Hope for the Future

This change in the grass roots gives some of the informants hope for the future of Russia’s civil society development. Even though all agree that the recent developments from the side of the state have been trying, the organizations are unyielding in their attempt at making the best of their circumstances. All the informants add positive notes of change in the sector. The informant from FOE Norway underlines the positive cooperation their grass root-partners have achieved with government contacts. The informant for the NHC emphasizes the development of international networks and horizontal networks. In the wake of the anti-corruption demonstrations in March, there was also signs of public discussion spreading in social media. The fact that there is potential for discussion, and that knowledge is spreading throughout the population is a positive development.

And it’s important, in this way the institutions are strengthened. I see these committees, and they have to go to court, to challenge politicians, members of the state duma, lobby their rights, which I see as a positive thing…Because the trust between state and people in Russia is very low. And civil society organizations work with strengthening institutions and building trust between the state and the citizens,

66

6 Concluding Remarks

The relationship between state and society is fraught with complications, and this thesis shows that Russia is no exception. What from an outsiders point of view might resemble a country crushed under a strict authoritarian regime with little or no activities of civil society, is in reality a narrow picture of the entire truth. This thesis has showed that the relationship between state and non-state actors is dependent on a system of interdependence, where the actors need one another in the scheme of things. These relations might depend on different aspects such as western influence, foreign funding and political activity. However, the findings in this thesis suggests that what proves to be the defining characteristics of this relationship are mutual benefits.

With this concluding chapter, the thesis will summarize the main findings of the study. It will assess the hypotheses together with the research question, and how the findings relate to the theoretical framework. Additionally, the chapter will give an account of the supplementary results discovered in the study, and assess how these fit into the theory of consensual contestation.

6.1 Research Question

I have approached this thesis using a mixed method of interviews with different experts and organizations and document analysis. The data has been analyzed using the framework of consensual contestation in addition to theoretical arguments on hybrid regimes. The

hypotheses were derived from the theoretical assumptions to answer the following research question:

What kind of interplay exists between civil society organizations and the governmental structures? What formal opportunities exist for civil society organizations’ influence? And in what way are these opportunities limited and/or encouraged by the current regime?

67 The theoretical baseline of this thesis outlined a hybrid regime that attempts to disengage society, through censorship and control rather than open repression. President Vladimir Putin emerges as a strong leader, succeeding in shaping the civil society sector with a “vigilant state”. Suspicion of Western influence after the color revolutions in former Soviet states has led to implications for foreign funding and support for the organized civil society. Meanwhile, the state attempts to shape the sector through categories of acceptable forms of contention and forms less accepted.

The aim of this thesis was firstly to discover what kind of interplay exists between civil society organizations and governmental structures in Russia. The interplay can be said to be clearly there, and complex in its workings. Following the theory, the interplay is marked by an interdependence and a mutually beneficial relationship. The analysis points towards an image of a dualistic state, which is outlined both by Tarasenko (2015) and Aasland et al.

(2016). Aasland et al. describe a strong government which allows for civil society participation on a normative level, yet still intent on limiting the room for development.

Tarasenko shows that there is still room for civil society participation, because the government has established spheres of influence to keep the status quo and limit open contestation.

The aim was thereafter to discover what formal opportunities there are for the organizations to influence. In the theory, Owen (2015) contends the outright dismissal of governmental bodies such as the Federal Public Chamber and the Presidential Council of Civil Society and Human Rights, and claims that there are numerous examples of success being accomplished through these bodies. Davies et al. (2016) discuss the governments interest in promoting civil society participation and cooperation and that this is also reflected in the policy, for example through establishing these formal opportunities.

Lastly, the aim of this thesis was to learn in what way are these opportunities limited and/or encouraged by the current regime. Henderson (2011) maintains that although the current regime takes the form of a vigilant state vis-à-vis NGOs and civil society, the strategy is more than pure repression. As both Henderson (2011), Bindman (2015) and Turbine (2015) all argue, the state draws a clear line between political and social claims, which in turn affect the opportunities these organizations receive.

68