Johnson's Russia List
#6092
22 February 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Note from David Johnson:
1. Washington Times: Nicholas Kralev, U.S. drops pledge on nukes.
2. Reuters: Olympics-Putin blames IOC, Rogge for Russian problems.
3. Reuters: S&P revise Russia outlook to positive from stable.
4. Dow Jones: Leos Rousek, RUSSIA WATCH: Kremlin In TV6 Revival Bid.
5. Moscow Times: Gregory Feifer, U.S. Company Wants to Buy NTV.
6. Vek: Andrei Ryabov, AN OFF-SEASON FOR CHUBAIS. Procrastination and
heads in the sand.
7. Izvestia: Alexander Livshits, WHERE SHALL WE BE SENT. The Russian
economy has done its best, it can do no more at the moment.
8. Vremya MN: EX-SECRETARY OF RUSSIA'S SECURITY COUNCIL ON THE AFGHAN
CAMPAIGN. (Kokoshin)
9. The Guardian (UK): Ian Traynor, War reporter falls victim to Russian
smear campaign.
10. Novye Izvestia: Yevgenya Shabalkina, THE FEDERAL SECURITY SERVICE
FINDS A NEW SPY. Anna Politkovskaya and Novaya Gazeta.
11. Wall Street Journal: Guy Chazan, Russian Authors Eschew Potboilers,
Embrace Classier Detective Novels.
12. Los Angeles Times: Mark Swed, Absolut(e) Musical Brilliance.
(St. Petersburg Philharmonic)
13. Reuters: Russia wants fast Caspian carve-up, sees progress.]
*******
#1
Washington Times
February 22, 2002
U.S. drops pledge on nukes
By Nicholas Kralev
The Bush administration is no longer standing by a 24-year-old U.S.
pledge not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states, a senior
administration official said yesterday.
Washington is "not looking for occasions to use" its nuclear arsenal,
John Bolton, undersecretary of state for arms control and international
security, said in an interview.
But "we would do whatever is necessary to defend America's innocent
civilian population," he said.
In case of an attack on the United States, "we would have to do what
is appropriate under the circumstances, and the classic formulation of that
is, we are not ruling anything in and we are not ruling anything out," Mr.
Bolton said.
"We are just not into theoretical assertions that other
administrations have made," he said in reference to a 1978 commitment by
the Carter administration not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear
states unless they attack the United States in alliance with nuclear-armed
countries.
On June 12 that year, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance made the
following statement on behalf of President Carter, which became known as
"negative security assurances":
"The United States will not use nuclear weapons against any
non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty or any
comparable internationally binding commitment not to acquire nuclear
explosive devices, except in the case of an attack on the United States,
its territories or armed forces, or its allies, by such a state allied to a
nuclear-weapon state, or associated with a nuclear-weapon state in carrying
out or sustaining the attack."
In 1995, Warren Christopher, the first secretary of state in the
Clinton administration, reaffirmed Washington's commitment. Along with the
pledges of the other four permanent members of the U.N. Security Council,
who are all nuclear powers, it became part of a resolution, which the
council adopted April 11, 1995.
But Mr. Bolton said such promises reflect "an unrealistic view of the
international situation."
"The idea that fine theories of deterrence work against everybody,
which is implicit in the negative security assurances, has just been
disproven by September 11," he said. "What we are attempting to do is
create a situation where nobody uses weapons of mass destruction of any kind."
Mr. Bolton spoke a day after returning from Moscow, where he led the
second round of arms-control negotiations that are expected to produce an
agreement on nuclear cuts in time for President Bush's visit to Russia in May.
The undersecretary said the "negative security assurances" never "came
up" in the discussions with the Russians. Washington has never had a
no-first-use nuclear policy but Moscow did until the mid-1990s.
Mr. Bolton's remarks displeased some arms-control analysts yesterday,
who said that such significant U.S. government statements as the "negative
security assurances" should not be repudiated.
"These assurances are important in order to maintain the integrity and
credibility of the nonproliferation regime. Repudiation can have a negative
effect on international security," said Daryl Kimball, executive director
of the Arms Control Association.
The nonprofit organization's publication, Arms Control Today,
discussed the issue in an interview with Mr. Bolton earlier this month.
Although Washington's official position on using nuclear weapons
against non-nuclear states has remained unchanged until now, "both
Democratic and Republican administrations have maintained ambiguity to
maximize the credibility of the U.S. nuclear force," Mr. Kimball said.
Only a year after the Clinton administration reaffirmed Mr. Carter's
pledge, Defense Secretary William Perry said on April 26, 1996:
"If some nation were to attack the United States with chemical
weapons, they have to fear the consequences of a response from any weapon
in our inventory. ... We could have a devastating response without use of
nuclear weapons, but we would not forswear that possibility."
John Holum, Mr. Bolton's predecessor at the State Department under
Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, said yesterday that the Bush
administration's position to ignore the 1978 commitment would not affect
the strategic balance of power but might send a wrong message overseas.
"It doesn't make the use of weapons of mass destruction more or less
likely, but it's reflective of the administration's negative view of
international treaties," Mr. Holum said.
He noted that there was an "extensive debate" in the Clinton
administration on whether it's "responsible" to rely on nuclear weapons to
combat potential biological and chemical attacks, but a decision was made
to maintain "ambiguity."
Mr. Bolton said there has been "no formal review" of Mr. Vance's
statement by the Bush administration, "nor are we going to undertake a
review of every official statement made by secretaries of states in the
past five administrations."
*******
#2
Olympics-Putin blames IOC, Rogge for Russian problems
MOSCOW, Feb 22 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin, in rare criticism of
the Olympic movement by a world leader, said on Friday that the new IOC
leadership was largely to blame for what he said was bad treatment of
Russian athletes at the Olympics.
Putin also accused Russian Olympic officials of being too passive in
defending their athletes.
Speaking to reporters in the Kremlin, the Kremlin leader said he agreed
with complaints by Russian Olympic officials and politicians that Moscow's
athletes in Salt Lake City were victims of bad and biased officiating.
"I fully agree and share this viewpoint. Not the last reason is the change
of generations in the International Olympic Committee," Putin said. "Juan
Antonio Samaranch has gone and Jacques Rogge has taken his place.
Regrettably for the new leadership, the first time is bound to be a flop."
He said he hoped the IOC leadership "will manage to solve these
difficulties. I hope they are of a temporary nature."
Russian officials have threatened to pull their team out of the Winter
Olympics following what they saw as biased and flawed judging.
The final straw for many was the disqualification of the women's
cross-country relay team following disputed officiating in figure skating,
ice hockey and freestyle skiing.
Putin, a skilled practitioner of judo and proponent of mass sport, said the
outcome of several events had caused "bewilderment." He blamed
commercialisation and the often murky procedures in selecting a venue for
the Games.
"Excessive commercialisation of the Olympic movement comes into conflict
with the very principles of the Olympics. This causes great concern among
all sport lovers," he said.
He said that as deputy mayor of St Petersburg in the 1990s, he had
witnessed "behind the scenes manoeuvres" connected with the city's bid to
stage the games. "All that does not help the Olympic movement," he said.
Putin said Russian Olympic officials should have done more to back their
athletes in Salt Lake City.
"The passive position taken by the Russian National Olympic Committee and
Russian representatives in the IOC also causes a certain bewilderment," he
said.
"Representatives of other countries whose athletes were not hurt so badly
by unobjective judging are taking a more active stance."
******
#3
S&P revise Russia outlook to positive from stable
LONDON, Feb 22 (Reuters) - Credit ratings agency Standard & Poor's said on
Friday it had revised its ratings outlook on Russian debt to positive from
stable, citing "genuine potential for improving the economy's structure."
S&P also affirmed Russia's B+ sovereign credit rating.
Russian bond prices rose on the news, reversing early losses blamed on
profit-taking. Russia's 30-year dollar bond benchmark (RUSGLB30-RR) was
quoted at 64.875 percent of face value at 1156 GMT, up from 64.5 earlier in
the session.
Russian debt included in the JPMorgan Emerging Market Bond Index Plus, the
industry benchmark, was yielding 557 basis points more than safe-haven U.S.
Treasuries, four basis points less on the day.
"(Reaction) is modestly positive," said Alex Garrard, emerging debt
strategist at UBS Warburg in London.
"The reason it is not more positive is that Moody's is regarded as the
pace-setter. But it is encouraging (for prices) because it heralds Russia's
imminent departure from the single-B credit category."
Moody's Investors Services upgraded Russia by two notches, to Ba3, its
third-highest sub-investment grade rating, in November. S&P's equivalent
rating would be one notch higher than the B+ it currently assigns Russia.
Fitch Ratings also rates Russia B+.
S&P said in a statement that Russia had shown a growing commitment to debt
servicing as its debt burden was reduced.
On Thursday, Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Kolotukhin said Russia would
probably have to repay a maximum $17 billion in foreign debt next year,
although it could be as low as $16 billion.
Kolotukhin said that, without active debt management, the country would
have had to pay $20.5 billion. Until this week, emerging debt analysts had
forecast that Russia would have to pay $19 billion in 2003, significantly
more than the $14 billion scheduled for this year.
S&P said Russia's ratings were constrained by the country's continued,
although decreasing, vulnerability to oil price fluctuations.
"Oil is a big part of the credit story in Russia, but ... they have reduced
their overall vulnerability to it," said UBSW's Garrard.
One significant factor was the agreement between Russia's government and
parliament to postpone $2.25 billion of spending until the fourth quarter
of 2002, or cancel it altogether if budget revenues are too low.
"That specific measures gave the government leeway to balance oil prices
even if they were around two dollars lower than expected," said Garrard.
*****
#4
RUSSIA WATCH: Kremlin In TV6 Revival Bid
By LEOS ROUSEK
February 22, 2002
A Dow Jones Newswires Column
MOSCOW -- Preparations to 'rescue' the bankrupted TV6, Russia's last
independent national television station, are in fact the first shots in
President Vladimir Putin's campaign for a second term in office.
And the latest twist, which has seen a group of prominent Russian
businessmen throw itself behind the former TV6 journalist team, was planned
by the Kremlin.
Does that sound too premature, or just plain absurd? Putin's ratings are
sky high, after all. Who on earth could challenge the new, healthy
president who, even in his second term, would still be decades younger than
any of his predecessors?
Earlier this week, Putin and his ex-secret service allies in the Kremlin
showed they know well how to work hard while appearing to do nothing. As
such, TV6 looks likely to be 'rescued' not by a single oligarch with
obvious dependence on the president, but by a large circle of big-hitters
from Russian business, including Anatoly Chubais, formerly deputy PM and
now chief executive of electricity monopoly Unified Energy Systems (R.UEN).
A 'Fellowship of the Ring' of free speech, if you like.
The Fellowship also embraces oil tycoon Roman Abramovich, aluminum magnate
Oleg Deripaska, machinery sector heavyweight Kakha Bendukidze and bankers
Alexander Mamut and Andrei Melnichenko, all influential enough but without
the explicit Tsar-client relationship that characterized Boris Yeltsin's
dealings with his media barons.
Even so, sources close to this deal say Putin's chief of staff, Alexander
Voloshin, helped put the Fellowship together.
Another TV6 backer, Oleg Kiselyov, who heads metals holding Metalloinvest,
said last Tuesday that the group is large and expanding "so that none of
the participants is able to dominate."
Cloak Of Independence
The Fellowship structure leaves the Kremlin in control of what will seem
like an independent TV channel, while individual Fellowship oligarchs use
their small change to buy some gratitude - and protection - from the
president whom they expect to stay in power at least through 2008.
Putin appears to be thinking back to 1996 when his political sponsor, Boris
Yeltsin, seeking re-election as president, was badly trailing his Communist
challenger Gennady Zyuganov. Then, the unrestrained support of two
television channels controlled by tycoons Vladimir Gusinsky and Boris
Berezovsky, propelled Yeltsin to an unlikely victory. That campaign, quite
coincidentally, was masterminded by Chubais.
The Fellowship also shows just how far Putin has retreated from his promise
to eradicate oligarchs "as a class."
It's much more the case that only individual ones like Vladimir Gusinsky
and Boris Berezovsky have been hounded into self-imposed exile, having lost
their media assets to energy companies with government ties.
So the rescue of TV6 looks unlikely to allay concerns about media freedoms
in Putin's Russia.
President Bush has been raising the subject consistently with the
government since he first met Putin in Slovenia last summer, White House
spokesman Ari Fleischer said in January.
Such pressure, from the U.S. and elsewhere, has complicated the Kremlin's
efforts to control the media and keep it Putin-friendly by avoiding such
thorny topics as the botched and bloody war in Chechnya - the original
cause of TV6's downfall and of Gusinsky's NTV before it.
The danger is that the more Russia projects itself as an ally of the west,
by backing the U.S.-led campaign against terrorism, for example, the less
Putin can afford to muffle media freedoms.
But therein lies his dilemma, for he cannot risk losing his iron grip over
the media if he wants to squash potential sources of anti-Putin publicity
ahead of the 2004 presidential elections.
And Putin is nothing if not a long-term thinker.
website: www.tv6.ru
*******
#5
Moscow Times
February 22, 2002
U.S. Company Wants to Buy NTV
By Gregory Feifer
Staff Writer
A U.S. television production company previously associated with exiled
media magnate Vladimir Gusinsky announced Thursday that it has offered to
buy Gazprom's controlling stake in NTV and the rest of what was once
Gusinsky's media empire.
Massachusetts-based Global American Television president Edward Wierzbowski
said the company made an offer last week acting together with an investor,
whom he refused to name.
The move stumped media observers, but there was speculation it may
represent a bid by Gusinsky to reclaim Media-MOST, taken over by
shareholder Gazprom, a state-controlled firm, in a bitter legal fight last
year.
Wierzbowski, speaking by telephone, declined to state the amount of his
company's offer for Gazprom's share, pointing to the fact that the gas
giant has repeatedly put off a long-promised valuation by Dresdner Bank's
investment vehicle, Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein.
Gazprom pledged in October to announce by mid-January the valuation of its
media assets and structure of the sale but has since postponed the deadline
twice. The foot-dragging has prompted accusations that the sale will not be
open and transparent.
Gazprom media arm Gazprom-Media seized its controlling stake -- 50 percent
plus one share -- in debt-ridden Media-MOST last April. U.S. investment
fund Capital Research Management holds a 4.5 percent stake in NTV
television. The rest of Media-MOST belongs to Gusinsky-affiliated firms.
Media-MOST's value has been fiercely debated. Gusinsky claimed last year
that it was worth $400 million or more, while Gazprom-Media put its value
at half that.
Wierzbowski said Global American Television offered to buy 25 percent of
NTV from Gazprom in November, and followed up with a bid for 25 percent of
Media-MOST's THT network in December. The offers expired Feb. 15, after
which the U.S. company made its bid for Media-MOST.
Gazprom-Media general director Boris Jordan and board chairman Alexander
Dybal were appointed in October to oversee Gazprom's announced plan to sell
off the assets seized from Media-MOST.
Jordan -- an American banker who helped lead the takeover at NTV, where
Gazprom installed him as director -- was also to direct the transfer of
Gusinsky-controlled Media-MOST shares to Gazprom-Media.
Gusinsky said last spring that he would sell off his remaining stakes in
Media-MOST, but he has stayed mum on the subject ever since.
Press Minister Mikhail Lesin earlier this month accused Jordan, however, of
buying Gusinsky's remaining 30 percent stake in NTV for himself. Jordan and
Gusinsky have denied any such agreement. Observers said Lesin made his
announcement to try to undermine an insider deal.
Media-MOST spokesman Dmitry Ostalsky said Thursday that he had not heard of
Global American's offer. "I've nothing to comment," he said. "It's between
Global American Television and Gazprom."
Gazprom head of corporate finance Alexander Semenyako also refused on
Thursday to comment on the announcement.
Global American is not new to Russia. The company produced a landmark
television program in 1982 -- in what was then the Soviet Union --
featuring satellite links between a U.S. studio and a Soviet one hosted,
respectively, by talk show impresario Phil Donahue and his Soviet
counterpart Vladimir Pozner.
The U.S. company also placed the first paid advertisement on Soviet
television for Pepsi, Sony and Visa, it said in a press statement.
Since then, Global American has, among other activities, sold U.S.
programming to Russian television stations and produced documentary
programs broadcast in Russia.
Media analysts were puzzled by Global American's announcement. Oleg
Panfilov of the Center for Journalism in Extreme Situations and Anna
Kachkayeva -- a media analyst with Radio Liberty and an assistant professor
at Moscow State University -- said they had no knowledge of it and were
hard-pressed to speculate.
Kachkayeva said Global American could be acting on behalf of U.S. financier
and philanthropist George Soros. Panfilov said cooperation with Jordan was
a possibility.
But Pozner, who is now president of the Russian Television Academy and
anchor of ORT's "Vremena" program, said that Jordan's involvement was
unlikely. "I'd be surprised if that's the case," he said.
Gusinsky was a more likely candidate, Pozner added, saying Wierzbowski has
long been a friend of several top Media-MOST insiders, including Pavel
Korchagin, a longtime deputy of former NTV director Yevgeny Kiselyov.
Wierzbowski's company has also sold programming to NTV, as well as to other
Russian channels.
Korchagin was general director of THT and last year became executive
director of TV6, where Kiselyov and a core team of NTV journalists found
refuge after the channel's takeover by Gazprom.
Lesin, who played a large part in the NTV takeover last year, did not
respond to questions faxed Thursday about the Global American offer.
Wierzbowski has also been a longtime associate of Lesin, who founded the
Video International advertising company a decade ago. "We were almost
one-sixth partners in Video International, but then we declined and said
we'd worked together," Wierzbowski said. "Was that a mistake? I think so --
if you look at Video International today."
Even so, he said, "Misha [Lesin] is a good old friend."
Global American helped get some of Video International's first programs
together to sell to Russian television, Wierzbowski said. The first
project, in 1991, was "Mrs. U.S.S.R.-Mrs. U.S.A.," and the most important
project was "CBS Week," a whole week of CBS programming on Russian
television, he said. "It was the beginning of getting large quantities of
Western programs on Russian networks."
Wierzbowski said his longshot successes working with Soviet television show
massive obstacles can be overcome.
"The history of working with Gazprom is not an easy one," Wierzbowski said.
"The odds are against us, but we don't look at things that way. We hope the
sale will be transparent and fair and that we'll be able to put in our bid."
*******
#6
Vek
February 22, 2002
AN OFF-SEASON FOR CHUBAIS
Procrastination and heads in the sand
Author: Andrei Ryabov
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]
THERE HAS BEEN A STIR AT THE TOP OF RUSSIAN POLITICS. THE BROAD
RANGE OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE FATE OF THE TV-6 NETWORK MAKES IT
POSSIBLE TO ASSESS THE PROSPECTS FOR POLITICAL POWER-STRUGGLE OVER THE
NEXT FEW YEARS. MAKING A STRONG-WILLED POLITICAL DECISION CAN NO
LONGER BE POSTPONED.
There has been a stir at the top of Russian politics. The broad
range of participants in the fate of the TV-6 network makes it
possible to assess the prospects for political power-struggle over the
next few years: those who own this network will be able to finish off
the oppositional parties.
Some analysts believe the old Yeltsin-era elite, supported by the
oligarchs, has consolidated in its battle against the St. Petersburg
group dealing with security issues, seized the political initiative,
and is just about to promote Anatoly Chubais for prime minister.
Others think that the president is yielding to the alliance with the
old Yeltsin team, and Prime Minister Mikhail Kasianov has availed
himself of the situation and considerably strengthened the
government's staff after native of St. Petersburg Klebanov was
dismissed from the post of deputy prime minister. Some more people
tend to think that the president will make some major staff changes in
his team this spring, but not the figures on whom the attention of the
media and analysts is focused will be given key positions in the power
circles.
The reason for differing interpretations is obvious. The
political developments themselves are contradictory and can hardly be
placed within the framework of any logical schemes. To all
appearances, the process of reconfiguring the leading political forces
has just begun and it cannot be reduced to only the struggle for
redistribution of spheres of influence and the access to resources.
The reasons for the current events go deeper.
In early 2002, the Russian elite has faced new challenges. It has
become clear that the noticeable deterioration of the social-economic
situation in Russia stems from the lack of any structural reforms in
the economy, rather than the slump of oil prices. The collapse of oil
prices only moved the usual diseases of the national economy from the
latent to the open phase, with every known symptom - inflation, growth
of budget non-payments. The Russian elite, which over the past few
years has grown accustomed to a favorable economic situation, which
permitted to carry out the policy in the course of which the wolves
(big corporations) were replete and the sheep (positive expectations
of the people) were intact, turned out to be unprepared for these
challenges. The government is attempting to continue the painful
market reforms and simultaneously raise the wage and pension rates.
This will aggravate the social strain and finally the cabinet will
have to choose between the strict distributive policy and further
reforms. Deep conflicts are outlined in the upper strata as well. The
military spending is not sufficient and the military lobby has been
demanding for a redistribution of the budget flows in favor of the
army. The center which first expropriated a considerable part of tax
proceeds from the regions, now wants the local governments to finance
an increase of wage rates for state employees the federal government
has promised. However, the regions do not have money for that and they
are commencing to rebel, what influences even the positions of the
Federation Council, which is arch-loyal to the central power.
Combining all these processes with the traditional struggle for power
between the competing elite groups we shall get an obscure picture,
more resembling a war of all against all.
This is a straight path to the social crisis of the system. It
might be possible to avoid such events if the supreme authorities,
enjoying extreme popularity now, seize the threads of the big
political game. The time when the logic of the election campaign,
where it is necessary to maintain high expectations of a maximal
quantity of wide social strata, determined the politics has passed.
However hard it could be, at the moment the federal authorities will
have to choose its support. If market reforms are continued, they will
have to apply for support to the biggest corporations and liberal
political forces, but deny the extensive social promises then, call
the people to pull in the belt instead of pleasing them with illusions
that, for instance, the housing reform will favor the poor. The
authorities will also have to accept a deterioration of relations with
the security ministries. If the Kremlin is planning to create a
pattern in which, on the stipulation that the fundamentals of the
market economy are retained, the state carries out a policy of social
justice redistributing a substantial share of corporations' incomes in
favor of the poor strata, quite a different course is required for
that - vertical corporative structures, which would compel the
corporations to share, a strong president's party, playing a role of a
political club against those mighty of the world who are dissatisfied
with the president's guidelines. Perhaps, there is a need for an image
of an enemy, which would substantiate an increase of both the military
spending and the necessary political mobilizations. It is,
undoubtedly, possible to postpone the hard choice until the better
times. From the tactical viewpoint, it can even prove to be successful
since the stability will retain.
However, the number of disaffected will be gradually increasing
both among the upper and the lower strata. Stability will be reduced
at the same time. Recalling the history of Russia: all dramatic events
have been consequences of postponing decisions for too long - this was
a key factor in the Bolshevik revolution and the collapse of the
Soviet Union.
(Translated by Andrei Ryabochkin)
*******
#7
Izvestia
February 22, 2002
WHERE SHALL WE BE SENT
The Russian economy has done its best, it can do no more at the moment
Author: Alexander Livshits
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]
DESPITE THE SLIGHTLY BETTER FIGURES OF ECONOMIC GROWTH, THERE ARE
STILL MANY DIFFICULTIES AHEAD FOR RUSSIA, ESPECIALLY THOSE CONNECTED
WITH ITS ECONOMIC POLICY, BOTH FOR FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC SECTORS. A
REAL TEST FOR THE HIERARCHICAL STRUCTURE OF GOVERNMENT SET UP OVER THE
PAST TWO YEARS IS IMMINENT.
The time for another presidential address is approaching. What
will the economic section contain? I have no idea, but have
expectations instead. The authorities' response to the challenges of
2002 is the key thing.
There are some challenges. Evidently, economic growth is petering
out. The devaluation of 1998 has done its best. The resources of
previous years are exhausted. The situation on global markets is still
dismal. The main hope is connected with real domestic demand, but it
has been slashed by high inflation. Foreign products are making
inroades into the remaining consumer demand, since imports are growing
rapidly. Even the most modest government forecasts (3.5% of the GDP
growth) causes doubts. An increase of the GDP by 2% would be pure
luck. In my opinion, there is nothing tragic about that. The economy
has yielded its best and can do nothing more at the moment.
I would like to mention in addition that the starting of the
structural reforms is always fraught with the slowdown of growth: much
money is needed but it would not be repaid soon. Similar events
happened in other countries. These are mere words, meditation of an
economist, so to say. What the policy will be like? It is not clear
yet whether production will be encouraged or the inevitable will be
accepted.
Russia has entered the fifth year of high inflation. Wallets are
emptied; the people are starting to get angry. Financial welfare of
enterprises has been deteriorating and investments are dwindling. The
officials keep reassuring us that last year's inflation figure (18.5%)
was slightly lower than that of 2000. Yes, it was, but rejoicing over
this fact is the same as telling a patient: "You are recovering now,
because yesterday you had a fever of 40 degrees, and today it's only
39.5 degrees." It should be admitted that the government has
constrained natural monopolies a bit. It pulled the rates and slowed
down the inflation. It is not enough, however, to stop inflation.
Tough measures from the Finance Ministry and the Central Bank are
required. We know which measures; the only unclear thing is whether
they will be applied or not. More importantly, whether the struggle
against inflation will become the priority task for the state, as it
should be.
The conflict between the natural monopolies and the entire
economy continued last year. Gas, energy and railway monopolies were
raising their rates in order to finance investments, while the rest
were offering severe resistance, moreover they had felt at least
slight support from the authorities. A compromise was achieved and
decisions were made. So what? The monopolists started complaining
about the most acute shortfall for investments and, together with the
consumers - about the inflation. All of them are right. It means that
we haven't yet reached the principal problems. The system of
management is not perfect. Money-investing in the monopolies is not
established. The authorities do not know precisely what they own and
what is happening there. There is a need for serious changes. What
will they be like and when will they happen? Having done a nice work,
the government and the Duma have adopted quite a number of good laws,
which we couldn't dream about in the 1990s. Now we need enactments,
instructions, decrees. This would not suffice, however. The laws are
reformatory, which means they will face resistance. A great deal of
managerial work is required from Moscow to the outskirts of our
country in order they come in force. It will be the task which will
test the hierarchy of power which has been built over the past few
years. I should like to understand how it would cope with this hard
task.
Our managers often say that the economy shouldn't be so dependent
on exports. It has been, however, greatly dependent on exports thus
far. Exports have caused rejoicing over the past few years. However,
the global situation has deteriorated before our eyes, accompanied by
chronic domestic inflation.
If the exports figures fall, the budget will collapse; so will
the reserves of the Central Bank, employment, and real incomes. The
state is supposed to produce an adequate response, probably a new
policy in the sphere of hard currency. If the authorities cannot cope
with inflation, let the ruble exchange rate be lowered, right? Further
questioning can be continued; but it is much harder to answer the
questions determining economic policy.
(Translated by Andrei Ryabochkin)
******
#8
Vremya MN
No. 33
2002
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
EX-SECRETARY OF RUSSIA'S SECURITY COUNCIL ON THE AFGHAN CAMPAIGN
State Duma deputy Andrei KOKOSHIN (OVR), ex-Secretary of
the Security Council, shares his views of the Afghan operation
with Artur BLINOV
Question: What is the main factor of military success
scored by the USA? What works best in such conflicts?
Answer: It is too early yet to draw final conclusions but
it is a fact that the Taliban as an organised political and
military force suffered a major military-political defeat.
There are both military and political factors that contributed
to the success of the operation. To begin with, a broad
counter-terror coalition was created very quickly, thanks to a
considerable role of Russia. The Taliban were isolated
virtually completely on the political, information and later
military planes. That situation differed radically from the one
in which the Soviet Union found itself after deploying its
troops in Afghanistan in 1979, without hardly any political or
information propaganda preparations.
The Northern Alliance, which revived also thanks to the
assistance of Russia and Iran, greatly contributed to the
defeat of the Taliban. Pakistan, whose leaders acted under the
influence of China which sent a high-ranking mission there as
soon as the USA started forming the counter-terror coalition,
played a considerable political role.
As for the purely military aspect, I would say that the US
troops have been training in such operations for at least 15-17
years, relying on special manuals and instructions, something
which we apparently neglect to do in good measure. The smooth
joint operation of different arms, logistics, communications,
control and intelligence troops is a focal point. As for
intelligence, the Americans highly evaluated the information on
the Afghan theatre they had received from Russia.
Question: How promising are such military novelties as
remotely controlled planes?
Answer: Remotely controlled reconnaissance and
subsequently reconnaissance-strike planes have long proved
their worth. In my tenure of first deputy defence minister in
the 1990s I tried to focus attention on them, which was very
difficult to do in conditions of a thinning defence budget.
However, we still managed to implement several ideas for such
planes. The idea was to create not only remotely controlled
aircraft but also remotely controlled helicopters.
Question: What is the military focus of the USA now? The
struggle against terror or the attainment of absolute military
superiority in the world?
Answer: Many things point to the conclusion that the
increased spending on defence and internal security is above
all a means of using direct state injections to lead the US
economy out of recession and ensure its growth, especially
during the 2004 presidential elections, and thus ensure the
re-election of George Bush.
Another task is to ensure a technological breakthrough in
the military sphere in order to surge far ahead of NATO allies,
Russia, China and India and create a situation where these
countries would be unable to catch up with the USA in the next
25-30 years. The increase of spending on external and internal
security also contributes to the fulfilment of the task of
combating terror.
Question: Will the unilateral US surge in the sphere of
military technologies reduce the significance of NATO?
Answer: Rather, the US role in NATO will grow still more.
Its European allies have no desire to spend as much money on
military items, including on the latest weaponry, as the USA.
Besides, the task of "containing" China and changing the centre
of military-political efforts in Asia Pacific is rising higher
on the US agenda.
******
#9
The Guardian (UK)
22 February 22, 2002
War reporter falls victim to Russian smear campaign
Ian Traynor in Moscow
A crusading Russian journalist who focuses on exposing human rights abuses
in the war in Chechnya has become the target of a smear campaign by Russian
intelligence.
Anna Politkovskaya escaped from the custody of Russian forces in Chechnya
last week while she was investigating the deaths of six Chechen civilians
who were, she says, murdered in the mountains by a small squad from Russian
military intelligence.
Politkovskaya was also arrested last year by army forces in Chechnya and
spent part of the year outside Russia after receiving death threats. The
FSB, the main successor to the KGB, yesterday alleged that she and her
newspaper - the fiercely independent Novaya Gazeta - were motivated by
money. It alleged that her work in Chechnya was done in order to attract
funds from wealthy western patrons.
The newspaper has announced that it intends to sue the FSB for libel.
Novaya Gazeta confirmed that it benefited from funding by charities
established by the US billionaire philanthropist George Soros, but denied
that Politkovskaya's work was connected with the money.
An FSB spokesman, Ilya Shabalkin, alleged that Novaya Gazeta had received
$55,000 (£38,600) from a Soros foundation, but that the charity intended to
halt the funding. Politkovskaya, it claimed, was trying to unearth "a
scandal" in Chechnya to attract publicity and more funding.
Politkovskaya, the author of a well-received book on the Chechen conflict,
can claim a unique record of commitment to reporting the war. She has
visited the rebel republic 39 times since Vladimir Putin launched the
current war in September 1999.
In a period when critical Russian reporting of the conflict has been
minimised, she has doggedly uncovered atrocities and human rights abuses by
Moscow's forces, as well as publicising the wretched lot of conscripts.
There were fears for her life last week when she was reported missing after
being taken into Russian military custody "for her own safety" while
investigating the deaths of six villagers in the mountainous Shatoi region,
south of the capital, Grozny.
The Russian official version was that the six died when their vehicle hit a
mine. Based on interviews with locals and relatives of the dead,
Politkovskaya concluded that the six were killed by a small unit of
military intelligence troops, who opened fire on the vehicle and then
torched it to destroy evidence.
She said that the Russians in the region operated on the principle of
"shooting anything that moves". The killings resulted in 28 children being
orphaned, she wrote. The dead included a local school director who was
pregnant.
Russian military officials have claimed that the journalist's accreditation
and paperwork are not in order, and they are pressing Moscow to withdraw
her accreditation.
Politkovskaya said she escaped custody in her latest investigation after
being told by friendly officers that she was in acute danger. She made it
across Chechnya into neighbouring Ingushetia before returning to Moscow.
*******
#10
Novye Izvestia
February 22, 2002
THE FEDERAL SECURITY SERVICE FINDS A NEW SPY
Anna Politkovskaya and Novaya Gazeta
Author: Yevgenya Shabalkina
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]
THE VEDOMOSTI NEWSPAPER REPORTED THAT THE NOVAYA GAZETA NEWSPAPER
HAD RECEIVED A GRANT FROM THE SOROS FOUNDATION. THE FSB IMMEDIATELY
CLAIMED THAT ANNA POLITKOVSKAYA'S TRIPS TO CHECHNYA WERE ESSENTIALLY
AN ATTEMPT TO CONVINCE THE SOROS FOUNDATION THAT ITS MONEY HAD BEEN
PUT TO GOOD USE.
An update on latest wild tale launched by General Zdanovich's department
Several days ago the Vedomosti newspaper reported that in
December 2000 the Novaya Gazeta newspaper had received a $55,000 grant
from the Soros Foundation for the Hot Spots program. Novaya Gazeta was
supposed to report on the use of the first installment, $14,000, in
mid-2001; but never bothered to do so, for some reason. The Soros
Foundation is allegedly considering suspending the project.
The cry was immediately taken up by the Federal Security Service
(FSB).
The FSB immediately announced that Anna Politkovskaya's trips to
Chechnya, inevitably ending in scandals, were essentially an attempt
to convince the Soros Foundation that its money had been put to good
use. FSB spokesman Ilya Shabalkin was long-winded in airing grudges
against the recalcitrant journalist. Shabalkin recalled her recent
trip to the Shatoi district without accreditation or an armed escort.
According to Shabalkin, Politkovskaya was asked to spend the night at
the commandant's office for safety's sake, but afterwards presented
this as an attempted detention. A more or less similar incident
occurred in the village of Khatuni, Vedeno district, last spring when
Novaya Gazeta reported Politkovskaya's arrest.
"The FSB has never even tried to disprove the facts highlighted
in Politkovskaya's articles. Whenever it tried, infrequently, the
attempts were always clumsy," says Pavel Gutionov, Chairman of the
Committee for protection of journalists' rights. "It is much easier
for secret services to turn the discussion to who financed the
journalists' trips to Chechnya. For some reason, however, our gallant
FSB agents forget that Anna began writing about the Caucasus conflict
and visiting Chechnya during the first Chechen war, or long before the
grant to Novaya Gazeta."
A few words about the grant. There has indeed been a grant from
the Soros Foundation for the Hot Spots program. The money was formally
paid to the newspaper, but the program is supervised by military
observer Vyacheslav Izmailov. The program aims to release POWs and
hostages from Chechen captivity, assist Chechen orphans, evacuate the
elderly from the zone of hostilities for medical treatment, etc. It
should also be noted that Izmailov had been doing all this and much
more before the money became available.
"It's really a laugh, all these allegations that the Soros
Foundation pays for scandalous articles about the war in Chechnya. Our
charter expressly forbids interference in editorial policy," says a
source from the Soros Foundation. "As for reports on the use of the
money, we have not had any problems with Novaya Gazeta in this
respect."
As the explanation goes, subsidized organizations do not always
submit their reports on time. Reasons may differ. Sometimes, it is
something simple like an illness of the project coordinator. Every
such incident is discussed by the department of grants. The Soros
Foundation is sensible, it doesn't suspend programs all at once, it
first sends a memo to the organization (just what was done with Novaya
Gazeta).
Sergei Sokolov, Novaya Gazeta Deputy Editor-in-Chief: The
escapade of General Alexander Zdanovich's department is so stupid that
the only possible response is laughter. It seems that this is the
secret services' way of distracting the public and the government from
the problems highlighted by Politkovskaya. We are prepared to take the
matter to court. Perhaps we will get some answers to our questions
there.
******
#11
Wall Street Journal
February 22, 2002
Russian Authors Eschew Potboilers, Embrace Classier Detective Novels
By GUY CHAZAN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
MOSCOW -- Grigory Chkhartishvili started writing fiction to spare his
wife's blushes. She adored trashy crime novels but was so ashamed of their
garish covers she wrapped them in brown paper. "I decided to write the kind
of detective novel that respectable ladies wouldn't be ashamed to read in
the Metro," says Mr. Chkhartishvili.
Four years and 12 books later, he's a literary lion.
Mr. Chkhartishvili, who publishes under the pen name Boris Akunin, is now
one of Russia's most popular novelists. His books about Erast Petrovich
Fandorin, a 19th-century gentleman-sleuth, top Russian bestseller lists.
With movie deals, a television series and translations into German,
Japanese, French and Italian (but not English), Fandorin fever may be going
global.
Bespectacled, bearded and balding, Mr. Chkhartishvili is faintly ill at
ease about fame. For years, he earned his living translating Japanese
literature and working on what he still considers his magnum opus, a gloomy
book entitled "The Writer and Suicide." His idea of a good time is to
stroll around a cemetery. "My friends think I'm a necrophile," he says.
Now, however, he hasn't just made crime pay, he has also made it
respectable -- and filled a lucrative gap in a Russian book market
previously split between pulp fiction for the masses and elitist prose that
doesn't sell well. His readers: a still-small but growing middle class with
money to spend and aspirations to defend.
"It's like Klondike," says literary critic Lev Danilkin. "Chkhartishvili
discovered a huge hunger for good quality popular literature, and now it's
bad taste to read trash."
For most of the 1990s, Mr. Chkhartishvili and fellow members of Moscow's
intelligentsia looked on glumly as the nouveaux riches ran the show. By
day, newly minted millionaires roared round the city in bulletproof
Mercedes-Benzes. By night they crowded the city's flashy clubs and casinos.
Now, booming book sales, foreign rights and TV contracts have brought Mr.
Chkhartishvili and several other serious writers both fame and modest
fortunes. He figures there are about 10 writers in Russia earning between
$100,000 and $500,000 (between 115,000 euros and 575,000 euros) a year from
their books. He isn't talking millions. "There are no Stephen Kings here,"
he says. But it's still more than they could dream of earning a few years
ago. "Intellectuals can finally achieve commercial success doing what they
enjoy," says Mr. Chkhartishvili. "For Russia , it's a new idea."
Cashing In on the Renaissance
Quite a few authors are cashing in on what some see as a cultural
renaissance. A difficult experimental novel by Tatyana Tolstaya was last
year's publishing sensation. The book, "Kys," sold 100,000 copies and made
Ms. Tolstaya a celebrity. Novelist Alexei Slapovsky is making big money
writing screenplays for Russian television. Some are dabbling in other
kinds of business, too: Dmitry Lipskerov, an acclaimed author, owns two
Moscow restaurants: Drova, which means Firewood in English, and Ris i Ryba
(Rice and Fish).
Russia's three biggest publishers, AST, Eksmo and Olma Press, have all now
supplemented their standard fare of thrillers and romances with modern
fiction by new authors. "We realized we'd been ignoring a huge section of
the reading public," says Alexander Sirota, spokesman for Olma Press.
"People have had their fill of potboilers; they want serious literature."
Mr. Chkhartishvili was one of the first to identify and satisfy this
appetite. In 1999, his publishing house, Zakharov, sold 50,000 of his
detective novels. Sales jumped to one million in 2000 and to three million
last year. His latest novel, "Lover of Death," sold out in a week. One
Moscow bookshop had six of his books in its top-10 bestseller list last
summer.
"It's a mass psychosis," says Igor Zakharov, founder and owner of the
Zakharov publishing house. He says he never paid a kopeck on advertising.
The stylish detective books, he says, "sell themselves."
Mr. Chkhartishvili is now going multimedia. His first novel, "Azazel," will
shortly appear on Russian TV, and Paul Verhoeven, director of Hollywood
blockbusters "Basic Instinct" and "Total Recall," is turning it into a
movie for international distribution. Meanwhile, Igor Menshikov, one of
Russia's most famous actors, is set to direct another Fandorin novel, "The
State Counselor." Businessmen call wanting to sell Fandorin champagne and
Fandorin eau de Cologne. Fandorin T-shirts are now for sale on Ozon, an
online bookshop.
All this has made the author a wealthy man. He recently moved from a
cramped flat near the Moscow Metro stop "Proletarskaya" to a luxury
apartment a short walk from the Kremlin. His cozy study is lined with
antiques -- an old barometer, a tennis racket, Victorian prints and
encyclopedias. There's a big billiard table in his lounge, and a new
Peugeot on the street outside.
But celebrity status, says Mr. Chkhartishvili, is sometimes a chore. He's
constantly turning down invitations to attend prize-giving ceremonies. He
never answers the telephone and rarely speaks to journalists. "Every day
someone calls up from 'Men's Underwear' or 'Cigar Smoker' wanting an
interview," he says. "I let my wife deal with them."
Haunting the Cemetery
He seeks refuge in a favorite haunt -- Moscow's Donskoi cemetery. "I love
the epitaphs," he says, pacing past elaborate 18th-century tombstones
overgrown with weeds. "The people are all dead, but the emotions they
inspired are all still here." His latest project is a book of essays and
short stories on famous graveyards of the world.
Set in what many Russians now regard as a civilized golden age in the late
19th century, Mr. Chkhartishvili's novels have as their driving force
Fandorin, a Slavic Sherlock Holmes who speaks Japanese and English, is
skilled at martial arts and has lady-killer good looks -- qualities that
set him apart from the beefy, violent protagonists of most Russian
thrillers. Millions of readers have been seduced by the books' elegant
style and classy, retro feel.
Yet Mr. Chkhartishvili balks at attempts to classify his work as serious.
He says some Russians still overly respect the written word, a relic of
Soviet times when dissident authors like Alexander Solzhenitsyn were
revered as prophets. "In totalitarian societies, the role of literature and
writers is seriously exaggerated," says Mr. Chkhartishvili. "Now
literature's just another form of entertainment."
Still, Russia's arbiters of taste think the Fandorin books are much more
than that. "Chkhartishvili will enter the annals of Russian cultural
history," says critic Lev Danilkin. "He crossed Russian classical
literature with the detective novel to create something entirely new. It's
a huge breakthrough, and a great encouragement to young writers."
To hold his fans' attention, Mr. Chkhartishvili has kept up a steady flow
of new projects. In the past five years, he has published nine Fandorin
books and three other mysteries, one set in the present day. He has written
a collection of short stories and two plays, one a parody of Chekhov's
"Seagull" and the other a version of Hamlet, written as a whodunit. He's
also turning one of his novels, "The Jack of Spades," into a musical.
"I'm a child of the socialist planned economy, and I have a five-year plan
to fulfill," he says.
But he admits he could soon face tough competition from other, younger
writers, similarly talented and productive. Russia , he says, is now in the
grip of a literary revival unseen since the end of communism. "Russian
literature was pregnant for nine years and only now it has given birth," he
says. "The world is in for a surprise."
*******
#12
Los Angeles Times
February 22, 2002
MUSIC REVIEW
Absolut(e) Musical Brilliance
By MARK SWED, TIMES STAFF WRITER
One brilliant, sunny, cloudless fall morning in Warsaw a few years ago, an
announcement came over the loudspeakers at the airport. The Lot Airlines
flight to Newark could not depart until the fog lifted. Five hours later,
the St. Petersburg Philharmonic, which was booked on the flight, arrived;
we were quickly hustled onto the plane and it took right off.
But not before the party began.
Once on the plane, the Russian musicians immediately brought out bottles of
vodka and lighted up cigarettes, ignoring seat belt signs and warnings from
crew. Food soon followed; the players had picked up roasted chickens from
somewhere. It was a raucous eight hours over the Atlantic. At their wits'
end, the flight attendants simply gave up and vanished. During the descent
into Newark Airport, the musicians were already in the aisles getting out
luggage. A violin fell from an open overhead bin as we landed with a thud,
offering an uproarious moment of orchestral hilarity.
The next evening, at Carnegie Hall, Russia's oldest and most elite
orchestra--its players young and old, men and women--gave a magnificent
concert of stirring, soulful Tchaikovsky.
Not much seems to have changed, given the news reports of the St.
Petersburg Philharmonic's carrying-on during the first leg of its flight
from Amsterdam to Los Angeles on Monday, at the start of a monthlong tour.
But this time, United Airlines, not amused by the vodka bottles and drunken
behavior, threw the musicians off the plane when it landed at Washington's
Dulles Airport. The orchestra was not allowed to proceed to LAX, putting
its concert Wednesday at the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion in jeopardy.
But after a night of sleeping it off, contrite St. Petersburgians flew to
LAX on Tuesday. The orchestra offered a formal apology to the airline. And
then, just as it did years ago in New York, the rowdy bunch put on a
magnificent concert.
The orchestra's antics did, however, throw an interesting light on the
music and the Russian character.
The program Wednesday contained works by the three most famous Russian
composers of the 20th century--Stravinsky, Prokofiev and
Shostakovich--written within an artistically stormy 20-year period.
It began and ended with the most popular 20th century Russian
symphonies--Prokofiev's "Classical" Symphony and Shostakovich's Fifth. In
between was Stravinsky's rarely heard ballet "Song of the Nightingale."
All three, it turns out, are works by young composers who had musically
misbehaved and were making amends.
In 1917, Prokofiev produced a Haydn-esque charmer in the wake of his
aggressively dissonant, hackles-raising Second Piano Concerto. Around the
same time, Stravinsky, who four years earlier had caused music's most
famous riot with his downright barbaric "Rite of Spring," wrote "The Song
of the Nightingale" in a colorful, exotic style that looked back to his
earlier ballet "Petrushka" and to the tradition of his mentor in St.
Petersburg, Rimsky-Korsakov.
Shostakovich's Fifth Symphony represents the century's most startling
example of musical reparation. After a dangerous denunciation from Stalin
for the "decadent," sexually explicit opera "Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk,"
Shostakovich kept himself out of the gulag thanks to the triumphant, upbeat
nature of his Fifth Symphony, which returned him, however uneasily, to
Soviet good graces.
The Shostakovich symphony is in the St. Petersburg Philharmonic's blood. It
premiered the work in 1937 under Evgeny Mravinsky, one of the 20th
century's greatest conductors, who led the orchestra for 50 years. A
recently reissued Everest recording by Mravinsky and the Leningrad
Orchestra (as it was then called) of the symphony from the early '50s,
shortly after Stalin's death, is an excellent document of the almost
unbelievable intensity the orchestra could produce with this score.
Yuri Temirkanov, music director of the orchestra since 1988, following
Mravinsky's death, has a somewhat different style, but the intensity is
still there. Temirkanov, who is also music director of the Baltimore
Symphony, loves to micromanage, which can make him seem fussy in some
music, such as the Prokofiev symphony. But he loves thrust, which sweeps
the listener along. When he can achieve both at the same time, as he did in
the Shostakovich, the effect is riveting.
Details took hold, yet the orchestra played with gripping unanimity. The
low string and brass instruments ground the ensemble with tremendous force.
In the slow movement, the quiet passages were taut whispers, an amazing
amount of expressivity found from a thin wire of sound. This is in fact an
orchestra that can fly sober, and the momentum throughout the symphony was
astounding; everything in the score seeming inevitable.
Stravinsky's ballet got a brightly colored, carefully tinted performance.
As an encore, "Tybalt's Death," from Prokofiev's "Romeo and Juliet," was an
irresistible display of orchestral virtuosity--fast, furious and
spectacularly percussive.
Let them have their vodka; they earn it the hard way.
******
#13
Russia wants fast Caspian carve-up, sees progress
By Patrick Lannin
MOSCOW, Feb 22 (Reuters) - Russia's top negotiator on how to split the
disputed Caspian Sea and its oil riches between five squabbling nations
said on Friday a solution was needed quickly to avoid rising tensions.
But Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Viktor Kalyuzhny also said progress was
being made as none of the nations involved were being too inflexible in
their stance over the sea, whose oil wealth is estimated to be close to
that of the North Sea.
"The process of legal determination (of the sea's status) has got seriously
behind what is happening de facto," he told reporters, referring to the
fact that oil companies and some nations were already exploring disputed
zones.
"Life goes on and you cannot stop it whether or not there is a solution on
the legal status and this is the main reason for the tensions which are
continously increasing," he said.
"The question of the Caspian's status should be solved as soon as possible."
He was speaking ahead of a conference next week in Moscow which will bring
together legal experts, officials and oil companies to thrash out the
Caspian issue.
Tensions over the sea, which also provides black caviar and millions of
tonnes of fish, break out from time to time.
The last series of serious incidents was in the middle of last year when an
Iranian gunboat drove off an Azeri exploration vessel from a disputed zone.
Kalyuzhny said progress on talks had been made at a recent meeting of
deputy foreign ministers and hoped that a declaration on the sea could be
drawn up in time for a summit of Caspian Sea leaders, expected in late 2002.
"All are seeking a solution, no one is sticking to one final position,"
Kalyuzhny said.
Iran has long been seen as the odd one out on the Caspian question,
insisting the sea should be split equally five ways.
The other states, Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan, seem to
have accepted a division along median lines, which would leave Tehran with
less than 20 percent.
Median lines are a system of dividing the sea by drawing lines from each
country's coast and then calculatinghow much territory they should have
according to where the lines intersect.
However, analysts say Turkmenistan has not quite accepted the median line
solution as it has some worries this would put it at a territorial
disadvantage as regards Azerbaijan, its direct neighbour across the sea.
*******
Web page for CDI Russia Weekly:
http://www.cdi.org/russia
Archive for Johnson's Russia List:
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson
With support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and
the MacArthur Foundation
A project of the Center for Defense Information (CDI)
1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW
Washington DC 20036