Thesis (M.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 1989.

Nikolai Baibakov was a key individual in the Soviet Union. His background as an oil engineer in the Baku region during the 1930s and his exploits as a deputy commissar for oil during the Second World War led to his appointment as the chief of the central economic planning organ of the USSR, Gosplan. In this post, he shaped the economy of his country in accordance with the political priorities of its leaders, often despite contradicting domestic economic realities. As a faithful communist, Baibakov’s advocacy of centralized planning in a command economy lasted his entire life, but it also cost him his job when Gorbache v started to steer the USSR in the direction of perestroika in 1985. In the aftermath of the break-up of the USSR and the subsequent privatization of its industries under Yeltsin, Baibakov remained a committed advocate of centralized planning, especially for the oil sector. His policies and ideological perspectives regarding oil as national security resource were vindicated under President Vladimir Putin at the beginning of the 21st century. / text

Tsar Ivan IV, commonly known as Ivan the Terrible, rapidly became a symbol of Russian national identity. From the creation of the Russian Empire by Peter the Great, Ivan became recognized as the leader who consolidated Muscovite territory in the 16th Century and centralised his power against the whims of an elite which sought to preserve their privileges. However, the construction of this historical narrative was a long process, limited by the paucity of the sources as well as certain state conventions. This thesis aims to analyse how the four key historians of the Russian Empire assembled historical knowledge on Ivan IV. The writings of Nikolai Karamzin, Sergei Soloviev, Vasilii Kliuchevskii and Sergei Platonov are examined in order to understand the process that forged historiographical knowledge on the second part of Ivan's reign, which was characterised by the cruelty as well as the consolidation of his power. This analysis outlines the influence that personal experiences, beliefs and socio-political context had on the way these historians interpreted this period, which was crucial to the emergence of the modern Russia state. / Le tsar Ivan IV, surnommé le Terrible, fut un personnage qui devint rapidement un symbole pour l'identité nationale russe. Dès la création de l'Empire russe par Pierre le Grand, il fut reconnu comme celui qui a consolidé le territoire de la Moscovie au XVIe siècle et a centralisé son pouvoir contre les velléités d'une élite à conserver ses privilèges. Cependant, la construction de ce récit historique fut un long procédé, limité par la rareté des sources et les conventions étatiques. Cette thèse visait à analyser comment quatre historiens clés de la Russie impériale construisirent les connaissances historiques sur Ivan. Les écrits de Nikolai Karamzin, Sergei Soloviev, Vasilii Kliuchevskii et Sergei Platonov seront pris en compte pour comprendre le processus derrière l'historiographie de la seconde partie du règne d'Ivan, caractérisée par une cruauté et par la consolidation de son pouvoir. Cette analyse démontre l'influence que les expériences personnelles de l'historien, ses croyances et le contexte socio-politique sur la construction de cette période jugée capitale pour l'État russe.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis examines the conflict between the military forces of Nestor Makhno and Mennonite colonists in southern Ukraine during the Russian Civil War (1918-1921) through the historical narratives found in each group’s literature. Employing a methodology derived from deconstructionist approaches to history and James Wertsch’s theory of distributed collective memory, this thesis considers the nature of each group’s historical narratives, their biases, the context of their respective productions and how these same narratives contain intimations of the other side’s perspective.

Democracy, anticipated by American and other Western powers to prevent economic chaos and political conflict within and among states, is not evolving as expected. Since 1991, Western governments have been providing large amounts of democratic assistance to the Former Soviet Union yet few, if any, of the recipient countries have developed into genuine democracies. This research argues that part of the failure resides in United States (US) democracy assistance's inadequate consideration of gender within democracy programming. The lack of effective gender analysis has not only been detrimental to women but has served to obscure comprehensive and vital components of democratic transitions. The field research conducted for this dissertation demonstrates: (I) that gender is more central to women's self- identification than ethnicity; (2) that the meaning, as well as significance, attached to ethnic identity vary between women and men; (3) that there is a greater male identification with ethnicity and with official identities such as citizenship; and (4) that women are more fully involved in the associations that make up civil society than men. Feminist and socio-political science theories are utilised to examine the interrelations of ethnicity and gender within modern Kyrgyzstan-the laboratory of US democratic programming and a country self-promoted as the "island of democracy" within a region prone to ethnic conflict, divided by gender and of geo-political strategic importance. US development practice provides the contextual frame for exploring the relationship of gender and ethnicity. As civil society is a mainstay in US democracy assistance, this so-called independent variable in democratic consolidation is used as a micro framework in this analysis. Gender/feminist theory provides a crosscutting tool intended to expand the theories, data, and analysis of this research to include a gendered perspective. The case study and corresponding field research test the hypothesis that ethnicity is gendered and that it is relevant to democracy assistance. Finally, the conclusion considers the unexplored nexus surrounding these relationships relative to US democratic assistance programming.

No description available.

No description available.

<p> This treatise focuses on the evolution of the xylophone in the music of Dmitri Shostakovich. The xylophone occupied an important position in Shostakovich's aesthetic, evidenced in the exposed solos of the first <i>Jazz Suite </i> and the <i>Polka from The Golden Age.</i> In his symphonies, Shostakovich's use of the xylophone expands the role of the instrument from a demarcation or coloristic device to a vehicle of complex cultural and personal ideas ranging from the struggle of the Soviet people under Joseph Stalin, the composer's own hatred of war, and prominently, the multi-faceted idea of betrayal. This document presents a biographical overview of Shostakovich's life, an overview of the history of the xylophone from antiquity through the Twentieth Century, and an analysis of the use of the xylophone in Shostakovich's symphonies. Rhythmic and melodic motives, orchestrational effects, and pitch class relationships are examined in addition to specific score examples.</p>