The postcommunist countries were amongst the most fervent and committed adopters of neoliberal economic reforms. Not only did they manage to overcome the anticipated domestic opposition to 'shock therapy' and Washington Consensus reforms, but many fulfilled the membership requirements of the European Union and even adopted avant-garde neoliberal reforms like the flat tax and pension privatization. Neoliberalism in the postcommunist countries went farther and lasted longer than expected, but why? Unlike pre-existing theories based on domestic political-economic struggles, this book focuses on the imperatives of re-insertion into the international economy. Appel and Orenstein show how countries engaged in 'competitive signaling', enacting reforms in order to attract foreign investment. This signaling process explains the endurance and intensification of neoliberal reform in these countries for almost two decades, from 1989-2008, and its decline thereafter, when inflows of capital into the region suddenly dried up. This book will interest students of political economy and Eastern European and Eurasian politics.

The postcommunist countries were amongst the most fervent and committed adopters of neoliberal economic reforms. Not only did they manage to overcome the anticipated domestic opposition to 'shock therapy' and Washington Consensus reforms, but many fulfilled the membership requirements of the European Union and even adopted avant-garde neoliberal reforms like the flat tax and pension privatization. Neoliberalism in the postcommunist countries went farther and lasted longer than expected, but why? Unlike pre-existing theories based on domestic political-economic struggles, this book focuses on the imperatives of re-insertion into the international economy. Appel and Orenstein show how countries engaged in 'competitive signaling', enacting reforms in order to attract foreign investment. This signaling process explains the endurance and intensification of neoliberal reform in these countries for almost two decades, from 1989-2008, and its decline thereafter, when inflows of capital into the region suddenly dried up. This book will interest students of political economy and Eastern European and Eurasian politics.

"In this carefully crafted, comprehensive study, Mitchell Orenstein provides a persuasive analysis of the significance of transnational policy actors in pension privatization around the world. The empirical evidence is strong and the theoretical framework is applicable to a wide range of social policy issues. The book presents an important challenge to state-centric perspectives, as well as many of the interest-based assumptions of political economy approaches. This is a first-rate study which deserves attention from both academic and policy-oriented audiences."--Robert R. Kaufman, Rutgers University

"An innovative investigation into the role of transnational actors in national pension policy. Orenstein argues convincingly that transnational actors matter but that they need to be more broadly defined and their influence not reduced to money or coercion. They work through various channels, most importantly through the power of ideas, adaptability to country circumstances, learning from experience, and building coalitions with other transnational and domestic actors. The proposed conceptualization constitutes a major progress in this area."--Robert Holzmann, World Bank

"An excellent book that makes a significant theoretical contribution, and supports it with a great deal of solid empirical research. Orenstein demonstrates that decision making in a crucial area of domestic policy--namely pension system reform--is strongly influenced by transnational policy actors. His argument is novel and important."--Kurt Weyland, University of Texas, Austin

"This is a thoughtful and well-researched book on an important topic. Orenstein argues that international actors--including but not limitedto the international financial institutions--exert influence in complex and multifaceted ways on domestic policy processes. The book is the best I know in making this case."--Stephan Haggard, University of California, San Diego

Russia's stealth invasion of Ukraine and its assault on the US elections in 2016 forced a reluctant West to grapple with the effects of hybrid war. While most citizens in the West are new to the problems of election hacking, state-sponsored disinformation campaigns, influence operations by foreign security services, and frozen conflicts, citizens of the frontline states between Russia and the European Union have been dealing with these issues for years. The Lands in Between: The New Politics of Russia's Hybrid War contends that these "lands in between" hold powerful lessons for Western countries. For Western politics is becoming increasingly similar to the lands in between, where hybrid warfare has polarized parties and voters into two camps: those who support a Western vision of liberal democracy and those who support a Russian vision of nationalist authoritarianism. Paradoxically, while politics increasingly boils down to a zero sum "civilizational choice" between Russia and the West, those who rise to the pinnacle of the political system in the lands in between are often non-ideological power brokers who have found a way to profit from both sides, taking rewards from both Russia and the West. Increasingly, the political pathologies of these small, vulnerable, and backwards states in Europe are our problems too. In this deepening conflict, we are all lands in between.