1991年底蘇聯的解體，使得俄羅斯的政治體制由一黨專政走向多元民主，其經濟體制也從過去以社會主義所有制轉變為市場經濟體制。在俄羅斯進行政經轉型的初期，國際貨幣基金會（International Monetary Fund；以下均簡稱為IMF）以龐大的金援為後盾，介入俄羅斯的政經發展，對俄羅斯的制度抉擇有著深遠的影響。因此，本文旨在透過剖析IMF1992年至1999年間援俄計劃的形成過程、內容、俄羅斯決策當局對IMF援俄計劃的回應，以及影響俄羅斯決策當局的因素，探究IMF援俄計劃與俄羅斯政經發展的互動關係。 本論文主要採用「系統理論」(the Systems Theory)的研究途徑，探討IMF的援俄計劃與俄羅斯政經發展的互動關係。其中，以「議價模式」(the Bargaining Model)說明在IMF援俄計劃的形成過程中，IMF的組織成員，主導IMF政策走向的美國、英國等已開發國家，以及俄羅斯當局三者的角力過程。最後，再以「克里姆林宮政治研究途徑」(Kremlin Politics approach)敘探俄羅斯決策當局回應IMF要求時的考量因素。在此研究架構下，本論文第一章除說明研究動機與目的、研究架構與途徑、研究限制外，還介紹與研究題目相關的文獻，並指出過去文獻所未考量之處，以做為論文研究之基礎；第二章續述IMF的運作概況，探討影響IMF援俄計劃形成的可能因素；第三章闡述俄羅斯的初始條件、IMF援俄計劃的內容、俄羅斯當局的回應，以及IMF援俄計劃所帶來的成效與弊端；第四章則論述1992年至1999年俄羅斯的政經發展，並指出IMF的援俄計劃對俄羅斯政經發展的影響；第五章為結論。 本論文的結論是，雖然俄羅斯的政經發展會相互影響，但是對俄羅斯的決策當局而言，政治的穩固比經濟發展路線的選擇更為重要。IMF在1992年至1999年間許多關鍵時刻對葉爾欽表示支持，使葉爾欽在多次的政爭中仍得以保有政權；而葉爾欽為獲得IMF的金援，自然會推動其所要求的市場經濟體制。因此，儘管俄羅斯的經濟改革迭有波折，但是市場經濟體制在俄羅斯生根已是無庸置疑。 / The collapse of the Soviet Union has led Russia from one-party dictatorship to plural democracy in politics and from socialistic ownership to free-market system in economy. During the initial period of Russia’s political and economical transformation, International Monetary Fund, backed up by the huge-amount loans, interfered with Russia’s political and economical developments, giving impact upon the choice of institutions in Russia. Therefore, this thesis is aimed to understand the interacting relationships between IMF’s aid program and Russia’s political and economical developments, by analyzing the forming process and content of IMF’s aid program toward Russia from 1992-9, the response of the Russian authorities toward IMF’s aid program, and the factors that influenced the Russian authorities to make their policies. The thesis adopts the Systems Theory as its research approach to discuss the interacting relationships between the IMF’s aid program and Russia’s political and economical developments. Meanwhile, I use the “Bargaining Model” to explain the wrestling process among IMF’s staff and personnel, the countries dominating IMF’s direction of policies, like the US and the UK, and the Russian authorities. Finally, I further focus on the factors that the Russian authorities considered in response to IMF’s demands. The first chapter includes the research motives and objectives, the research frameworks and approaches, the research restrictions, and the relevant literature. The second one mentions the general situation of IMF and the factors that may influence the forming of the IMF’s aid program toward Russia. The third one specifies the initial conditions in Russia, the content of the IMF’s aid program, the Russian authorities’ responses, and the effect and the problems that the IMF’s aid program may bring out. The fourth one points out the impact that the IMF’s aid program put upon the Russia’s political and economical developments. The fifth one is the conclusion. The conclusion is that though politics and economy influence each other in Russia, the stable political situation is more important than the choice of economic developments for the Russian authorities. IMF’s support for Boris N. Yeltsin on many key occasions from 1992 to 1999, allowed him to retain his power. And Yeltsin naturally promoted the market economy that IMF required for getting its loan. Therefore, despite the continuing difficulties in Russia’s economic reform, it’s no doubt that the market economy has taken root in Russia.