The Impact of War on Center-Periphery Relations in Russia and Ukraine

• In Event: Federalism and War

Abstract

This paper identifies key differences in the impact of war on the center-periphery relations in Russia and Ukraine. The short-term consequences of the aggression against Ukraine were entirely consistent with the patterns of previous behavior of Russia: delegating administrative responsibilities to the regional governors and blame-shifting for policy failures while maintaining ever stricter political centralization. In the pre-invasion era Russian leadership did not elaborate any strategy or special plans to prepare the regions for a long war in Russia. Instead, after the outbreak of the war the Kremlin relied on the measures and instruments similar to those used after the Crimea annexation and during the pandemic crisis.
In Ukraine, on the contrary, regional, and local governments became important independent actors during the war. There were strong indicators that the decentralization reform launched in the country in 2014 helped promote a multi-level national resilience system. The paper seeks to explain the factors that contributed to this variation, particular to the stability of center-regional relations in Russia despite the shocks of war and sanctions. We argue that it was due to the informal institutions and personal networks. Regional governors remained loyal to the incumbent and did not influence the national agenda. "All about the war" was designed and elaborated in the Presidential Administration. Moscow's repertoire regarding the regions was predictable, it has already been tested after the annexation of Crimea and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most important elements of this repertoire are the transfer of additional zones of responsibility to the regions and “patronage assistance” to the territories of Ukraine occupied by Russia.
In Ukraine decentralization reforms launched in the country in 2014 helped to promote a multi-level system of governance that reinforced and strengthened national resilience. Regional and city governments became important independent actors in time of war. These governments, empowered with more rights and resources, proved to be able to effectively operate in an autonomous mode. New variable - proximity to the front lines – determined the agendas of regions and local communities.

Authors

• Mikhail G. Filippov, SUNY, Binghamton

• Irina Busygina, Harvard University