Johnson's Russia List
#6096
24 February 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Note from David Johnson:
1. Reuters: Momentum building for sweeping expansion of NATO.
2. RIA Novosti: RUSSIA ON THE THRESHOLD OF NEW STAGE OF COOPERATION WITH
NATO.
3. Peter Lavelle: Untimely Thoughts - Defending the Fatherland in far aboard
skating rinks (re Russian patriotism).
4. Boston Globe: Bryan Bender, Plan to store warheads draws fire of
arms-control backers.
5. Reuters: Thousands rally hoping to oust Moldovan Communists.
6. Itar-Tass: Putin honours late Sobchak, St Petersburg's first mayor and
his former boss.
7. The Observer (UK): Tamsin Blanchard, To boldly decorate. Adam Bartos
spent
three years documenting the homes and offices of Russia's cosmonauts - and
the
results are out of this world.
8. Lenard Leeds: Comment re Montaigne/6095.
9. BBC Monitoring: Kazakh paper critical about US military presence in
Central
Asia.
10. BBC Monitoring: Russia, China "irritated" by US presence in Central
Asia -
Uzbek radio.
11. Transitions Online: Creating an Axis of Normality. (re US and Central
Asia)
12. Rossiyskaya Gazeta: Russian Daily Readers Interview Electoral
Commission
Head on Election Procedures. (Aleksandr Veshnyakov)]
*******
#1
ANALYSIS-Momentum building for sweeping expansion of NATO
By John Chalmers
BRUSSELS, Feb 24 (Reuters) - September 11 and a warmer wind from Moscow have
made it increasingly likely that up to seven ex-Communist states may join the
West's NATO defence alliance in a sweeping expansion that few thought
possible a year ago.
Invitations will go out at a summit in Prague in November.
The final choice from a list of nine applicants may not be made by the 19
current NATO members until the last minute, as in 1997 when the alliance
first opened its doors to three former stalwarts of its Cold War adversary,
the Soviet-run Warsaw Pact.
But, unlike five years ago, there is now no furious debate in the United
States, NATO's dominant force, over the wisdom of extending its security
guarantee eastward to Russia's frontiers. Waging a global "war on terror"
after September's attacks on the United States has made Washington keener to
build new alliances.
And with President Vladimir Putin aligning himself more with the West, there
is less aggressively anti-NATO Russian rhetoric to influence the enlargement
debate, even though admitting the Baltic states would take the North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation right onto the soil of the former Soviet Union itself.
The question of whether to go for enlargement at all, once a privately
preferred option for some west European policymakers eager not to anger the
Kremlin, is no longer even being asked.
"There is now a very real sense that there is no official limit," one NATO
diplomat said. "We're saying that, if nine nations prove they're ready, we'll
take them."
Fresh doubts about NATO's post-Cold War relevance following Washington's
largely go-it-alone war in Afghanistan seem to have fuelled enthusiasm for
enlargement among other member states.
Secretary General George Robertson, who has tirelessly defended NATO's worth
against critics for the past five months, sees the Prague summit as a chance
to adapt the organisation to meet the challenges posed by threats like those
of the Islamist militants suspected of September's suicide hijack attacks.
NEW ALLIES
"Prague will consolidate the alliance's position as the primary means for
developing our armed forces to defeat terrorism and contribute to other
asymmetric challenges," Robertson said in a speech last week.
Philip Gordon of the Brookings Institution believes that September 11 has
made the case for enlargement stronger.
"Enlargement will contribute to the process of integration that has helped
stabilise Europe over the past 50 years and promote the development of strong
new allies in the war on terrorism," he wrote in a recent paper.
The nine applicants face differing prospects for Prague.
Diplomats say that Slovenia, which was passed over when Poland, Hungary and
Czech Republic acceded in 1999, is almost certain to get an invitation to
join in Prague.
Entry for Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, now liberated from a 50-year
annexation by the Soviet Union, is also virtually assured since Putin
softened his hostility to the idea.
Slovakia could make it five. But if elections due to take place just before
Prague return a nationalistic government under former premier Vladimir
Meciar, its hopes could be dashed.
A Western diplomat said Macedonia and Albania had accepted -- though not yet
publicly -- that they will not make the grade.
But membership for Romania and Bulgaria, once a distant prospect, looks
increasingly likely to take the tally to seven.
One ambassador at NATO's Brussels headquarters said that at a recent
brainstorming session on enlargement representatives from several countries
spoke out strongly in favour of taking seven new members. And no one spoke
explicitly against it.
There is supposed to be an official silence on membership prospects ahead of
the Prague summit to avoid diminishing the incentives for candidates to make
reforms required for entry.
That membership checklist includes demonstrating a commitment to the rule of
law and human rights, establishing democratic control of the armed forces and
promoting stability and well-being through economic freedoms.
SILENCE NOT HOLDING
But horse-trading has begun and the silence is not holding.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has said he expects Slovakia to be in the
next wave of new European Union and NATO states and his foreign minister,
Joschka Fischer, has thrown Berlin's weight behind the Baltic states' bid for
membership.
EU Enlargement Commissioner Guenter Verheugen said last week that NATO should
take in Bulgaria and Romania, Balkan laggards which are not expected to
qualify for EU membership for several more years, to avoid the "danger of
double rejection."
France, Italy, Greece and Turkey are also likely to push hard for Bulgaria
and Romania, arguing that NATO needs a strong southern European dimension and
a foothold in the Balkans, where the threat to security is far greater than
in the east.
Diplomats say that enlargement would support a U.S.-inspired agenda to
develop NATO into a more global organisation which can deal with new threats,
including terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, and also act as a bridge
to Russia.
But many believe the entry of countries which can add little to the
alliance's military strength will turn NATO into more of a political
organisation and less of an armed force.
"The 2002 enlargement of NATO might symbolise the end of NATO as a meaningful
military institution," analyst Sean Kay wrote in a paper for the independent,
Washington-based Center for Defense Information.
"Eventually, NATO will become the central security organisation for all of
Europe, most likely replacing many of the activities that are currently
undertaken by the 50-plus member Organisation for Security and Cooperation in
Europe."
*******
#2
RUSSIA ON THE THRESHOLD OF NEW STAGE OF COOPERATION WITH NATO
MOSCOW, FEBRUARY 24, 2002. /RIA Novosti correspondent/ -- Russia starts
consultations with the North-Atlantic Alliance's members on new mechanisms of
Russia-NATO cooperation.
Norway's charge d'affaires in Russia Ule Horpestad reported that this issue
will be discussed by Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia Yevgeny Gusarov and
his Norwegian counterpart Kim Trovik in the course of the Russian-Norwegian
consultations to be held in Oslo on February 24-25. The high-ranking
diplomats will consider the sides' proposals to create new efficient
mechanisms for consultations and cooperation between Russia and the Alliance,
as well as joint making of decisions, and taking coordinated actions.
The meeting of heads of foreign-policy departments of Russia and NATO
countries held in Brussels early in December reached an agreement to launch a
process of radical changing the forms and methods of cooperation. Russian
Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov stated that the process should result in setting
up a new body, which should be the full-fledged "twenty" format.
Moscow believes that within the new format Russia and NATO could cooperate in
developing and fulfilling joint decisions to combat international terrorism,
search for answers to new risks and threats, oppose to proliferation of mass
destruction weapons, as well as in "reaction to crises." Brussels believes
that the mechanism of making decisions by the 20 countries should be tested
first at a limited number of issues to check how it works.
Brussels considers that the principle difference of such a mechanism from the
incumbent Russia-NATO Joint Standing Council lies in the fact that
representatives of 19 NATO countries come to a Council's session with a
common agreed opinion, while the new format will envisage joint discussion
within the "twenty," not within the "19 + 1" format.
Russia's dialogue on these issues only starts with Yevgeny Gusarov
consultations in the Norwegian Foreign Ministry.
*******
#3
From: "Peter Lavelle"
Subject: Untimely Thoughts
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002
Peter Lavelle: Untimely Thoughts - Defending the Fatherland in far aboard
skating rinks (re Russian patriotism)
(February 23, p.m.) My apartment building is well known for the high
percentage of KGB pensioners residing here - almost all of them women. At
first blush one would not think this august community would be hardcore
sports fans. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. But, because I have to
walk the dog early each morning, I could not but notice that virtually every
apartment block window was lilt at 5 a.m. today. It would not be an
exaggeration to state that all of Russia stayed up to watch the US-Russia
hockey game in Salt Lake City. In the five years I have lived here, I have
never seen such a level of social solidarity and national concern. The new
holiday celebrated for first time this year - "Defenders of the
Fatherland" - could not have been observed on a better day. Still again,
Putin's Russia takes virtue from necessity.
I am not particularly interested in sports and do not watch the Olympics on
television. In retrospect, maybe I should have at least watched the
ice-skating events. For the last few days, I have been bombarded by
questions from people at work (many of whom I rarely speak to) concerning my
position on 'Russia's maltreatment in Salt Lake City'. Once in a while I
have to face the consequences of what my passport means in this country. I
have simply pleaded ignorance and adopted a neutral posture. I have noticed
that once Russians get a bee in their bonnet, neutrality is rarely accepted
with grace. Of course I remember reactions to the NATO bombing of Belgrade
and opinions expressed after 9/11. For some Russians both events were
significant, but at the end of the day most reactions were muted. Few
Russians engaged in conversation about these events. The denial and theft
of "our Olympic gold" is something entirely different. Russian pride has
been stirred; Russia's conscience has been moved.
President Putin was spot on with his political reaction - spin doctoring at
its best. While most Russians complained of America's arrogance, hubris,
and one-sidedness, Putin came out with a strident criticism of the
International Olympic Committee. Criticizing the Committee clearly was the
wrong body to focus on, but it did serve Putin's purpose. He did not accuse
the Americans of any wrongdoing. He slapped the wrists of Olympic
bureaucrats - international and Russian alike. Kicking around bureaucrats
is something he knows and does well. His words were never really listened
to in Russia, though his sentiment that Russia was/is getting a raw deal
rang in everyone's ears. On the eve of celebrating "Defenders of the
Fatherland", everyone was singing in Putin's chorus. Today Russians watched
re-runs from the Olympic Games - not the re-runs of Soviet Second World War
II films. Defending the fatherland, it would seem, includes far away
skating rinks. If this is a paradigm shift, it should be welcomed.
After checking a few news websites, the usual suspects, I am of the opinion
that most the anger of the Russian's may be misplaced. Though one thing
seems to be clear, either the Russian team has been extremely unlucky or it
is the focus of a lot of extra scrutiny - maybe both. Extra scrutiny, if
true, is unfair. To be honest, I have no idea who is right, but I do see
the impact on many Russians and I am pleased. One element of life here that
is difficult to accept is the anemia of the social and national spirit.
For all the good news coming out of Russia concerning its macroeconomic
situation, life remains extremely hard for the vast majority. On top of
this, it is estimated that the percentage of adult Russians interested in
politics is a single digit. Reform and restructuring are obviously
important, though rarely it is the stuff of emotion and pride.
Over the last few days, I have witnessed a society pull together. There is
of course an element of victimization involved here - something that
traditionally has resonance in this culture. The anger engendered by the
games will pass, most likely very quickly too. I hope what will not pass so
fast is the feeling of solidarity. What should pass is the "us against
America" or "us against the world" mentality. What can be saved and savored
from this experience is the fact that a meaningful Russian ethos remains
intact - a people who have a common identity and sense of belonging.
The uses of adversity can unite; the uses of adversity can also inform a
people of what it means to be a people. The elderly women of my apartment
block were watching to protect the interests of Russia last night, not
unlike how they seem to always to watch out for Russia on just about
everything that threatens this country's essence. I wonder how many of them
have ever watched a hockey game in the quiet hours of the morning. My sense
is that all of them desire Russia to find its true place in the world.
Never underestimate these women; hell is paid if one does not. They are the
ones who usually watch those old Soviet WW II films.
Peter Lavelle, Head of Research, IFC Metropol, Moscow, Russia
********
#4
Boston Globe
February 24, 2002
Plan to store warheads draws fire of arms-control backers
By Bryan Bender, Globe Correspondent
WASHINGTON - The Bush administration's decision to store thousands of nuclear
weapons left over from the Cold War, rather than destroy them, has drawn
fierce criticism from arms control advocates, who say the move could
undermine the improved relations between the United States and Russia.
When he campaigned for the White House, President Bush pledged to
dramatically reduce the US nuclear arsenal, arguing that the end of the Cold
War no longer required the US military to prepare for a massive nuclear
exchange with Russia.
Last month, the Department of Defense completed a review of the US nuclear
arsenal that calls for reducing the number of warheads from 6,000 to about
1,700 over the next decade.
But the Nuclear Posture Review also calls for keeping more than 4,000
unneeded warheads in storage for possible future use, rather than dismantling
them, and that stance has become the focus of fierce debate in the United
States and Russia.
The administration's decision has angered Russia, which agreed at a summit
last fall between Bush and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to cut
nuclear stockpiles by two-thirds of their Cold War levels. Russian officials
expected the warheads would be destroyed, not put into storage.
The US undersecretary of defense for policy, Douglas Feith, defended the Bush
plan earlier this month before senior Democrats on the Senate Armed Services
Committee who criticized the storage plan as ''moving the furniture around''
to avoid outright nuclear reductions.
''We call what we're doing a reduction, because we think it is highly
significant that we're going to be reducing the number of warheads available
for use,'' Feith said. The US nuclear force includes land-based missiles and
nuclear-armed submarines and bombers.
Feith said that the United States no longer has the facilities to build
nuclear weapons and that it would be foolhardy to destroy existing ones.
Nevertheless, he described the removal of the warheads from service as a
significant step forward. ''We are closing the history books on the Cold War
balance of terror,'' Feith said.
Military officials said the warheads would be stored in a way that would make
it easy to put them back on a missile if necessary.
The Defense Department's review states that US nuclear strategy is no longer
focused on the threat of nuclear attack from Russia but on the threat from
China's small nuclear arsenal or the threat from Iran, Iraq, North Korea, or
others seeking to develop nuclear weapons capability or chemical and
biological weapons.
But congressional critics contend that the plan shows that American military
and political leaders still see Russia as a threat.
''It's warehoused terror, rather than immediate terror,'' Senator Carl M.
Levin, a Michigan Democrat and chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said
of the US plans during a hearing last week.
Senator Daniel K. Akaka, Democrat of Hawaii, called the storage plan ''a
distinction without much of a difference.''
By maintaining access to the warheads, the United States is sending a message
to Moscow that it still views the Russian nuclear arsenal as a direct threat,
said Morton Halperin, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.
''The numbers make no sense, unless you are talking about either surviving a
Russian attack or destroying Russia, because for no other purpose would you
conceivably use anything like the numbers that apparently the military keep
telling the civilians they need,'' he said.
The Russians are insisting that the two countries sign a new arms reduction
treaty that sets limits on the number of nuclear warheads. Moscow also wants
the warheads to be destroyed, rather than be removed and stockpiled.
''I am talking about a legally binding document,'' General Colonel Yuri
Nikolayevich Baluyevskiy, first deputy chief of the Russian General Staff,
said last month during a visit to Washington. He said that such a treaty
would provide ''predictability and transparency of our nuclear policy on both
sides.''
Ivo Daalder, a foreign policy specialist at the Brookings Institution in
Washington, said: ''It is very clear where the Russians are. It has to be a
treaty that calls for irreversible cuts and is verifiable.''
There is a heated debate within the Bush administration about how to address
Russia's concerns. Analysts predict that the Pentagon, which does not want to
be bound by a specific number of warheads, will win out over the State
Department, which is pushing for a binding treaty.
The US position will be decided before Bush visits Moscow in May.
Many analysts agree that Russia is not in a strong enough position to change
US policy. The analysts cite as evidence the recent US decision to pull out
of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and Washington's developing plans
to take military action against Iraq despite fierce Russian objections.
''Russia is playing with a weak hand,'' said Robert Pfaltzgraff, president of
the Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis at Tufts University. ''Putin needs
good relations with Bush for economic reasons and for access to capital.''
But over time, Washington's practice of taking advantage of Russia's weakness
to further US goals could backfire, Daalder warned.
''You can't have a relationship built fundamentally on one side doing all the
giving and the other doing all the taking,'' he said.
*******
#5
Thousands rally hoping to oust Moldovan Communists
By Dmitry Chubashenko
CHISINAU, Feb 24 (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Moldovans streamed into the
capital Chisinau on Sunday, answering nationalists' calls for a mammoth show
of people power to try to overthrow the Communist government.
Carrying banners reading "Stop the Red Terror!" and "The Communists are
Terrorists," at least 40,000 people from the tiny country of four million
poured into Chisinau's central square, a Reuters reporter at the scene
estimated.
Thousands, bussed in from outlying villages by the nationalist
Christian-Democratic People's party, were forced to trudge five km (two
miles) into the city after their vehicles were halted at police roadblocks.
But police presence in the city centre was minimal.
Tens of thousands of nationalists, schoolchildren and students have staged
peaceful rallies since January to protest against the government's
pro-Russian policies, which they fear will play down Moldova's cultural and
linguistic links with neighbouring Romania.
Protesters fear the Communists, who control more than two-thirds of
parliament and all key ministerial posts, want to put Moldova, a former
Soviet republic, back into the Kremlin's orbit.
The demonstrations began as an outcry against plans to force children to
learn Russian in schools and to rewrite history textbooks, but, driven by
nationalist leader Yurie Rosca, they have shifted focus to call for the
government's resignation.
The Communists, in power since February 2001 after a landslide election
victory driven by promises to fight poverty, have so far tolerated the
rallies and last week backed down on the language and history textbook plans.
CRIPPLING FOREIGN DEBT
But on Saturday, President Vladimir Voronin, a moderate who has said he will
not use force against children, branded Rosca a "terrorist" prepared to "shed
the blood of children" to stage a coup.
Analysts say Moldova is facing economic collapse, with the protests piling
pressure on a government wrestling with crippling foreign debt and pleading
for funds from hesitant foreign lenders. Many economists feel Moldova is
heading for a complete debt default and will need bailing out.
"We came here to defend our rights and language. We are not frightened by the
Communists," said student Dumitru, 19.
Most young people feel Moldova, an impoverished agricultural country, would
have a better future tied to western Europe. They are keen to preserve
cultural links with Romania, whose language they share, from which Moldova
was excised by Moscow during World War Two.
Many Moldovans supported the idea of uniting with Romania after gaining
independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, and hundreds of demonstrators
carried the Romanian flag on Sunday.
Many feel they have little to lose by protesting -- four-fifths of the
population live below the poverty line of a dollar a day. Emigration, legal
and illegal, is at a record high.
Voronin has abided by election promises to raise pensions and preserve wages
but has failed to persuade global lenders to release vital funds.
The International Monetary Fund and World Bank have held onto their cash,
worried about the slow pace of reform and the recent resignation of the
economic and finance ministers, the only non-Communists in the government.
*******
#6
Putin honours late Sobchak, St Petersburg's first mayor and his former boss
ITAR-TASS
Moscow, 23 February: President Vladimir Putin today signed a decree in
support of the initiative by St Petersburg's executive body to perpetuate the
memory of its first mayor Anatoliy Sobchak.
Given Sobchak's considerable contribution to the establishment of Russian
statehood and the development of law studies, the president instructed the
government to create 10 personal Sobchak stipends of 700 roubles each from
2002 for students of law departments in state universities and other
specialized higher educational institutions which have state accreditation.
The government should also determine the procedure for awarding the stipends
on a competitive basis.
******
#7
The Observer (UK)
24 February 2002
Interiors
To boldly decorate
Adam Bartos spent three years documenting the homes and offices of Russia's
cosmonauts - and the results are out of this world. Tamsin Blanchard watches
the space
By Tamsin Blanchard
The telephones alone are worthy of a book. In Russia, it seems, they are
status symbols - the more you have, the more important your role in life. In
the pages of Adam Bartos's book Kosmos: A Portrait of the Russian Space Age
(£28, Princeton Architectural Press), desks groan under the weight of five or
six at once - some with great, clunky, old-fashioned dials, others with
buttons, and all in a very particular colour palette of duck-egg blue,
lipstick red, buttery cream and black that assures them cult status as style
icons. In private offices and studies, telephones are rewarded with their own
little purpose-built table, away from the general business of the desk. The
multiple phone lines are in need of some modern streamlining, rather like
some of the great hulking computers which fill entire rooms and are probably
as powerful as the small desktop computers and slimline laptops that have
become part of our everyday lives. 'The phones in Russia are amazing,' says
Bartos.
For a period of three years, American photographer Adam Bartos travelled to
Russia in search of the people and places that enabled the country to send
Yuri Gagarin into space in 1961. He looked inside the great missile assembly
halls, the rocket launches, the spacecrafts themselves, and the offices and
homes of some of the scientists and engineers who made it all possible. Like
his earlier project on the UN building, International Territory: The United
Nations, 1945-95 (£20, Verso Books), with text by Christopher Hitchens,
Kosmos is effectively a book about interiors - a series of still lives on
mantelpieces, faded flock wallpapers, and richly trimmed standard lampshades.
'In a very broad sense, the book is about design,' says Bartos. The
architecture and both the industrial and domestic interiors he encountered
while researching the book shared a very specific aesthetic - in particular,
the colour palette. 'Most of the apartments have large windows with a great
deal of light, and very often there are spots of saturated colour.' He even
began seeing signature Gucci stripes painted on industrial equipment.
Everywhere you look, there are muted blues, grassy greens, mustard yellows,
and cobalt blues. It's a range of colours that seems to have stopped being
mixed in the 60s. Although the pictures were all taken between 1995 and 1998,
they look as if they are caught in a time capsule. It is as though time
stopped on 27 March 1968, the day Yuri Gagarin, the first man to conquer
space, was killed in a car accident. 'It's a future that's past,' says
Bartos, 'an obsolescent future.'
Gagarin's office - preserved exactly as it was on the day he died - is
photographed, complete with the portrait of Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, the
founder of Russian cosmonautics, hanging above the bookcase. More bizarrely,
the room where Gagarin slept the night before his flight into space in 1961
is captured in all its cold, spartan bleakness. A simple metal-framed, single
bed is pushed against mustard-striped wallpaper, a basic woven bedspread
thrown over it. You can imagine the sleepless night he must have spent there,
contemplating the journey schoolboys dream of.
Bartos says he tried to keep away from the more kitsch heroic stuff of Soviet
iconography. But he couldn't resist a stylised head of Gagarin mounted on a
multicoloured pebble-dash wall of the stairwell of a visitors' centre, or
some of the trophies proudly displayed in the homes of the designers and
scientists. On every desk and mantelpiece, there seems to be a miniature
silver model rocket, poised to take off from its tiny metal stand, a
Thunderbirds toy come to life. 'I suppose the higher up the hierarchy, the
more beautiful the trophies,' says Bartos.
On a purely superficial aesthetic level, however, it is the homes of people
like the rocket pioneer Boris Rauschenbakh - with its oak parquet floors,
elegantly printed wallpaper and exotic mix of gold-brocade-on-50s-modern
chair, brightly woven blanket, black-and-white bamboo-print cushion, antique
Chinese urn and the obligatory telephone (in a particularly vibrant shade of
turquoise) carefully placed on its own little woven mat - that make this
Russian world of interiors so inspiring.
Forget the rockets and spacesuits. The men who empowered Russia to win the
space race had impeccable taste. And their homes are unchanged since the days
when their creative juices were at full flow. It is an effortless mix of
functional comfort and Oriental decoration. The men's studies all follow a
similar pattern, with a radio, an easy chair, a day bed, and the table for
the phone; there is something quite feminine and homely - but at the same
time cool and modern - about the way they are decorated, with their white
lacy curtains and their patterned brocades. As Bartos comments, the interiors
are a slice of another time, a naive, innocent period when science fiction
became a reality. Dust off the mothballs and these rooms have stood the test
of time, even if the space race has long since moved on.
******
#8
From: "Lenard Leeds"
Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2002
Subject: Comment re Montaigne - No. 6095
There was a good deal of irony in item #7 of JRL installment 6095, entitled
“Russia Rising” and penned by former Russia correspondent Fen Montaigne.
In April of 1999, Montaigne released a book called “Hooked: Fly Fishing
Through Russia.” The following is the review that appears at
http://www.fishandfly.co.uk/bookrevs/hooked.html by Dennis Smith:
REVIEW
Montaigne is a Russian-speaking former US correspondent in Moscow who
decided to spend three months casting a fly around Russia - from north to
south and east to west - but avoiding tourist areas like the Kola peninsular.
The result is far removed from run-of-the-mill fly fishing books and, with
its vivid descriptions of life in provincial Russia today, has a far
greater appeal to a general audience than the title suggests. The trip is
not something that anyone without Montaigne's linguist skills and knowledge
of the country could ever contemplate - and at the end one is surprised he
is still uninjured and hasn't been robbed (although he does come near it).
It is a depressing picture of a subsistence level economy and those who
imagine the joys of carefree fly fishing in unspoiled rivers and lakes in
remote parts of Russia are in for a shock. He still needs permission and
permits to fish anywhere and the result is frequently a blank or the odd
modest fish or two.
The waters are devastated by pollution, poaching and chronic over fishing
and those fish that are caught are quickly despatched for the pan or pot -
catch and release is a bizarre concept. It is not until near the end of his
trip - at a nature reserve with a US-Russian scientific group - that the
fishing is anything like what most anglers might hope to find.
Although he seems to have a fair amount of tackle with him, there is little
in the way of description - and he was certainly not carrying a priest! His
financing is also a mystery - was he really wandering around potentially
dangerous parts of the country with thousands of dollars or roubles in his
wallet? He was hardly in areas where there were friendly hole-in-the-wall
machines or the locals were taking traveller's cheques.
END REVIEW
I well remember another review, which appeared shortly after the book’s
publication in Sports Illustrated. There, the reviewer focused on
Montaigne’s exceedingly vivid characterizations of squalid Russian toilets
throughout the country, and ended with perhaps the most blunt three-word
characterization of Russia ever written, namely “desperately screwed up.”
Now, just three years later, the only significant difference being the
election of a proud KGB spy as president, Russia is “rising?” Ironic indeed.
When Montaigne speaks of “four star restaurants” springing up like weeds,
he does not mention who has awarded these stars. Michelin? The New York
Times? Likewise, Montaigne does not comment on the fact that many of these
restaurants may well be serving fish contaminated in the polluted rivers he
fished, without disclosure.
When Montaigne mentions “vibrant computer software businesses,” he does not
name a single product placed on the world software market by a Russian
publisher.
He does not mention Russia’s plummeting population, it’s unsuccessful war
in Chechnya, or its abject failure at the Olympics, brilliantly commented
upon elsewhere in the same JRL issue.
And most surprising of all, Montaigne does not draw the obvious historical
parallel between the “rising” Russia he has just now discovered and the
Russia of 100 years ago, where there was also a flourishing and
impressively dazzling but tiny class of superrich and a vast exploited
underclass. 100 years ago, that lead to bloody revolution followed by
decades of totalitarian despair.
However, what appeared in the JRL was only an excerpt. I will look forward
to reading the entire piece, where I expect all these details will be
filled in.
******
#9
BBC Monitoring
Kazakh paper critical about US military presence in Central Asia
Source: MN Novosti Nedeli, Almaty, in Russian 20 Feb 02 pp1-3
The West does not need to set up military bases in Kazakhstan because the
country is far from Afghanistan, Kazakh political analyst Konstantin
Syroezhkin told the Kazakh MN Novosti Nedeli newspaper. At the same time, the
newspaper quoted another expert, Maulen Ashimbayev, as saying that with the
arrival of the US military, Russia had "lost its military and political
dominance" in Central Asia, and had been "practically ousted by the USA".
However the newspaper thinks that nobody can answer the question as to
whether a hypothetical deployment of Western troops in Kazakhstan would lead
to the growth of extremist sentiments and to the dissatisfaction of Russia
and China. The following is an excerpt from an article by Azat Zakiyev
published by the Kazakh newspaper MN Novosti Nedeli on 20 February:
"Neighbours have opened their southern gates. NATO has not come from the east
but the south." This is roughly what many articles and reports in the Central
Asian media have been saying. The region has been living under the US Stars
and Stripes for the past two months. And it's not only the Afghan events,
which have not calmed down yet, which are the reason for this. Western
countries are setting up fully fledged military bases in the very heart of
Central Asia, in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, moreover under the very nose of
China.
[Passage omitted: US-Kazakh relations are developing steadily; US ambassador
to Kazakhstan, Larry Napper, discussed with Kazakh MPs the ratification of a
US-Kazakh intercontinental ballistic missile launch silos elimination treaty
- processed separately from Kazakh MN Novosti Nedeli newspaper]
After the events of 11 September 2001 and with the beginning of the [US-led]
antiterrorist operation in Afghanistan [on 7 October 2001], the world entered
a new reality. The majority of CIS countries have backed the USA in their
intention to strike Taleban and Al-Qa'idah bases [in Afghanistan] and they
have also expressed their readiness to provide the Pentagon with air
corridors and even with military infrastructure. They did not have to
persuade the West for long. Mirages and Phantoms have already arrived at
military and civilian airfields in Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, and NATO
military bases have appeared there like mushrooms after the rain. The US
military themselves say that they have come for one year only, but judging by
the nature of the work being carried out, the brave guys from Florida and
Paris have decided to stay for a long time at Khanabad [airfield in southern
Uzbekistan] and [the Kyrgyz capital] Bishkek's Manas airport. Information has
leaked from Uzbekistan that the USA would not mind renting the Khanabad base
for 25 years. Kazakh and Russian political analysts are commenting
practically in the same way - Western countries have come to Central Asia,
most likely, for a long time. And present realities should be considered
bearing in mind their long-term presence in the region.
The director of the Kazakh Institute for Strategic Studies, Maulen
Ashimbayev, has arrived at the conclusion that Russia has lost its military
and political dominance in Central Asia, i.e. it has practically been ousted
by the USA. Most of the local and Russian media say the same.
It is no secret that our southern neighbours are expecting to gain many
advantages from the presence of the USA and its allies. However, not everyone
has fallen into a state of euphoria. It is difficult to say that "Islamists
have put their hands" here, but leaflets condemning the deployment of NATO
troops have appeared in Kyrgyzstan. Some opposition figures are also unhappy
with this. In addition, last week, some Kazakh media criticized the
cooperation between our neighbours and the USA in this issue. Kazakh
Commercial TV news bulletins said that the US military had behaved in
Kyrgyzstan as if they were the masters.
It is quite understandable that, due to the specifics of the situation in
Uzbekistan, nobody is openly showing his disagreement with the US military
presence. But it is difficult to say that everyone is happy [in Uzbekistan].
One question arises: how will Kazakhstan regard a hypothetical deployment of
US or French troops in the country? Will this lead to the growth of extremist
sentiments among the grassroots and to the dissatisfaction of Russia and
China, with whom Kazakhstan is tied by the Shanghai [Cooperation
Organization] agreements.
It seems that our position on this issue has not been formulated yet, and
nobody can categorically answer this in the negative. Russia's approach is
still unclear, too, although the Russian ambassador to Kyrgyzstan, Georgiy
Rudov, has noted that that he has long been resisting the deployment of
Western military in the country [Kyrgyzstan]. Perhaps, the most concrete was
Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka, who stated that the Central Asian
countries should have discussed this issue with their allies in the
Collective Security Treaty.
An additional question pops up because there is some unity in reports being
carried by our media that NATO is seen to be approaching Kazakh borders. Is
[Kazakh] parliament's refusal to ratify an agreement with the USA on missile
launch silos elimination a logical continuation of the anti-US ballyhoo about
military bases? Most likely, no. The topic of military bases has become
fashionable. However there are no grounds for the anti-US sentiments in
Kazakhstan so far and they are hardly likely to appear. Rural districts of
Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan are another matter, where favourable conditions are
being created for the agitators of extremist groups to point out "infidels"
and potential enemies in the face of Western military.
Renowned political analyst Konstantin Syroezhkin has agreed to comment on the
situation for MN Novosti Nedeli newspaper. He believes that there is no need
for the West to set up military bases in Kazakhstan because Kazakhstan is far
from Afghanistan. And China could also express its strong disagreement. In
this case the Majlis [lower chamber] deputies, who "only" disagree with the
fact that the US military intend to bring their equipment into the country
without customs examination to eliminate missile launch silos, are right. If
a radar station or another special technical means is brought into the
country under this campaign - then this is already a military presence.
So, there is no need, so far, to speak about anyone forcing "anti-US
hysteria" [in Kazakhstan].
*******
#10
BBC Monitoring
Russia, China "irritated" by US presence in Central Asia - Uzbek radio
Source: Uzbek Radio first programme, Tashkent, in Uzbek 0900 gmt 23 Feb 02
China and Russia consider deployment of US warplanes and troops in Central
Asia a threat to their political and economic interests in the region, a
commentary on Uzbek radio said on 23 February. The commentator quoted an
unidentified Chinese diplomat in Kazakhstan as saying that the USA had asked
to use a base in eastern Kazakhstan for operations against China, and that
the USA had installed intelligence equipment in Kyrgyzstan, also for use
against China. The Russian defence minister was also quoted as saying that
the USA did not need to deploy troops in Kazakhstan because the military
operations in Afghanistan are nearly over. The following is an excerpt from
the commentary:
[Presenter] The geopolitical situation has changed dramatically in Central
Asia since the 11 September events. The United States has started to sideline
Russia in Central Asia, the region which Russia considers to be its sphere of
influence. Abduvali Soibnazarov has the details.
[Correspondent] China, which for the last 10 years has been trying to
strengthen its influence in Central Asia, has become a second- or third-rank
partner. But it seems that China is more displeased than Moscow. It considers
the deployment of US forces in the region a threat to its political and
economic interests. Kazakhstan might become the first victim in the rivalry
between various states due to its geographical location.
A Chinese diplomat in Kazakhstan has said that by deploying its forces at
Central Asian military bases the United States is trying to lessen China's
influence. Such a statement has made officials in Astana [Kazakh capital]
think, since Kazakhstan has initiated friendly relations with both the United
States and China and does not intend to show preference to neither the one
nor the other.
According to the Chinese diplomat, the United States has expressed its wish
to deploy its forces at an air base near Semipalatinsk [in East Kazakhstan
Region]. The air base was built by the former Soviet Union with a view to
using it in military operations against China. Now the USA is going to use
the military base in military operations against China, the Chinese diplomat
said.
He also said that the deployment of US forces at air bases in Kyrgyzstan
could also be regarded as a part of a campaign against China, the Chinese
diplomat said. He said that the Americans had installed secret equipment on
Kyrgyz territory to conduct intelligence work against China.
Officials in Kazakhstan deny such accusations. According to a high ranking
official from the Kazakh Defence Ministry, Washington has asked Astana to
deploy its troops in Kazakhstan's southern (?Sarob) [presumably Saryozek or
Sarybel], Taldy-Korgan air base and Shymkent airport, not in Semipalatinsk.
However, it should be said that Taldy-Korgan Region borders on China and has
a modern military infrastructure.
The US officials have not expressed their view of these accusations yet.
However, speaking about the possibility of the USA using Kazakhstan's
military bases a US representative in Kazakhstan has said that Washington was
planning to become the only partner for Kazakhstan.
[Passage omitted: during the years of independence Kazakhstan has established
good partnership relations with Russia, China and the USA]
Since the start of the fight against terrorism Washington has been demanding
that Astana should stop its multi-directional policy and recognize the USA as
its main strategic partner. Observers say that the Kazakh leadership is ready
to cooperate with the USA which is able to help the country to develop its
oil and gas sector. Though the Kazakh president has stated that he supports
Washington he is not taking specific measures, they say, and add that
[Nursultan] Nazarbayev was not using all his opportunities in full.
As regards China, it is calling [on Kazakhstan] not to cooperate with the USA
and exerting pressure on official Astana.
Russian officials are also worried about Kazakhstan's developing relations
with the USA. The Russian defence minister, Sergey Ivanov, stresses that
there is no need for America to deploy its troops at Kazakhstan's air bases
since the military operations in Afghanistan have entered their final stage.
Russian Duma speaker Gennadiy Seleznev also criticized the US military
presence in the region. The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has not said
anything critical on this yet.
US officials have always said that the US presence in Central Asia is not
permanent. A joint statement released by the US-Russian group on Afghanistan
at a meeting on 8 February also said that. However, one cannot say that the
USA deployment of its military aircraft and troops in Central Asia would not
irritate Russia and China.
*******
#11
Transitions Online
www.tol.cz
[editorial]
Creating an Axis of Normality
The best new opportunity for the United States in Central Asia is simply
the chance to establish normal relations.
This is a time when simple words cover policy turmoil. In the space of a
little over six months, U.S. foreign policy has moved from apparent
isolationism to grand coalition-building (embracing various untouchables of
the American Right such as Russia and the United Nations) to
coalition-splitting (amid accusations of global unilateralism from the
Americans’ most natural ally, Europe). In the meantime, simple desires
expressed in simple terms have succeeded one another, with first a “war
against terrorism” and now Bush’s “axis of evil.” If success in the “war on
terrorism” has fed the temptation to broaden the moral war and extend
military strikes, how will--or, rather, how should--U.S. policy-makers
react to the temptations of their success in Central Asia? They should
decide quickly, because there are many looming tests in a region where the
sands appear to be shifting.
Before the strikes against Afghanistan began, the United States was
sometimes accused of limiting its contacts with the region to oil deals and
preaching from afar about human rights. When the strikes against
Afghanistan began, some feared that Washington would support and in effect
strengthen authoritarian regimes. All would be excused in the interests of
an “anti-terrorist” drive in a region that has had some degree of Islamic
militancy for a decade, and in the desire to gain a longer-term military
presence in an area previously inaccessible to Western forces. And, of
course, temptations loomed of potential oil deals from the Caspian to
Central Asia and of the opportunity for new oil routes, symbolized in early
February by the decision of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to
build a pipeline through Afghanistan.
Fortunately, there have been some welcome signs in the past few months that
the U.S. administration is following an approach that is more nuanced that
that. Several moves and statements this year indicate an attempt by
Washington to distinguish between Chechen separatism and Chechen radical
Islamist fighters. Elsewhere in the Caucasus, the United States has
partially redressed one imbalanced position by lifting--albeit only one
year at a time--restrictions on aid to Azerbaijan, and has done so without
threatening the never-ending talks on Nagorno-Karabakh. And in Central
Asia, Washington’s declarations that it has no interest in a long-term
military presence in the region may have dulled some of the venom from
hawks in the Kremlin.
However, the policy challenges are mounting and becoming more urgent. The
most pressing decisions probably do not relate to the United States'
biggest concern, militant fighters, because in that respect, little can
done in the immediate term. Where the problem is greatest, in Tajikistan,
the United States has little influence: President Imomali Rakhmonov's
statement early in the Afghanistan campaign that he was in touch with
Russian President Vladimir Putin "every day or every second day, sometimes
every hour, depending on the situation" shows that U.S. involvement there
is entirely in the hands of the Kremlin. Still, by ousting the Taliban,
uprooting Al Qaeda, and (reportedly) killing the head of the Islamic
Movement of Uzbekistan, the campaign in Afghanistan has already set back
the militants’ operations substantially.
Other policy dilemmas--though welcome--are emerging. In Turkmenistan, the
defection of three leading diplomats in three months indicates that the
sands beneath President Nursultan Niyazov’s fortress are slowly giving way.
Meanwhile, in Kazakhstan, the call for greater plurality, first shouted
loudly in 1999 by the Forum of Democratic Forces (FDS), has gained a second
wind in the emergence of the Democratic Change movement. In Azerbaijan,
autocratic President Heidar Aliev, now nearly 80, faces reelection or
retirement next year.
The most pressing problems, though, are in Kyrgyzstan and in Georgia. In
Kyrgyzstan, human rights and press freedom are now literally a matter of
life and death for some, while Georgia and Russia’s plan to repatriate
7,000 to 8,000 Chechen refugees, mainly women and children, raises the
possibility of a gross violation of the Geneva Convention by forcing
civilians back into a zone of military activity.
Georgia may say no one will be forced back, Russia may claim no one will be
going back into a conflict zone, and the United States may be rightly
concerned about small groups of Al Qaeda fighters in Georgia, but on this
issue the decision should be clear: avoid knee-jerk reactions and second
the UN High Commissioner for Refugees in opposing the refugees’ return.
When deciding on other emerging issues, policy-makers should seek to
encourage long-term stability--political, economic, and military.
Militarily, in the region’s interests, the U.S. aim should be to promote a
security arrangement that is as multilateral as possible. As for its own
interests, this is one area where security cannot be a unilateral affair.
In the grander scheme of things, in a region flanked by four (possibly
five) nuclear powers, a NATO member (Turkey), and a country in a permanent
state of war (Afghanistan), military footholds in Central Asia seem an
irrelevance--especially with huge strategic stockpiles of oil and gas at
stake.
Elsewhere, the greatest opportunity created by the sudden U.S. involvement
in Central Asia is not military- or oil-related, but simply the opportunity
to create more normal relationships with countries in an isolated but very
important part of the world. Recently, Elizabeth Jones, the U.S. deputy
secretary of state, said that “there is a lot of talk about how, because we
have new military relationships with several of these governments, that
somehow we're giving a bye to human rights and democracy." But, she said,
“in fact, … because we have so much more contact, we have an easier time of
discussing each of these issues with the governments of the region." With
some of those “issues” at the boiling point and Uzbekistan’s President
Islam Karimov due next month in Washington, it’s high time to make sure
that all that extra contact actually leads to action.
*******
#12
Russian Daily Readers Interview Electoral Commission Head on Election
Procedures
Rossiyskaya Gazeta
19 February 2002
[translation for personal use only]
Vladislav Vorobyev report on reader's questions to head of Russian
Federation Central Electoral Commission Aleksandr Veshnyakov: "Aleksandr
Veshnyakov: Voters Have Become Lazy. Russian Federation Central
Electoral Commission Chairman Answers Our Readers' Questions"
Perhaps, no other newspaper can compare with
Rossiyskaya Gazeta in terms of the number of its readers who have visited
the offices of our country's top leaders.
Moreover, they were not just given a tour there; they met with the
Federation Council chairman, as well as with the chairmen of the Russian
Federation Supreme Arbitration Court and Constitutional Court. Over a
cup of tea they asked all the questions they wanted to hear answers to
and received professional answers. The conversations were, indeed, very
interesting and useful for both sides.
This time Rossiyskaya Gazeta's readers paid a visit to the Central
Electoral Commission's [CEC] office as part of our campaign called "Day
of Open Doors." We already reported on Rossiyskaya Gazeta's pages how
this happened. Today we publish our conversation with CEC Chairman
Aleksandr Veshnyakov. "I am ready to listen to all your questions and
to answer them jointly with my colleagues to ensure you form a clear-cut
opinion both on the people working at the CEC and on the tasks we are
fulfilling," with this statement Aleksandr Albertovich opened our
meeting.
The first question from a reader immediately followed.
[Reader] How come elections in our country are ever more often
accompanied by scandals surrounding election campaigns?
[Veshnyakov] Indeed, there were scandals. For some reason, however,
the mass media zero in on problem-stricken regions, whereas the remaining
election races sort-of pass unnoticed. Last year, for instance,
elections were held to 32 regional organs of the legislative branch.
Meanwhile, people are mostly talking about Maritime Kray, where voter
turnout was really low and elections did not take place in almost
one-half of electoral districts. It is the sole region where the new
legislative organ was not elected in its legally competent composition in
2001.
I think that, unfortunately, we sometimes excessively humiliate and
criticize ourselves. This even gives some people a kind of
satisfaction. Meanwhile, a naïve reader gets the impression that
everything is bad in our country, that all laws are invariably breached
during elections, and that the very laws are faulty. By far it is not
so.
Moreover, I can say that representatives of numerous foreign electoral
organs very meticulously examine the experience of our work. Lawmakers
in some countries have even started to borrow particular provisions of
Russia's electoral laws. I share the opinion Russian President Vladimir
Putin recently expressed in an interview with a foreign newspaper. In
his opinion, the Russian Law on Political Parties can serve as a model
for many countries in terms of transparency of parties' financial
activities.
OSCE experts have already invited our CEC specialists to monitor the
[legislative] election in Ukraine. Prior to that we worked at the OSCE
mission in Belarus. Russian specialists also take part in the drafting
of the European codified international act regarding standards of free
democratic elections. Moreover, it was our experts who prompted this
idea to their colleagues at the OSCE.
In addition the Russian side in cooperation with our colleagues from the
CIS countries had prepared the draft CIS convention on free democratic
election standards, which was unanimously approved by the [CIS]
Interparliamentary Assembly on 24 November 2001. The draft has been
included on the agenda of the next session of the Heads of State Council.
If the convention is signed we will have a unique international legal
document that has no analogues anywhere in the world.
[Reader] How do other countries assess our electoral system and
relevant legislation?
[Veshnyakov] Western experts positively assess the changes that have
taken place in our electoral legislation in recent years. Russia's
electoral legislation currently meets all existing international
standards. Moreover, in terms of its practical application we are also
the leader among the CIS countries. Nevertheless, we have to take into
account a number of remarks. They primarily concern election campaigns
and the use of the state media in favor of candidates representing the
authorities.
[Reader] How high is the electorate's activity in Russia as a whole?
[Veshnyakov] The Russian population's activity during elections is
insufficiently high. The country's average voter turnout in regional
elections is 40 percent of the total number of voters. As for elections
of heads of the executive in Russian Federation components, voter turnout
is much higher, as a rule some 10 percent higher. At the same time I
would point out that these are problems faced by organizers of elections
in almost all those countries of the world where really democratic
elections are held.
Virtually everywhere electoral commissions take steps to meet voters
halfway, for in recent years voters have become -- forgive me the
expression -- too "lazy." In the epoch of new information technologies
the general trend in world practice is to create such forms of
participation in elections, which would be the most convenient for
voters. They include voting by mail, voting based on powers of
attorney, and voting via the Internet.
The Russian Federation CEC, for instance, is also considering the
possibility of organizing voting by mail. But first, we will have to
introduce amendments to existing laws. Should such laws be approved by
legislators we would like to test them in individual Russian Federation
components first and then, after developing the mechanisms for the
protection of confidentiality of the vote, we would like to expand them
to Russia's entire territory and use them instead of the early vote and
"vote at home" procedures, which are currently criticized and their
criticism is often times well-founded. Therefore, before making the
decision on this issue it is necessary to thoroughly weigh all the "pros"
and "cons."
That said, we should keep in mind that in most European countries, where
voting by mail is already used, voter turnout immediately went up 10-15
percent. The proposal to introduce voting via the Internet is also
being discussed. In Russia, however, we are not ready for this yet,
mostly for technical reasons. In addition, most people have no
confidence in modern technologies thus far.
[Reader] Public associations of young electors currently exist in a
number of regions of the Russian Federation. Do you support those kinds
of initiatives?
[Veshnyakov] The Russian Federation CEC very positively assesses any
public initiatives, which help galvanize our youth's election activity.
Moreover, we ready to render both moral support for voters clubs and
provide them with methodological aids.
Moreover, the Russian Center for Electoral Techniques Training was set up
to improve legal education of voters and organizers of elections. And
we can present its projects to all those interested. Let us cooperate.
[Reader] Does the CEC have the right to pass substantive judgments
regarding elections in Russian Federation components or is it merely
allowed to issue recommendations?
[Veshnyakov] We do have the right to pass substantive judgments.
However, the CEC does so in extraordinary situations only. We prefer
another approach. Before election campaigns we ask our colleagues in
regional electoral commissions to work in such a way as to prevent
voters' complaints to the CEC against regional commissions' actions or
lack of thereof. Nonetheless, we had to pass some 10 substantive
judgments in the last year and one-half.
I would add that there was one case in our practice where we had to
invalidate the decision of a state organ of power in Nenetsk Autonomous
District. At issue was the illegal setting of the election date.
[Reader] As you know, Russia's migration situation is very complicated.
Some 8 million persons moved to Russia after the breakup of the USSR.
How does the CEC ensure that this vast group of people takes part in the
election process?
[Veshnyakov] We carefully monitor the statistical data regarding those
citizens of the former Soviet Union who moved to Russia. Taking into
account that Russia currently has around 109 million electors 8 million
is an impressive figure. I would point out that every Russian
Federation citizen who reached a certain age (this provision fully
applies to immigrants to Russia provided that they acquired Russian
citizenship), has the right not only to take part in elections but also
the right to be elected to organs of state power and local
self-government.
[Reader] Rayon electoral commissions are formed for the duration of the
election period only. Would it not be worthwhile to envision at the
legislative level that at least the post of a rayon electoral commission
chairman is permanent? Look what we have now: Their powers expire
following the day of the election. Meanwhile, they still have to
publish their reports and do a lot of other things. Who has to do this?
[Veshnyakov] We are perfectly aware that it is necessary to solve the
above problems in the immediate future. Moreover, in a number of
Russian regions this issue has already been solved along those very lines
that you suggest. Federal legislation does not prohibit this.
The election in Adygea took place recently. All chairmen of territorial
commissions work on a permanent basis there. Incidentally, this is
great help in solving a lot of problems. At the same time, we cannot
enshrine this in a federal law and thus make this procedure binding for
all electoral commissions. One of the reasons is: Who will provide
the funds required?
We cannot solve this problem using funds from the federal budget, for
[regional commissions work] at a different level. However, we have
prepared and, which is very important, coordinated with the Russian
Federation Government the draft federal law on the Vybory [Election]
nationwide automated system. The document envisions the post of "system
administrator." People in such posts are already working in every
rayon, but the issues of their funding and status have not been fully
solved to date. We want to make them public servants working in
federation components' electoral commissions. They will work in rayons
and receive their salaries from the relevant state structure -- the
electoral commission of a federation component. At the same time, a
system administrator will have the right to be appointed one of the
leaders of the electoral commission, for instance, its deputy chairman.
We believe that this way we will create the mainstay of any electoral
commission at the territorial or municipal level.
[Reader] Perhaps, it would be worthwhile to introduce the practice of
electing the so-called "reserve deputy" who would automatically occupy
another deputy's seat at the State Duma in the event that deputy resigns,
for instance, assumes a post in executive organs. In that case there
would be no need to hold repeat elections.
[Veshnyakov] This procedure, indeed, is already applied in practice in
some countries. Our experts analyzed this problem and arrived at the
conclusion that we will not do so.
This idea has a lot of downsides, including the most obvious one: There
is the threat that some people may want, for instance, to discredit or
even eliminate a deputy and thus clear space for the "reserve deputy."
This way we can instigate criminal phenomena.
At the same time the option of simultaneous election of governors and
vice governors is being discussed. In particular situations, for
instance when the head of a region resigns for health reasons, the vice
governor will perform his functions until the next election. In my
opinion, this scheme is acceptable for Russia.
[Reader] What is the future of the 5-percent hurdle applied during
State Duma elections? Would it not be advisable to introduce changes?
[Veshnyakov] I believe we should not change anything at this point,
although some people express the opinion the hurdle should be raised to
the 7-percent level. Various kinds of consultations with
representatives of State Duma factions are currently underway. As far
as I know, legislators advocate the same standpoint thus far. I believe
we should exercise reasonable conservatism in discussions over this
issue. 5 percent is an optimal option for electoral associations.
[Reader] Please advise: What is the best way for any Russian citizen
to keep abreast with the developments taking place at CEC's sessions and
with its decisions?
[Veshnyakov] You should closely monitor Rossiyskaya Gazeta's
publications. This very newspaper carries all our decisions on its
pages. Our meetings with electors convince us that people read
Rossiyskaya Gazeta carefully and obtain from it the needed information on
electoral legislation and its application. And not only that.
Sometimes the publishing of an official document in Rossiyskaya Gazeta
can, for instance, launch an election campaign either in a particular
district during State Duma elections to replace an outgoing deputy (15
deputies have vacated their posts since December 1999) or throughout
Russia when general federal elections are called.
********
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