서강대학교

목차

The goal of this thesis is to examine influence of secret intelligences on transformation of state structures. The main research question is focused on Russian secret intelligence and its influence on transformation of the Post-Soviet Russia’s state structures. The methods used in this study are qualitative research methods.
Since Napoleonic Wars the importance of secret intelligence had progressively increased. In the beginning, as a part of military crystallization, its scope and functions were limited and subordinated to military purposes. However, with the raise of ‘political citizenship’ and institutionalization of the state the need for ‘social stabilizer’ emerged, especially in countries with sensitive geopolitical positions and complex societies. As a result, secret intelligence’s functions and purposes had diverged from the previous subordination to the military.
Hence, both high military and civilian governing structures, which were in a quite discordance throughout XIX and early XX century, increased their dependence on secret intelligence. If in the beginning secret intelligences were created due to changes in the concept of war, then throughout the time they become factor of changes of many political and social concepts. After the October Revolution, secret intelligence in Bolshevik Russia and later in Stalin’s Soviet Union evolved from the state stabilizer into the
nucleus of the state crystallization. Its scope and functions were broadened, and its distributive power within the state highly maximized.
The secret intelligence under Stalin started to develop as another form of military crystallization, altering the previous concept of war. This directly had repercussion in US, causing creation of the reii sembling ‘new generation’ secret intelligence. If the level of direct and open arm clashes between US and Soviet Union were law during the Cold War, it was only due to the nuclear deterrence and the fact that they were replaced with numerous covert actions conducted all over the world. With the progress in communication technology importance and power of secret intelligence strengthened even more.
However, its real power should be tested only within the state. As institutional part of the state, Russian secret intelligence’s distributive power increased, up to the point where it developed capabilities to alter and transform entire structure of the state. If this capability is confirmed in the case of the country where the ‘new generation’ secret intelligence originated from, then resembling secret intelligences could possess the same altering power and could create similar effects in situation of inner-state instability and great external threat.
Throughout the history Russia had shown tendencies to respond to the great external threat with the raise of ‘garrison state’ and inner social restrictive consolidation; in other words, with the ‘service-class revolution.’ Secret intelligence structure in the last decade of Soviet Union facing great external threat caused by SDI and internal instability, instigated by corruption within Nomenclature structure, tried to transform the state. Yet, at that time this was not possible. Failure in conducting the service-class revolution soon was followed by disintegration of the Soviet Union and the new political and economic tendencies for transformation of the state towards democracy with open market economy. The rise of the new business elite’s power, further degradation of preserved Nomenclature structures, inner state instability caused by war in Chechnya and continuous external threat caused by intensified US military actions in the world during 1990s, one more time alarmed the initiation of the serviceclass revolution. This time, secret intelligence structure was consolidated, and economy passed critical breaking-up stage giving abutment for the initiation of the Russian forth service-class revolution.
From the mid-1990s Russian secret intelligence strengthened its power and started shifting transition and altering transformation of the state towards the new form of arrison state . ‘militocracy with open market economy.’ This form was adequate and up to date with domestic and international contemporary politico-socio-economical environment. Empirical confirmation of my assumptions has been made through comparison of transition of Russian Federation with the ex-Soviet states which successfully passed transition towards democracy with open market economy, and with some ex-communist state that resemble Soviet model in terms of comparable development of secret intelligences’ structures. It implies that Russian secret intelligence influenced transformation of the post-Soviet Russia’s state structures.