Russia at the beginning of the 20th century The reign of Nicholas II was the time of the highest rates of economic growth in the history of Russia. For 1880–1910 growth rates industrial production exceeded 9% per year. According to this indicator, Russia came out on top in the world, ahead of even

As Professor Bartenev rightly believes, describing the history of economic transformations in Russia: “Economic policy cannot and should not be based on rigid schemes. It is recognized to take into account the entire set of conditions, to provide for a variety of options and alternatives. The policy itself covers an unusually wide range, a multi-layered palette of directions, levels and actions.

This is precisely what was not done during the implementation of the “shock therapy” program in Russia. The reform in Russia was carried out through the adoption of normative legal acts, most of which were by-laws at the initial stage: resolutions, decrees, orders. The calculation was made on the regulation of the economy through the use of the price mechanism. During this period, there was a total shortage of goods in Russia, but a large amount of money accumulated in the hands of the population, which was not possible to spend anywhere. The Gaidar government immediately released prices in the country, and the resulting inflation immediately deprived people of their accumulated savings.

The problem was not only, unfortunately, the rise in prices for goods and services, but production also declined. Enterprises, experiencing a shortage of funds, which, moreover, were depreciating at a faster rate, were not able to purchase all the necessary raw materials for uninterrupted production.

Supporters of "shock therapy" believed that the period of "shock", production cuts and hyperinflation would not last long. They hoped that the “invisible hand” of the market would bankrupt enterprises producing unprofitable, low-quality, obsolete products, and prices would become regulators of supply and demand, as in a classical market economy.

However, the reformers made a number of gross mistakes. The former economic mechanism was completely broken (single-sector model). The State Planning Commission and the ministries responsible for directive economic policy were liquidated. A new system for managing economic processes has not been formed.

Instead of one imbalance (“a lot of money - a shortage of goods”), the state created another by its actions (“lack of money - lack of liquidity - lack of working capital– decline in production – stagnation in the economy”).

The economy was in a state of permanent crisis, which lasted until 2000. So the volume of GDP in 1999 in relation to 1991 decreased by at least 40%. The largest declines were noted in the manufacturing industries: mechanical engineering, instrument making, automotive, light industry. The imbalance in the structure of production between the industries that produce products for national consumption and the basic sectors of the economy, the so-called “heavy” industries: energy, metallurgy, chemistry and petrochemistry, has become obvious. So, if from 1990 to 1994. in the sectoral structure of Russian industry, the share of heavy industry (energy, metallurgy, chemistry and petrochemistry, woodworking) ranged from 79.9% to 85.4%, while mechanical engineering and metalworking occupied a share equal to 16.8% to 21.7%, light industry - from 4.4% to 9.8%, food industry– from 9.6% to 10.3%. At the same time, smaller shares of industries producing consumer goods fall on 1994, indicating that by the mid-1990s the situation was deteriorating.

Agriculture was slowly dying. Efficient numerous farms have not been created, because. prices for agricultural equipment grew faster than for the products of the agro-industrial complex, that is, not a single farmer could afford to purchase equipment for cultivating the land. The banking system did not work, loans to small businesses and farmers were either not issued at all, or offered at such an interest rate that any business immediately lost its attractiveness: it was impossible to make a profit from it.

One of the main problems, as already noted, was inflation. It was generated by a number of factors such as: (1) rising prices for the services of natural monopolies; (2) inflation expectations; (3) instability of the country's economy. If in 1994 for one Russian ruble gave 41 US cents, then in 1999 - only 4 cents.

The standard of living of Russians has sharply worsened. Monetary income of every third Russian was below the official subsistence level. Seventy percent of the population had 10% of the total income in Russia, and 0.2% had 70% of the national wealth. The income of the richest Russians was ten times higher than the income of the poorest strata of society. It still remains a mystery how it was possible to prevent a social explosion, because sociologists have long calculated that a revolution is taking place in a country where the income of the richest exceeds the income of the poorest citizens by more than 14 times.

Simultaneously with these negative processes, the shadow economy and the criminalization of Russian society grew rapidly.

The situation was also aggravated by the fact that by the beginning of the reforms, investment resources in the country had been exhausted. There was a budget deficit in the country, inflation "ate" the savings of citizens, foreign investment did not go to the country. No one even wanted to try to invest in an economy with an unformed regulatory and legal framework, the absence of an institution to protect investor funds, a large share of energy-intensive, material-intensive, labor-intensive industries characterized by scientific and technical backwardness, and significant tax pressure.

Since 1999, there has been some shift in economic development. However, it did not occur due to successful structural transformations, but due to favorable external conditions and high prices, mainly for Russian raw materials and semi-finished products (oil, gas, ferrous and non-ferrous metals). This became possible due to the devaluation (4 times) of the ruble against the dollar. Exports of Russian manufacturers became profitable, while imports to Russia, on the contrary, rose in price, which caused a revival of domestic demand for the products of Russian manufacturers.

Based on the foregoing, it is obvious that at the beginning of the 21st century, the Russian economy had a number of significant unresolved problems, the lack of an effective economic policy, even despite the constantly adopted laws and decrees of the President of the Russian Federation aimed at developing the economy and improving the living standards of the population.

A pertinent question is: does Russia have sufficient economic potential to develop and implement such a successful economic policy aimed at implementing structural reforms and capable of changing the situation in the country for the better?

To answer this question, it is necessary to study the economic potential of Russia and assess the position of the country in the world economy. Based on this analysis, it will be possible to formulate the prospects for Russia's development and the main directions of its future economic policy.

The concept of "economic potential" is very complex and multifaceted. Briefly, it is “the aggregate capacity of industries National economy countries to effectively produce industrial and agricultural products, carry out capital construction, transport goods, provide services to the population, etc.”

That is, the economic potential reflects, in fact, the natural resource potential (the presence of minerals), characterizes the achieved level of development of the country's economy and features of its structure, and also shows the degree of its involvement in world economic processes and in foreign economic activity.

To assess the economic potential, most often, experts use the GDP indicator.

Based on this interpretation, it should be stated that since the beginning of the reforms, the economic potential of Russia has been declining compared to industrialized countries. So, if in 1993 Russia's GDP (in absolute terms) amounted to 735.2 billion US dollars, or more than 3.3% of the global value (ninth place in the world), then in 2000 it amounted to 1.61% of the global one.

According to the official indices of the Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, in 1998 the volume of industrial production in Russia amounted to 28% of the US level, 36% of the German level, 61% of the French level, and 73% of the UK level. At the same time, the corresponding ratio in terms of GDP in the same year for Russia turned out to be 7.5% to the US level, 32.5% to the German level, 44.5% to the French level and 47.5% to the UK level.

The figures are extremely disappointing, especially when you consider that Germany, France, Great Britain, and even the United States are inferior to Russia in a number of positions: either in territory, or in the number of highly qualified workers, or in terms of natural resources.

So, of the total volume of minerals mined in the world, Russia accounts for: apatite - 55%, natural gas - more than 28%, diamonds - 26%, nickel - 22%, oil - 12%, hard coal – 12 %.

23% of all world coal reserves are located on the territory of the country. In terms of explored reserves of this mineral, Russia ranks third in the world after the United States and China.

Unfortunately, as many experts note, the presence of so many minerals often creates more problems than positives, because. leads to the fact that we stop appreciating what we have and rely on the export of raw materials, not seeking to diversify the economy, to make it innovative rather than raw. This, in particular, is evidenced even by the statements of government bodies. In particular, in the document “Updated forecast of social economic development of the Russian Federation for 2006 and the main parameters of the forecast up to 2008”, compiled by the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia says: “In 2006-2008. Russian exports will mainly include fuel and energy products, ferrous and non-ferrous metals, chemical products and fertilizers, timber and paper products, and engineering products.” Machinery and technical products will traditionally occupy the smallest share in Russian exports.

In conclusion, consideration of the Russian economy, I would like to note the following. Despite the fact that over the past few years Russia has been demonstrating fairly high GDP growth rates, despite the huge volumes of gold and foreign exchange reserves and savings in the Stabilization Fund, the economy still has a lot of problems that arose in the early 90s. Among them: (1) low standard of living of the population, especially public sector employees; (2) high criminalization and corruption of the economy; (3) an extensive “shadow” sector in the economy; (4) predominance in the structure of exports of raw materials and semi-finished products; (5) depreciation of fixed assets in industry (more than 50% in metallurgy); (6) the deplorable state of agriculture, despite the fact that it is recognized as a priority in one of the national projects; (7) the outflow of capital abroad (from 5 to 15 billion dollars a year, depending on the opinions of various experts); (8) outflow to industrialized countries of the most promising scientific personnel and employees of higher education, caused by low funding of domestic science, poor development of machine and automotive industry, in Russia are not in demand. domestic cars, and the novelties of the foreign auto industry: Ford, the new Opel Astra, etc.

Solving these most serious problems will require not only time and large capital expenditures on the part of the state and the business community. Economists have long agreed that the “human factor” plays a decisive role in any economy. Russia is no exception in this regard. The main driving force in the transformation of the Russian economy will be the desire and appropriate behavior of each of its economic entities.

Orenburg State

agricultural university

Faculty of Economics

Department of Economic Theory and Management

Course work

Prospects for the development of Russia in the XXI century

Orenburg - 2003

Introduction

Chapter 1. Economic growth in Russia: opportunities and prospects

Russia's place in the global economy

The problem of development quality, rates and trends of economic growth

Modernization of the economy as the main factor of economic growth

2.1 The problem of choosing a strategy

2.2 Outlines and features of the strategy

2.3 Measures to implement the economic growth strategy

Conclusion

Literature

Introduction

The change of the Kremlin leadership in the winter-spring of 2000 symbolically marked the most important milestone in the socio-economic development of Russia, which, however, has not yet attracted sufficient attention from researchers.

Our country has entered a new stage of economic development. Now Russia can be ranked among the countries defined as ""emerging markets"".

At present, there has been a new turn in the discussion on the issue of the mechanism for entering the trajectory of sustainable economic growth.

Discussion of the development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2010 and for the long term seems to be a very urgent task. The socio-economic development strategy expands the system of targets, stimulates a shift in emphasis to the qualitative characteristics of economic dynamics, and thus serves as the basis for the macroeconomic development program.

Target term paper study possible options and scenarios for Russia's economic development currently available. Analyze them and, if possible, evaluate them, with the help of articles and publications of such economists as Glazeva S., Lynn I., Chernenko E., Yasina E. and others. And also to give a real picture of the state of the Russian economy both within the country and against the backdrop of global trends.

Chapter 1. Economic growth in Russia: opportunities and real prospects

1.1 Russia's place in the global economy

All our historical experience shows that a country like Russia can live and develop within its existing borders only if it is a strong power. In all periods of the weakening of the country - political or economic - Russia has always faced the threat of disintegration.

Yes, certain achievements of recent years have made it possible to talk about stabilization. Some even had the feeling that all our problems had been solved. That the future of Russia is quite predictable and successful. And the only question is whether our economy should grow by 4% or 6% a year and how much we should spend.

But it's not. We are facing serious threats. Our economic foundation, though stronger, is still unstable and very weak. The political system is underdeveloped. The state apparatus is ineffective. Most sectors of the economy are not competitive. Meanwhile, the population continues to fall. Poverty is receding very slowly. The international environment remains difficult. Competition in the global economy is not decreasing.

Around us are countries with highly developed economies. It must be said frankly: where they can, they will push Russia out of promising world markets.

As a result of the decade-long crisis, Russia lost the advantage of a large-scale economy, falling in terms of GDP from 5th place (which was occupied by the USSR in 1991) to 10th (in 2001).

The transformational crisis of the early 1900s qualitatively changed our place in the world, throwing the Russian economy far back (Table 1).

Table 1. Specific gravity countries in global terms (in %)

Nevertheless, the Russian economy has been growing for more than four years after a nine-year decline: in 1999, the country's GDP grew by 5.4%, in 2000 - by 9%, in 2001 - by 5%, in 2002 - by 43%, i.e. . over the past four years, GDP has increased by about 1/4. If we add to this the forecast growth of 4% in 2003, then for 1999-2003. The country's GDP should increase by about 31%. So, in the last four years, the current GDP of the country has so far been only about 2/3 of the GDP of 1990, and taking into account the GDP growth in 2003 (4-5%), by the end of 2003 we will surpass only 70% the level of GDP in 1990, so that to reach at least the pre-reform level of GDP production, the country will need at best another seven to eight years.1

Russia's contribution to world GDP declined from 333.4% in 1991 to 1% in 2001, and in terms of purchasing power from 5.3% to 2.6%. Russia's per capita income in 2001 was about 5.8% of the US level ($2,135 per person at the current exchange rate), and it ranked 78th out of 175 countries in IMF output, behind countries like Brazil. $2986) and Poland ($4652).

As a result of the positive dynamics of GDP, Russia's share in world GDP increased slightly, but increased (about 1.8%)2. The economic position of the country in the world has improved somewhat after almost the 10th weakening: from the second half of the second ten countries of the world, we have approached several steps (up to about 14th place) to the top ten countries of the world. If this correlation between the economic growth rates of Russia and the rest of the world continues in the coming years, then by the end of the first decade of the new century, Russia will be able to approach the 5-6th place in Europe in terms of the volume of GDP produced. She held this position a hundred years ago. The leaders and our benchmarks in the modern economic competition are Canada, Spain, Australia, South Korea, Mexico. The place of the current Russian economy in the world is comparable to the economy of the Netherlands - a country, in terms of its territory and population, approximately equal to the territory and population of Moscow and the Moscow region.

As for Russia's position in the world (and not in Europe), over two decades (the 90s of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st century) the world has already changed and will change so that even with the most favorable development of events, Russia and in 2010 will not be able to be in the top ten advanced countries of the world. Therefore, it remains only to dream of reaching the 12th place in the world by the end of the first decade of this century, and ten years later - to enter the top ten countries of the world. In accordance with the Guidelines for the long-term socio-economic policy of the Government of the Russian Federation, the pre-crisis maximum level of Russia's GDP in 1990 was supposed to be surpassed precisely at the end of the first decade of the 21st century. At the same time, the actually achieved average annual GDP growth rate during 2000-2002. is very close to the government's forecast, although it became lower than accepted for the medium term (2002-2004). According to this forecast, even under the optimistic scenario, the average annual growth rate of Russia's GDP should have been approximately 4.4%.

If we take Portugal, the poorest EU country, as a benchmark, then with an average annual growth rate of Russian GDP of 8%, we will be able to catch up with Portugal in terms of GDP per capita in 2024; at a rate of 6.5% - in 2037-2038; while maintaining a GDP growth rate of 4.4%, we will never catch up with Portugal in this indicator.

In terms of GDP per capita, calculated at PPP, Russia currently ranks 60th in 2001, there were 7.3 thousand dollars of GDP per Russian, which positions it among countries with an average standard of living, ahead of Russia: Argentina, which experienced the recent economic crisis; such investment-prosperous countries as Mexico and the Republic of Korea; member countries 6. CMEA - Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic. Portugal (17 thousand dollars - the lowest level among the EEC countries) is almost three times ahead of Russia. Our country lags behind the USA by more than 4 times. Thus, the gap in living standards between modern Russia and the United States exceeded that which existed at the beginning of the 20th century (28% of US income).

The age-old drama of Russian modernization, filled with the “blood” of industrialization and collectivism, the “leap” into space and the virgin epic, the Brezhnev version of the “mass consumer society”, the convulsive acceleration during perestroika and, finally, the barbaric leap into market-capitalist civilization, did not lead to overcoming Russian backwardness. Russia is again balancing on the verge of a developed and a backward country, the right criteria for backwardness are now different. Let's try to think not about the traditional Russian question: who is to blame, but about how the Russian economy can develop further and what is needed to change its position in the world.

After a ten-year crisis, the growth rate of the Russian economy has finally (over the past three years significantly outpaced the growth rate of developed countries (demonstrating no more than 2-3% on average, but inferior to both separately developing Asian countries (China-7.5%), and some countries with economies in transition such as Kazakhstan - 8.6%). This means that our approach to the west will be generally slower than these countries. China will be able to catch up with Russia in terms of per capita income in 25-30 years. At the current growth rate, Russia will come out (from the current $178 in GDP at current prices) to a per capita income of $500 per month by 2019 and $1,000 only by 20313

It is especially important to overcome the lag in the growth rates of the closest neighboring countries - the Baltic States, the Visegra Group and the CIS, since lagging behind them threatens Russia with a further loss of its influence in the post-Soviet space and in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, with its huge demographic and rapidly growing economic potential, it is likely to become our main geopolitical and economic rival in the coming century. There is a threat that not only in the far abroad, but also in the near abroad, Russia will be surrounded by states that are developing much more dynamically than it is, and many of which surpass it in terms of living standards.

To prevent this from happening, it is necessary to accelerate the growth rate of 5-6% per year, which is recognized by almost everyone. This pace is dictated by the need both to increase resources for the modernization of the economy and the public sector, and to improve the living standards of Russians and prevent further lagging behind the developed and many new developing countries. Against the backdrop of the desired high growth rates, the trend towards a slowdown in development cannot but arouse alarm among the elite of society, if it is really concerned not only with its own selfish, but also with national interests.

1.2 The problem of development quality, rates and trends of economic growth

No matter how undervalued the exchange rate of the national currency and the level of per capita GDP, the exchange rate of the Russian ruble in real terms, after an 88% fall in 1998, began to gradually strengthen since 1999. During the period from January 1, 1999 to September 1, 2002, real exchange rate of the ruble against the US dollar amounted to 31.4%. During the same period, official gold and foreign exchange reserves increased by 3.6 times - from 12.2 billion to 44.3 billion dollars.4

Compared to most countries in the world, Russia has sufficient opportunities for the development of the "new economy". However, there is still a significant gap with industrialized countries. This can be traced on the basis of a number of indicators characterizing the level of implementation of information technologies and the significance of scientific research and development.

One common indicator is the share of spending on R&D in GDP. If in Japan and the United States R&D spending is about 3% of GNP, in the EU it is about 2%, then in Russia it is less than 1%. In order for Russia to be able to reduce its lag behind the most developed countries, both the state and economic structures must pay special attention to the efficiency of spending money.

The next indicator is the export of science-intensive products. According to available data, Russia's share in the world markets for high-tech products is only 0.3%, which is 130 times less than that of the United States.

The impact on labor productivity is also significant, since business processes and management principles are qualitatively changing in the conditions of the “new economy”.

Another indicator of the development of the "new economy" is the increase in the availability of the latest information technologies for the population. The increase in their production was 20 to 30% per year. The level of telephony in the country has grown significantly. The number of mobile phone users has doubled annually to almost 18 million. It is estimated that today about 10 million people in Russia use the Internet.

The increased potential of the country has made it possible to improve the lives of tens of millions of people. Thanks to economic growth over the years, almost 4 million people left the ranks of the unemployed. The opportunity to work and earn money has also seriously reduced the scale of strike activity - from almost 900,000 people in 1997 to less than 5,000 in 2002.

Real incomes of the population increased by 32%. The average pension three years ago was 70% of the subsistence minimum, and last year it was equal to it.

And finally, final consumption per capita has increased by almost a third in three years. Last year, this indicator exceeded the level not only of the crisis year of 1998, but even of the pre-crisis year of 1997. And in 2002 it turned out to be a record for the entire national history.

Meanwhile, the results we have achieved are still very modest.

First, a quarter of Russian citizens still have incomes below the subsistence level.

Secondly, economic growth in the country remains extremely unstable. So if in 2000 industrial production grew throughout the year, then in 2002 - in total only for six months. As a result, unemployment has been on the rise in recent months.

And finally, the third. The rates of economic growth are decreasing. Last year, after a 10 percent growth in 2002, the economy expanded by just over four percent. Meanwhile, the decline in growth rates leads to a decrease in the rate of social development, and does not allow solving many other problems facing the country.

The reasons for the decline in growth rates can be various factors. First of all, they include:

dependence of the Russian economy on raw materials and energy resources, which make up 80% of our exports. Only oil, oil products and gas account for 50% of exports.

further growth requires new investments, the amount of old equipment is excessively worn out.

the unfavorable demographic situation is also not conducive to economic growth.

The abolition of investment income incentives immediately led to a negative reaction in growth rates, i.e., a number of previously existing incentives for foreign investors were cancelled.

Since 1999, the Bank of Russia has been pursuing a fairly aggressive monetary policy. Prices, however, grew more slowly than the money supply; accordingly, real cash balances increased. At the same time, the growth of real GDP was less than the growth of the latter. Accordingly, the velocity of circulation of money fell. In 2002, the growth rates of the money supply slowed down, the growth rates of real cash balances also decreased, and the velocity of money circulation decreased.

These and many other reasons slow down our economy.

But nevertheless, compared with many newly industrialized countries, Russia has a number of unique technologies, fundamental science and a still high level of education, that is, it has a much more developed human potential. However, even here our positions are not indisputable, and in the years of crisis we have suffered huge losses. According to the Human Development Index (HDI), calculated in accordance with the UN Program, in 2001 Russia ranked 60th in the world out of 176 countries, falling into the group with an average level of human development. "champion" - Norway, USA - Czech Republic (33), Hungary and Slovakia (35 and 36 respectively). The HDI is a cumulative indicator measured on the basis of life expectancy at birth, PPP-adjusted per capita income, and educational attainment. If in the first two positions Russia lags far behind the developed countries, then in terms of the level of education, scientific potential and even technological development, we can be compared with the leading countries.

The government has recognized its responsibility for education as a key factor in the country's competitiveness, future stability and prosperity. In this regard, an increase in investment in education is planned: in the next five years, it is planned to increase the share of budget financing of education in GDP from 3.5 to 4.5% with an annual increase in funding from the federal budget by 25%, from the regional budget by 10%. About 15% of the funds allocated for primary, as well as secondary higher education, are intended for the development of the education base (purchase of equipment, IT and computers, advanced training of teachers, scientific developments) and 7.5% for general education. According to experts, the growth of extrabudgetary funding will be up to 2.2% of GDP (compared to 1.5% at the moment). In order to attract additional investment in education, it is advisable to consider introducing preferential taxation of private investments, including exemption from taxes on charitable donations, and allowing enterprises that invest in education to include personnel training costs in production costs.

Russian "factory" science is insignificant in terms of its resources, which do not exceed 6% of the cost of research and development. Also extremely low is the share of higher education institutions performing research and development.

The number of universities conducting scientific developments during 1990-2001 decreased from 453 to 388, and since the newly created private universities practically do not conduct research, scientific activity is typical for only 40% of Russian universities. The continuation of such a trend can lead to irreversible consequences, both for science itself and for the quality of specialist training.

In terms of life expectancy (a little over 65 years), Russia ranked 100th out of 162 countries in 1999. It turns out that a person, having finished working until retirement, on average, according to statistics, dies after 6-11 years. In many ways, it is the indicator of average life expectancy that serves as a generalized indicator of the economic and moral health of society, while it is not strictly determined by the level of per capita income.

In the domestic industry, there are several points of growth in high-tech industries. First of all, we are talking about the CPSU. The export of Russian arms exceeded $3 billion a year. The government's forecast provides for an increase in the utilization of production capacities, a 75% increase in the production of civilian products in 2004 compared to 2000, which will amount to about 48% of the total output of the defense complex. In particular, the production of aviation equipment, according to the forecast, will exceed the level of 2000 by 2.6-2.7 times.5

In 2001 - 2002 new economic growth trends began to materialize. Growth begins to gradually involve enterprises focused on the production of expensive goods and high quality services.

The achievements of the past year make it possible to look to the future of Russia with optimism. They testify to the latent strength of the Russian economy as well as to the adequacy of the policy of the central authorities. Prudent macroeconomic policies and bold structural reforms are already bearing fruit. If they continue, Russia will certainly be able to realize its significant economic potential.

1.3 Modernization of the economy as the main factor of economic growth

After the crisis in 1999-2001, Russia demonstrates relatively high growth rates. In three years, GDP grew by 20% and in 2001 amounted to approximately 72% of the 1990 level against the maximum point of decline of 60% in 1998.6 The main factor behind these positive changes is the market reforms carried out since 1988 and especially in 1992-1993. . Theoretically, it was clear that these reforms should lead the country out of the impasse of the planned economy and ensure economic growth on a fundamentally new basis. Despite repeated disruptions and significant losses, in the end it turned out that way.

While Russia was going through an acute transformational crisis, the world economy was experiencing unprecedented growth, based on the Internet and, in general, the information and communication revolution. In the US, the economy has grown by an average of 3.5-4% per year for 10 years. Europe was not far behind. It is true that Japan experienced a crisis in the “catch-up” development model, but the “Asian tigers” until 1997, as well as China and Vietnam, set records in its implementation on their own soil. China's GDP has doubled. In general, developing countries increased their production by 5% per year. It seemed that the era of post-industrial prosperity had come. In the US, they began to complain about the fall in labor morale due to too low unemployment.

The crisis of 1997 - 1998 developed countries, but "runaway capital" went from here to "safe havens", that is, to the USA and Europe, more heating up the markets. after that boom there should have been at least a correction. September 11 triggered the events and the global economic crisis, at best a recession, became a fact. In November 2001, the IMF published a pessimistic forecast, all corrections to its previous estimates of world economic growth. In December, negative changes were made once again. Including for Russia, the GDP growth rate for 2002 was reduced from 4.2% to 3.65%.

For us, the global crisis is dangerous primarily because of the reduction in demand for Russian exports, the corresponding decline in prices and incomes. This is natural, it can throw off the rhythm of the economic recovery that has begun. the central issue is oil prices.

The fall in oil prices, in the most likely development scenario, entails a decrease in economic growth rates by 1.5 - 2% percentage points, and has a fairly moderate impact on the budget.

The new revival in the economy was caused mainly by an increase in oil prices in connection with the expectation and onset of the Iraqi crisis. Thus, an increase in oil prices will initially cause an increase in export earnings and an increase in external demand, giving the economy a first impetus. Then the inflow of export earnings leads to an increase in domestic demand, which gives a second boost to growth. Most likely, a new crisis in the next 2-3 years is unlikely.

Logically, it is time to seriously engage in modernization. And this is a strategic task of enormous proportions, unlike those that arise in connection with fluctuations in oil prices: sterilizing excess liquidity or sequestering is a daily routine.

The meaning of modernization is clear:

Reorganize Soviet enterprises into market companies, change equipment, introduce the most advanced technologies in all industries, master products that are competitive in the country and on world markets, and to do this, sharply increase productivity and efficiency, reduce costs, and train personnel capable of solving these problems. And so in every form.

And outside of a single firm, it is necessary to decide what the structure of the Russian economy will be in the 21st century.

Will its fuel and raw material orientation be preserved, or will it be possible to take a strong position in the manufacturing industry, in high technologies?

whether large industrial industrial and financial groups (conglomerates) will prevail, over and over again capturing new industries, new enterprises. Or, along with them, small and medium-sized enterprises will occupy a high share in the economy. Will there be a competitive environment only in world markets or also within the country?

Will modernization be carried out from above by authoritarian methods with direct and active state intervention in the economy, or will it proceed on the basis of private initiative, with the strengthening of all democratic institutions and with a limited role of the state?

The image of Russia in 20-30 or 50 years depends on the solution of these issues. Moreover, we are talking about the use of a historical chance, about whether it will be possible to break the centuries-old tradition of backwardness, the oppression of the majority of the people under a powerful state and an all-powerful bureaucracy; turn into a country and wealthy citizens. If you look from this side, then it can be argued that we have only just begun to solve such problems, rather at the level of creating prerequisites, stopping in indecision before the main tasks.

Table 2.1. the forecast of the structure of world exports made at the IMEMO RAS is given. The conclusions can be drawn as follows: in international trade, the export of finished products will grow at a faster pace. They will also account for a growing share of income. At the same time, demand for textiles and clothing, the basis of Chinese exports, will decline. Significantly more than twice, the market share of Russian export goods will decrease. In general, the weight and influence of suppliers of fuel and raw materials will decrease, and their incomes will also fall relatively. The main reason is the introduction of resource-saving technologies in developed countries. The role of agricultural exports, which were the main ones in Russia before the revolution and which many are counting on, will fall even more.

Thus, in order to maintain and strengthen its positions in the world, including in terms of income, savings and well-being, Russia must gain positions in the world markets for finished products. As well as services, the share of which in world trade will grow faster than trade in goods. So far, no changes have been observed in this area. There is no clear policy on this vital issue.

Table 2.1.

Chapter 2. Russia's Future Development Strategy

The problem of choosing a strategy

Having entered the 21st century, the citizens of Russia have the right to expect from the government a clear strategy for the further development of the country, its economy and social sphere. Moreover, as a result of the ongoing reforms, Russia was thrown back in terms of the main indicators of the level of economic development by 25-30 years ago. As a result of the implementation of strategically incorrect radical reforms, today we are below the critical line in all indicators of economic security; the processes of degradation of the scientific and production potential are becoming irreversible, the very ability of Russia to independent development is questionable. A two-fold drop in production, a five-fold reduction in investment, the export of 300 billion dollars abroad, enormous damage from the "brain drain", the shameful bankruptcy of the state - this is the last frontier from which today you need to start the restoration of the country.

In 2000, discussions were held in the Russian power structures - parliament, government, State Council - on the choice of a strategy for the further socio-economic development of Russia. Despite the monstrous failures committed by the radical liberals, the latter, with the support of international financial organizations, insist on continuing the previous line of self-elimination of the state from the economy. This is evidenced by the government-approved long-term program for the socio-economic development of the country, one of the key ideas of which is the deregulation of the economy. Although for every unbiased researcher it is obvious that the problem lies not in excessive state intervention, but in its inefficiency, the subordination of state policy to private interests that are contrary to the goals of the country's socio-economic development. The disintegration of the state, in turn, made it impossible for the mechanisms of market self-organization to function normally. In the absence of effective state regulation, the markets were under the control of organized crime, which blocked the mechanisms of free competition.

The failure of the reform was the result of an incorrect macroeconomic policy and the criminalization of the economy, the subordination of state policy to the interests of enriching the court merchants. The disorder of the money circulation system, the large-scale export of capital, price imbalances, inflated interest rates, the liquidity crisis, the disintegration of the economy, the inefficiency of its structure - these and other problems that impede the revival of production, have become a natural result of the economic policy pursued.

There are two main strategies for the development of the country. The first has been implemented so far according to the principles of the "Washington Consensus", developed in order to "clean up" developing countries for the free movement of large international capital. And the second, proceeding from national interests and based on creating the most favorable conditions for the restoration and development of domestic scientific and production potential and raising the people's well-being, combining the principles of economic efficiency and social justice, relying on one's own resources and increasing the competitiveness of the national economy on a global scale , energizing existing and maximizing the rapid development of new opportunities for economic growth.

The specificity of the current moment lies in its turning point. The choice of strategy today will predetermine the future development of the country for many years, and perhaps even decades. This is due to the peculiarities of the current state of scientific and production potential. If today its underutilization allows, with an appropriate economic policy, to reach high growth rates (up to 10% per year) by loading idle production capacities, then in a few years the avalanche-like disposal of obsolete equipment will “put” the economy in objectively severe resource constraints. If the choice is made in

1. Political development. Describing the events of the beginning of the XXI century, we can say that the period of revolutionary changes in Russia is over. On March 26, 2000, early presidential elections were held. V. Putin named market relations, patriotism and sovereignty as the main points of the election program. At the same time, it was emphasized that the democratic choice made by the country in the 1990s was beyond doubt. V. Putin already won in the first round, having received 52.5% of the votes. A new period began in the history of post-Soviet Russia.

The first steps of the second President of Russia V.V. Putin were sent to strengthening the "vertical of power", increasing the authority and role of the state in the life of society.

An important step towards the creation of a strong state was the administrative reform. In May 2000, a seven federal districts: Central, Northwestern, Southern, Volga, Ural, Siberian and Far Eastern. The districts act as intermediate and at the same time connecting links between the center and 89 regions of Russia. Plenipotentiary representatives of the President were appointed heads of districts. It was possible to solve an extremely important task: to bring local laws in line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal legislation. These measures made it possible to strengthen the role of the center at the local level, strengthen the Federation, and restore Russia's unified legislative space.

Another political reform in 2000 was reorganization of the Federation Council. The upper house of the Federal Assembly began to be formed not from governors, but from representatives of the regions (two from each), elected by their legislative bodies and appointed by the heads of administrations. In order to ensure the constant participation of the heads of regions in the development of state policy, in August 2000, a State Council - an advisory body of power under the head of state.

In the field of state symbols, the president proposed a compromise, taking into account the positions of different parts of society. In December 2000, the State Duma approved law on national symbols of Russia . The tricolor white-blue-red flag and the coat of arms in the form of a double-headed imperial eagle are reminiscent of the centuries-old history of Russia. The red flag of the victory of the Russian peoples in the Great Patriotic War became the flag of the Armed Forces. The national anthem with the new text and music of the USSR anthem symbolizes the unity of generations; inextricable link between the past, present and future of our country.

There has been a change in the Russian multi-party system. In 2001, the State Duma adopted law "On political parties", which was supposed to raise the importance of political associations in the life of the country, strengthen their influence, and minimize the number of active parties. The law recognizes as such only those organizations that have massive support from the population, have representation in the regions and are federal. As a result, instead of the approximately 300 political organizations that participated in the 1999 elections, 26 parties were admitted to the elections to the State Duma, which took place on December 7, 2003.

In July 2000, Putin met with representatives of big business. At these meetings, which became regular, new rules were developed in the relationship between the state and the business elite. The President proclaimed the principle of "equidistance of oligarchs» meaning their removal from political power. Law enforcement agencies have launched investigations into several large companies. At the same time, it was announced that there would be no revision of the results of privatization.

Was held judicial reform. It provided for the introduction of a jury throughout the country since 2003, the introduction of the institution of magistrates, the arrest of citizens only by a court decision, the transfer of correctional institutions from the Ministry of Internal Affairs to the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Justice, etc.

A number of important steps have been taken in the military sphere. Major changes were made to military reform plans death August 12, 2000 nuclear submarine "Kursk". This tragedy revealed the severity of the problems that have accumulated in the armed forces. The task was set to transfer the main combat-ready units of all types of the Armed Forces to the contract system. The main result of the military reform should be the creation of a well-trained, equipped with modern weapons, and socially protected Russian army.

By 2004, political life in Russia had become more stable. The parliamentary elections in December 2003 strengthened V. Putin's position as a national leader. The pro-presidential "party of power" "United Russia" won an impressive victory, receiving 37.57% of the vote and 2/3 of the deputy mandates in the Duma. The second and third places were taken, respectively, by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (12.61%) and the Liberal Democratic Party (11.45%). More than 9% of the votes were received by a new association - the Motherland bloc, whose leaders spoke with anti-oligarchic and patriotic slogans. The liberal-democratic parties SPS and Yabloko were defeated - they could not overcome the required 5% barrier to the State Duma.

Their defeat should not be seen as the collapse of the most liberal idea in Russia. It is significant that none of the parties or electoral associations participating in the elections opposed private property and civil liberties. The reasons for the failure of the liberals of the Yeltsin era were the discrepancy between their words and deeds, ignoring the vital interests of the Russians (they were “terribly far from the people”), the ambitions of party leaders who did not want to agree among themselves on fundamental issues. Finally, the Union of Right Forces and Yabloko have not become representatives of the interests of small and medium-sized businesses over the years of reforms.

The outcome of the presidential elections held on March 14, 2004 was predictable. Putin won an even more convincing victory: 71.31% of voters voted for him. Of course, in the course of the parliamentary and presidential campaigns, the government made full use of the administrative resources and capabilities of the media subordinate to it. However, the main factor in Putin's victory was the support of Russian society for his practical steps as head of state, as well as for his immediate goals. The most important of them were: doubling the GDP by 2010, fighting poverty, completing the administrative reform, fighting corruption, reforming the housing and communal services, reforming the army, and solving the housing problem.

In 2005, the formation of Public Chamber. It is formed from well-known citizens appointed by the president, as well as on an elective basis from representatives of public organizations. Its purpose is to harmonize and protect the interests of citizens before the legislative and executive authorities.

On October 1, 2007, at the congress of the United Russia party, Putin announced his decision to head the list of United Russia. In autumn 2007 elections to the V State Duma were held. United Russia won with a big advantage. The country voted for Putin's course, that is, the country's development strategy laid down in the eight messages of the President to the Federal Assembly.

In the presidential elections of the Russian Federation in 2008, a single candidate from the parties "United Russia", "Fair Russia", Agrarian Party, "Civil Force" was proposed by Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev. During the election campaign, D.A. Medvedev came up with a liberal program for the renewal of the country, identified as priorities the increase in the efficiency of the state, the fight against corruption, the creation of a truly independent judiciary, the development of civil society, overcoming Russia's scientific and technological backwardness from developed countries, the development of private initiative and, based on it, the knowledge economy.

March 2, 2008 70.28% of voters who came to the polls cast their votes for D. Medvedev. He became the youngest head of state in Russian history since 1917. In his speech at the inauguration ceremony on May 7, 2008, D.A. Medvedev said that he considers his most important task "the further development of civil and economic freedoms, the creation of new, the broadest, opportunities for self-realization of citizens - citizens who are free and responsible both for their personal success and for the prosperity of the whole country."

Thus, in Russia at the beginning of the XXI century. in general, a democratic political system has been formed, providing for the election of heads of executive power, as well as legislative and representative bodies.

2. Fight against terrorism. In 2000-2003 The federal center has taken decisive steps to create civil authorities in Chechnya. The Federal Program for the Restoration of the Economy and the Social Sphere of the Republic was adopted. The process of Chechnya's return to normal life has been and continues to be hindered by political bandits and international terrorists, who have targeted civilians in Russian cities as targets of their criminal activities. On October 23, 2002, a detachment of Chechen suicide bombers took hostage about a thousand spectators and actors of the musical "Nord-Ost" at the Theater Center on Dubrovka in Moscow. During the special operation to rescue the hostages, almost all the terrorists were destroyed. However, as a result of the assault, 129 hostages, including children, also died - mainly due to the use of sleeping gas against the background of overwork and fatigue. The Russian government has demonstrated its firm intention not to make concessions to terrorists.

In the spring and autumn of 2003, first a referendum on the Constitution was held in Chechnya, and then elections of the President of the republic. On September 1, 2004, the bandits committed a new terrible terrorist attack: they seized a school inBeslan (North Ossetia). 1181 people were taken hostage. Inhumans kept babies, schoolchildren and teachers without water and food for 52 hours. As a result of the school bombing and during the release of the hostages, 333 people died, including 186 children.

After a series of terrorist attacks in August - early September 2004, the President of Russia announced the need for serious changes in state power in order to effectively counter the terrorist war. V. Putin's political reform included two fundamental changes: the election of governors not on the basis of the will of all voters, as was the case before, but by voting of legislative assemblies on a candidate proposed by the president and the introduction of a proportional system of elections to the State Duma based on party lists instead of the previous mixed system.

The North Caucasus remains the most unstable region. Here, the highest unemployment in the country, the lowest salaries, huge subsidies from the federal center, clannishness, corruption and religious extremism flourish. The events of October 2005 in Nalchik (the capital of Kabardino-Balkaria), when a group of militants tried to seize the city, showed that the challenge to Russian power now comes not only from Chechnya. There are forces in the world interested in destabilizing the situation in the Caucasus.

In 2005-2007 Russian special services carried out a number of successful operations, as a result of which the leaders of political banditry in the North Caucasus A. Maskhadov, Sh. Basaev and their accomplices were destroyed. In November 2005 parliamentary elections were held in Chechnya. Thus, the formation of state authorities in the Chechen Republic was completed. Peaceful life has returned to Chechnya.

3. Socio-economic development. Since 1999, not very large, but steady growth of the economy has begun. The growth of state budget revenues created the possibility of regular increases in wages and pensions. The real incomes of the population increased. At the same time, the rate of inflation dropped noticeably. For the first time in many years, an increase in agricultural production was recorded. The year 2002 was especially record-breaking, when the grain yield reached 19.6 centners per hectare. GDP growth made it possible to successfully pay off the external debts of the state. For the period 2000-2003. Russia paid the creditors, together with interest, $50 billion.

The growth of economic indicators was caused by a number of factors: the fall in the value of the ruble after the financial crisis of 1998, high world prices for oil (more than two times in five years), gas, metals and other fuel and raw materials, as well as a number of actions of the President and governments of the country. In particular, the tax legislation was streamlined. In 2001, a single 13% income tax was introduced; reduced to some extent the tax on profits of enterprises and organizations. A pension reform based on the accumulative principle has begun to be implemented. In 2001-2003 laws were passed on the sale and purchase of land. At the same time, in relation to the land issue, various conditions in individual regions of the country are taken into account. The Customs and Labor Codes have been adopted. The President and the Government set a course for denationalization, transfer to market rails and free pricing of natural monopolies - electric power, railway transport, gas industry.

In 2002, Russia was recognized as a country with a market economy. Steps are being taken to join World Trade Organization (WTO). This organization unites about 150 countries of the world and covers more than 95% of the world trade turnover. But accession to the WTO is by no means an end in itself, but only a means, one of the instruments for ensuring the country's national interests.

The social structure of society is also changing. More and more people are becoming economically independent of the state, "market" and private property relations and habits are becoming more and more rooted.

However, the main problem today is the restructuring of the economy, the development of high-tech industries . The Russian economy still has a pronounced raw material character, and the state budget is highly dependent on world oil and gas prices. In May 2003, President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin noted that "our economic foundation ... is still unstable and very weak."

Judging by macroeconomic indicators, Russia is one of the richest countries in the world. Budget revenues exceed expenditures. In 2005, gold and foreign exchange reserves exceeded $150 billion and were the largest in the history of the country. According to this indicator, Russia is among the top ten countries in the world. The Stabilization Fund was created. At the same time, the share of Russia in the world market of high-tech products is only 0.5% against 60% for the USA and 6% for Singapore. Only 5% of Russian enterprises implement scientific and technological achievements. At privatized plants and factories, machine tools built back in the Khrushchev-Brezhnev era continue to operate.

The market for services is being formed extremely slowly and with difficulty, especially in the housing and utilities sector (housing and communal services). The state apparatus works extremely inefficiently. Changes in the social sphere are slowly taking place. Reforms were hindered by internal disagreements in the government cabinet, first M. Kasyanov, and then M. Fradkov, the lack of a unified point of view on the nature and pace of reforms. All this complex of problems is to be solved at a new stage.

In the summer of 2004, federal law No. 122 was adopted, which abolished almost all social benefits that about 103 million people had previously enjoyed. For beneficiaries, monetary compensation was introduced. Monetization of benefits, which in early 2005 caused a wave of protests in many cities of Russia, clearly showed how painfully liberal social reforms are perceived by society.

One of the main and most serious threats to Russia is the huge difference in income between the capital and the regions, between the poor and the rich. On September 5, 2005, Putin came up with four social projects aimed at significantly improving the quality of life of Russian citizens. National projects – quality healthcare, modern education, affordable housing, efficient agriculture– should become the number one priority in Russian economic policy for the coming years.

Society has an understanding of the problems that need to be addressed. There are discussions about the optimal use of the stabilization fund.

First of all, it is necessary to develop a “knowledge economy”. Only such an economy ensures sustainable development. He spoke about Russia's chances for leadership in the field of nanotechnologies (technologies with which a person can control individual molecules when creating nanostructures with certain physical, chemical and biological properties) and the need to develop a program of scientific research in this area, speaking with an annual message to the Federal Meeting in May 2006, President V. Putin. The Russian government has approved a program for the development of nanoindustry infrastructure.

In July 2007, the president signed a three-year budget (for 2008-2010), the first such financial document in Russian history. One of its main goals is to eliminate the country's dependence on energy exports.

Before the new president D.A. Medvedev faces even more difficult tasks. These are inflation, the consequences of the global financial crisis, corruption and inequality, and demographic problems. The global economic crisis, which began at the end of 2008, of course, also affected the Russian economy in the most serious way. However, significant reserves have been accumulated in the country, and they expand the ability to confidently go through a period of instability. The anti-crisis policy is aimed at supporting domestic demand, social protection of the population, and creation of new jobs.

4. Spiritual life of Russian society. At the turn of the century, Russian culture was in a state of crisis. In the early 1990s the new government adopted a large number of special acts relating to certain areas of culture. However, instead of the state fulfilling an extensive list of obligations assumed, there was a massive reduction in budget funding for the socio-cultural sphere. The material situation of workers in education, science and culture has deteriorated sharply, which has led to a drop in the prestige of their professions. The market forced everyone to earn money, look for patrons and sponsors, and sell their products. The material base of culture, including due to privatization, has been undermined.

The scarcity of funding (in 2000 - 40% of the 1991 level) predetermined the crisis state of the education system. The deterioration of the economic situation of significant social strata has reduced the opportunity for their children to receive an education. In 2004, more than three million children were not in school. Trying to adapt to new conditions and higher education. During the years of reforms, the number of commercial universities has quadrupled. The number of students more than doubled between 1993 and 2003 to over 4 million. Especially popular were "market" professions: economist, financier, manager, lawyer. By the beginning of the new millennium, ideas were formed about the main directions of modernization of the entire education system in Russia. In September 2003, Russia officially joined the Bologna process, committing itself to comply with European standards and principles in the field of higher education. Bologna Declaration, signed in June 1999 by twenty-nine European countries, involves the creation of a single system of higher education for students from European countries. The modernization of education is the basis for the modernization of Russia.

At the same time, many residents of Russia were alienated from the wealth of national culture. Television and radio became the main source of cultural information for many citizens. The role of books, museums, theaters has significantly decreased. Despite the growth in the circulation and range of books, most of them are purchased in the capitals. Real, serious books do not reach the Russian hinterland. There are fewer people who read books.

Sport. In the 1990s, mass sports and physical education were in a deplorable state. Sports schools and clubs were closed, wild clothing markets ("flea markets") were hosted at the stadiums. All this could not but affect the achievements of Russian athletes.

In recent years, the situation in sports has begun to change for the better. In September 2005, the government approved the concept of a federal target program development of physical culture and sports for 2006-2015. The implementation of the document is designed to significantly increase the number of citizens involved in sports. To do this, it is planned to build 1.5 thousand multifunctional gyms, more than 700 stadiums and modernize 7 federal sports centers.

Conclusion. Russia and the World at the Beginning of the Third Millennium.

The strategy of modern Russia on the world stage is set out in the Foreign Policy Concept of the Russian Federation, approved by the President in June 2000. Russia stands for the creation systems of a multipolar world and denies the claims of any state to world hegemony. Based on their own capabilities - military-strategic, economic, political - Russian diplomacy is implementing the idea of ​​a multi-vector policy, seeks to maintain ties with many countries of the world.

had a huge impact on the state of international relations terrorist attack on the United States on September 11, 2001 3 thousand American citizens died. The illusion of US omnipotence crumbled. Terrorist acts led the world community to consolidate in the fight against terrorism and laid the foundation for formation of a new political situation in the world. The problem of international terrorism came to the fore. The emergence of a common enemy again caused a change in relations with the United States.

V. Putin has long emphasized the threat of international terrorism, primarily in connection with the second war in Chechnya. He was the first to express support for the American people and government during the attacks in New York. In 2002, Russia supported the US military operation against the Afghan Taliban, who were accused of supporting international terrorism. Cooperation between the special services is developing. At the meeting between Putin and Bush in November 2001 in the United States, for the first time, it was announced that Russia and the United States were united by common ideological values, devotion to democracy and a market economy. A Joint Statement on New Relations between Russia and the United States was signed. The presidents stated that neither side considers the other as an adversary or a source of threats. At the same time, they reaffirmed their "determination to fight the threats to peace in the 21st century." Common threats include terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, aggressive nationalism, ethnic and religious intolerance, and regional instability. In recent years, meetings between the presidents of Russia and the United States have become regular.

True, partnership with Washington looks fragile so far. In 2002, the US unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty, which was considered the most important element of the international security system; American military bases began to be created on the territory of the CIS countries; In the spring of 2004, the second expansion of NATO took place (Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia joined the alliance). A serious obstacle to effective cooperation is the fact that Western countries have not overcome policy of "double standards", according to which terrorists inside Russia are considered as "rebels", "fighters for independence". Washington is concerned about the process of centralization of power in Russia, seeing it as an infringement on democracy.

In the spring of 2003, the US and its allies launched a war in Iraq to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime. Russia came out for a political solution to the Iraqi crisis based on the UN and the leading role of its Security Council. The US course was opposed by many of its Western allies, most of the EU members and, most importantly, France and Germany. There was a political rapprochement between Russia and these countries. However, despite the contradictions with Washington and London on the Iraqi crisis, all parties have shown an interest in preserving and observing common interests.

The Far Eastern and Asian direction of Russian foreign policy is actively developing. In July 2001, Russia and China were able to sign an unprecedented treaty of good neighborliness, friendship and cooperation. Russia is ready to seek a mutually beneficial solution to the problem of the South Kuriles, to discuss Japan's participation in the economic development of these islands, but does not question its sovereignty over these territories.

Our country is an active participant in the young, but very promising structure of the multilateral dialogue in Asia - Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). It was formed in June 2001 in Shanghai on the initiative of six states - China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. After India, Pakistan, Iran and Mongolia received observer status in July 2005, the SCO formally began to unite half of the world's population. The market for goods and services here is no smaller than in Europe. India and China top the list of countries with which Russia has military-technical cooperation. These countries account for more than 80% of export deliveries of domestic weapons and military equipment.

The pragmatism of Russia's foreign policy manifested itself in relations with partners in the Commonwealth of Independent States. Meetings of heads of state (summits) and Interparliamentary assemblies of the CIS were regularly held.

In 2003-2004 in Georgia and Ukraine, the so-called "color revolutions" took place, which were more like top coups with the participation of the masses and foreign capital. Some leaders of these countries still blame the "hand of Moscow" for all their troubles. Events have shown that one should not force any of the closest neighbors to friendship. It is necessary to adhere to rational relations of equal partners with neighboring countries and support Russian business in the largest CIS republics - Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Belarus, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan. One of the first steps of such a rational and pragmatic policy was the transition to market settlements for energy carriers with a number of CIS countries.

Attempts to revise the results of the Second World War in some of the former Soviet republics are condemned by the Russian public.

A serious test for the country was developmentsin the zone of the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. On August 8, 2008, when the Olympic Games opened in Beijing, the Georgian army fired from "Grad" launchers and other large-caliber guns on the capital of South Ossetia, Tskhinval, and South Ossetian villages. Civilians and Russian peacekeepers were killed. Representatives of the unrecognized republic stated that the Georgian troops had actually started a war and were storming Tskhinvali. Dmitry Medvedev noted: “In international law, such incidents are classified as crimes, just as the murder of thousands of citizens is called “genocide.” Russian troops, protecting their peacekeepers and citizens living in the region, launched a military operation to enforce peace. They stopped the adventure of Georgian President Saakashvili and destroyed the military infrastructure of the aggressor.

In an effort to ensure peace in this region, D.A. Medvedev and French President N. Sarkozy worked out certain agreements (six Medvedev-Sarkozy principles). Among them - do not use force, finally stop all hostilities, ensure free access to humanitarian aid, Georgian troops must return to their places of permanent deployment, Russia - go to the line preceding the start of hostilities; the beginning of an international discussion on the future status of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and ways to ensure their security. Russia recognized the independence of North Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Thus, at the beginning of the 20th century. Russia's foreign policy has become more pragmatic and proceeds from the national interests of its own country. A reasonable balance has been found in international affairs in relations with the US, Europe and China. Today Russia occupies an important place in the world community. It is called upon to play an important role in the formation of a new system of international security. 2006 was the year of Russia's chairmanship of the G8. Russia has huge opportunities. They are recognized by the world.

1. Russia has been and remains, together with the United States, a nuclear superpower.

2. Russia plays a leading role in the fight against international terrorism.

3. Russia controls 30% of the world's oil, gas, minerals, and therefore it was, is and will be in the most distant future the most powerful producer of all major types of energy resources. (The US is the world's largest consumer of energy). In 2005, an agreement was signed between Russia and Germany on the construction of the North European Gas Pipeline (NEGP), the route of which will pass through the Baltic Sea. It will be a joint venture. The length of the gas pipeline will exceed 1,200 km. Its commissioning is scheduled for 2010. The essence of the project is to organize a direct corridor for gas supplies from the main producer (Russia) to the largest sales market (Western Europe). This should help meet the growing demand of Germany, Great Britain, France, Holland, and Denmark for gas imports and increase the reliability of their gas supply. The project caused discontent among the Baltic countries and Poland, which may lose their income from the transit of Russian gas. They immediately dubbed it the “Putin-Schroeder Pact.

In the summer of 2007, a Russian Arctic expedition aboard the nuclear-powered icebreaker Rossiya reached the North Pole and planted the Russian flag at the bottom of the Arctic Ocean at a depth of 4,000 meters. The expedition made a sensation: in the region of the Lomonosov Ridge, it discovered a huge territory rich in oil, gas and other minerals. Based on the research results, Russia will be able to expand its economic zone in the Arctic, increase its continental shelf by 1.2 million sq. km. The issue is to be decided by a special UN commission.

4. Russia is a growing market for the leading countries of the West and large countries of the East (primarily China, India, Japan).

5. Russia's relations with China, India and other countries of Asia, Latin America and Africa are an important part of the entire system of international relations.

6. Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council. It remains one of the main participants in the diverse system of international treaties that are aimed at strengthening stability throughout the world.

7. The world community is threatened with irreparable catastrophes if Russia breaks up into small pieces. Therefore, the Russian state and society are actively fighting against separatist centrifugal tendencies and, thereby, make a great contribution to global stability and security.

8. The Russian people have been and remain one of the most educated peoples in the world. The Russian-speaking diaspora over the past 20 years has taken exceptionally powerful positions in Europe, the USA and Canada.

The fact that in July 2007 the International Olympic Committee chose Sochi as the capital of the Winter Olympic Games to be held in 2014 should be considered as recognition of the growing opportunities of modern Russia. Games are an occasion to declare yourself to the whole world.

There are many problems on the way of Russia's mutually beneficial integration into the modern world. To solve them, Russia needs to work on creating a modern dynamic competitive economy, create a modern political and economic culture of the society, restore scientific and military potential.

Test yourself

Which of the following events refers to the second half of the 1990s?:

1) a campaign to combat drunkenness and alcoholism; 2) approval at a referendum of the Constitution of the Russian Federation; 3) first Chechen War; 4) dissolution of ministries.

Currently, Russia has an agreement on the Union State with: 1) Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, China and Tajikistan; 2) Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan; 3) Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania; 4) Belarus.

Which of these events occurred during the stay of V.V. Putin as President of the Russian Federation: 1) the implementation of administrative reform; 2) adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation; 3) creation of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; 4) acceptance of Russia into the group of eight most developed countries of the modern world.

Which of the aforementioned provisions underlies the foreign policy of the Russian Federation since the mid-1990s?: 1) on military-strategic parity; 2) on peaceful coexistence; 3) about a multipolar world; 4) about new political thinking.

Orenburg State

agricultural university

Faculty of Economics

Chair economic theory and management

Course work

Prospects for the development of Russia in the XXI century

Orenburg - 2003

Introduction

Chapter 1. Economic growth in Russia: opportunities and prospects

1.2 The problem of development quality, rates and trends of economic growth

1.3 Modernization of the economy as the main factor of economic growth

Chapter 2. Russia's Future Development Strategy

2.1 The problem of choosing a strategy

2.2 Outlines and features of the strategy

2.3 Measures to implement the economic growth strategy

Conclusion

Literature

Introduction

The change of the Kremlin leadership in the winter-spring of 2000 symbolically marked the most important milestone in the socio-economic development of Russia, which, however, has not yet attracted sufficient attention from researchers.

Our country has entered a new stage of economic development. Now Russia can be ranked among the countries defined as ""emerging markets"".

At present, there has been a new turn in the discussion on the issue of the mechanism for entering the trajectory of sustainable economic growth.

Discussion of the development of the Russian Federation for the period up to 2010 and for the long term seems to be a very urgent task. The socio-economic development strategy expands the system of targets, stimulates a shift in emphasis to the qualitative characteristics of economic dynamics, and thus serves as the basis for the macroeconomic development program.

The purpose of the course work is to study the possible options and scenarios for the economic development of Russia that are currently available. Analyze them and, if possible, evaluate them, with the help of articles and publications of such economists as Glazeva S., Lynn I., Chernenko E., Yasina E. and others. And also give a real picture of the situation Russian economy both within the country and against the backdrop of global trends.

Chapter 1. Economic growth in Russia: opportunities and real prospects

1.1 Russia's place in the global economy

All our historical experience shows that a country like Russia can live and develop within its existing borders only if it is a strong power. In all periods of the weakening of the country - political or economic - Russia has always faced the threat of disintegration.

Yes, certain achievements of recent years have made it possible to talk about stabilization. Some even had the feeling that all our problems had been solved. That the future of Russia is quite predictable and successful. And the only question is whether our economy should grow by 4% or 6% a year and how much we should spend.

But it's not. We are facing serious threats. Our economic foundation, though stronger, is still unstable and very weak. The political system is underdeveloped. The state apparatus is ineffective. Most sectors of the economy are not competitive. Meanwhile, the population continues to fall. Poverty is receding very slowly. The international environment remains difficult. Competition in the global economy is not decreasing.

Around us are countries with highly developed economies. It must be said frankly: where they can, they will push Russia out of promising world markets.

As a result of the decade-long crisis, Russia lost the advantage of a large-scale economy, falling in terms of GDP from 5th place (which was occupied by the USSR in 1991) to 10th (in 2001).

The transformational crisis of the early 1900s qualitatively changed our place in the world, throwing the Russian economy far back (Table 1).

Table 1. Share of countries in world indicators (in %)

Nevertheless, the Russian economy has been growing for more than four years after a nine-year decline: in 1999, the country's GDP grew by 5.4%, in 2000 - by 9%, in 2001 - by 5%, in 2002 - by 43%, i.e. . four recent years GDP increased by about 1/4. If we add to this the forecast growth of 4% in 2003, then for 1999-2003. The country's GDP should increase by about 31%. So, in the last four years, the current GDP of the country has so far been only about 2/3 of the GDP of 1990, and taking into account the GDP growth in 2003 (4-5%), by the end of 2003 we will surpass only 70% the level of GDP in 1990 in such a way that in order to reach at least the pre-reform level of GDP production, the country will need at best another seven to eight years.

Russia's contribution to world GDP declined from 333.4% in 1991 to 1% in 2001, and in terms of purchasing power from 5.3% to 2.6%. Russia's per capita income in 2001 was about 5.8% of the US level ($2,135 per person at the current exchange rate), and it ranked 78th out of 175 countries in IMF output, behind countries like Brazil. $2986) and Poland ($4652).

As a result of the positive dynamics of GDP, Russia's share in world GDP increased slightly, but increased (about 1.8%). The economic position of the country in the world has improved somewhat after almost the 10th weakening: from the second half of the second ten countries of the world, we have approached several steps (up to about 14th place) to the top ten countries of the world. If this correlation between the economic growth rates of Russia and the rest of the world continues in the coming years, then by the end of the first decade of the new century, Russia will be able to approach the 5-6th place in Europe in terms of the volume of GDP produced. She held this position a hundred years ago. The leaders and our benchmarks in today's economic competition are Canada, Spain, Australia, South Korea, and Mexico. The place of the current Russian economy in the world is comparable to the economy of the Netherlands - a country, in terms of its territory and population, approximately equal to the territory and population of Moscow and the Moscow region.

As for Russia's position in the world (and not in Europe), over two decades (the 90s of the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st century) the world has already changed and will change so that even with the most favorable development of events, Russia and in 2010 will not be able to be in the top ten advanced countries of the world. Therefore, it remains only to dream of reaching the 12th place in the world by the end of the first decade of this century, and ten years later - to enter the top ten countries of the world. In accordance with the Guidelines for the long-term socio-economic policy of the Government of the Russian Federation, the pre-crisis maximum level of Russia's GDP in 1990 was supposed to be surpassed precisely at the end of the first decade of the 21st century. At the same time, the actually achieved average annual GDP growth rate during 2000-2002. is very close to the government's forecast, although it became lower than accepted for the medium term (2002-2004). According to this forecast, even under the optimistic scenario, the average annual growth rate of Russia's GDP should have been approximately 4.4%.

If we take Portugal, the poorest EU country, as a benchmark, then with an average annual growth rate of Russian GDP of 8%, we will be able to catch up with Portugal in terms of GDP per capita in 2024; at a rate of 6.5% - in 2037-2038; while maintaining a GDP growth rate of 4.4%, we will never catch up with Portugal in this indicator.

In terms of GDP per capita, calculated at PPP, Russia currently ranks 60th in 2001, there were 7.3 thousand dollars of GDP per Russian, which positions it among countries with an average standard of living, ahead of Russia: Argentina, which experienced in recent times economic crisis; such investment-prosperous countries as Mexico and the Republic of Korea; member countries 6. CMEA - Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic. Portugal (17 thousand dollars - the lowest level among the EEC countries) is almost three times ahead of Russia. Our country lags behind the USA by more than 4 times. Thus, the gap in living standards between modern Russia and the United States exceeded that which existed at the beginning of the 20th century (28% of US income).

Age-old drama Russian modernization, filled with the “blood” of industrialization and collectivism, the “leap” into space and the virgin epic, the Brezhnev version of the “mass consumer society”, the convulsive acceleration during perestroika and, finally, the barbaric leap into market-capitalist civilization, did not lead to overcoming Russian backwardness. Russia is again balancing on the verge of a developed and a backward country, the right criteria for backwardness are now different. Let's try to think not about the traditional Russian question: who is to blame, but about how the Russian economy can develop further and what is needed to change its position in the world.

After a ten-year crisis, the growth rate of the Russian economy has finally (over the past three years significantly outpaced the growth rate of developed countries (demonstrating no more than 2-3% on average, but inferior to both separately developing Asian countries (China-7.5%), and some countries with economies in transition such as Kazakhstan - 8.6%). This means that our approach to the west will be generally slower than these countries. China will be able to catch up with Russia in terms of per capita income in 25-30 years. At the current growth rate, Russia will come out (from the current $178 in GDP at current prices) to a per capita income of $500 per month by 2019 and $1,000 only by 2031

It is especially important to overcome the lag in the growth rates of the closest neighboring countries - the Baltic States, the Visegra Group and the CIS, since lagging behind them threatens Russia with a further loss of its influence in the post-Soviet space and in Eastern Europe. On the other hand, with its huge demographic and rapidly growing economic potential, it is likely to become our main geopolitical and economic rival in the coming century. There is a threat that not only in the far abroad, but also in the near abroad, Russia will be surrounded by states that are developing much more dynamically than it is, and many of which surpass it in terms of living standards.