Articles by R G Gidadhubli

In the context of the numerous accidents involving Russian-made MiG aircraft in India, it is interesting to examine how the military industrial complex, which had disintegrated after the collapse of the Soviet Union is being remodelled and refurbished and the challenges it faces. The upgradation and modernisation programme and the promotion of R and D appear to be leading to a re-emergence of Russia as a major producer and exporter of arms in the world lagging behind only the US.

In the 1980s there had been a surge of anti-Stalinist sentiment in the then Soviet Union and several publications had come out based on hitherto undisclosed material, documents and memoirs. By contrast, the 50th anniversary of Josef Stalin's death on March 5 this year brought to the surface evidence of growing nostalgia among sections of Russians for Stalin.

After a decade of change and transition, Russia is only part of the way to the goal that it had set itself of transformation to a developed market economy. The 'shock therapy' that it adopted rather than a gradual reform process appears to have generated some adverse developments in the economy and society.

The end of the cold war combined with the collapse in demand for industrial goods as a result of the sluggish economy have severely constrained attempts to change the production patterns of the military industrial complex towards the manufacture of products for civilian use. With Russia's improving relations with NATO, its military production and trade may get a boost.

The Russian parliament last month approved the Land Code Bill, allowing limited private ownership of land for agriculture. The bill has strong dissenters, including the communist and agrarian parties, who have raised several important objections to the private ownership of agricultural land. Russia has to promote private ownership of land if it is to achieve its objectives of establishing a market economy and lure greater investment in agriculture. However, the government needs to ensure that such privatisation is not misused, benefiting a few at the cost of the larger interests of the country