Based on an original large-N dataset of individual Ukrainian oligarchs and qualitative evidence, this article tests competing perspectives on the political power of big capital. We find, surprisingly, that neither the assumption of direct power by the oligarchs nor the mobility of oligarchic assets helps tycoons protect their fortunes against shocks. Instead, the indirect strategies of party support and media ownership significantly enhance business wealth. Empirically, we profile postcommunist oligarchs by examining the political and economic activities of 177 oligarchs from 2006 to 2012. Theoretically, we contribute to the literatures on instrumental and structural power of capital, and on the interactions between extreme wealth, rule of law, and democracy. In doing so, we contrast the logic of flexibility, according to which oligarchs benefit from political adaptability and deniability, with the logic of commitment compensation, according to which oligarchs benefit from direct power when the rule of law is weak.
EarleJ.GehlbachS. (2015). The productivity consequences of political turnover: Firm-level evidence from Ukraine’s orange revolution. American Journal of Political Science, 59, 708-723.
9.
EngvallJ. (2015). The state as investment market: A framework for interpreting the post-Soviet state in Eurasia. Governance, 28, 25-40.
10.
FaccioM. (2006). Politically connected firms. The American Economic Review, 96, 369-386.
FoxG. A.Negrete-YankelevichS.SosaV. J. (2015). Ecological statistics: Contemporary theory and application. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
13.
GehlbachS.SoninK.ZhuravskayaE. (2010). Businessman candidates. American Journal of Political Science, 54, 718-736.
14.
GelmanA.HillJ. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
15.
GurievS.RachinskyA. (2005). The role of oligarchs in Russian capitalism. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19, 131-150.
16.
HaleH. (2015). Patronal politics: Eurasian regime dynamics in comparative perspective. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
17.
HellmanJ. (1998). Winners take all. World Politics, 50, 203-234.
18.
HoffK.StiglitzJ. E. (2004). After the big bang? Obstacles to the emergence of the rule of law in post-communist societies. The American Economic Review, 94, 753-763.
JohnstonM. (2005). Syndromes of corruption: Wealth, power, and democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
21.
JunisbaiB. (2012). Improbable but potentially pivotal oppositions: Privatization, capitalists, and political contestation in the post-Soviet autocracies. Perspectives on Politics, 10, 891-916.
22.
LeshchenkoS. (2011, September3). Yaltynsk’kyi kastynh na krisla Yanukovycha i Azarova [A casting in Yalta for the chairs of Yanukovych and Azarov]. Ukrains’ka Pravda. Retrieved from http://www.pravda.com.ua/articles/2011/09/19/6597613/
LindblomC. (1977). Politics and markets: The world’s political economic systems. New York, NY: Basic Books.
25.
LohmannS. (1992). Optimal commitment in monetary policy: Credibility versus flexibility. The American Economic Review, 82, 273-286.
26.
LomsadzeG. (2014, November13). Georgia: Political crisis prompts speculation about Ivanishvili’s political role. EurasiaNet.org. Retrieved from http://www.eurasianet.org/node/70911
27.
MarkusS. (2007). Capitalists of all Russia, unite! Business mobilization under debilitated dirigisme. Polity, 39, 277-304.
28.
MarkusS. (2008). Corporate governance as political insurance: Firm-level institutional creation in emerging markets and beyond. Socio-Economic Review, 6, 69-98.
29.
MarkusS. (2015). Property, predation, and protection: Piranha capitalism in Russia and Ukraine. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
30.
MarkusS. (2016). Sovereign commitment and property rights: The case of Ukraine’s orange revolution. Studies in Comparative International Development, 51, 411-433.
31.
McMenaminI. (2012). If money talks, what does it say? Varieties of capitalism and business financing of parties. World Politics, 64, 1-38.
32.
NorthD.WallisJ.WeingastB. (2009). Violence and social orders: A conceptual framework for interpreting recorded human history. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
33.
PikettyT. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
34.
PuglisiR. (2003). The rise of the Ukrainian oligarchs. Democratization, 10(3),99-123.
35.
RadnitzS. (2010). Weapons of the wealthy: Predatory regimes and elite-led protests in Central Asia. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
36.
RazoA. (2008). Social foundations of limited dictatorship. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
37.
RojanskyM. A. (2014). Corporate raiding in Ukraine: Causes, methods and consequences. Demokratizatsiya, 22, 411-443.
38.
RyabinskaN. (2011). The media market and media ownership in post-communist Ukraine: Impact on media independence and pluralism. Problems of Post-Communism, 58(6), 3-20.
SchmitterP. (2010). Business and neo-corporatism. In CoenD.WilsonG.GrantW. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of business and government (pp. 248-260). London, England: Oxford University Press.
41.
SchoenmanR. (2014). Networks and institutions in Europe’s emerging markets. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
42.
SchoenmanR.McMenaminI. (2007). Together forever? Explaining exclusivity in party–firm relations. Political Studies, 55, 153-173.
43.
SeamanS. R.WhiteI. R. (2013). Review of inverse probability weighting for dealing with missing data. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 22, 278-295.
44.
SlaterD. (2013). Democratic careening. World Politics, 65, 729-763.
45.
StarkD.VedresB. (2012). Political holes in the economy: The business network of partisan firms in Hungary. American Sociological Review, 77, 700-722.
46.
TruexR. (2014). The returns to office in a “rubber stamp” parliament. American Political Science Review, 108, 235-251.
47.
WayL. A. (2005). Rapacious individualism and political competition in Ukraine, 1992–2004. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 38, 191-205.
48.
WilsonG.GrantW. (2010). Business and political parties. In CoenD.WilsonG.GrantW. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of business and government (pp. 191-207). London, England: Oxford University Press.
49.
WintersJ. (1996). Power in motion: Capital mobility and the Indonesian state. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
50.
WintersJ. (2011). Oligarchy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
51.
YadavV. (2011). Political parties, business groups, and corruption in developing countries. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
