Johnson's Russia List #6036 23 January 2002 davidjohnson@erols.com A CDI Project www.cdi.org [Note from David Johnson: 1. Luba Schwartzman: ORT Review. 2. NTV news summary. 3. Interfax: Russian economy grows 5.7% in 2001. 4. Interfax: Illegal capital flight put at up to $1.5 bln per month. 5. Moscow Times: Grigory Yavlinsky, Balancing the Accounts for 2001. 6. Novaya Gazeta: Alexander Mineev, FROM ELECTING PUTIN TO PUTIN'S CHOICE: WHO SUPPORTS HIM. About Putin's decision to change the course of Russia's foreign policy. 7. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Alexandra Novikova, SEEKING EMPLOYMENT: SUBMIT PROPOSALS TO THE PARTY. Priorities and current developments for several major parties. 8. Reuters: Franks sees no permanent US bases in Central Asia. 9. Kommersant: Boris Volkhonsky, THE US TRIES WALKING IN THE SHOES OF THE USSR. Explaining a long-term US military presence in Central Asia. 10. St. Petersburg Times: Maxim Popov, With the New Land Code, the Time To Buy Land Is Now. 11. Peter Lavelle: Untimely Thoughts - A sorry cast of characters. 12. New York Times editorial: Silencing Critics of the Kremlin. 13. Washington Post: Masha Lipman, Blackout in Russia.] ******* #1 ORT Review www.ortv.ru Compiled by Luba Schwartzman (luba7@bu.edu) Research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology and Policy at Boston University HEADLINES, Tuesday, January 22, 2002 - Russian President Vladimir Putin chaired a meeting on the socio-economic development of Chechnya. Minister Vladimir Yelagin, head of the Chechen administration Akhmat Kadyrov, and Chechen Prime Minister Stanislav Ilyasov were present. Salaries, pensions, public transport, banks and the financial system were on the agenda. - Russian journalist Grigory Pasko will not ask the president for a pardon, but his lawyer stated that a decision by President Putin to pardon Pasko on the basis of the appeals by human rights organizations would be a humane act. - President Putin met with the State Duma faction and group leaders to discuss the questions that the parliament will work on this year. The president told the deputies that there are 116 high-priority bills, which include pension laws, land reform, and social guarantees to military servicemen. - The Russian Ethnographic Museum celebrates its 100th anniversary. - The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation has began reviewing the right of the President to dismiss governors. The case was initiated simultaneously by three claimants -- Chuvash President Nikolai Fedorov, the parliament of Adygeya, and the parliament of Yakutia. Fedorov withdrew his appeal, since there has been no precedent for the use of the law, but the parliamentarians decided to go through with the process. - TV-6 is no longer broadcasting. Media Minister Mikhail Lesin announced that a contest for the frequency will be held on March 27th. NTV+Sport, which pledged not to apply for permanent broadcasting, will use the channel in the interim. - President Putin met with Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexii II, who awarded the president "for outstanding activity in solidifying the unity of the orthodox peoples." - Federal Border Troops Commander Konstantin Totsky declared that Americans must leave Afghanistan after completing the operations. - In Daghestan, Deputy Mayor of Makhachkala Akhmed Aliev and his wife were found shot to death in their home at about 9am this morning. According to witnesses, there were two masked assailants; two guns were recovered from the crime scene. An investigation has been initiated under a terrorism statute. - Colonel General Vladimir Mikhailov will take over the post of General Air Force Commander from Anatoly Kornukov, who is retiring. - An airplane carrying 20 tons of medical goods has set off for Kabul. Russian humanitarian to Afghanistan will total 4.5 billion dollars. - President Putin presented state awards to 41 Russian political experts, scientists, and cultural figures including cardiologist Valery Shumakov, chess grandmaster Anatoly Karpov, writer Konstantin Vanshenkin, Sberbank Chairman Andrei Kazmin, head of the procurator's international legal department Issa Kostoev, actor Mikhail Boyarsky, singer Oleg Gazmanov and writer Mikhail Zhvanetsky. - A state of emergency is still in effect in flood-damaged Krasnodarsk krai. ****** #2 NTV news summary January 22, 2002 The following is a transcript of the main news broadcast at 1900 on the Segodnya Program. The Presenter is Pyotr Marchenko For the first time in Russia broadcasting on one of the federal channels was cancelled today following a court order. The TV6 license was suspended at midnight sharp. A decision on who will control the channel 6 frequency will be made in two months. There's to be a tender for the channel on the 27th of March. Vladimir Kondratyev reports on the dramatic final events surrounding TV6. -------- The authorities resorted to strong-arm tactics in dealing with TV companies by interrupting TV programs on air for the second time since spring last year. In April last year when NTV fate was under the spotlight a TV program was suddenly interrupted because of an apparent attempt to divert the frequency. Last night at midnight the viewers of Channel 6 also didn't get to watch the closing titles. The authorities kept their word, at least formally. There was no black screen, but instead of a regular picture there appeared a technical one. Instead of TV6 NTV Plus sports programs started in the morning with the tempting promises of broadcasts from the Salt Lake City Olympic games. The very fact that the license was suspended and the broadcasting stopped isn't a great surprise. Press minister Michael Lesin announced these measures yesterday, after the order on the liquidation process initiated on the request of Lukoil were passed to him by court officials. What is really surprising is the hurry in which the ruling has been carried out. Lesin claimed it would take a day or two to clarify all the judicial and technical details. According to the TV6 staff, the process of pulling the plug on all the studios was accompanied by switching off the office phones and Internet lines which were switched back on later. There were fears that the TV6 journalists and technicians would be denied passes to work and their working places would be sealed up. That hasn't happened yet, though video equipment and cassettes are not allowed to be carried out. All the journalists stayed at work today. Yet nobody knows what future lies ahead for the new company registered a few days ago by a team of journalists and whether it is going to take part in the competition for the frequency. News on the radio and in the Internet is hardly an adequate replacement for the professional team of journalists from TV6, but the main thing to do now is to keep them working as a team. And that amounts to one thousand and two hundred people in Moscow alone. There are one hundred and sixty regional TV6 partners who also face problems. There have been delays in wages since December. That was one of the primary questions to Kiselev, Krichevsky, Korchagin and other managers at today's staff meeting. No decisions were passed, the company managers just tried to explain the situation to the employees. But it seems that this particular question should be addressed to Berezovsky who at present isn't able to finance the company as he used to. None of the many correspondents, foreign included, were admitted to Studio five where the meeting took place. It was a private talk only for the TV6 insiders. As Interfax reports nothing special was announced, the TV6 management promised to keep working on all issues and to pay wages as soon as possible. Evgeny Kisilyev claimed not to have any doubts as to the results of the forthcoming tender for the license though he said he wasn't going to give in and quit fighting. While Kisilyev was addressing the journalists in "Ostankino", Press minister Lesin was holding a press conference to announce the dates of the tender and to reassure the TV6 team as far as he could. The team of journalists are unable to finance its own broadcasting or raise necessary funds for it yet. The Ministry knows that perfectly well. The question of finding an investor or a financial partner is still to be addressed. The only hope is that the situation finally takes a turn for the better and a miracle happens, the miracle for which the TV6 staff is waiting - a return to the airwaves. It seemed last week that the sides were nearing a compromise and that the team would stay on the channel. That doesn't seem so possible today and yet there must be a reason for President Putin and Premier Kasyanov publicly announcing their utmost support for the TV6 journalists. The only ones who didn't get the news of the TV6's shutdown were participants in the "Behind the glass - two" project. They are leading their routine life the coverage on which can be found in Internet. "We are working on sheer enthusiasm and don't know whether we'll get paid"'- one of the project managers said. Vladimir Kondratyev, Igor Kovrigin, Vyacheslav Voronov and Alexei Chervyakov, NTV, Moscow. --------------- The latest developments have caused quite a stormy reaction among Russian politicians, each of them having his own version of what happened. ----- Deputy Morozov: "This problem is a Molotov's cocktail consisting of politics, economic conflicts and, if I'm not mistaken, of personal confrontations between some well-known people. How shall we react to that? With great regret. It's a pity that our famous journalists no longer work on Channel 6 which has been quite effective lately and that such a thing has happened." State Duma Speaker Mr. Seleznev: "I think the TV Channel managers got confused. In Korchagin's initial request there seemed to be an option for the TV6 team to keep working on a temporary basis until they could bid for the permanent license. Then they suddenly changed their mind and decided to reject the previous agreement. And here is the result." Leader of the Union of the Right Forces Boris Nemtsov: "Putin was fighting against Berezovsky, and the TV viewers and journalists fell victim. As often happens in Russia a noble fight against the oligarchs has ended in disgrace." Leader of The People's Deputy faction Gennady Raikov: "The managers at TV6 are largely to blame. The Channel has been closed because they should have been more consistent in their actions. The Press ministry agreed to let them come on air until the tender for the frequency. It was the executive director Kisilyev who yesterday sent a letter with the request to regard the previous interim agreement invalid. The Press ministry had nothing to do but to follow the law." Vice-Speaker Vladimir Zhirinovsky -"The main mistake they made which led to the shutdown is that they kept broadcasting for abroad. They used the old NTV net and broadcasted all the programs, political and analytical included, for the US and Canadian audience. What for? They shouldn't have done it. They should have waited till everything calmed down, they should have registered as a new entity and then they should have struck a new deal. They should have moved step by step. And what do we have now? A revolution. Everybody in Russia likes revolutions, journalists are no exception. ---------------------------- It should be stressed that those in the mass media are also expressing quite different views on the situation surrounding TV6. ------- Eduard Sagalayev - "It's a pity that we have to deal with such a battle between shareholders. It's quite obvious that one of the shareholders is backed up by the authorities, though. That seems to be the real reason for what has happened." Oleg Poptsov - "Two laws have clashed. The law on the freedom of property versus the law on the freedom of speech. By every way possible we are trying to prove the priority of the law on the freedom of property over the law on the freedom of speech. I don't think it's right. First of all, because the two laws are equal. Information or speech is property too and as property it also needs freedom for further development." Raf Shakirov -"There's no doubt the case is political. The team's actions are quite inconsistent thus causing contradictory public reaction. Igor Shabdurasulov -"It seems to me that neither side has a clearly defined position on this. Their stands are constantly changing, so there is no possibility of analyzing the current situation in order to solve it." --------------------------- The First Vice-Premier of the City Administration and his wife are reported killed in Makhachkala this morning. Practically all the law-enforcement agencies are taking part in the search for two hit men involved in this. Akhmed Aliev was considered to be the Daghestani capital mayor's right-hand man and had never been involved in any scandals. The investigators are still baffled as to the reasons for this murder. ------------------------- A new emergency in Israel. A terrorist sniper managed to start shooting in the very center of Jerusalem, in one of the busiest places of the city. Fifteen injured have been reported. ------------------------- Another high-ranking Russian official had to spend several hours in the General Prosecutor's office today. As reported by the news agencies Head of the State Customs Committee (GTK) Mikhail Vanin was summoned for questioning as a witness for the case of the "Grand" and "Tri Kita" (Three Whales) furniture centers. These companies are charged with smuggling. The centers' management in its turn has accused two high-ranking GTK officials of office abuse. No details on Mr. Vanin's questioning have been disclosed yet. The only thing GTK confirms is the fact of Mr. Vanin paying a visit to the Prosecutor's office. The General Prosecutor's office has offered no comment on the case. ------------------------- Further special trains carrying radioactive waste from Bulgaria are to appear in Russia as early as this year. It's part of a framework agreement on dismantling the Bulgarian Kozlodui nuclear power station. Krasnoyarsky mining-chemical plant already received the first nuclear fuel cargo last year. The story has caused a high-profile scandal. Russian ecologists claim the Bulgarians have not only brought in import-denied substances but haven't paid for their processing either. -------------------------- A powerful snowstorm is hitting Sakhalin today. Due to bad weather the island has been cut off from the mainland. The local authorities regard the situation as an emergency. The runways of Sakhalin airport are covered with snow. Sea connections have also been interrupted because of a huge storm in the Tatar Strait. Heavy snow has cut telephone lines. The roads are covered with layers of snow two meters deep. Civil defense and emergency situations authorities recommend residents stay indoors and stock up on food, medicines and candles in case it takes some time for the bad weather to pass. The only transport to function on the island is the railway. The trains still keep to the schedule. Local operative services work round-the- clock. According to the weather forecasts the storm is to last for two more days and then it will move to Kamchatka. --------------------- A trial for the death of twenty-two servicemen from the Sergiyev-Posad Militia special forces (OMON) in Chechnya is the focus of attention again. High-ranking militia men were summoned to court today. Ministry of the Interior generals gave their version of the tragic events when the militia servicemen were killed by friendly fire. ******* #3 Russian economy grows 5.7% in 2001 MOSCOW. Jan 23 (Interfax) - Production of goods and services in the five core sectors of the Russian economy - industry, construction, agriculture, transport and retail trade - grew 5.7% in 2001, compared to growth of 10.2% in 2000, the State Statistics Committee reported on Wednesday. In December 2001, production in the core sectors was up 5.1% year- on-year and 2% from the previous month. Industrial production in 2001 rose 4.9% to 5.881 trillion rubles, agricultural output grew 6.8% to 1.001 trillion rubles, capital investment was up by an estimated 8.7% to 1.6 trillion rubles, freight turnover increased by 3.1% (including 4.9% by rail) and retail sales rose 10.8%, the committee said. The visible foreign trade turnover in the first eleven months of 2001 grew 5.4% year-on-year as exports slipped 0.5% while imports rose 19.5%. Real disposable incomes rose by an estimated 5.9% in 2001, and the real wage was up 19.8%; in nominal terms, not adjusted for inflation, wages rose 45.5%. Consumer price inflation was 18.6% in 2001 and producer price inflation was 10.7%. In December, industrial output rose 2.6% year-on-year, agricultural production grew 4.7%, and capital investment was up by an estimated 11.5%. Freight turnover grew 1.8%, including 0.7%. Retail sales in December were up 11.4% year-on-year. ******* #4 Illegal capital flight put at up to $1.5 bln per month MOSCOW. Jan 23 (Interfax) - Illegal capital flight from Russia amounts to $1 billion to $1.5 billion per month, according to various estimates, Federal Tax Police chief Mikhail Fradkov said on Tuesday. "In our country laundering of illegal income is closely tied to illegal capital flight abroad," Fradkov said during an Internet conference. Not a single security agency is capable of handling this problem on its own, so the tax police is improving cooperation with other relevant agencies, he said. "Right now we are shifting contacts with our foreign colleagues onto a course of concrete informational and rapid-reaction cooperation. It think that the more active our cooperation is, the more effectively we'll be able to fight transnational criminal groups, money laundering and capital flight," Fradkov said. He said fly-by-night firms usually play a key role in illegal money transfers abroad. Fradkov recalled that 20 Moscow banks inspected by the tax police alone transferred about $5 billion abroad through such firms. Fictitious firms taking part in foreign economic operations often commit major fraud, undermining the country's reputation, Fradkov said. ****** #5 Moscow Times Janaury 23, 2002 Balancing the Accounts for 2001 By Grigory Yavlinsky The most important positive political development of 2001 was without doubt the decisions taken by the country's leadership in the wake of Sept. 11. President Vladimir Putin, despite opposition from the political elite and from his own entourage, came out in favor of Russia joining the international counter-terrorism coalition. The decision was the right one, not only because of the show of solidarity with the victims of the ignoble attack, but also because the threats with which the United State was confronted are no less and possibly even greater for Russia. The main point is that the direction of foreign policy following Sept. 11 has considerable strategic potential and could provide a basis for Russia to become a European state. In the light of this, the agreements signed in Brussels in October during meetings between Putin and the leaders of EU member states are significant. However, the fact is that a serious shift toward Europe can only be achieved if foreign policy steps are attended by real and profound changes in domestic policy. So far, no such changes have taken place. On the contrary, domestically, there have been no positive developments, only negative ones. The main one is the crackdown on independent national television companies, in part through the authorities' attack on NTV's editorial team and later on when it moved to TV6. The upshot is news coverage on different channels is becoming more and more uniform -- this is a huge leap backwards to the absolute supremacy of a single "correct" point of view. And it is but one in a long list of things that includes the liquidation of the Presidential Pardons Commission and the conviction of Grigory Pasko on charges of treason -- something that should be taken as a clear warning to all democratic politicians and journalists, and indeed to all people of independent views. The direction of domestic policy toward "managed democracy" and an administrative-bureaucratic corporatist system -- in which emasculated democratic institutions and procedures serve as some kind of fig leaf -- remains unchanged. This system operates for the benefit of bureaucrats and functionaries. In this country, bureaucrats and the majority of politicians neither want nor are capable of running the country under democratic conditions, they merely want to look respectable in the eyes of the international community. Thus, instead of democracy, they are creating a Potemkin Village, whose facade merely has a European appearance. In reality, power is concentrated in one single center: the Kremlin. The State Duma has ceased to play any serious role and merely acts obediently on the instructions of the executive branch. The government is entirely technocratic and largely represents the interests of natural monopolies and big business, which is intertwined with the state. Our judges are not independent and frequently do not so much pass sentence as render services to the authorities, as in the case of Pasko, TV6 and many, many others at different levels. Civil society is developing dynamically, but its participation in political and public life remains extremely limited. Last year, there was a very real danger of the authorities establishing control over certain civic organizations and the danger persists, especially for those organizations that monitor the state's compliance with human rights and liberties laws. I am convinced that the whole organization of the pompous "Civic Forum" in the Kremlin Palace of Congresses was undertaken with a view to taking control of these organizations. The advantages of "managed democracy" are very seriously discussed. The so-called political elite effectively foists upon the country the following choice: either managed democracy or none at all. However, managing democracy is tantamount to destroying it, and with its destruction, the only hope for a worthy future for the country and its citizens will also be lost. Last year showed very clearly that the administrative-bureaucratic system veiled in sham democracy is extremely ineffective. Federative reforms and the construction of a "vertical executive chain of command" have clearly failed. Presidential plenipotentiaries in the federal districts can by no means be called key political figures, even in individual regions of their districts. In regional elections, it has become normal practice to use the dirtiest of smear tactics. The courts, the prosecutor's office and law enforcement agencies carry out political "orders," and the elimination of candidates (on some technicality) on the eve of elections is widespread. Furthermore, governors and the presidents of ethnic republics who pledge loyalty to the Kremlin are not only given carte blanche to continue their arbitrary and unchecked rule, but also get to run for an unconstitutional third term in office. The authorities' propagandists have declared victory in the Chechen "information war." However, the silence does not undo what is happening on the ground. Every day people are dying -- including Russian soldiers and innocent civilians -- and every day is marked by the complete absence of the rule of law. The policy toward Chechnya is at a complete impasse and is both senseless and dangerous. It has made the situation much more difficult than it was in 1999, when the federal government had a unique opportunity to win the support of the majority of the civilian population of Chechnya. The situation has deteriorated to such an extent that now a huge amount of preparatory work will be required for talks, which cannot be avoided, to produce some positive results. Is capitalism in Russia becoming more civilized? Gradually enterpreneurs, some major industrialists, certain journalists and the public in general are coming to the realization that "wild capitalism" is hostile to an open society, democracy and the observance of human rights. It is not only inadmissible and anathema to modern liberalism, but also hugely counterproductive to the emergence of a competitive, modern market economy. The problem, however, is that the state is closely tied to this system and is shored up by it, in spite of all the talk about "distancing from the oligarchs." Economic growth, about which so much has been said for most of the past year, has been primarily a product of high world oil prices. This cannot be considered an achievement of the government, but rather a stroke of good fortune that cannot be relied upon to endure. In fact, there have been very few significant reforms. Yes, taxes have been reduced and an acceptable budget has been passed, the parameters of which to a large extent coincide with the alternative budget produced by the Yabloko party. In general, obstacles are not being overcome and problems are simply being put off until tomorrow. This could result in Russia irreversibly falling behind Europe and the developed countries of the world. The necessary structural reforms, new technologies, real private property, and support for small and medium-sized enterpreneurs are not in place. In addition, there are serious demographic problems, as well as the problem of reforming the armed forces, on which the security of the country directly depends. And time is running out. This year will in many respects be decisive, and success or failure depends on whether measures will be implemented to make good on the lag. If the problems of structural economic reform, attracting investment, creation of a modern, independent judicial system and stamping out corruption are not resolved in the next year or year and a half, Russia's statehood may be under threat. A great deal depends on the actions of the democratic opposition. Yabloko is completely and irreconcilably opposed to the course aimed at establishing a full-blown corporatist police state. A broad coalition is only now beginning to be formed. Last year, there were two sessions of the Democratic Consultative Meeting, which brings together political and civic organizations of a democratic orientation. The formation of a democratic coalition will be achieved by working out common positions on the most important issues in the life of the country, coordinating actions for the defense of human rights, democratic institutions and independent media. For Yabloko, 2001 was not a bad year, although it was also not an easy one. Over the past six months, more than 6,000 people joined the party. We are building a party on new principles. In elections for the party's leadership and for selecting a candidate for the presidential elections, we for first time in Russia plan to hold primaries. Our goals for the immediate future are to promote the necessary reforms for the country. In the economy this is the continuation of tax reform, creation of a functioning banking system and the development of legislation to facilitate investment. In state building, top of the agenda is to make the Federation Council an elected body. We will also do all within our power to push military reform forward. This is absolutely essential and can be achieved in the immediate future. Grigory Yavlinsky is leader of the Yabloko party. He contributed this comment to The Moscow Times. ****** #6 Novaya Gazeta No. 4 January 21-23, 2002 FROM ELECTING PUTIN TO PUTIN'S CHOICE: WHO SUPPORTS HIM About Putin's decision to change the course of Russia's foreign policy Author: Alexander Mineev [from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html] PUTIN'S INITIATIVE TO MAKE RUSSIA'S FOREIGN POLICY PRO-WESTERN HAS GENERATED RUMORS IN POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC CIRCLES ABROAD. OPINIONS HAVE BEEN DIVIDED, AS USUAL. SO IS PUTIN'S INITIATIVE A STRATEGIC MOVE OR A NEW TREND IN RUSSIA'S FOREIGN POLICY? While President Putin was confirming that his new foreign policy is aimed at expanding cooperation with the West, the leading analysts in the West were arguing in Brussels, where a forum on security issues took place. How stable is this course, and how stable is the decision Vladimir Putin made on September 11? What is the decision based on, and might a new, impulsive turn be expected one day? Many European governments are afraid that another sweeping turn in the anti-Western direction may occur in Russia's foreign policy, and are calculating the possible political aftermath of their steps to meet Moscow's initiatives, Stephen de Spiegeleire, director of RAND's Center for Russia and Eurasia said. On the other hand, a support of the pro-Western policy inside Russia depends on the mutuality of the West. An ambivalent understanding of Russia's development prevails in the West. There are reassuring signals from economic and legal spheres, but a new centralization of the power, unscrupulous methods of waging warfare in Chechnya, infringement on the freedom of the press are on the other scale. Even though the West has temporarily disregarded some aspects in response to Russia's friendly effort, it would not last for long. And the first signs of it are evident already. Some participants of the forum skeptically considered that supporting of the anti-terrorist coalition by Putin was nothing more but a tactical maneuver. However, the majority of forum participants tended to believe that it was a considered strategic decision. In the opinion of Dmitry Trenin of the Moscow Carnegie Center, the decision was based on fundamental interests of Putin: to choose the Western, but not the Stalin's variant of modernizing Russia. Angela Stent, Director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies of the Georgetown University was trying to perceive, what exactly circles of Russia's political establishment are backing this policy and guarantee its steadiness. However, in the US both the "circles" and the "establishment" shape and secure the policy, and the policy is slightly changed when a new president comes to power. In the case of Russia the whole point is that the strategic decision is not yet a strategy. A course in foreign policy taken on September 11 is only the choice of the president, his sole decision, caused by defectiveness of the democratic system in Russia. A manifestation of authoritarianism, one might say. Therefore Putin's personal popularity in the country and consistency in his actions can be the only guarantee. Russia's relationship with the West and its European policy is an internal, rather than an external problem. In response to Putin's impulsive decision, the Western leaders offered similar impetuous initiatives, summoned to accelerate Russia's involvement in the democratic family. These initiatives are reduced to establishment of new institutions and structures, in which Russia would immediately be given the role of an influential partner and ally. There is also Blair's initiative of establishing a NATO-20, and Chiraq's proposal of the European Security Council. However, as some participants of the Brussels' forum rightly noted, institutional framework is always of secondary significance. Have the bad institutions ever impeded strengthening confidence between Russia and the EU, Russia and NATO? Has the Partnership and Cooperation agreement with the EU exhausted itself? Is the NATO-20 likely to resolve the problem of relations between NATO and Russia easier than the Permanent Joint Council, in which Russia formally has, by the way, 50% of the vote instead of 5%? The imperfection is about the contents of the institutions' work, rather than in their quantity. More exactly, the drawback is about the lack of mutual wish, which should reveal itself. There is shortage for people in the milieu of Russia's bureaucratic and security structures, who would really share liberal values and to which the declared policy of closing in with the West is appealing. We need a real bureaucratic revolution, an inflow of new blood, an appearance of a new generation of diplomats and generals to replace the current ones, who are mainly raised up in conformity with the standards of the Soviet Union. (Translated by Andrei Ryabochkin) ****** #7 Nezavisimaya Gazeta January 23, 2002 SEEKING EMPLOYMENT: SUBMIT PROPOSALS TO THE PARTY Priorities and current developments for several major parties Author: Alexandra Novikova [from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html] OVERALL, POLITICAL PARTIES IN RUSSIA ARE CONCERNED WITH STRENGTHENING THEIR POWER IN THE REGIONS; SOME OF THEM, HOWEVER, ARE ALREADY PREPARING FOR THE NEXT DUMA ELECTIONS. POLITICAL PARTIES PREPARE TO RESUME THEIR ACTIVITY AFTER THE NEW YEAR HOLIDAYS. Following a sequence of party congresses, most of them in December 2001 and January 2002 and concerned with bringing the structures' documentation in conformity with the law "On the Parties", there emerged a general effect that the political structures of Russia only took a time off. (...)ctOnly now Russia's political structures become to resume their activities after the New Year's holidays; so, the party life promises to become more diverse soon. What are the parties planning to do in the near future? We asked the leading political parties this question. Establishing regional branch offices is the fundamental problem the party authorities of United Russia faces. Unlike all the rest of the parties, it has to implement the most difficult step - to unite three local groups of the party in each of 89 regions and elect its local leaders. In an interview to our reporter, senior deputy of the Central executive committee of United Russia Yevgeny Trofimov told that the party has decided to use a non-typical approach to resolution of this delicate issue. Instead of ordering to solve all staff problems in the regions within a month, the membership of the party applied to governors, head of legislative assemblies in the regions and also regional envoys with a request to express their opinions about the most suitable candidacy for heading local branches of United Russia. As a result, over 2,000 proposals was submitted into the Central committee, and the most honorable would be picked out at a special meeting in March, and only after that the candidacies will be nominated to regional branch offices. After that the party will build up the network of local and primary party groups. Most frequently, university heads of local higher education institutions and also directors of enterprises are proposed, Trofimov said. In some regions, regional leaders even include themselves in the party lists, as, for instance, Ulianovsk governor Vladimir Shamanov. Moreover, to complete the main documents of the party and form the machinery of the new structure is among United Russia's plans. The Union of Right Forces (URF) is also active, as usual. Thus, in February the party of Boris Nemtsov intends to hold a conference dedicated to freedom of speech in Russia entitled "Power of press of the press on power?", and also a campaign aimed against toughening the visa regime for Russian citizens entering the US. Besides, the URF intends to continue upholding the necessity for conducting a military reform, which the government is about to resume to discuss in March. As for withdrawal of a part of party members from the URF, it would not excite a wave of withdrawals from the party, as is thought in the structure. However, an upcoming political council of the URF, at which confirmation of the authority of the head of the party's executive committee is expected, can be rather hard. Three nominees would claim to this post, which is currently occupied by Eldar Yanbukhtin, a source in the URF told us. Preparation of amendments to the Constitution, linked with transition of the Federation Council on the elective basis will be the main "surprise" from the URF. Yabloko is also preparing the bill of appointing the upper house by election; however, the party does not intend to amend the Constitution, deputy chairman of Yabloko Sergei Mitrokhin said. Basically, Grigory Yavlinsky's structure intends to focus on the struggle for banning exportation of the nuclear waste to Russia and also working out amendments into the law of reforming the housing services. Moreover, Yabloko also intends to work on the bill "On Public Television", which would enable forming a certain semblance of the BBC TV network, and also the document "On Public Monitoring of Activity of the Special Services." As for the party building, the entire year through Yabloko will be forming a network of election headquarters, which would not elect regional heads only, but also prepare for the next elections to the Duma. Unlike the parties mentioned above, the CPRF held its congress only last Saturday. Therefore, in the near future the structure under the head of Gennady Zyuganov intends to get ready for changing the registration of the party in the Justice Ministry. In order to succeed in that, the communists will have to hold conferences in the regions. Decisions adopted at the congress are to be confirmed at the conferences; after that the documentation will be submitted to the Justice Ministry headed by Yuri Chaika. However, the communists consider preparation for the impending parliamentary election to be their main task. It is piously believed in the CPRF that the parliamentary election will be held ahead of schedule. The major wave of tempestuous election campaigns is behind already, whereas less than two years is left until the next Duma election, if the forecast of the communists is not taken into account. So, the only factors which can enliven routine of current Russia's political structures are, on the whole, either the law "On the Parties", or law creation in the lower house of parliament. (Translated by Andrei Ryabochkin) ******* #8 Franks sees no permanent US bases in Central Asia By Olga Dzyubenko BISHKEK, Jan 23 (Reuters) - Washington does not plan to maintain a permanent military presence in ex-Soviet Central Asia despite a substantial build-up of troops there now, the general commanding the U.S.-led Afghan campaign said on Wednesday. "We don't intend to have permanent bases in the region," General Tommy Franks told reporters on a visit to Kyrgyzstan. But despite the remarks, sceptics in Russia said they suspected U.S. troops would not soon give up their new foothold in what Moscow still regards as its own backyard. Speaking after meeting Kyrgyzstan's President Askar Akayev in the capital, Bishkek, Franks said that even without a troop presence the United States would remain involved in the region as it continued its campaign against violent militants. "We will continue to have discussions with each of the countries in the region as well as a great many around the world," he said. After the September 11 attacks on the United States, Washington won permission for bases and logistical support from four of the five ex-Soviet Central Asian states near Afghanistan -- Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. The fifth, Turkmenistan, is officially neutral. While Moscow has also backed the U.S.-led coalition and raised no objection to the presence of U.S. troops in Central Asia, it has started to question how long they will remain. President Vladimir Putin has said he expects it not to be long. Sergei Yushenkov, the liberal deputy chairman of the security committee in Russia's State Duma lower house of parliament, said it made sense for the Americans to say the bases were temporary but to keep them indefinitely anyway. "I would not consider (Franks's) statement as the final decision of the United States," he told Reuters. "Central Asian countries may ask for these bases to have temporary status. But I think these countries will ask the United States to prolong that period as long as possible. "If the United States were to decline to keep permanent bases in central Asia, they would be behaving unpragmatically. I do not think they would behave unpragmatically." He said keeping the bases was in the interests of regional leaders, because they provided leverage in dealing with Moscow, created local jobs and helped guarantee overall security. There are now some 200 Americans at Kyrgyzstan's Manas airport near Bishkek and this will eventually build up to around 3,000 and some 40 aircraft. At least 1,500 are based in Uzbekistan's Khanabad airbase near the Afghan border. Franks will end a five-day visit to the region on Friday. (Additional reporting by Ivan Rodin in Moscow) ******* #9 Kommersant January 23, 2002 THE US TRIES WALKING IN THE SHOES OF THE USSR Explaining a long-term US military presence in Central Asia Author: Boris Volkhonsky [from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html] THE MAIN GOAL OF THE U.S. MILITARY OPERATION IN AFGHANISTAN SEEMS TO BE CLEAR NOW: OIL AND GAS DEPOSITS IN THE REGION, AND SUPPORTING THE ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF AMERICAN CORPORATIONS. HOWEVER, THE US DOES NOT SEEM TO BE WILLING TO WITHDRAW ITS TROOPS FROM CENTRAL ASIAN STATES EITHER. A tour by General Tommy Franks around Central Asian states is not a mere gesture of gratitude for the support in the counter-terrorist operation in Afghanistan. The whole matter is about a US military presence in the region "for a good long while." The main goal of the military presence is to uphold the economic interests of U.S. companies, primarily in the oil and gas sectors. At the very beginning of the counter-terrorist operation Washington, seeing Moscow's scowling explained the necessity for using airfields and bases in the territories of former Soviet republics exceptionally with the needs of the current operation: allegedly, the Pentagon needs airfields situated close to the theater of military operation and bases of logistical support. Reluctantly, Moscow agreed to accept this variant then. However, already early this year the situation changed radically. The military operation against the Talibs is almost accomplished, but liquidation of the bases is out of the question. U.S. official delegations became regular visitors to the region: on the line of the Congress, the Department of State and the Pentagon. Finishing his visit to Uzbekistan, leader of the Congress majority Tom Daschle said frankly: "We will increase our presence in this region in order to maintain US interests in Central Asia. Hence, our presence in the region will be permanent; a required level of confidence with governments of Central Asian states exists here already." The Americans have been mastering at least two military airfields in full swing: In Khanabad, Uzbekistan, close to border on Afghanistan, where at least 1,500 U.S. soldiers are stationed; in Kyrgyzstan this is the Manas airfield in the capital, which has the longest runway in the region. Tajikistan has also been offering its services, but Commander-in-Chief of the US Central Command general Tommy Franks is to make a definitive decision yet, whether the Tajik airfields are suitable for US planes (the general is expected to arrive in Dushanbe tomorrow). The increased activity of the Americans in Central Asia after the action actually ended has not remained unnoticed by the world press. The Guardian of London regarded these events "a grandiose strategic seizure of power in Central Asia." In Moscow, where former Soviet republics are viewed as the zone of vital interests for Russia, this activity gave rise to unconcealed irritation of the military and politicians both. Yesterday chief of the Federal Border Guard Service Konstantin Totsky, who had returned from Tajikistan, said that in his opinion, the Americans should go home as soon as the counter-terrorist operation in Afghanistan is accomplished. Some politicians echoed the general's words, advancing the old thesis of the vulnerability of Russia's borders "in the south." Meanwhile, it is evident that for the US its military presence in Central Asia is not an end in itself. In essence, the words former ambassador of the Taliban to Pakistan Abdul Salaam Zaeef had said the US had just begun to bomb Afghanistan, "The war is waged not because of Osama, but oil and gas fields in the region," prove to be correct. This topic is discussed ardently in the world press. Expert of the U.S. Council for International Relations Richard Butler told in the article, published in The New York Times: "Now the prize is oil - getting it and transporting it - and Afghanistan is again contested territory. The difference (between the current situation and the situation of the 19-20th centuries. - Kommersant) is that this time around, it is the United States that will be playing the game of Russia." Thus, increasing the US military presence in Central Asia is directly linked with the interests of the U.S. big business. According to Mr. Butler, the US is sharply interested in impairing its dependence of the main player in the oil market - Saudi Arabia. To achieve that, it must revive the projects of transporting oil and gas from Central Asia and the Caspian region. In part, this concerns a pipeline from Turkmenistan via Afghanistan to Karachi (to India in the long term; in addition, this is the reason for the interest Washington is showing in a resolution of the India-Pakistan conflict in Kashmir). Work on the project began in the mid-1990s with the involvement of US oil concern Unocal. However, the project was shelved because of the instability in Afghanistan at the time. Now Washington seems to have decided that it is high time the Afghan project was revived (as well as another - an oil pipeline along the route Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan, via which oil from Azerbaijan is supposed to reach Turkey, bypassing Russia). Increased activity by the U.S. military is observed not only in Central Asian states, but also to the west of the Caspian region. In particular, we have already reported twice on the close attention the Pentagon is paying to the former Russian military base of Vaziani in Georgia. (Translated by Andrei Ryabochkin) ****** #10 St. Petersburg Times January 22, 2002 With the New Land Code, the Time To Buy Land Is Now By Maxim Popov CONTRARY to what many people think, the new Land Code adopted in October has not brought about private ownership of land in Russia. The concept of private title to land has already existed for a number of years. A large number of companies and individuals had owned land long before the adoption of the new Land Code, and many of them had acquired the land on the secondary market. What new, then, has the Land Code brought? The Land Code has unequivocally provided for the ability to purchase land under newly constructed (as opposed to privatized) buildings. Previously, only a few regions (St. Petersburg included) had read into the old privatization legislation of 1992 to 1994 the right of owners of the newly constructed buildings to buy the land under them. In most of Russia's regions (Leningrad Oblast, for example), the authorities had been selling land only to the owners of privatized enterprises, while denying such a right to new investors. The provisions of the law "On the Introduction of the Land Code" elaborate the price of land beneath buildings. The price is determined based on the land-tax rate and the population of the municipality in which the land is located. The law sets upper and lower prices depending on the population, within which the regional authorities may establish their price. The upper price limit for high-population municipalities is 30 annual land-tax rates, while the minimum limit for the less-populated regions is three annual land-tax rates. Where regional authorities do not establish a price, the respective lower limit applies. The Russian government is authorized to establish coefficients ranging from 0.7 to 1.3 applicable to the price of the land. Until the respective government regulation is adopted, no coefficient applies. The procedures for actually buying land are not determined yet in most regions. In practice, the former procedures for sale to privatized enterprises apply. The procedure of privatization of land under the Land Code involves establishing a cadastre (or land-registry) lay-out of the plot. Obtaining a cadastre lay-out can take a significant amount of time - as much as six months at the state cadastre organizations. However, specialized private companies can significantly expedite the cadastre procedure so that it can take as little as one week. Many companies should now consider whether to purchase the land under their enterprises, which they have been leasing from the state up to this point. The pros of land purchase are as follows: . Purchasing is a one-time expense. You are not subject to fluctuations in rents, which are determined exclusively by the state and can be changed at any time. While the rent amount in many cases is nominal at present, this will not necessarily be the case in the future. . Land ownership allows additional leverage through the freedom to mortgage the land and the buildings constructed thereon without the consent of the landlord, which would otherwise be required in most cases. . On disposal of the enterprise, a company owning its land obtains a return of its investment by selling the land, as opposed to rent, which is a cost that can't be recovered. . With Russia's economic development looking positive for the future, land is liable to appreciate over time, so the company may obtain not only the return of, but also a premium onn its land investment. . A final factor is the fact that the land prices set by the law "On Introduction of the Land Code" are very modest as compared to those of other developed countries. Other business considerations aside, now is a good time to buy land in Russia: Land taxes are low, the lower prices set out in the code apply since most regional authorities have yet to set their own prices, and the government has not yet adopted the adjustment coefficients, which will likely be raised when they do get around to doing this. Now is a good time to consider this opportunity. Maxim Popov is a senior lawyer with Andersen Legal specializing in real estate transactions. He contributed this piece to the St. Petersburg Times. ****** #11 From: "Peter Lavelle" Subject: Untimely Thoughts Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 Peter Lavelle: Untimely Thoughts - A sorry cast of characters Pulling the pug on TV6 was a sad day for Putin's Russia. Not only has this unsavory tangle of events hurt the cause of freedom of speech in Russia, the rule of law has been grossly assaulted and President Putin has lost a lot of goodwill with the very people in the west he hopes to impress and emulate. Closing TV6 in many ways is an appropriate reflection of what has gone wrong in Russia since 1991 into the present. Many share blame for what has gone wrong; the character-types surrounding the closure of the TV station have been with us from the very start. Greed, power, position, and egos have beset the electronic media since the advent of post-Communist Russia. The debacles of NTV and TV6 are only two of the best examples of this country's halting leap to become a normal country. Both are examples of Putins selective approach to restructuring Russia. However, I fear emotions are flaring more than reasoned thoughts. Unlike some elements of an almost frenzied western press, freedom of speech has indeed suffered a set back, but a return to the Soviet Union it is not. It is not strange that the west focuses on this single issue so much. The concept of freedom of speech is one issue that the west -- because of its importance in the west -- can identity or differ itself from Russia. Everything else about Russia remains, to one degree or another, a mystery. Both the Russian government and the market place (of ideas) are still learning what a free media actually means. For some in the government, a free media is only free to champion and praise the ruling elite. Some monied individuals used the media to forward personalized agendas. Neither group has taken the interests of society to heart. This remains the case today. Besides, much of this whole affair was about money as well. Whoever gets the renewed license in late March -- with good management -- can look forward to attractive advertising revenues. I would not be surprised that this has been part of the Kremlin's plans all along. Putin and Kasyanov made claims to protect the people of TV6 only days ago. Putin's kind and magnanimous words, as usual, were made while abroad. (Sometimes I wonder if it would be better if the president ruled Russia while living in a more idealistic western environment). These words appear quite empty after the fact. Putin disappoints  his personal vendetta with Berezovsky is unbecoming of a statesman. I am as pleased as punch that the baneful Berezovsky is losing his influence in Russia. But as it seems to be the norm in Russian history, the cost may be higher than the lofty aim. Lesin also shows his most grotty side in this affair. The Minister has (again) made a mockery of the rule of law. Again, to please his master, he has drifted into the realm of ad hoc law making. Minister Lesin can no longer surprise us, but unfortunately he can continue to disappoint. The so-called victims of the government's work are not blameless. Many members the TV6 cast merely carried over the war of words and positioning from their NTV days. NTV and TV6 were more truthful about the war in Chechnya. Both were even better than their rivals in revealing government corruption. At the same time they had a political agenda that appeared more about the personal interests of Gusinsky and Berezovsky. Does anyone remember the media campaign covering the Duma elections of 1999? NTV's reporting was less than noble. I may be out of step with the conventional wisdom, but Kiselyov should not be remembered as Russia's godfather of the free word. The greatest casualties (besides the truth) are the rule of law and public confidence in the media. Again, the "dictatorship of law" is more "bout arbitrary political preferences of the powers-that-be. Engaging in illegality (or the legal void) and bad faith to make an difficult situation right is unacceptable. The "dictatorship of law" confirms the strong will continue to dominate the weak. The weak have no recourse, no different from TV6's dilemma. TV6 was legally exhausted into to submission. Putins victory over Berezovsky is as empty as it is meaningless. Satirist Viktor Shenderovich was right; the skill set of journalists does not include legal niceties. The law and the threat of force is the strong hand of the authorities. Does the tune "I fought the law and the law won" come to mind? TV6 in many ways out-manipulated itself. TV6 miscalculated about how the law, as it stands, in the end would probably defeat it. Legal reform remains an area of reform sadly lagging in Russia's restructuring project. The Russian public is also a victim. Not because they are outraged, but because the loss of TV6 is politics as usual -- and just one less TV broadcast in the regions. My very unscientific public opinion survey of this story tells me as much. Very few Russians I spoke to about TV6 mentioned the issue of freedom of speech. Rather they spoke about who is now stealing from whom. Putin is not seen as the bad guy, he is seen as a Russian ruler quieting an insalubrious business-political interest. What Putin, his government, and the Berezovsky-like business interests have done though is to undermined public confidence that the public sphere can ever truly change in Russia. The mistakes that have been made do not mean Russia is slipping back in some kind of Soviet past. The mistakes that have been should inform us that Russia's ruling elite has yet to take seriously the meaning of democratization. Disagreement with the government is not sedition. Disagreement with government policy can often help rulers fine-tune or correct misdirected policies. Would be media magnets have yet to learn that the electronic media is not a personalized soapbox. Both sides have yet to realize that TV should be much more than just another revenue stream to capture. Both sides still cannot manage to capture the hearts and minds of the average Russian. Reform of the electronic is still on the agenda. Putin and Russia are not evil, to recast a past reference. Reform is just occurring much more differently and painfully than we all had hoped. Peter Lavelle, Head of Research, IFC Metropol, Moscow, Russia ******* #12 New York Times January 23, 2002 Editorial Silencing Critics of the Kremlin In the Soviet years, Moscow curbed opposing voices in the name of safeguarding Communism. Now it appears that critical media outlets are being shut down in the name of regulating business. The latest casualty is TV-6, Russia's only independent television outlet. TV-6 inherited the mantle of NTV, the nationwide television network that was once independent enough to repeatedly criticize the Kremlin and show the realities of Chechnya until it was taken over by Gazprom, the state-controlled gas company, and made to toe a more respectful line. Many of NTV's best journalists moved to TV-6, where they continued their mission for a smaller but still loyal television audience. Now a Russian court has shut down TV-6 as well, using the same law that allowed the takeover of NTV last year. The TV-6 operation was owned largely by Boris Berezovsky, a forceful and unrelenting critic of President Vladimir Putin. Mr. Berezovsky's television venture was said to be doing fairly well until a minority shareholder insisted that the company be liquidated because of an obscure law that contradicted international accounting standards by including capital investments by owners as debts. In fact, the law was so misconceived that the Russian Parliament repealed it as of Jan. 1. A higher arbitration court simply ignored the repeal, and with unusual speed for such matters, shut down TV-6 as of midnight on Monday. Viewers suddenly found themselves watching an all-sports channel instead of the usual programming. Mr. Putin's supporters argue that Mr. Berezovsky has been wielding his media outlet as a political ax, and that the government has in effect liberated the TV-6 journalists from their owner's biases. Mr. Berezovsky's views are not the point. The point is that his journalists did not depend on the Kremlin's support or good will like those at other major networks. Without a network independent of the government, Russians around the country have access to only three major networks, all controlled in various ways by the state. The closing of TV-6 sends a message to other journalists at every level: criticizing the Kremlin can be bad for business, even worse for journalism. As President Bush pursues his new friendship with Mr. Putin, he should not be shy about raising free-press issues with the Russian leader. Indeed, he should make a point of discussing the subject when he travels to Moscow this spring. Sustaining a media free to criticize those in power is essential to Russia's political, judicial and economic development. ******* #13 Washington Post January 23, 2002 Blackout in Russia By Masha Lipman MOSCOW -- With the shutdown yesterday of TV-6, Russia has lost its last national television company not controlled by the government. The action comes only nine months after the squelching of Russia's biggest privately owned communications group, Media-Most. Last April its main asset, the national TV channel NTV, was taken over by a government surrogate. The Kremlin's victory over TV-6 came more easily than the previous one and has provoked little public reaction. Both operations were aimed at getting rid of defiant media tycoons: Vladimir Gusinsky, the former owner of Media-Most, and Boris Berezovsky, major shareholder of TV-6. The Kremlin regarded them as political rivals equipped with dangerous weapons. It was aided by public dislike of both media moguls, who are seen as self-seeking fat cats. The campaigns against both media institutions were disguised as business litigation. The bottom line is that in today's Russia, all national television broadcasting is either fully controlled by the Kremlin or constrained by self-censorship. The submission of NTV and now of TV-6 stands to encourage any local boss seeking to get rid of his own political and media rivals. In the provinces the struggle may be as fierce as in Moscow, but the methods are generally less sophisticated, and flagrant violations of the law are common. A local TV company in the city of Lipetsk was physically seized recently by a group of people reportedly acting with the governor's blessing. Last spring, as the Kremlin struggle against NTV reached its climax, the public was emotionally engaged. Thousands came out to rally in support of NTV -- an unusual public reaction. The political elite was swept by passionate debate. Some defended the Kremlin, arguing that the takeover of NTV really was just the resolution of a business dispute unrelated to freedom of speech. An eloquent minority called it a betrayal of democracy. On TV and radio talk shows emotions ran high. Today there is no such passion. True, some voices were raised against the liquidation of TV-6, and there were public expressions of concern over the immediate threat to freedom of the press. But the Kremlin propagandists barely feel the need to respond: The public clearly is not interested. It's not that people are unaware of the motives behind the liquidation of TV-6: In a recent St. Petersburg poll, 39 percent said it was a political move. But they see no problem with that. More than 70 percent in the same poll believe President Vladimir Putin is an advocate of democratic change. "The public does not want to defend its interests," remarked Yevgeny Yasin, a liberal economist. The Russian public does not see the TV-6 drama as having anything to do with its rights and freedoms. This was what made the Kremlin victory so easy. This public indifference, combined with high approval ratings for the political leadership (Putin's range between 70 percent and 80 percent), will make further subjugation of the media easy for the government. Some print media and online publications remain beyond Kremlin control. So far, the government has not sought to bring them under its thumb, since the newspaper runs are generally small and Internet access is still limited to a small percentage of the Russian population. But there is no question the Kremlin will be able to bring them under control if it deems it necessary. In a recent interview with Polish media, Putin lamented the Russian people's excessive dependence on the state. He blamed this attitude on the bad legacy of Communist government, which deprived its citizens of all property, responsibility and initiative. It appears, however, that the Russian president has peculiar ideas about how to encourage the Russian people to be more entrepreneurial and responsible. While he calls for reducing government control over economic matters, he appears to believe that government guidance and control are fine in other areas. Since a court decision 10 days ago that stripped TV-6 of its status as a privately owned company independent of the Kremlin, Putin has assumed the role of the benefactor and savior of its journalists. The TV-6 team will be assured of support from the government, he said. The journalists were thus offered a choice: either to be kicked out or to surrender to the Kremlin. They could accept financing from a source chosen by the government or cease to be broadcasters. One of the top managers of TV-6 referred to this dilemma as being caught between the bad and the very bad. After some hesitation, the journalists opted for the very bad alternative. The government reacted immediately: The broadcast of TV-6 was switched off at midnight Monday. The only way for the TV-6 team to come back on air will be with the Kremlin's forgiveness and blessing. This means that they, like NTV before them, will have to become reasonably loyal and cooperative with the Kremlin. Masha Lipman, deputy editor of a Russian newsmagazine financed by Vladimir Gusinsky, writes a monthly column for The Post. ******