Johnson's Russia List #6038 24 January 2002 davidjohnson@erols.com A CDI Project www.cdi.org [Note from David Johnson: 1. BBC Monitoring: Tender for controversial broadcasting licence officially launched in Russia. 2. Reuters: Chechen says Moscow contacts continue but no talks. 3. BBC Monitoring: Opera about Putin's private life could be produced in Russia. 4. Moscow Times editorial: Prosecutors Are Not The Problem. 5. BBC Monitoring: Russia may join Baku-Ceyhan pipeline project - sources. 6. BBC Monitoring: Russian premier against sharp rise of tariffs on services of natural monopolies. 7. Reuters: Russia limits rises in key state-regulated tariffs. 8. Moscow Times: Site Takes U.S. Opinion To Former Soviet States. 9. Financial Times (UK): Robert Cottrell and Andrew Jack, Doubts cast on Russian deal settling Czech debt. 10. Andrew Gentes: Reply to Lavelle/6036. 11. The Times (UK): Michael Binyon, Children face street curfew in Moscow. 12. Statement from NTV Plus. 13. John Deever: Re: 6031-Visas. 14. Obshchaya Gazeta: Russian official interviewed on plans for nationwide October census. 15. BBC Monitoring: Central Asian nations may prefer USA to Russia - Tajik newspaper. 16. Parlamentskaya Gazeta: STATE DUMA RESOLUTION ON ABM. 17. Reuters: WTO chief sees Russia in trade body next year. 18. New York Times: Floriana Fossato and Anna Kachkaeva, Putin's Message to the Media. 19. The Globalist: Slick Russia Vs. Free Media.] ******* #1 BBC Monitoring Tender for controversial broadcasting licence officially launched in Russia Source: Russia TV, Moscow, in Russian 0800 gmt 24 Jan 02 Rossiyskaya Gazeta [official government daily] today published an official press ministry announcement on the terms and conditions of a tender to be held on 27 March to determine who is to broadcast on vacant television and radio frequencies. This means that applications can be submitted starting from today. Press minister Mikhail Lesin has said there will be five or six contenders for the frequency on which the TV6 television company used to operate [until its closure on 22 January]. So far, no-one apart from the staff of TV6 has firmly indicated an intention to take part in the tender. There is still time though: the closing date for applications is 6 March. The applicants have to pay a fee of about R30m. The press ministry announcement says the applicant that submits the best broadcasting concept and feasibility study will be declared winner of the tender. ******* #2 Chechen says Moscow contacts continue but no talks By Peter Graff MOSCOW, Jan 24 (Reuters) - Chechen rebels are in telephone contact with the Kremlin but there are no immediate plans to relaunch peace talks after a first and only meeting last year, the rebel envoy said on Thursday. "Telephone contacts have continued between my assistants and deputies of (Moscow envoy Viktor) Kazantsev, but no meetings," Akhmed Zakayev told Reuters by telephone from Strasbourg in France, where the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe debated Chechnya this week. Zakayev, envoy of Chechen pro-independence President Aslan Maskhadov, briefly met Kazantsev, President Vladimir Putin's representative to southern Russia, at a Moscow airport in November for the only peace talks in more than two years of war. After months of toning down criticism of Moscow's Chechen campaign after the September 11 attacks on the United States, Western leaders have again been calling for talks to end the war. Since the November meeting, Moscow has said it is still willing to meet Maskhadov's representatives but the Chechens must disavow the use of force and lay down their arms. "Our position has always been clear. We are ready for talks without preconditions. My meeting with Kazantsev showed that," Zakayev said. "But we have no choice. We cannot halt our resistance when we face our complete destruction. The choice is Russia's -- do they want war or peace?" he said. "Since my meeting with Kazantsev, their acts of force against the population have become only more severe. It would be amoral for us to reopen talks under such conditions." In December and January, Russia launched a new military crackdown in Chechnya, sealing off villages and carrying out mass arrests of men it says are suspected militants. A spokesman for Kazantsev declined to comment on the reported telephone contacts, as did the Kremlin. Putin made the offer that led to the tentative November talks after the September 11 attacks. Russia says its war in Chechnya is part of the global fight against terrorism. But while Western countries share Moscow's view that some Chechen guerrilla chiefs have links to international Islamic extremists, they have consistently urged Moscow to hold talks with the more moderate Maskhadov. Maskhadov was elected Chechnya's president in a 1997 poll that had the Kremlin's blessing at the time. As the rebels' military commander in the first, 1994-96 Chechen war, he became Moscow's preferred partner for peace talks. But Russian officials now describe the accord they signed with him to end that war as "treason" and say he is wanted on charges of leading an armed rebellion. Russian forces have occupied nearly all of Chechnya since early 2000 and installed a pro-Moscow administration. But with no parallel political process they have failed to pacify the region. Rebels kill troops almost daily in shootings and bomb attacks, and have assassinated scored of pro-Moscow Chechen officials. Some 150,000 refugees have yet to return from neighbouring regions. ******* #3 BBC Monitoring Opera about Putin's private life could be produced in Russia Source: Ekho Moskvy radio, Moscow, in Russian 1600 gmt 23 Jan 02 An opera about President [Vladimir] Putin's private life could soon be produced in Saratov. The Vedomosti newspaper reports today that the opera is entitled "Monica in the Kremlin". In this opus, the infamous story of Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton is transplanted into Russia, while one of its principal characters in President Putin. The author of the opera intends to offer the part of Monica to the well-known singer Lubov Kazarnovskaya, and that of President Putin, to Nikolay Baskov [both are popular, rather than classical, singers]. It remains for me to add that the opera was written by the Saratov composer Vitaliy Okorokov, former manager of the all-girl pop group Kombinatsiya, which gained fame with such songs as "The Accountant" and "Two Slices of Sausage". ****** #4 Moscow Times January 24, 2002 Editorial Prosecutors Are Not The Problem The idea that a group of the nation's richest individuals, many of whom got their wealth by what we will politely call dubious means, would blame law enforcement agencies for damaging their reputations in the world business community by pursuing clear indications of large-scale theft is nothing short of absurd. Even more so given that on the same day, one of their own -- LUKoil -- was using law enforcement officials, in this case court bailiffs, to black out a national television station. Despite owning just 15 percent of TV6, a LUKoil subsidiary had managed to bankrupt the station on the basis of an old law. But in the letter the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs sent to the prosecutor general complaining about its investigations, where was the outrage at LUKoil for damaging Russia's reputation in the world? You didn't hear the U.S. State Department spokesman expressing concern about the poor Sibur managers in jail on suspicion of major asset stripping at Gazprom. Instead it was the questionable legality of the TV6 decision that he found troubling. With the criteria for bankruptcy used by LUKoil to steal TV6 away from Boris Berezovsky, we could bankrupt practically every company in the country. Isn't that a concern for industrialists worried about the reputation of Russia's business environment? And what about the damage the Press Ministry has caused to Russia's reputation? Instead of allowing the TV6 team to stay on the air until a tender for the license is held or at least giving TV6 a chance to warn its viewers, Press Minister Mikhail Lesin abruptly pulled the plug at midnight Monday, catching the person speaking in mid-sentence. After this middle-of-the night maneuver, what is the world supposed to think about how business is done in Russia? Lesin still has a chance to redeem himself, though. He can give the TV6 journalists temporary permission to use the frequency, whether or not they "get organized" (read distance themselves from Berezovsky). And he can make sure that when the tender is held March 27, they are given every opportunity to win. ******* #5 BBC Monitoring Russia may join Baku-Ceyhan pipeline project - sources Source: RIA news agency, Moscow, in Russian 2114 gmt 23 Jan 02 Moscow, 23 January: Russia may take part in the implementation of the construction of the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline, well-informed sources in Moscow told RIA. Russia's possible participation in the project is on the agenda of Azeri President Heydar Aliyev's Moscow talks starting on Thursday [24 January], sources said. [Omitted: known facts about Baku-Ceyhan pipeline project] Sources have said that one of Russia's biggest oil companies, LUKoil, may participate in the project. LUKoil president Vagit Alekperov earlier told correspondents that his company was considering its possible participation in the construction of the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline. LUKoil plans to have a 7.5-per-cent stake in the project if a positive decision is made, Alekperov said. [Omitted: more known details] ******* #6 BBC Monitoring Russian premier against sharp rise of tariffs on services of natural monopolies Source: Russian Public TV (ORT), Moscow, in Russian 0900 gmt 24 Jan 02 [Presenter Olga Kokorekina] The Russian government is now discussing changing the tariffs on services provided by natural monopolies [Gazprom, Unified Energy System of Russia and Russian Railway Ministry]. [Omitted: known facts] Our correspondent Natalya Semenikhina joins us live. Natalya? [Correspondent] Last year the ministers decided that annual growth of tariffs of all natural monopolies should be limited by 35 per cent. [Omitted: known facts] [Russian Prime Minister] Mikhail Kasyanov said at the beginning of the session that the government had scrutinized the financial affairs of all natural monopolies and concluded that all of them should cut production costs. [Kasyanov] It is clear that the key issue is to cut costs, because we cannot allow with closed eyes all problems to be solved by increasing tariffs and prices, ultimately at the expense of the consumers of goods and services produced by those infractructures [natural monopolies]. [Correspondent] As we know, tariffs will be indexed in two steps. The first mandatory one will take place in February-March. As for the second one, it may never happen. At least, Kasyanov made it clear that natural monopolies would have to present to the cabinet very serious arguments to use the 35-per-cent limit in full. It will happen only in an exceptional situation and in exceptional circumstances. [Kasyanov] In line with a forecast we made, 35 per cent is the maximum increase that we can accept. We made an additional analysis after the government considered this issue and now it is clear that this level, which is already lower than the monopolies asked, should be reached only in exceptional circumstances. [Omitted: correspondent said that natural monopolies would have to coordinate their budgets with the government in the next two or three years; that the government will also consider the investment programme of the Russian Railway Ministry.] ******* #7 Russia limits rises in key state-regulated tariffs MOSCOW, Jan 24 (Reuters) - Russia will keep increases in state-regulated tariffs in 2002 below a previously planned maximum of 35 percent, Trade and Economic Development Minister German Greff said on Thursday. Tariff liberalisation is part of plans to restructure the natural monopolies -- the railways, gas giant Gazprom and national power grid UES -- but the government is fighting inflation, which was well above target last year. "The government has made a decision to more strictly limit tariff increases, even in comparison with the decision taken earlier that established a 35 percent limit," Greff told journalists after a government meeting. Big industrial consumers whose operations will become more costly with increases have also called for more limited hikes. Greff said the rise in electricity tariffs to households over the year would be an average of 17.9 percent. Transmission fees for UES were already raised by 20.2 percent from January 1 and from March 1 prices for electricity on the federal wholesale market will rise by 20 percent. Freight tariffs for the railways from February 15 will be raised by 16 percent, after having been put off from January due to concerns about inflation. Gas tariffs will be increased by 20 percent from March 1 and Greff noted they could be "corrected" upward after the company presents its budget for 2002. ******* #8 Moscow Times January 23, 2002 Site Takes U.S. Opinion To Former Soviet States Russians have a new online view of the United States. Washington Profile at www.washprofile.org is a Washington-based news source in the Russian language concentrating on public opinion in America, especially toward events in the former Soviet states. Washington Profile says its goal is to "introduce [readers] to the entire spectrum of positions and opinions that are popular in America." "Our great peoples must better understand each other's intentions, goals and views," the site says. "Unfortunately ... stereotypes from the past, as well as new ones, are sometimes taken as certain truth." Washington Profile writes its own articles, but also provides material from government departments and nongovernmental organizations. Nikolai Zlobin, a former professor at Moscow State University, founded the project, originally called Washington Online, in August 2000, when it was based at the Russian program of the International Center in Washington. Bruce Blair, director of the Center of Defense Information, is chairman of the project's supervisory board. The main page has a list of statistics that draw an outline of U.S. public opinion, with the first item on the list particularly comforting: "52 percent of Americans have a favorable view of Russia," according to the Program on International Policy Attitudes, which says that this is the highest level of popularity in four years. Below the statistics is a link to the January edition of the online newspaper. Some of the articles, taken from other sources, have links to complete texts in English. Each article comes with a "fact of the day." The interview section includes transcripts from Boeing vice president and former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Thomas Pickering and former KGB Lieutenant General Oleg Kalugin. There's a link to a photo section featuring pictures of life in America, or least life in Washington. The site has links to research organizations, governmental departments, human rights organizations, U.S. media outlets and others, along with an archive of past editions. ******* #9 Financial Times (UK) 24 January 2002 Doubts cast on Russian deal settling Czech debt By Robert Cottrell and Andrew Jack in Moscow Investors and politicians are demanding more details of an opaque deal whereby Russian debts to the Czech Republic with a face value of $2.5bn were settled at a huge discount through an obscure intermediary called Falkon Capital. Falkon bought the rights to the Russian debt last year for about $550m, then agreed to transfer them to UES, the Russia power monopoly, apparently for a similar sum, say people familiar with the transaction. A complicated series of loans and debt repayments followed, involving other Russian companies, which even some directors of UES admit to not understanding. Finally, the Russian government acquired the Czech debt from UES, in exchange for writing off debts of $1.35bn that UES owed to the Russian federal budget. Citing the difference between the $550m paid to the Czechs and the $1.35bn written off by Russia, two US economists, Michael Bernstam and Alvin Rabushka, have called the deal an "electrifying - taxpayers could say 'electrocuting' - switch" of budget money to UES. They claim that the transaction was one of several arranged by the Russian government late last year to boost nominal tax revenues. UES was due to hold a meeting with analysts on Thursday to explain its part. It is seeking to play down the immediate impression that it may, in effect, have gained up to $800m, saying the true figure was much less. "I don't like the deal," said Bill Browder, a leading private investor in UES. "It's not clear who benefited from the transaction, who owns Falkon, and whether there is any connection between the decision-makers." One question hanging over the deal is why the Czech and Russian governments did not settle the debt directly. On Wednesday the Russian finance ministry was referring inquiries to UES, which said it had legal advice that a direct deal between governments would breach Paris Club rules governing sovereign debt. However, the Czech Republic is not a member of the Paris Club, and its published rules do not appear to present any obstacles. According to a person involved in the transaction, the Russian government tied the Czech debt deal with UES to a broader series of transactions involving UES and the federal budget. UES was required to settle trade debts with other creditors including Gazprom, the country's gas monopoly, and the nuclear power industry, enabling these companies in turn to settle tax debts to the treasury. "The government did not pay out any cash; it ran the money around, and in the end it may have been owed less in uncollectable debts," summarised one investment manager. "My biggest concern is not that this is a bad deal for UES but simply that there is so much secrecy surrounding it," said David Herne, a non-executive director of UES on Wednesday. He said the deal had not been discussed by the UES board. Additional reporting by Robert Anderson in Prague ******* #10 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 From: Andrew Gentes Subject: Reply to Lavelle/6036 In his "Untimely Thoughts" posted today on the List Peter Lavelle writes regarding the closure of TV6: "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." I rather dislike the notion that Russia is little other than a mystery wrapped inside an enigma, since this perpetuates the view that we in the West have little choice but to throw up our hands in despair when it comes to trying to figure out why that country is the way it is. In his piece Lavelle correctly notes that the TV6 episode is not so much about free speech as it is about law. Yet contrary to Lavelle's just quoted statement, it is possible to understand why Russia continues to demonstrate such a different approach to law than the West. First, its autocratic tradition allowed tsar, gensek, and, now it seems, president, to always be above the law. Even when Nicholas II promulgated a constitution, he went on to ignore both it and the Duma which he simultaneously created as soon as the revolutionary ferver of the time subsided. The eventual result as we all know was his forceful overthrow and execution. Second, the state/society relationship in Russia has always weighted the former over the latter. This inverts the relationship in the West, and certainly in the United States, where the rights of individuals over those of the community are guaranteed by our Constitution. Finally, my second point hints at perhaps the most fundamental distinction between the legal traditions in Russia and the West, and concerns the limited influence of the Enlightenment on Russia. Sure, Catherine the Great toyed with a legislature and had epistolary love affairs with Voltaire et al. But when she felt her personal authority threatened after the French Revolution, she proved herself one of history's greatest despots, increasing exponentially both serfdom and Siberian exile. Even more significantly, Enlightenment ideas had virtually no impact on the narod--the people for whom these ideas really mattered--largely because of the existence of what Abbott Gleason and others have characterized as the "two Russias"--the privileged, narrow stratum of elites, and everyone else. If one devotes some thought to the subject and does a bit of secondary reading instead of necromancing, as it seems so many pundits are wont to these days, then Russia become much less of a "mystery" than Lavelle suggests. And perhaps this demystification, more than anything else, will indirectly promote the salubrious developments which both Lavelle and I jointly wish to occur. == Andrew Gentes 570 266-4664 History/PoliSci 214 Pine Crest Mansfield University Mansfield, PA 16933 ******* #11 The Times (UK) January 24, 2002 Children face street curfew in Moscow FROM MICHAEL BINYON IN MOSCOW MOSCOW is considering a curfew on all children aged under 16 as a way of dealing with the 50,000 homeless children roaming the capital’s streets, many of whom are criminals, prostitutes and drug addicts by the age of 11. The city council confirmed yesterday that Yuri Luzhkov, the Mayor, was pressing for the swift passage of measures to deal with the children, but no funds had been set aside. Mr Luzhkov sought the curfew as the latest response to President Putin’s demands for urgent action to deal with the street children, whose numbers are now larger than they were after the Revolution and Civil War. The public is outraged about children sleeping rough in stations, over air-vents, in empty basements or in makeshift cardboard shelters that offer little protection against winter temperatures that plunge to -20C. At an emergency meeting of the Moscow City Council last night Mr Luzhkov proposed a law making it illegal for any child or teenager to be on the streets after 11 pm. “If this child is homeless, he must be sent to a shelter, cleaned, fed and put to bed. Those with a home should be sent to their parents,” he said. A vote on the proposal is yet to be taken. Other city councillors have called for tougher laws against the exploitation of homeless children by criminals, who pose as their parents and force them to beg. Moscow police have already been rounding up children at the main railway stations, embarrassed by the publicity given to their numbers. Many have been forcibly returned to their families, while others have been taken to overcrowded shelters and orphanages. Aid workers said yesterday that repressive measures, such as curfews, would have little effect on the problem, which is exacerbated by bureaucracy and official demands for papers from the homeless. They said that long-term solutions, such as more orphanages, were costly and there was little interest at lower levels in tackling the problem. Officials have also been harassing the aid agencies, complaining that their soup kitchens and handouts encourage more homeless people to come to Moscow from other cities and live on the streets. The Salvation Army has been repeatedly ordered to stop its food distribution. A spokesman for Médecins sans Frontières said that children were part of the larger problem of 300,000 homeless people in Moscow, most of whom have no papers, come from other cities and do not qualify for social services or a place in the city’s few shelters. Many of the street children have escaped from shelters because of the abuse, squalor and hard discipline there. Nine out of ten children have parents who are living, but who abuse or neglect their children. Many of the runaways have come from homes that have a history of alcoholism. Russians are usually indifferent to the huge numbers of adult homeless. Mr Luzhkov recently referred to them as “rats” bringing crime and disease to the city. But the growing rabble of dirty and pale children begging on commuter trains or lying comatose after sniffing glue has become a national scandal. It was an issue that figured prominently in the questions put to Mr Putin during his live phone-in before Christmas and prompted him to ask his Government to produce an emergency plan of action. ******** #12 From: Kimberly Kriger Subject: statement from NTV Plus Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 This statement from NTV Plus was issued yesterday in Moscow. "NTV Plus, the satellite pay TV network, which has been the provider of sports news to TV-6, has agreed to provide sports programming over the TV-6 channel for a 45-day period pending the auction of the TV-6 broadcast license. As a result, viewers will be able to watch "free TV" broadcasts of the Winter Olympics and other major international sporting events from 8:00 a.m. to midnight daily over this channel for the next six weeks. NTV Plus emphasized that it will not be a bidder for the TV-6 license. Boris Jordan, chief executive officer of Gazprom Media, who has expressed his interest in forming an international consortium to bid for the Gazprom Media assets, also confirmed that he would not participate in the auction for the TV-6 license. Mr. Jordan further stated that he believes it would be in the best interests of building a vibrant, independent media industry in Russia if the journalists and management of TV-6, who have expressed an intention to bid for the TV-6 license, were to succeed in this effort." Kimberly Kriger Kekst and Company 437 Madison Avenue, 19th floor New York, NY 10022 tel: (212) 521-4862 (direct) fax: (212) 521-4900 kimberly-kriger@kekst.com ******* #13 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 Subject: Re: 6031-Visas From: "John P. Deever" Constantine Dmitriev is correct that the State Department's new harsh visa restrictions apply not only to men from Russian and the Middle East, but to men from all countries where the US already bars visitors without visas. Nevertheless, this rule appears to have been imposed with little thought, planning, or public discussion -- an assertion I can make while reaffirming the importance and usefulness of David Johnson's list by sharing the following personal anecdote. I forwarded the original JRL item on the new visa restriction to my wife, an international student and scholar adviser at a university (which I won't name to spare them the embarrassment). She and her colleagues, startled by the news, re-posted the Moscow Times story to Scholar-L, a listserv read by university foreign student advisers all over the country. My wife wasn¹t the only one who was shocked by this new restriction -- universities all over the country are probably scrambling right now to assist visiting professors and researchers in fulfilling the State Department's sudden draconian requirement, one which comes on top of so many existing restrictions. Unlike many State Department forms, the Form DS-157 is not available as a .pdf on the Internet at this time, making its obligatory nature onerous as well as foolish. Of course its detailed questions about past employment and affiliations are no more likely to identify terrorists than would be a security officer's outright question "Are you planning to blow up this plane?" Like so much post-September 11 lawmaking, the parties who stand to gain by propagating fear pulled out their "Beyond Our Wildest Dreams" files and went to work. John P. Deever Publications Program Officer Initiative for Social Action and Renewal in Eurasia 1601 Connecticut Ave NW #301 Washington DC 20009 tel: 202-387-3034, fax: 202-667-3291 http://www.isar.org ******* #14 Russian official interviewed on plans for nationwide October census Obshchaya Gazeta 17 January 2002 [translation for personal use only] Interview with Russian census official Irina Zbarskaya by Aleksandra Samarina: "Souls of the Population -- They Will Be Counting Us in Exactly a Year. In the Name of the Law" Irina Zbarskaya, the chief of the Population Census and Demographic Statistics Administration of the State Committee on Statistics of Russia, answers the questions of OG. [Samarina] It is clear that a universal census of the population is not just a statistical act. People should know their country; it is no accident that even Afghanistan, without having been able to get rid of war yet, recently announced its intention to count its citizens. But why is a law needed -- in my opinion, there have not been any problems with the census here, have there? [Zbarskaya] The last time a population census was conducted was in 1989 -- in a different country, under a different political order. It was all very simple then: the Council of Ministers passed a decree, the CPSU Central Committee sent out a letter, and the secretaries of the party committees at the local level supported the process -- and answered for it with their party cards. Everything was written out in great detail: what enterprise supplies the equipment, and so on and so forth. The executors were specified -- "with the preservation of their wages from their principal place of work." My predecessors did not experience the kind of headache we have today -- we need to attract 600,000 people! There is no rigid vertical power structure today like there was before. The federal authorities can only recommend, in very mild form, that the regional authorities take part in this endeavor. [Samarina] What is most important in the law, and how does the present census differ from the prior one? [Zbarskaya] First of all, the participation of the population is regulated: it -- that participation -- is declared to be the social obligation of every citizen. But most important, in my opinion, is that the state is guaranteeing the confidentiality of the information obtained in the course of the census. Previously there had been no law -- and the state did not promise to keep it secret... We have no interest in some specific Ivan Ivanovich Ivanov living someplace, higher education... We are creating a depersonalized database that differs fundamentally from the register of the population that is inherent in the databases of various agencies or the Pension Fund, for example. We are conducting a census based on the word of the people being surveyed, we do not ask them to show any documents, we do not check out the correctness of the answers. There will be no verifications of passports or registrations. The census takers will present identification developed by FAPSI [Federal Agency for Government Communications and Information], and it is virtually impossible to forge. The crime situation in this country is very complicated. We understand that not everyone will open their door to our workers. So fixed census offices have been envisioned where people can drop in on their free time. You can also tell about yourself by telephone. They are already using more advanced technologies in the United States and Canada, they are doing surveys over the Internet -- we are still not ready for that. [Samarina] What is the principal difficulty of this enormous undertaking? [Zbarskaya] The scale of it. We have been preparing for four years, and it will be conducted like a military operation -- in eight days. October 4 will be declared "readiness 0," and the preliminary rounds will begin. The census takers will become familiarized with their population, and people will be informed once again of the impending survey. It is like a photograph of the country at a particular moment: the critical date of the census is midnight on 9 October 2002. Those who were born after October 9 will not get into the census. On the other hand, those who leave this life on the 10th will be counted! [Samarina] Most of the developed countries conduct their censuses in years ending in a nine or a zero -- why do we have such an odd date? [Zbarskaya] Because of the lack of financing in 1997 and 1998. The new law stipulates that a census has to be conducted no less often than once every ten years. Some countries, such as Canada or Japan, for example, count their population once every five years -- that would be too much for us... [Samarina] How will illegal immigrants, the homeless, and other unsettled persons be counted? [Zbarskaya] We will set up tables at markets, train stations, and other "gathering places" of such parts of the unregulated population, where those wishing to can take part in the census. We already tried out this option at four Moscow markets in the area of Preobrazhenskaya Square during a test census -- strange as it may seem, homeless people come to us very willingly. It is understandable in a psychological sense -- a person wants to stay a person to the end, and the performance of his civic duty records the not quite lost status of these poor people. We are also working through the management of the markets -- they explain to the illegals that nothing at all is being asked of them. If they say they have come here to work, we ask them about their country of origin, their country of permanent residence, we determine the gender and age -- and that's it! [Samarina] How much is this population census going to cost? [Zbarskaya] The costs are less than in other countries: in America, for example, one person counted costs the taxpayers 35 dollars, but here just one. The economy will be achieved chiefly through the modest pay for the workers. The census takers will get about one and a half thousand rubles for the three weeks (including training). We are hiring interested people from among students and those temporarily unemployed. There are many women among them -- people open the door to them more willingly. Of course, the question of the danger to our census workers arises as well. We will draw up in advance, with the aid of the police, lists of "bad" apartments there they will knock only in the accompaniment of the divisional inspector... [Samarina] Have authorities, parties, and social movements tried to use the census to get a reading on the population? [Zbarskaya] We took note of such matters at once -- our endeavor is outside of politics. Attempts to make use of the census for political purposes -- for election campaigning -- were made in some regions, and we stopped that. True, at the initiative of scholars, we did include on the questionnaire a request that women tell the number of children they had, but then we rejected that idea. The percentage of responses received to the test questionnaire was too low -- people do not want to share the secrets of their private lives. And they are correct in that. ******* #15 BBC Monitoring Central Asian nations may prefer USA to Russia - Tajik newspaper Source: Biznes i Politika, Dushanbe, in Russian 18 Jan 02 The Central Asian leaders are beginning to realize the advantages of the United States' presence in the region, says Tajik newspaper Biznes i Politika. They expect it to result in greater Western investment and financial aid, the newspaper says. According to Biznes i Politika, Russia may not be able to compete with the USA as far as economic assistance is concerned. The following is the text of the article on 18 January. Subheadings have been inserted editorially: Following a long period of thinking over the Central Asia geopolitical drawing board, the Russian leadership - running out of time - has stated that "Russia must increase its presence in Central Asia". What is this? Is this a warning to the Central Asian leaders who have felt euphoric and rushed into the embrace of the very rich "American uncle" or a challenge to the world's only superpower - the USA - marking a new stage in the "big game" in the Central Asian geopolitical arena? What will the Russian leadership undertake in order to increase its presence in this region - [resort to] economic and political pressure or [provide] powerful economic support? Central Asian developments are causing a large number of questions and problems to arise. US presence desirable for Central Asia For the Central Asian countries themselves, the presence of America is more desirable than that of Russia. Certain countries in the region have already begun to realize the advantages of cooperation with the USA. This is primarily true as regards economic cooperation. The Central Asian ruling elites have no other route to take. Firstly, the external enemy which is embodied by "Islamic extremism" coming from Afghanistan and which makes it possible to control the public opinion in the region, is disappearing. Acute social and economic problems are coming into the forefront. Large injections of financial aid are needed to deal with them. That is why for the ruling elites in the region's countries, alliance with the USA means staying in power and getting enormous financial aid. Taking into account that the powerful US propaganda machine is already in operation in this area - that is to say that it is laying out the prospects for cooperation between the region's countries and the USA, it is possible to believe that the choice has already been made. Thanks to the efforts of the US media, the interest of large Western economic associations in the region has sharply increased. The positive image of the Central Asian countries will attract additional investment. Thanks to the USA, the region's countries and even Russia are getting rid of the problems of contagious trouble and drugs coming from Afghanistan. Furthermore, economic restoration work in Afghanistan is of strategic significance for the Central Asian countries. The US presence in the region is a guarantee that interethnic and interstate relations will harmonize. The trend is already visible. For example, relations between Uzbekistan and Tajikistan have improved. It is possible to say that it is very important for the USA that peace should be established in the region and all conflicts should be settled or the conflict zones should be localized. The fact that the competing Central Asian countries will very soon begin to interact economically and politically is more a reality than just an idea. Take relations between Greece and Turkey which are the United States' partners. These countries have various claims towards each other but they are developing good-neighbourly relations under the United States' mediation. The same will happen in Central Asia. USA needs its presence in the region Stability in Central Asia is a guarantee that the US strategic ideas will be successfully carried out in the Middle East. There is a different question - how will the USA and Russia, which wants to increase its influence - interact in the region? The USA will not want to share a tasty bit such as Central Asia with anyone else. The stakes are too high. Even if the US political leadership wants to work in tandem with Russia, the US transnational corporations will never agree to this. It is noteworthy that the US powerful economic circles have contributed to the intensification of the US influence in the region. As many experts in political sciences have correctly predicted, the struggle of cultural-historical cycles for resources is an attribute of the new century. The struggle has increased over the globalization period. There are economic motives behind every combat action in the Middle East. The USA has paid a high price for this and it will not give Central Asia away for nothing. There is a question. What was the basis for the statement by Russian State Duma speaker Gennadiy Seleznev that "Russia must increase its presence in Central Asia"? Was it based on Russia's actual capability or was this just a populist slogan? The usage of the verb "increase" perhaps suggests political pressure, something the Russian leadership has often used towards the CIS countries. It is true that this will slow down the development of certain countries in the CIS. The effect of this will be that firstly these countries will develop strong immunity and lose any desire to cooperate with Russia at their own free will. Secondly, their sympathy towards the USA and the West will grow and it is with them that relations will be developed. If the verb "increase" applies to Russia's comprehensive "economic aid" to the Central Asian nations, where is an appropriate item in the Russian Federation's budget for 2002? No-one is refusing to cooperate with Russia if this is what it really wants. What currently exists in relations between Russia and the Central Asian countries cannot be called partnership relations. That is why the statement by Russian State Duma speaker Seleznev may cause differing comments. However, one wants to hope that relations between Russia and the Central Asian countries will embark on a qualitatively new level which will be for the good of these countries' peoples. ******* #16 Parlamentskaya Gazeta No. 17 2002 [translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only] STATE DUMA RESOLUTION ON ABM On Priority Measures in Connection with the Decision of the United States of America on Unilateral Withdrawal from the Treaty Between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems of 26 May 1972 In the past few decades the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (Russian Federation) and the United States of America have signed a number of treaties on strategic offensive weapons and anti-ballistic missile systems. Their implementation allowed the sides to considerably reduce their nuclear arsenals, strengthen mutual trust, and facilitate the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and their delivery vehicles. The task of further mutual strengthening and deepening of these positive changes looked logical and possible in the near future. The decision of the United States of America on unilateral withdrawal from the Treaty Between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems of 26 May 1972 was wrong and will have a destabilising effect, because it will actually destroy the existing system of international treaties of ensuring strategic stability, which has proved highly effective, and create practical prerequisites for a new spiral of the arms race. The State Duma shares the evaluation of the decision of the United States of America provided by President Vladimir Putin. Being guided by Point 2 of Article 2 of the 4 May 2000 Federal Law No. 56-FZ "On the Ratification of the Treaty Between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Weapons," the State Duma points out that conditions have arisen that can be termed as force majeure in terms of the provisions of Article VI of the said Treaty. Proceeding from the above, the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation hereby resolves: 1. To ask the President of the Russian Federation: - to order immediate consultations with the houses of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on the issues of ensuring the national security of the Russian Federation and preserving strategic stability in view of the decision of the United States of America on unilateral withdrawal from the said Treaty and with due consideration for Article 3 of the Federal Law "On the Ratification of the Treaty Between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Weapons"; - to instruct the Government of the Russian Federation to submit to the houses of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation in the first quarter of 2002 the annual report on the situation in the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation, the progress of the implementation of international treaties of the Russian Federation in the sphere of strategic offensive weapons and anti-ballistic missile system, as well as proposals on the variants and stages of development of the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation and systems that ensure their operation and application, with due consideration for the plans of the United States of America concerning the deployment of the national anti-ballistic missile system and economic possibilities of the Russian Federation. 2. To ask the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation to hold a joint discussion by the spokesmen of the houses of the said report of the Government of the Russian Federation. 3. To instruct the State Duma Commission on the implementation of the Treaty Between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Weapons (START-2 Treaty), the Treaty Between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems of 26 May 1972 (ABM Treaty) and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, and on the signing of a new treaty on further reduction and limitation of strategic offensive weapons (START-3 Treaty) to prepare and submit for the consideration of the State Duma in January 2002: - proposals on the composition of representatives of the State Duma for regular consultations with President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation on issues of ensuring the national security of the Russian Federation with due consideration for the obtaining situation in the sphere of strategic offensive weapons and anti-ballistic missile system; - a plan of work of the aforementioned Commission until 13 June 2002 to analyse the obtaining situation in the sphere of strategic offensive weapons and anti-ballistic missile system, the implementation of corresponding international treaties of the Russian Federation, and the elaboration of proposals for consideration by the State Duma. 4. To forward this Resolution to President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation, the Federation Council and the Government of the Russian Federation. 5. To forward this Resolution to Parlamentskaya Gazeta for official publication. 6. This Resolution comes into force as of its adoption. Gennady N. Seleznev, Chairman of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation Moscow 16 January 2002 ******* #17 WTO chief sees Russia in trade body next year By Robert Evans GENEVA, Jan 24 (Reuters) - World Trade Organisation Director General Mike Moore said on Thursday he believed Russia, the last major power outside the body, could become a member by the spring or early summer of 2003. "Russia is much closer (to joining) than people think. We could surprise ourselves," Moore told a conference of Reuter editors. "I believe it can be done by May or June next year if everything goes right... President (Vladimir) Putin is very engaged on the issue and has some top-class people working to make sure it happens." Moore was speaking as a Russian delegation was holding talks with trade diplomats from many of the currently 144 members of the WTO in the latest round of negotiations since Moscow applied to join the global trading club in 1993. Trade officials and envoys said the talks were going well although agriculture remained a major problem, with many WTO members insisting that more would have to be done to open up he still largely state-financed Russian farming sector. Earlier this week U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick told reporters during a visit to Geneva that there had been good progress in the negotiations with Russia. European Union officials have voiced similar views. Over the past few months Moore, a former New Zealand prime minister who steps down at the end of a three-year mandate at the end of August this year, has been increasingly optimistic about Russia's membership prospects. FASTER MARKET OPENING Entry would mean a faster opening to foreign goods and services of the former giant communist economy with a population of some 150 million people, and would ensure Russian products equal access to outside markets. But to get to that point, Russia has to satisfy all major trading partners in bilateral as well as multilateral talks that it will be able to conform to WTO open trading rules. It then has to have the WTO's ruling General Council, grouping all members, and then its parliament, the Duma, approve an accession package -- effectively a treaty document -- detailing all the liberalisation commitments it will take on. China, still under the rule of a communist party, became a WTO member in December after over 15 years of tortuous negotiations. Other big economies still to join are Ukraine, Saudi Arabia and Iran. Moore told the Reuter editors he realised there was some opposition in Russia, including among business circles, to economic openings that could undermine the position of what were effectively privatised monopolies. But he said he saw a "window of opportunity" over the coming months, especially as a package of legislation that would bring Russia's import and export procedures and customs laws into line with WTO rules was due to go before the Duma (lower parliament). Moore's stance was given implicit backing later by his appointed successor, former Thai deputy prime minister Supachai Panitchpakdi who takes over as WTO chief on September 1. Speaking to reporters alongside Moore after an hour-long meeting at WTO headquarters, Supachai said he felt Russia should join as soon as possible -- although he was not sure how far Moscow had gone in creating the necessary legal framework. "I'll bet you a hundred dollars that Russia will be in when Dr Supachai is director-general," Moore declared with a grin. ****** #18 New York Times January 24, 2002 Putin's Message to the Media By Floriana Fossato and Anna Kachkaeva Floriana Fossato, former Moscow correspondent for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, is a political analyst. Anna Kachkaeva is a professor at Moscow University and training director for Internews-Russia. MOSCOW The recent decision of Russia's Higher Arbitration Court to dissolve TV-6, a national television network, has been described as marking the end of large-scale independent broadcast journalism in Russia. The truth is both less and, potentially, more dramatic. Russian television has a vibrant, extensive web of local and regional TV stations; not all free speech has come from Moscow. However, the attack on the national stations may well have serious effects on regional journalism, including a return to the self-censorship that was such a noticeable feature of the Soviet decades. The 1990's saw a vicious battle for power among the men who became known simply as "oligarchs." The media tycoons Vladimir Gusinsky and Boris Berezovsky formed a cartel to re-elect President Boris Yeltsin in 1996, then broke down into feuding. Both have been forced by President Vladimir Putin's new elite to flee the country. Gradually and inevitably, they are losing their media empires. Last year, the gas giant Gazprom took over Mr. Gusinsky's Media MOST (a holding company that controlled the national NTV station and the regional TNT network). Many NTV journalists, who had been very critical of Mr. Putin, decamped to TV- 6. Now a major oil company, Lukoil, has succeeded in having a court agree to dissolve TV-6; the broadcast license will be auctioned off in March. Television outside of Moscow has mainly been exempted from this kind of aggressive interference, though since the Gazprom takeover there have been several incidents, notably in Lipetsk. The past decade has seen the hectic emergence of some 600 regional TV stations, increasingly professional and broad enough to become an indispensable source of information, including alternatives to the official line, for a country spread across 11 time zones. Of hundreds of regional television stations, most are not controlled by the state. According to Pavel Korchagin, a TV-6 official, the company's network included 156 regional television stations in all major Russian cities, reaching more than 80 million viewers. Most regional partners were bound to the network by contract. This means that they complemented local programming — mainly evening news and morning entertainment shows — with content from TV-6. Another 10 regional stations were majority- owned subsidiaries of TV-6. The dissolution of the parent station and the repeal of its broadcasting license will have severe effects on these affiliates, as can be seen in the experience of the TNT network, which together with its partner NTV was TV- 6's predecessor in being attacked by the government. TNT includes more than 100 regional television stations in 582 large and small cities across Russia, reaching more than 75 million people. Eleven regional stations are majority-owned by TNT. Since the April 2001 takeover of TNT's parent company by Gazprom, the relationship between the Moscow-based company and its regional partners has become increasingly strained. At the end of 2001 some 30 regional TNT affiliates appealed to Gazprom and Mr. Putin, asking to be allowed to buy themselves out of the network. Their reasons are mainly economic — poor management and dull content have led to smaller audiences, less advertising and therefore reduced income, making the stations less financially viable. But the problems are also political. Regional stations don't want their politics dictated from the Kremlin, not least because it sends a signal to more local authorities that they might pile on and intimidate TV stations themselves. Beyond that, many regional journalists may suspect that in the future it would be best to take into account the interests of political bosses and owners instead of pursuing stories on their own initiative. A recurrence of self-censorship among Russian journalists is proving to be perhaps the most destructive consequence of the events of the past 12 months, and one that will be extremely difficult to overcome. President Putin's administration could do a lot to advance Russian democracy by making sure his battles with media oligarchs don't also destroy a vigorous and varied regional system. Without some careful attention now, it could require years to be rebuilt. ******* #19 The Globalist www.globalist.com January 23, 2002 Slick Russia Vs. Free Media Can you imagine General Electric closing down NBC, one of the largest media operations in the United States, because of supposed "financial" difficulties? Well, this is exactly what happened in Russia in late January 2002, when TV6 — the last independent Russian media outlet — had its plug pulled by bailiffs. While this sounds like — and is — another attack on press freedom, it is breathtaking to track the convoluted and seemingly legalistic way in which Russian businessmen and oil tycoons go about muzzling public opinion. Twin pillars Russia's vast energy resources and its newly independent media were expected to be twin pillars that would help the country rise from the mire of communism and realize its full potential. The oil and gas industries in particular were supposed to attract vast foreign investment and supply the hard currency Russia needed to build a modern economy and free society. At the same time, the rise of independent mass media was meant to safeguard that freedom. After eight decades of subservience to the official propaganda needs and strictures of Communist Party censorship, literally hundreds of new publications sprung up in Russia once communism had fallen. Radio and television reporters suddenly became inquisitive and seemed eager to keep corrupt politicians and rapacious bureaucrats in line. But things didn't work out quite as smoothly as planned. To be sure, Russia did manage to tap its energy resources. It became the second-largest oil exporter after Saudi Arabia and emerged as the main supplier of natural gas to Western Europe. Exports of natural resources — mainly oil and gas — earned Russia a trade surplus of around $50 billion in 2001. That comes to an impressive 15% of GDP. High oil prices, which fortuitously spiked in 1999, right after Russia defaulted on its debt in August 1998, saved the country from a severe economic depression and protected Russians from penury. Foreigners keep out And yet, the much anticipated foreign investment into Russia has been all but non-existent. Overall, Russia has attracted less direct foreign investment than Poland, Hungary or the Czech Republic. Together, they make up less than a third of Russia's population — and they entirely lack its energy resources as investible opportunities. The independent media in Russia also failed to live up to its promise. One reason was the fact that most of the financial oligarchs who privatized Russia's economy in the early 1990s — collectively known at the time as the "seven bankers" — acquired their own media empires in the process. An independent — but corrupt — media Even though newspapers, magazines and television stations were still largely free to report what they wanted, they largely functioned as mud-slinging tools serving the needs of their owners — the rich oil tycoons and media kings. The public soon lost all respect for Russia's newly-born Third Estate. Since coming to power in January 2000, Russia's rather young President Vladimir Putin, acting in sharp contrast to his septuagenarian predecessor, Boris Yeltsin, has been far less tolerant of criticism in the media. Yet, it fell to the country's largest oil and gas companies — both of which still have a substantial state ownership component — to muzzle the most outspoken media outlets. How did this come about? In early 2001, Gazprom — Russia's natural gas near-monopoly and the country's largest company — dismantled Media Most. Owned by Vladimir Gussinsky, Mr. Putin's political opponent, Media Most had relentlessly criticized Mr. Putin's war in Chechnya and warned about his KGB background. Short, quick death of Media Most But unfortunately for Mr. Gussinsky and the Russian people, Gazprom was a key creditor of Media Most — and simply moved to take over the company when it was unable to repay its debts. To appreciate the outrageousness of this situation, these maneuvers are akin to GE — which has owned NBC since 1986 — closing down the media operation (under the pretext of financial difficulties) to curry favor with the Bush administration. Turning on TV6 But Media Most was not the only casualty. Less than a year later, in November 2001, TV6 met a similar fate. This time it was Russia's largest oil company, Lukoil, that was instrumental in getting the courts to shut down TV6. The Lukoil pension fund, owning a 15% stake in TV6, went to court to get it liquidated, claiming that the company was not performing up to snuff. That channel was, incidentally, the last remaining independent television station. Many of the reporters who left Media Most when it closed had found refuge at TV6. Curiously, both Gazprom and Lukoil used ostensibly market-oriented financial methods to battle the feeble independent media groups. And of course, the powers that be in the new Russia might be inclined to point out that Western economists and the IMF have long called on Russia precisely to adopt such methods in its own efforts at market reform. Reform process gone awry What Russia needs, they have said, is to allow creditors to shut down companies that can't pay their debts. Well, here then is a fine example of two blue-chip energy companies taking a leadership role in a badly needed reform process. Except, of course, it has been only used against maverick media companies that criticized the government a little too much. In other cases, Russian companies that don't pay their debts are usually allowed to get off scot-free. A hard lesson to learn It remains to be seen how soon Russia's energy sector and the media can emerge from recent setbacks. As two of Russia's most promising assets, the country is counting on them to help lead the way in the post-communist era. In the meantime, Russia has learned a hard lesson about market reform. And the unfortunate casualty of this experience has been an independent media. *******