"The red directors were one of the main political forces. Another force was the former Soviet ministers who lost everything because of the transformation of the Soviet Union to Russia"

Anatoly Chubais, a popular Russian economist and political leader, supplies insight into the complicated political landscape following the dissolution of the Soviet Union with this quote. The statement highlights 2 considerable political forces that emerged in the disorderly duration of transformation: "the red directors" and "the former Soviet ministers."

"The red directors" refers to the managers of the big, state-owned business that dominated the Soviet economy. These people, often referred to as "nomenklatura", were essential gamers within the industrial sector. During the Soviet period, they was accountable for the operation of important state possessions. With the Soviet Union's collapse, these directors found themselves in a precarious position; on one hand, they had the opportunity to utilize their knowledge and connections to get a grip in the emerging market economy. On the other hand, they had to browse the political and economic turmoil that included the transition to industrialism. Thus, they ended up being a formidable political force, frequently promoting for policies that would safeguard their interests and guarantee their survival and impact in the brand-new financial order.

The "former Soviet ministers" represent another influential group navigating this change. These people, who had held positions of power in the Soviet government, experienced a remarkable shift in their status and influence. The dissolution of the Soviet Union resulted in the taking apart of their administrative power and the loss of their roles. For them, the shift represented a personal and professional crisis. As a result, a lot of these former ministers were forced to adjust to the new political and financial realities, often by aligning themselves with emerging political parties or getting in the private sector. Their experience in governance and administration, however, indicated they stayed an important force in shaping post-Soviet policies and political characteristics.

In essence, Chubais underscores the stress and adjustments that identified the post-Soviet shift in Russia. The two groups he explains highlight the more comprehensive struggle in between keeping impact within a transformed system and redefining one's role in a drastically different political and economic landscape. This battle played a significant role in shaping modern-day Russia's political foundations and continues to affect its trajectory.