May 9, 2001 

This Date's Issues:   5244 • 5245

Johnson's Russia List
#5245
9 May 2001
davidjohnson@erols.com

[Note from David Johnson:
1. Baltimore Sun: Clifford Gaddy and Michael O'Hanlon, Bush administration must ease up on Russia.
2. Jane's Defence Weekly: Phillip Clar, Russia has no reconnaissance satellites in orbit.
3. Reuters: Putin marks victory with message on missiles.
4. BBC Monitoring: Putin addresses Victory Day parade.
5. strana.ru: Russians’ opinion on WWII.
6. UPI: Veterans angry over Stalingrad battle movie.
7. Interfax: Reorganization of Russian cabinet of ministers to be completed soon - analyst. (Pavlovsky)
8. Financial Times (UK): THE ARTS: Alive to the sounds of new music: MUSIC MOSCOW: George Loomis reports from the Moscow Forum on Russian composers' attempts to pair the 'ethnic' with the 'technic."
9. Laura Belin: re: Hahn/5243.
10. AFP: Tuberculosis sweeps Ingushetia with influx of Chechen refugees.
11. UPI: Harvey Black, Russian potato crop threatened by blight.
12. The Scotsman: Chris Stephen, Fierce battle for Chechen town.
13. strana.ru: Russians link their future to activity of president.
14. Itogi: Oleg Odnokolenko, MINISTRY OF CEREMONIES. The challenges facing new Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov.
15. Washington Post: Susan Glasser, Letter From Russia. Patriotism, Selling Like Hot Cakes.]

********

#1
Baltimore Sun
May 8, 2001
Bush administration must ease up on Russia
By Clifford Gaddy and Michael O'Hanlon
Clifford Gaddy and Michael O'Hanlon are senior fellows at the Brookings 
Institution. 

WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration is off to a rough start in its 
relations with Russia, and much of the reason is its insistence that Russia 
cease selling military technology to Iran. 

The Bush team is right to worry about Russian arms sales to Iran, a country 
that still supports terrorism, refuses to recognize Israel's right to exist, 
and sits astride the critical Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz. 

But the administration is wrong to pick up where the Clinton administration 
left off and treat all such sales equally. 

And it is also wrong to think that Russian President Vladimir Putin would 
consider ending all of his country's arms sales to Tehran. If the Bush 
administration is to avoid a worsening relationship with Russia and make 
progress in constraining Russia's dangerous arms trade with Iran, it needs a 
more nuanced policy. Zero tolerance will not work. 

Weapons technologies represent nearly half of Russia's exports of machinery. 
There is no way that economically beleaguered Russia will give up a large 
chunk of such a valued source of hard currency, which presently accounts for 
about $3 billion a year. Indeed, Mr. Putin recently declared a policy of 
strengthening and centralizing Russia's arms industry. 

The United States can live with perhaps 90 percent of Russian arms sales. 
Therefore, it should focus dialogue on those 10 percent of greatest concern. 

Like any other country, especially one adjacent to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, 
Iran has every right to a viable self-defense force, including tanks, other 
armored vehicles, artillery, fighters, helicopters, surface-to-air missiles 
and surface ships. Such Iranian military assets should not unduly concern the 
United States because U.S. forces could counter them in the event of war. 

Instead, Washington should save its breath for those weapons that Iran could 
use in small numbers to cause severe loss of life or political and economic 
disruption in the region. These include ballistic missiles, anti-ship and 
land-attack cruise missiles, advanced sea mines and submarines. 

Such weapons could sink oil tankers or even U.S. Navy ships and could 
terrorize populations in places like Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and 
Israel. 

Washington also has reasonable grounds for worrying about Moscow's nuclear 
trade with Iran. Russia is unlikely to suspend all such trade -- most of 
which is permitted under international law, since Iran's nuclear reactors are 
under international safeguards and monitoring. 

But the right U.S.-Russian dialogue may convince Moscow to forgo sales of 
technologies like uranium enrichment devices that could help Iran build a 
"basement bomb." 

The bad news in Mr. Putin's recent decision to reinvigorate Russia's arms 
industry is that Washington has even less hope of stopping exports to Iran. 

But the good news is that Mr. Putin's centralization of defense industrial 
policy should permit him to rein in individual firms whose exports would harm 
the Russian national interest. 

Rather than asking for the moon, the Bush administration should work to 
convince Moscow that certain arms sales to Iran are not to Russia's long-term 
advantage, either. 

*******

#2
Jane's Defence Weekly
May 9, 2001
[for personal use only]
Russia has no reconnaissance satellites in orbit 
Phillip S Clark 
JDW Special Correspondent London 

First to return was Cosmos 2372, which was de-orbited on 19 April after 207 
days in orbit. Then Cosmos 2370 was de-orbited after a year in orbit on 3 May 
or 4 May.

The Russian photo-reconnaissance satellite programme has been running at a 
low level in recent years after the 1970s and 1980s when more than 30 
launches would take place each year: in 1999 there was only one launch and in 
2000 three launches took place.

Four types of photo-reconnaissance satellite are currently operated by Russia 
, three belonging to the Yantar family and one to the Orlets family. The 
Yantar-1KFT, codename Kometa, satellites are launched once every year or two 
and undertake missions to update topographic and mapping data maintained by 
the Ministry of Defence.

Flights usually last for about 45 days with a single descent vehicle, a 
modification of the original Vostok sphere, being recovered at the end of the 
mission, this containing the complete photographic package. In 1998, the 
Cosmos 2349 Kometa satellite undertook photographic surveys under the SPIN-2 
programme for the USA.

The current close-look Yantar-4K2 satellites, codename Kobalt, are also now 
only launched every year or two. The satellites originally flew for a 
standard 60 days but the three most recent launches in 1997, 1998 and 1999 
have seen lifetimes of 120 days. The Kobalt satellites have three re-entry 
vehicles. Two small film return capsules are carried which can return data 
while the main satellite continues to operate in orbit and at the end of the 
mission the conical main descent module is recovered with the camera system 
and remaining film.

The operational lifetime of satellites like Kometa and Kobalt are limited by 
the amount of film which can be carried and this is overcome with the 
Yantar-4KS1 Neman satellites. These return images digitally via radio link, 
either direct to Russian controllers when passing over Commonwealth of 
Independent States territory or via data relay satellites in the Potok system 
which are operating in geosynchronous orbit. Recent Neman satellites have 
operated in orbit for about a year, with the record-holder having remained in 
orbit for 419 days. With Neman, the lifetime is limited by the amount of 
propellant for in-orbit manoeuvring which can be carried.

During the 1980s, it looked as if the Soviet Union was moving towards a 
capability to maintain at least one Neman and one Kobalt satellite in orbit 
on a permanent basis, but financial cutbacks after the collapse of the Soviet 
system meant that this could not be maintained into the 1990s. During the 
period 28 September 1996 to 15 May 1997, Russia had no photo-reconnaissance 
satellites in orbit, the longest break since the programme began in 1962.

The most recent addition to the Russian family of photo- reconnaissance 
satellites is the Orlets-2 Yenissey which has only flown twice. The 
configuration of these satellites is not known, but they are believed to 
carry more than 20 film-return capsules. Both satellites in the series were 
de-orbited at a time which would have permitted part of the satellite to have 
been recovered, but in the case of the first satellite it is believed that 
the main structure came down over the Pacific Ocean, the 'graveyard' for the 
disposal of all large Russian satellites including the Mir space station.

While the Yantar-class satellites weigh 6.6 to 7 tonnes and are launched on 
the Soyuz-U vehicle, the 12 tonne Orlets-2 requires the much larger Zenit-2 
launcher.

During 2000, the three launches were representatives of the Neman (Cosmos 
2370), Yenissey (Cosmos 2372) and Kometa (Cosmos 2373) series. Cosmos 2372 
returned after almost matching the lifetime seen on the first Yenissey 
mission of 221 days (Cosmos 2290). Cosmos 2370 spent a full 12 months in 
orbit before its recall.

Russia no longer has any photo-reconnaissance satellites in orbit following 
the return to earth of two satellites in recent weeks. 

*******

#3
Putin marks victory with message on missiles
By Ron Popeski

MOSCOW, May 9 (Reuters) - Russia commemorated victory in World War Two on
Wednesday with its first civilian defence minister greeting troops in Red
Square and President Vladimir Putin issuing a subtle message on U.S.
missile defence plans. 

Sergei Ivanov, appointed by Putin in March, stood ramrod straight in a dark
blue suit as he moved swiftly through the square in an open-top silver grey
ZiL limousine to congratulate 5,000 troops from different parts of the
armed forces. 

Diplomats and bemedalled veterans, many leaning on canes or crutches,
watched as troops filed past with flags aloft. A small group then performed
a colourful marching routine, at one point placing their rifles on the
ground to spell "pobeda" (victory). 

Ivanov's appointment was part of Putin's plans to modernise the military,
still reeling from the collapse of Soviet rule. 

Putin called for unity more than five decades after a war in which Russia
and former Soviet states lost more than 20 million people, far more than
any other allied nation. 

"Our nation had such unity and such a will that this strength was enough to
raise the world to fight fascism," he said from a rostrum alongside the
mausoleum housing the embalmed body of Soviet state founder Vladimir Lenin. 

"We have no right to give up this spirit today." 

Veterans had no apparent objections to a civilian minister. 

"This should have happened a long time ago," said Valentin Cheilonbiyev,
74, who fought on the Belarussian Front in the push west to capture Berlin.
"The celebration was wonderful, clever and succinct. Putin's speech was
well thought-out." 

Putin also had a message for Bush, who wants to build a U.S. national
missile defence system denounced by Russia as a threat to global stability
aimed against its own nuclear arsenal. 

"The experience of post-war history shows that one cannot build a safe
world only for oneself, moreover one which harms the interests of others,"
he said. 

Russia opposes Washington going it alone in building a missile shield, but
says it is ready to talk about threats Washington fears from "rogue states"
like North Korea and Iraq. A U.S. delegation arrives on Friday to discuss
the proposal. 

PUTIN WARNS AGAINST VIOLENCE, EXTREMISM 

Putin referred to the 20-month-old drive against Chechen rebels, saying
World War Two's lessons had included "teaching us to find a balance between
force and reason. They make it clear that abetting violence and extremism
leads to awful tragedies." 

He also hinted at the proposed military shake-up, saying victory was a
"spiritual core" for an army "developing and being structured anew, which
is taking on modern features." 

The reform is intended to make the army more modern and reduce the
importance of the nuclear missile force while preserving a strong nuclear
defence. Ivanov has also said that widely detested general conscription
will also one day be ended. 

As the hour-long parade drew to a close, 3,000 leftists, led by Communist
Party chief Gennady Zyuganov, made their way down Moscow's main
thoroughfare, some carrying portraits of wartime leader Josef Stalin and
calling for restoration of Soviet rule. 

Victory Day is marked a day later than V-E day in the West as Soviet
generals signed the document on German surrender a day after the other
allies. Parades were cancelled after the end of communist rule but revived
in 1995. 

Television viewers are treated to a stream of films, documentaries and
wartime songs. The day is marked in most other ex-Soviet republics, except
the Baltic states, occupied in turn during the war by the Red Army and the
Nazis. 

In Ukraine, where public opinion remains split between Soviet army veterans
and those who joined nationalist groups to battle both communist rule and
Nazi occupation, President Leonid Kuchma led officials in laying a wreath
at a memorial. 

In Belarus, which lost a quarter of its people in the war, President
Alexander Lukashenko accused Western countries of planning "to start a
fourth war against us, using the example of Yugoslavia." The West accuses
Lukashenko, who is running for re-election this year, of stifling opposition. 

*******

#4
BBC Monitoring
Russia: Putin addresses Victory Day parade 
Source: Russian Public TV (ORT), Moscow, in Russian 0700 gmt 9 May 01 

Comrade soldiers and sailors, sergeants and warrant officers; comrade
officers, generals and admirals; esteemed veterans and citizens of Russia:
I congratulate you on Victory Day, on a great victory by a great people, on
a victory of justice over evil and violence, of freedom over enslavement,
and of life over death. It was a victory which ennobled our country, and
brought glory to, consolidated and tempered the people of Russia. 

And so today, when for the first time we regard that victory in the new
century, its significance can only grow. It was that victory which gave us
the opportunity to live and work in peace, enabled us to gather together
and grow stronger, and helped us to step into the new millennium as an
independent and proud state. 

I greet the veterans of the Great Patriotic War: You defended our right to
be citizens in a free state. I thank you both for you work in peacetime and
your contribution in wartime, for your courage and strength, for the fact
that you are side by side with us today. With every passing year, we honour
the generation of victors with greater and greater emotion. It is our
sacred duty to take good care of and protect the soldiers and workers of
the fateful years of the war. 

We know the price of victory well. We remember the millions of the dead and
injured, as well as the millions of those unborn after the terrible war. We
remember the cities razed and villages burnt. We remember the loss of our
cultural treasures. We remember everything that we lost then. Indeed, 9 May
is a date we mark with tears in our eyes, in which greatness and sadness,
national pride and national memory, the glitter of awards and the tears of
our veterans are as one forever. 

Esteemed comrades: Then, in 1945, we were not subjugated. Our people had
the unity and the will sufficient to rouse the world to the struggle
against fascism. We must not lose that spirit today. We must not betray
that which is sacred to us and our banners of victory. 

Today, as in the years of the war, the red flag of the armed forces is once
again in service. The traditions of victory have become the spiritual core
of the Russian army, an army which is now developing and is being built in
a new way and which is acquiring modern features. 

We won a victory in the most just war of the 20th century. It was a war of
liberation, for the sovereignty and independence of our Fatherland. We need
its lessons today. They teach us to find a balance between force and
reason, and warn that the encouragement of violence, the encouragement of
extremism leads to terrible tragedies. I want to stress this and say that
nobody must forget that. Nobody is in their right to do that. 

The whole of postwar experience points to this: One cannot build a secure
peace for oneself alone, the more so to the detriment of others. 

Respected citizens of Russia: For 56 years now, Victory Day has been a date
that, to us, is the most important, most to do with the people and most
dear to our hearts. I would like to stress that far from every nation can
take pride in a victory such as this. To inherit it is not only a great
honour, it is also above all a great responsibility. 

Today, the legacy of our veterans is in our blood and their heroic deed in
our hearts. Their achievement still serves us today. It helps us to
overcome difficulties and go forward, and obliges us to strive for new
accomplishments and new victorious heights. I congratulate you on Victory
Day, dear friends. Glory be to the soldiers of 1945! Glory be to the victor
nation! Glory be to Russia. Hurrah! 

*******

#5
strana.ru
May 9, 2001
Russians’ opinion on WWII

Over one-third of Russians (35%) believe that the Soviet Union's losses in
the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945) by far exceed the losses of Germany
because of the sudden attack by the Nazis on the USSR, a recent public
opinion poll shows. A decade ago only 21% of Russian citizens thought so.

Over one-fifth of Russians (22%) see the causes of the difference between
the losses in that the Stalin leadership cared little about losses, while a
decade ago this view was shared by 33%.

Many respondents (19%) explain the tragedy by the military and technical
superiority of Germany in the first years of the war (16% a decade ago).
Others explain it by the weakness and incompetence of the Soviet command
(11% against 12%), and the cruelty of Nazis (8% against 5%).

Meanwhile, 71% consider that the Soviet Union could have won without the
help of the allies (62% a decade ago).

The opinion poll has shown also that over half of Russians would welcome
the idea of building a monument to all who died in World War II on both
sides, while 32% of Russians are against such an idea.

********

#6
Veterans angry over Stalingrad battle movie

MOSCOW, May 8 (UPI) -- As moviegoers in the Russian capital bought tickets
Tuesday to watch a Western-made movie depicting the crucial World War II
battle, war veterans from the southern Russian city of Volgograd demanded
Russian legislators ban the picture.

Labeled Europe's most expensive film ever, French director Jean-Jacques
Annaud's "Enemy at the Gates" definitely struck a wrong chord with survivors
of the historic Stalingrad battle.

On Tuesday, a group of veterans from Volgograd (formerly Stalingrad) sent
a letter to the lower chamber of the Russian parliament, the State Duma,
demanding that the screening of the movie be suspended, the official
Itar-Tass news agency reported.

No official comments regarding the demand were available from the Duma
Wednesday.

The veterans were offended by what they called distortions of real facts
that eventually depicted the city's defenders as cannon fodder who blindly
obeyed orders of Red Army officers and played a miniscule role in
Stalingard's defense.

According to the letter, Soviet commanders, in turn, were described as
ruthless tyrants, always ready to kill deserters or officers with miserable
records to boost soldiers' morale.

One such scene shows the character of Nikita Khrushchev -- who later
became the general secretary of the Communist Party -- ordering a Soviet
general who failed to drive back the Germans to commit suicide to encourage
his fighters.

The 84-million-dollar movie opened in Russia on March 30. The premiere was
held in Russia's third-largest city of Nizhny Novgorod on the Volga River.

The movie received relatively good reviews from film critics, mostly owing
to the star-studded lineup of actors including Jude Law, Rachel Weisz,
Joseph Fiennes and Ed Harris.

At the same time, it was a commercial success at the box office,
collecting as of April 22 a total of $46.3 million in the United States and
$48.3 million elsewhere.

Nevertheless, its portrayal of events that reversed the course of World
War II has angered Russian battle survivors who fought against the Nazi's
for six months.

The Battle of Stalingrad was fought from July 1942, until February 1943,
when Germany's 6th Army under the command of Field Marshal Friedrich Paulus
surrendered to Russia, virtually ending the German offensive in the Soviet
Union.

*******

#7
Reorganization of Russian cabinet of ministers to be completed soon - analyst 
Interfax news agency 

Moscow, 9 May: The process of reorganizing the Russian cabinet of ministers
may be brought to completion in May or June, Gleb Pavlovskiy, the head of
the Effective Policy Fund, told Interfax on Wednesday [9 May]. 

This process over, a hierarchy of governing the country could be regarded
as built, he said. 

President Vladimir Putin's "softness" on the cabinet has resulted in
delaying the construction of the hierarchy, Pavlovskiy said. "The cabinet
has for a long time been outside it. It was not until this spring that the
cabinet has become its element and this process is still gong on," he said. 

In particular, in time the structure of the top executive bodies will have
one centre rather than two as now, the cabinet and the presidential
headquarters, Pavlovskiy said. 

This is being done by the rotation of personnel between the presidential
structures and the cabinet and will end with reorganization of the cabinet,
he thinks. 

As a result, the system will work as one unit, Pavlovskiy believes.
"Because the president is the chief executive, his headquarters and the
cabinet must work as parts of the same mechanism. If they do not, there is
friction between them," he said. 

When the reorganization ends, the Putin team will be formed, even though he
does not like this expression, Pavlovskiy said. "The country expects the
president to do just that, to form a good working team," he said. 

*******

#8
Financial Times (UK)
9 May 2001
THE ARTS: Alive to the sounds of new music: MUSIC MOSCOW: George Loomis reports from the Moscow Forum on Russian composers' attempts to pair the 'ethnic' with the 'technic" 
By GEORGE LOOMIS

For a time after the collapse of the Soviet Union, it looked as though 
contemporary Russian composers would be a major international force in new 
music. Edison Denisov, Sofia Gubaidulina, and especially Alfred Schnittke 
attracted much attention, products of a rich cultural heritage and of a 
system that promoted rigorous training and recognised - for better and for 
worse - the value of new music. The freedom to embrace western techniques 
openly instead of clandestinely could only enhance the Russian composer's 
place in the world. 

Denisov and Schnittke are now dead, and Gubaidulina lacks any heir apparent. 
For the curious, the week-long Moscow Forum International Festival of 
Contemporary Music gave valuable insights into Russia's new music scene. Run 
by Vladimir Tarnopolsky, a key force among Russia's progressive/avant-garde 
composers, the festival is one of Moscow's three annual outlets for new 
music, each with its own constituency. (Moscow Autumn favours more 
conservative fare, and the loosely structured Alternativa festival includes 
jazz and cross-over.) 

Showcasing Russian composers is a vital part of Moscow Forum, now in its 
eighth year, but so is addressing what is happening elsewhere. The cellist 
Frances-Marie Uitti demonstrated her pioneering two-bow technique, which has 
attracted Gyorgy Kurtag, Luigi Nono and other composers. Several pieces used 
MAX/MSP technology, a new way of uniting electronic music and conventional 
performance by generating sounds from those produced by the performer. And 
conferences featured guests from abroad, including the American composer and 
conductor David Gompper, who last autumn organised an epochal Russian new 
music festival at the University of Iowa that brought together composers of 
all stripes. 

A decade after Soviet restraints came off, one still senses an exhilaration 
over the range of possibilities open to the Russian composer. "There is a 
goulash of ideas here, a feeling of 'let's try it all'," observed Thomas 
Christensen, a music theorist from the University of Chicago. The audience is 
young and enthusiastic. But the festival puts a brave face on a serious 
situation which, like most arts-related problems in Russia, is rooted in the 
lack of money. A com poser has little hope of gaining recognition abroad when 
opportunities at home are so sparse. Orchestras rarely perform new music, and 
even the film industry, where many a Soviet composer toiled, has dried up. 
The government does nothing to help. How long can the Moscow Conservatory 
continue to have more than 60 composition students? 

But currently the number of active composers is formidable. As an indication, 
the festival programmed works by around 30 Russians, only three of whom were 
represented in the Iowa festival. The most conspicuous absence was that of 
Tarnopolsky himself, who thought it impolitic to program his own music. 
Sergei Zagny's Hymnes for tape was awfully brief, though its references to 
national anthems were amusing, and Vladimir Nikolayev's On the Brinks, with 
its opening of whispers and other voiceless sounds, was a bit far out. But 
Alexander Vustin's condensed setting of the Requiem for solo soprano (the 
excellent Elena Vassilieva) made a fine effect in its Dies Irae rhythms and 
soothing final harmonies. 

These works, in various ways, reflected the festival's theme of "Avant-garde 
at the Crossroads of Ethnic and Technic". One might underestimate the 
"ethnic" content of avant-garde music, but for Tarnopolsky it constitutes an 
expression of the composer's identity that goes beyond nationalism. 

A seminal work, such as Stravinsky's Saucers for Russian Peasant Songs, 
sometimes put later efforts in perspective. Vladimir Martynov's primitive 
Night in Galicia had a distinctly minimalist flavour, with its same-pitch 
chanting and repeated chordal pattern. A piece by Alexander Raskatov brought 
vibrant rhythms to the peasant idiom, but his Prayer for soprano and string 
quartet made haunting use of hushed, long-spanned vocal phrases. 

Yury Vorontsov arrestingly explored the sonic potential of three flutes and 
piano in There, When the Cry Flies, its pentatonic scale adding an Oriental 
colour. One of the most clear-cut pairings of "ethnic and technic," and an 
especially effective one, came in Sonochronotop #3.1.1, an MAX/MSP piece by 
Andrey Smirnov, head of the Conservatory's electronic music studio. Here 
Dmitri Kalinin's performance on the shakuhachi, a Japanese flute, gave rise 
to myriad vibrations, reverberations and echoes. In a piece for tape, 
Kalinin, a Conservatory student, demonstrated proficiency as a composer in 
his own right. And a piece for tuba, double-bass and bass-drum by another 
student, Dmitri Kourliandski, a parody of stern instrumental utterances, 
served as another reminder of what is at stake. 

*******

#9
Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 
From: laurabelin@excite.com (Laura Belin)
Subject: re: Hahn/5243

Gordon Hahn is absolutely right that the US limits foreign media ownership.
I did not mean to imply that Russia's regulations on foreign media ownership
are a major media freedom issue, and I should have made that clear. I was
trying to suggest that although Petro praises Putin for opposing limits on
foreign media ownership, the Kremlin's stand on this issue is not clear-cut.

In any case, the restrictions on media freedom in Russia for the most part
do not stem from Russian laws, which offer a great deal of protection to
journalists on paper--in some ways more protection than journalists enjoy in
any Western country. Rather, the problems stem from how laws are selectively
applied. For instance, tax inspections and criminal investigations tend to
afflict only media (or media owners) that publish views opposed to the
authorities.

******

#10
Tuberculosis sweeps Ingushetia with influx of Chechen refugees

NAZRAN, Russia, May 9 (AFP) - 
In the Fortress Hospital, Ingush and Chechen patients sleep in corridors
and tents in the garden, victims of a raging tuberculosis epidemic in
Ingushetia, where most of the war refugees from Chechnya have fled.

"Counting both Ingush and Chechen refugees, the infection rate has reached
155 per 100,000 people compared to 60 to 70 for the rest of Russia," said
Liza Ausheva, head doctor at this clinic in the main Ingush city.

"In one district on the border with Chechnya, the number of tuberculosis
sufferers has doubled, from 43 per 100,000 in 1999 to 87 in 2000 because of
contact with refugees," she added.

The problem is all the more acute as Chechens are often afflicted by a
strain of tuberculosis that is resistant to drugs, because the collpase of
their health system since the first 1994-96 war.

Treatment of these patients is therefore more complicated, costlier and
longer.

Children are not spared by the epidemic: six beds have been set aside in
the women's ward to care for the mostly seriously ill.

"One mother arrived here with her tubercular little boy after having made
practically the entire journey on foot for hours from the north of
Chechnya," the doctor recalled.

In the delapidated hospital, built in 1930, water and electricity are
regularly cut off, which does not stop staff from incessantly washing the
walls and floors.

In the men's ward, several rooms which have the use of a single toilet are
used to accommodate refugees, many of them ill for several years, and
patients have been placed in the corridors.

"In Grozny, there are no means to to treat us," said Rezvan, her cheeks
sunken by the illness. Her 14-year-old daughter caught tuberculosis after
arriving in Ingushetia.

Nineteen months after the start of the latest Russian offensive in
secessionist Chechnya, Ingushetia is currently host to 170,000 refugees,
swamping the tiny republic's population of 350,000 people.

"We have 150 beds but we need 300. We lack medicines and there are several
cases of contagion among our staff. Before the war, the situation was under
control, tuberculosis was declining in Ingushetia," said Doctor Ausheva.

She suggests treating the Chechens at home in anti-tuberculosis centres
near the border where the situation is more or less calm as the movemement
of refugees only increases the risk of contagion.

In the hospital garden, the Russian emergencies ministry has installed a
dozen medical tents which house 42 tuberbulosis sufferers, all refugees.

Since their arrival at the end of last October, ministry doctors have
carried out more than 6,000 consultations and 369 people have been
hospitalised before being evacuated outside Ingushetia.

"There are new cases in the (refugee) camps, among women and children, but
we don't find out about all of them," said a Russian doctor as a queue of
refugees waited outside the medical tent for a check-up.

"People are afraid to get examined. They don't understand that the entire
tent needs to have an x-ray if one case is discovered. The women fear they
will be forced to leave if they are found out to be ill," added the young
doctor, wearing a surgical mask over his mouth.

******

#11
Russian potato crop threatened by blight
8 May 2001 
By HARVEY BLACK, UPI Science News

Agricultural scientists fear the same fungus that caused the Irish potato
famine in the 19th century now threatens serious harm to this important crop
in Russia.

Kndukuri Raman, professor of plant breeding at Cornell University and
executive director of the Cornell-Eastern Europe-Mexico Late Blight Project,
said he is worried about the country's ability to control the fungus
Phytophthora infestans, which causes the disease known as late blight
because it attacks potatoes late in the growing season.

Last year, late blight wiped out 15 percent of Russia's potato crop.
Introduced into Russia in the late 18th century, potatoes are an integral
part of the Russian diet, according to David McDonald, professor of Russian
history at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

"You can find potatoes every day on virtually every Russian table," he
said. "They are as much a part of what Russians eat as bread." Whether the
late blight actually will devastate this vital crop is uncertain and it
depends on the weather, said John Niederhauser, adjunct professor of plant
pathology at the University of Arizona, and an internationally recognized
authority on the disease.

If the weather is cool and rainy, he said, "they could have losses
greater" than last year, he told United Press International. He said a late
blight infestation would be a "disaster" to the Russian people because of
the importance of potatoes to their diet. The origin of the problem appears
to be twofold: the development of aggressive strains of the fungus that can
resist fungicides, and Russia's anemic economy, which hobbles attempts to
develop and distribute naturally resistant varieties of the potatoes to
farmers.

"In Russia there is almost a complete collapse of their agricultural
production," said Charles Brown, a scientist with the U.S. Agriculture
Department in Prosser, Wash. "So any disease that attacks the crop makes
everything more difficult."

Brown and Raman said the vast majority of potato production comes from
family gardens, and as idyllic as that may sound, it means trouble for
agriculture. Raman said the owners of these garden plots have other jobs and
"they are not able to attend to their little farms. So these small farms are
more prone to late blight." What is needed, he said, is the integration
into Russian agriculture of new varieties that have been bred for long
lasting resistance to the late blight fungus. While resistant varieties have
been developed, he added, there are severe problems multiplying and
distributing them throughout the country.

A good extension system also is needed, Raman said, to teach farmers how
to most effectively apply fungicides. The resistant strains are not
completely able to fend off the fungus on their own and frequent spraying is
needed.

But in Mexico, where the fungus actually originated, there are resistant
strains which need only two or three fungicide applications during the
growing season, instead of 18 to 20, Niederhauser said.

Niederhauser said seeds from these resistant varieties must be produced
and distributed soon because the Russian potato-growing season starts in
about a month. "The problem right now is there is no national system for
getting seed multiplied and distributed," Brown said.

Raman said another crucial element is monitoring the potato fields for new
strains of the fungus, which continually mutates. As new strains occur, new
varieties of resistant potatoes must be developed. Niederhauser said that
is a long-term effort, lasting several years and requires crossing resistant
varieties with potatoes that have valuable commercial features, such as high
yield, good taste and high nutrition.

The problems facing Russian potato production are to be discussed at an
international meeting in Poland in June.

******* 

#12
The Scotsman
May 9, 2001
Fierce battle for Chechen town
Chris Stephen In Moscow 

RUSSIAN forces using artillery and helicopter gunships have fought their
first pitched battle this year with Chechen rebels for control of the
region’s third largest town, Argun, as fighting flares across the province. 

Two rebel units on Monday infiltrated Argun, which sits at the mouth of a
strategically important gorge, attacking Russian troops and ambushing a
relief convoy, destroying armoured vehicles. 

In the battle that followed, Russia used heavy artillery and rocket-firing
helicopters in a fierce bombardment of the south eastern suburbs. Assault
troops moved into the town under a dense cloud of smoke and last night said
they had regained control. 

The battle comes amid an escalating rebel offensive that began last weekend
and has seen the province wracked by confused fighting, with at least 15
separate attacks mounted on Russian positions. 

The offensive forced Moscow at the weekend to cancel plans to cut
three-quarters of the 80,000-strong army in the province. And after mines
destroyed army vehicles in the Chechen capital, Grozny, Russia has also
reversed plans to reopen the city to the provincial government - the
cornerstone of its much-vaunted "normalisation" process. 

Rebel forces have attacked at a key time. A European Union delegation is
visiting the province, and is due to report on the human rights situation
at an EU-Russian summit in Moscow on 17 May. 

The delegation’s leader, the Swedish ambassador, Sven Hidman, said he had
been hearing allegations of human rights abuses during his tour. 

The new fighting also underlines the failure of the FSB, the renamed KGB,
to make any impact on the province. In January, the FSB was given command
of the Chechen operation after the army proved unable to smash the rebels.
But secret servicemen have proved no better than the generals in either
defeating the rebels in the field or seizing their commanders. 

Moscow is using badly trained troops, thinly spread, to tackle one of the
world’s best organised and most ruthless guerrilla organisations, well
funded from abroad. The melting of winter snows allows its units to live
happily in the open, and spring foliage means they are hard to track with
Russian air power. 

The Argun battle also brought confusing statements from the various Russian
services involved in the battle, hinting at continuing problems in
co-ordination. 

Russia’s regional army commander, General Gennady Troshev, said the Argun
battle had been planned as a sweep to evict guerrilla units from the town.
"It was all previously planned, we had losses," he said. 

But the interior ministry said the troops had run into an ambush, and
needed to be reinforced, with at least four soldiers dead. Among 14 rebel
dead, the Russians say they found two Wahhabis - Islamic fundamentalist
volunteers from the Middle East. 

A spokesman for the Chechen rebels, Movladi Udugov, told news agencies that
the rebels had carried out their ambushes, then pulled out most of their
men when the Russians sent in reinforcements. 

The battle comes with Moscow desperate to end the war, partly to salvage
the credibility of their army, viewed as impotent and dogged by allegations
of torture and corruption among units in the province. 

Russia is also facing a belated piling-up of criticism by human-rights
agencies about its human rights record. 

Last month the Council of Europe gave Moscow a month to clean up its act,
or face suspension from membership - the first time any nation would have
been suspended from the organisation. 

Also last month the United Nations Human Rights Commission passed a
resolution, sponsored by the European Union, condemning Russia as using
"disproportionate" force. 

And this month’s Moscow summit may see fresh criticism from the EU human
rights groups have meanwhile accused Moscow of dragging its feet over the
most contentious issue of all - the discovery in March of the bodies of 42
executed Chechen civilians dumped outside the Russian military headquarters
at Khankala. 

What is conspicuously missing from all this is any talk of finding a peace
settlement. The Chechen rebels say they will settle for nothing less than
independence. Russia says talks can be held only if this idea is discarded.
Meanwhile, the suffering goes on for tens of thousands of refugees. 

******

#13
strana.ru
May 7, 2001
Russians link their future to activity of president

The results of a poll conducted by the Public Opinion Foundation show that
the people's attitude towards reforms in Russia is directly connected with
confidence in the country's top leadership.

The dominant belief among the people is that the choice of reform course
and responsibility for it must rest on the president's shoulders (56% of
the respondents uphold such an opinion). Only 27% of the responds connect
the reforms with the work of the government.

In May 2000 (right after Vladimir Putin's inauguration), the majority of
Russians (56%) considered that the new president had to carry out the
reforms more energetically. If this condition was met, 58% of the
respondents then replied that they were ready to uphold the activity of
Putin. Also almost 63% were certain that Putin would actively carry out the
reforms, moreover a significant part of the population (59%) predicted that
these transformations would be successful.

A year after Putin's election, 53% of those polled think that he really
pursues economic reforms. More than a half of the respondents give a
positive estimate to results the reforms bring in their wake. It ought to
be mentioned that 55% of all those polled think that Putin has a program of
further transformation of Russia.

As shown by polls taken in the last few months, Russian nationals are
equally convinced that the Government will succeed and not succeed in
achieving reform results, the former point of view prevailing noticeably
since the start of this year. In keeping with the February poll, 40% of
respondents are positive on that score while 32% hold the Government will
not achieve results.

*******

#14
Itogi
May 8, 2001
MINISTRY OF CEREMONIES
The challenges facing new Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov 
Author: Oleg Odnokolenko
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html] WILL DEFENSE MINISTERSERGEI IVANOV COMMAND THE PARADE ON RED SQUARE THIS WEEK? WILL HE WEAR A UNIFORM? THE COMPLEXITIES OF THESE DECISIONS ARE SYMBOLIC OF THE LARGER PROBLEMS FACED BY THE NEW DEFENSE MINISTER, WHICH INCLUDE COPING WITH POWER STRUGGLES AND LAUNCHING REAL CHANGES IN THE MILITARY.

It's the tradition for defense ministers to command the Victory 
Day parade on Red Square each May. The whole procedure should not be 
too draining for Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov. However, there are 
some other details. Since Ivanov himself says that he is more of a 
civilian than an officer, and does not plan to wear his uniform, his 
participation in the military parade will generate a great many 
political, technical, and military-aesthetic problems.

All this does not concern Deputy Defense Minister Igor Puzanov, 
until recently Moscow Military District Commander. For the sake of his 
boss, Puzanov will eagerly revise all regulations and even the script 
for the parade itself. On the other hand, regardless of what Ivanov 
wears on May 9 (his uniform or civilian clothes), his appearance on 
Red Square in this capacity will conflict with the concept of 
transformation of the state's military system. And Ivanov, former 
secretary of the Security Council, was directly involved in work on 
this concept. The fact of Ivanov's participation in the main parade of 
the year indicates that he remains "the top general". In the United 
States, for example, civilian secretaries of defense never participate 
in military ceremonies, because the principle of separation of 
military and political functions in the defense ministry should be 
observed even in such relatively minor matters. It is probably because 
of this that the Russian government is in no hurry to announce who 
will command the ceremony this year.

There is more to it than fine points of ceremony. This issue is 
directly related to the power struggels within the Defense Ministry. 
If the principle of separation of military and political functions 
were to be observed, the parade should be commanded by Chief of the 
General Staff Anatoly Kvashnin. What about the most important military 
speech of the year, traditionally delivered on May 9? Kvashnin's 
current status doesn't merit such an honor. His conflict with the 
previous defense minister Igor Sergeev ended with Kvashnin as the 
winner, but only at first sight. According to our sources, Kvashnin 
may also be dismissed in the near future.

The promotion of Colonel General Nikolai Kormiltsev, Ground 
Forces Commander-in-Chief, to the status of a deputy defense minister 
is viewed in the military circles as confirmation of the theory that 
Kvashnin will soon be asked to leave. According to our sources, as a 
deputy defense minister Kormiltsev will command the Ground Forces and 
monitor military districts as well, the traditional function of the 
General Staff.

Vladimir Yakovlev, former commander-in-chief of the Strategic 
Missile Forces and Kvashnin's old opponent, may also be promoted to a 
deputy defense minister. At least, this is how some specialists 
interpret Sergei Ivanov's words to the effect that Yakovlev is not 
resigning from the army, and "will soon be offered a high post within 
the Defense Ministry". If the General Staff is also stripped of the 
functions currently performed by the Main Operational Directorate 
(some reports indicate this possibility), Kvashnin will find himself 
removed from key decision-making.

Kvashnin should have seen that he had not won his battle with 
Sergeev when Ivanov made it quite clear that he would not tolerate 
insubordination. Some specialists don't rule out the possibility that 
Kvashnin's career is actually at an end. Needless to say, candidates 
for his post are selected for close links with the defense minister 
and the president.

For example, head of the Main Operational Directorate Yuri 
Baluyevsky may expect a promotion because he is an analyst, just like 
Ivanov. Valentin Korabelnikov of the GRU is from the secret services, 
just like Putin and Ivanov. Valentin Bobryshev of the Leningrad 
Military District may expect a promotion because he is from St. 
Petersburg. For the time being, this unofficial list also includes 
Paratroopers Commander Georgy Shpak, who simply dislikes Kvashnin.

Even if Kvashnin retains his post, he is unlikely to be able to 
challenge the minister after all the changes that are about to happen. 
Firstly, Kvashnin has already been sent a clear message that finding a 
replacement for him is not a problem. Secondly, his powers are not 
what they used to be. Thirdly, the new defense minister is known to be 
fairly close to the president. A conflict with Sergei Ivanov would be 
like a conflict with the president himself.

We know now that Ivanov has never intended to share power with 
the chief of the General Staff. He has taken over, and that is that. 
Our source in the Defense Ministry says that Ivanov began by studying 
the contents of the so-called "nuclear case". After that, heads of 
directorates were summoned to the new defense minister one by one, 
each of them reporting to the boss on the functions of their 
directorates.

Not everything may turn out right for Ivanov. His opponents 
predict serious problems because "he is a lieutenant general who has 
never even commanded a platoon." They say that this sad lack of 
experience will cost Ivanov respect among army and military district 
commanders. Opponents also say that all transformations in the Defense 
Ministry boil down to simple reshuffles and changes in paperwork 
procedures.

However, this doesn't mean that the replacement of upper echelons 
in the Defense Ministry would have been free of problems if someone 
from the tank troops or the Navy had been appointed defense minister. 
On the contrary. That is why everyone agrees that Putin's decision to 
appoint a "stranger", someone not associated with the existing 
military clans, was strategically correct. It is easier for a stranger 
to handle the inevitable conflicts of interests.

At the same time, the inevitable battle with generals' ambitions 
is just the visible part of the problems, and not the most important 
problem. Ivanov's legacy includes the problem of Chechnya as well. The 
war continues, and keeping the army in Chechnya is essential. Military 
reforms are another part of Ivanov's legacy. Judging by the views 
expressed in the military media (according to our sources, the 
minister's article was actually written by Baluyevsky), Ivanov's views 
on the military reforms don't differ greatly from his predecessor's. 
Lowering the status of the once-privileged Strategic Missile Forces is 
probably the only difference. Sergeev also planned to improve the 
control system, change the rear services structure, draw up a program 
of social support, and equalize expenses on maintenance and arms 
procurement in future (these days, up to 70% of the defense budget 
goes on current costs, a situation which does not facilitate the 
process of establishing a modern army). At the same time, the nation 
cannot very well expect an economic boom when one-third of the 
national budget goes into defense (Germany spends only about 1% of its 
GDP on defense). The minister does not say how this vicious circle can 
be broken. However, the solution is known - it requires radical 
changes in the system of mobilization training and mobilization (it is 
time we stopped preparing ourselves for a new world war) and cutting 
costs of the nuclear deterrent, by agreement with America.

Neither the Kremlin nor the Defense Ministry have shown they are 
ready for this so far. If everything remains as it is, the new 
minister will have to learn to ride and start commanding military 
parades. After all, it is not the whole truth that military hardware 
cannot enter Red Square because of the Iver Gates. The rest of the 
truth is that Russia cannot afford more pompous ceremonies.

*******

#15
Washington Post
May 9, 2001
[for personal use only]
Letter From Russia 
Patriotism, Selling Like Hot Cakes 
By Susan B. Glasser
Washington Post Foreign Service

MOSCOW

Just a few years ago, Misha Kozarev and his friends plied their dates with 
amaretto, the latest novelty liqueur from the West. They snacked on Snickers 
and frequented video cafes that played Sylvester Stallone movies. If it was 
imported, it was hip.

Today, Kozarev is general manager of a popular new radio network that plays 
nothing but homegrown rock. Ersatz Spice Girls and would-be Madonnas are 
banned. And he hasn't seen anyone order amaretto in a long while.

"It was very uncool to be Russian in the beginning of the '90s," Kozarev 
said. "Every newspaper and television show was obsessed with showing how bad 
this country is and how hopeless we are and how good life is in the West. Now 
it's cool to be Russian again."

Indeed, from the all-Russian rock on Kozarev's radio stations to the "made in 
Russia" labels showing up in supermarkets, consumer nationalism has risen 
with political nationalism under President Vladimir Putin. Western companies 
that once found it easy to sell anything with English on the package now take 
pains to obscure their ownership of Russian brands. If a product isn't nasha 
-- Russian for "ours" -- it's simply harder to sell.

In advertising, as in politics, plays on patriotism are in. Russian bears 
sell beer and kerchiefed babushkas star in cutting-edge music videos. The 
trademark onion domes of Russian churches decorate labels for chocolate bars 
and dumplings. Far from being an oxymoron, Russian Style is a cigarette brand 
made by a Western tobacco firm just for the Russian market.

There's even a name for this process: "Russification." At a time when 
globalization means more of the same around the world, Russia is defying the 
trend by turning inward again.

"I try to avoid foreign products," said 45-year-old teacher Tamara Filatova 
over an after-school snack of homemade wine and sweet Russian cake. Her 
colleague Elena Pavlovskaya grimaced when offered a Pepsi, as fellow teacher 
Svetlana Yevlash threw in: "Our products are better than foreign ones."

Marketing surveys confirm how dramatic the turnabout has been for a country 
that once embraced all things Western as the antidote to 70 years of 
communist deprivation. Before 1998, according to the firm Comcon, only 48 
percent of Russians said they preferred to buy domestic goods when 
considering quality and not just price. By 1999, that figure was 90 percent. 
It's a striking change accelerated by the 1998 ruble devaluation that made 
many imported goods inaccessibly expensive for Russians.

Economists say Western firms lost as much as two-thirds of their market share 
after the crash -- and have yet to fully recover even as the Russian economy 
has bounced back. "Domestically produced goods have knocked international 
brands out of the top slot virtually across the board," the magazine 
Euromoney recently proclaimed.

While price has a lot to do with the Russian rout -- 85 percent of Russians 
cannot afford imported luxuries as average salaries hover around $80 a month 
-- the change suggests something deeper. In a place where consumer choice is 
still a novelty, where a decade ago a hunk of generic cheese indifferently 
wrapped in plain brown paper marked a successful day of shopping, the change 
suggests just how uneasy Russia still is about its own evolving brand of 
capitalism and the West that exported it.

These days, ads are aimed at salving the wounded pride of an ex-superpower 
struggling to reassert itself. And they are pitched to "regional, low-income 
citizens who believe the U.S. should not be ahead of Russia," said Marina 
Malikhina, head of a marketing research firm.

British American Tobacco was perhaps the first to capitalize on this idea. 
When it launched its Yava Gold cigarettes just before the 1998 crisis, the 
ads were a prototype for the new patriotism -- semi-humorously, 
semi-seriously showing a Russian bear in a "retaliatory strike" on the Empire 
State Building.

Like the nationalistic ads that followed, it was patriotic revenge on the 
triumphant post-Cold War West. The fact that it's those same Western 
capitalists who are often reaping the profits is usually left unsaid.

"The most successful products today are local ones created by Western 
companies and promoted using Western techniques but aimed at Russian 
patriotism," said Alexander Gromov, managing director of the Moscow office of 
the international ad agency Saatchi & Saatchi. "They are talking to Russians 
speaking their language -- but using all the tricks of Western marketing."

When U.S. confectionary giant Mars started a new candy bar here recently, it 
named it Derzhava -- a politically loaded word that translates literally as 
"power" and is the unofficial slogan of Russia's strong-state crowd.

The Derzhava television ad campaign appeals directly to Russians who believe 
they have been left behind by capitalism: A husband, his wife and her mother 
sit at their modest country dacha watching in disgust as their nouveau-riche 
neighbors haul in tacky statues to adorn their glitzy new palace. As the 
husband bites into his chocolate, he reassures the tea-drinking mother and 
daughter: "Forget about money; taste is everything."

But it's a homegrown company -- Wimm-Bill-Dann -- that offers perhaps the 
most widely recognized example of how firms have accommodated themselves to 
the shift in post-Soviet consumer culture. Back in the early 1990s, fledgling 
Wimm-Bill-Dann created a bestselling juice brand with the cryptic and, to a 
Russian ear, completely Western-sounding name J7. Under the new mood, 
Wimm-Bill-Dann, now the country's largest dairy and juice company, chooses 
only Russian names for its products.

Eager to compete with Wimm-Bill-Dann, the international dairy firm Danone has 
invested millions in local plants and embraced the buy-Russian hook, even 
marketing its own brand of "Classic Russian" kefir, a sour yogurtlike drink 
that is a Russian staple. "Made in Russia" may be stamped prominently on the 
bottle, but Danone's kefir costs more than its competitors and doesn't taste 
classic enough for the purists.

"The 'Made in Russia' label is an affirmation we belong here," said the 
company's local marketing director, Mark Putt. But he acknowledged, sitting 
in his office at the famous Soviet-era Bolshevik Biscuit factory that Danone 
has purchased, "Danone will never be leaders in kefir. It's a very 
traditional Russian thing."

On the other side of Moscow from the Bolshevik factory, the cash-strapped 
teachers of School No. 1280 agree that buying Russian is a state of mind and 
not simply a matter of price. As much as anything, it's about identity -- a 
realization that while they may now be free to choose Coca-Cola and 
McDonald's, they really prefer the strong black tea and omnipresent sausages 
of their Soviet past -- they're nasha.

"I prefer Russian food in general," said Galina Jacobson, an English teacher 
whose daughter lives in America.

Like the others, Filatova recalled her first infatuation with Western goods, 
going to the supermarket "like it was a museum." But she laughed about her 
one-and-only time trying a Snickers ("too sweet") and drew the line at just 
about anything foreign for her home, even resisting her friends' pleas to try 
a German-made toothpaste.

Later, on a trip to the market, she put only one imported product in her 
modest basket -- a $1.45 can of cat food. And that only because there's no 
domestic alternative her cat will eat. Pointing to a carton of 
Wimm-Bill-Dann's yogurt, Filatova said she had chosen it over Danone's 
similarly priced version because "it tastes better. It's nasha."

To Kozarev and his friends at their all-Russian rock network, that's the 
point. With financial backing from controversial local tycoon Boris 
Berezovsky and international media magnate Rupert Murdoch, they tested three 
formats: Two emphasized Western music, one was homegrown. It won.

"It turned out that we have been overfed with Western culture, and not of the 
best quality," Kozarev said. "There was a strong reaction against it."

They chose a simple name for their stations: Nasha.

******* 

Johnson's Russia List Archive (under construction):  http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson

CDI Russia Weekly:  http://www.cdi.org/russia

CDI Headlines:  http://www.cdi.org/

Defense Monitor:  http://www.cdi.org/dm/2001

Weekly Defense Monitor:  http://www.cdi.org/weekly/

CDI News Analysis and Press Advisories:  http://www.cdi.org/press/

CDI Video:  http://www.cdi.org/adm