed civic mobilisation, civil society's weakness seriously affected the three revolutionary processes. These were in fact initiated, led, controlled, and finally subordinated by former members of the authoritarian regimes' political elite. Finally, the supposedly democratic revolutions proved to be little more than a limited rotation of ruling elites within undemocratic political systems.

Kyrgyzstan's dark ages: framing and the 2010 hydroelectric revolution

“…Scholars have convincingly argued that this was not a popular revolt, but rather a putsch orchestrated by regional elites, some of whom lost seats in parliament in fraudulent elections (Cummings and Ryabkov 2008;Hale 2006;McGlinchey 2011;Radnitz 2006Radnitz , 2010Tudoroiu 2007). It may also have been influenced by the example of other revolutions in the post-Soviet space (Beissinger 2007).…”

Pathologies of Europeanisation: Fighting Corruption in the Southern Caucasus

“…A notable exception was the democratic surge of the Rose Revolution in Georgia that was mainly championed by various grassroots organisations in 2004. The promising event, however, did not bring about democratic consolidation, as the recent events of the 2008 war illustrate (Laverty 2008;Tudoroiu 2007). In Armenia and Azerbaijan, the situation is even worse.…”

Institutional influences on SME exporters under divergent transition paths: Comparative insights from Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan

“…Unlike Tajikistan, and its other Central Asian neighbours, Kyrgyzstan has followed a more liberal and more democratic path to transition (EBRD, 2013). The unprecedented political changes that followed the 'Tulip Revolution' of 2005 (Tudoroiu, 2007) strengthened commitment to further market reforms and engendered a more pluralist political culture. Thus, we observe clearly divergent paths of transition and apparently contrasting institutional environments in the two countries, which justified their selection as comparative cases.…”