Johnson's Russia List
#6110
2 March 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Note from David Johnson:
1. The Times (UK): Richard Beeston, Russia shies away from confronting
Stalinist horrors.
2. Interfax: Russia wants equal security in arms negotiations with USA,
says army official.
3. UPI: Frederick M. Winship, Met's 'War and Peace' triumphs.
4. Vedomosti: Economics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences,
RUSSIAN ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE: OUTLOOK BLEAK.
5. AP: Georgia Finally Gets U.S. Attention.
6. Itar-Tass: Russian minister calls on USA to put cards on table over
Central Asia.
7. Washington Times: Nicholas Kralev, Karimov to back U.S. stay in region.
8. The Russia Journal (US Edition): Robert Guldin, Solving the Great
Russian Investment Puzzle.
9. The Guardian (UK): John O'Mahony, The Guardian Profile: Mstislav
Rostropovich. An icon for our times.]
*******
#1
The Times (UK)
2 March 2002
Russia shies away from confronting Stalinist horrors
From Richard Beeston in Moscow
ONE of the most ambitious projects of post-communist Russia, the
rehabilitation of millions of victims of Stalin’s purges, is coming to an
end. But after 13 years of trying to rectify some of the bloodiest abuses,
there are fears that Stalin may yet win his final battle.
Aleksandr Yakovlev, head of the presidential rehabilitation commission, who
embarked on his crusade in the last years of the Soviet Union, said that
Russia had failed to learn the lessons of its own history. He accused the
public of apathy and the authorities of open hostility to his work.
“We have rehabilitated 4.5 million people since we began the work under the
authority of the old Politburo of the Communist Party. In those days we
were only allowed to deal with Stalin’s victims, but later under Yeltsin we
widened our search to include all Soviet political victims. There are about
400,000 cases left, so we are nearing the end of our work,” he told The
Times. It is expected to be complete within the year.
Mr Yakovlev, who was a member of the Politburo, said that most Russians
cared little about Stalinism’s legacy and the Communists responsible for
abuses were unrepentant. “The official history still remembers Stalin as
the great commander-in-chief who defeated Hitler,” he said. “No one wants
to face the fact that he killed 30 million of his own people, most of whom
disappeared without a trace. No one has apologised for what they did, and
most people do not seem to care whether we confront this chapter in our
history or not.”
The commission reviews the case of each victim of the purges and recommends
rehabilitation to the President, who sends cases to the Prosecutor-General
and finally to the Supreme Court, which overturns the original conviction.
“Most of the names were obviously political figures who were tried,
sentenced to death and shot in the various blocks of repression like
Trotsky, Bukharin, and so on. But sometimes a name would crop up that was
completely out of context and we would have to search why they had been
killed,” Mr Yakovlev said.
In one case the victim was the neighbour of the secretary to Lazar
Kaganovich, one of Stalin’s henchmen.
The secretary typed out the daily death list and she added her neighbour’s
name to secure the flat when it was abruptly vacated.
In some cases survivors of the camps refused to co-operate with the
commission. “One man spent 20 years of his life in hard labour. He did not
want to be rehabilitated by the same state that had locked him up. Frankly,
I could sympathise with him,” Mr Yakovlev said.
Mr Yakovlev said that Russia had lost the chance to confront this dark
period in its history when Communism collapsed. Although a former Communist
leader, he favoured banning the Communist Party, burying Lenin, whose body
still lies in state in Red Square, and holding public hearings to try those
guilty of carrying out the worst atrocities.
But his appeals have been largely ignored and Mr Yakovlev has found
resistance growing against his campaign throughout Russia, not least
because of the return to power of many former KGB agents, including
President Putin. To his surprise Mr Yakovlev even found people living in
denial in Magadan, the remote corner of the Far East which was the heart of
the Soviet gulags, and where millions died. He believes that it may just be
too early for Russia to confront its recent past.
“People are tired, they do not want to listen any more. Perhaps that is
what happens after civil wars — like England after Cromwell or France after
the Revolution. It took 100 years for society to settle down. We have not
reached that point yet.”
*******
#2
Russia wants equal security in arms negotiations with USA, says army official
Interfax
Moscow, 1 March: First Deputy Head of the Russian General Staff Col-Gen
Yuriy Baluyevskiy said that Russia cannot give up its main "principle of
equal security" during negotiations with the USA.
"Our position is basically unchanging. One of the principles at these
negotiations is that of equal security of the sides. We will not agree to
less," he told a briefing today in Moscow.
"Russia and the USA cannot solve the security problems of their states by
working without each other or against each other," Baluyevskiy said. "The
world should see new qualities of relations between our two countries in
spite of the existing differences," the general said.
Baluyevskiy, who heads the group of Russian military experts at
negotiations with the USA on the reduction of strategic offensive arms,
said it is necessary to look for compromises that will make it possible to
eliminate existing disagreements between Russia and the USA.
"The USA preserves both the warheads and the carriers. We military men do
not see the movement towards a radical reduction of strategic offensive
arms that was earlier stated by the USA," he said.
In this connection, Baluyevskiy pointed to "the new concept" of
operationally-deployed warheads which US experts introduced at the talks
(operationally-deployed warheads are nuclear warheads the USA says will be
mounted directly on carriers).
Baluyevskiy said the modern Russian S-400 Triumf air defence system "cannot
be a counterbalance to the antimissile defence the USA intends to develop".
"The S-400 is a system aimed at deflecting aeroballistic and ballistic
targets in a theatre of war," Baluyevskiy said.
He said that in February 2000, Russia asked the USA and other NATO
countries "to discuss issues relating to cooperation in theatre ballistic
missile defence [nonstrategic ballistic missile defence]". "However, until
now, they have not given it the attention for which we hoped," Baluyevskiy
said.
******
#3
Met's 'War and Peace' triumphs
By Frederick M. Winship
NEW YORK, March 1 (UPI) -- The Metropolitan Opera's first staging of Sergei
Prokofiev's "War and Peace" is a triumph over the production challenges
inherent in a work that requires spectacular staging as well as a cast with
formidable vocal prowess.
No other Met premiere in recent years has caused so much excitement among
opera fans, whose expectations have been more than fulfilled, if not
exhausted by the four-and-a-half hour production. The staging is austere but
technically awesome, and the nearly all-Russian cast sings brilliantly and
acts convincingly.
Prokofiev's sixth and last opera, completed in 1946, never really touches the
heart, but the inventive score completely engages the ear with its gorgeous
lyric passages, compelling patriotic choruses, urgent military marches, and a
recurring waltz motif. This is not a work that offers memorable arias and
duets, relying instead on lyric exchanges that carry the plot forward without
the interruption of set pieces.
Giving performances of special note are a non-Russian principal, American
bass virtuoso Samuel Ramey, in the role of Field Marshal Kutusov, and soprano
Anna Netrebko as Natasha Rostova, the ill fated heroine of the opera.
Ramey gives a towering but utterly controlled performance as the wily old
Russian commander who defeated Napoleon, and Netrebko is completely winning
as a lovely, slender Audrey Hepburn look-alike with the pure "white" voice
for which Slavic sopranos are famous.
"War and Peace" has 68 roles sung by 52 soloists, 120 choristers augmented by
227 extras and 41 dancers, and Napoleon's white horse, a dog, and a goat. Few
opera houses in the world could handle such forces but the Met has the
capability plus $4 million from billionaire opera enthusiast Alberto W. Vilar
to carry it off without a hitch, with one exception.
One of the male supernumeraries taking the role of a French soldier, slid off
the sloping stage and into the orchestra pit on opening night, causing
conductor Valery Gergiev to stop the music until he was assured the extra was
unhurt. When the Met management ascertained that it was no accident but a way
of attracting attention, it fired the 21-year-old actor the next day.
The revolving domed stage floor rising above a sloped collar, a copy of that
used in the Mariinksy Opera production in St. Petersburg two years ago, is
the only complicated aspect of the opera's simple set. In Act 1, the "Peace"
act, it appears to be a parquet floor with a trompe l'oeil coffered design
suitable for scenes in Moscow's noble palaces and ballrooms. In Act 2, the
"War" act, it becomes a muddy hillock for battle scenes and is split open
like an egg to show scenes of suffering in the burned-out ruins of Moscow.
Projections on a cyclorama suggest 13 separate scenes, ranging from an
idyllic summer day with cumulus clouds to the nighttime burning of the
capital's golden domes, the result of Kutusov's "scorched earth" policy. The
big snow scene that is the setting of Napoleon's retreat from Moscow takes
the prize for theatrical blizzards, covering the stage dome with what appears
to be an inch of the white stuff.
One of the most memorable visual moments of the production is the silhouette
of crazily cavorting lunatics, released from prison when Moscow burns,
against the flaming night sky, a signature touch by director Andrei
Konchalovsky, best known for his cinematic work both in Russia and Hollywood.
Gurgiev and Konchalovsky, who is making his American operatic debut, have
elicited a truly stirring performance in which every cast member down to the
lowliest chorister, including a number of children, is acting every minute he
or she is on stage. No standing around in serried ranks in the big choral
scenes, as is the tradition in most opera productions, even at the Met.
This is a co-production with the Mariinsky Theater and is having 10
performances running through March 19.
"War and Peace" has been presented at the Met twice before by visiting
companies, the Bolshoi Opera of Moscow in 1975 and the English National Opera
in 1984. But neither of these can be compared to the grandeur of the Met's
own production, which has 346 people on stage for the final scene celebrating
Russia's 1812 victory.
Prokofiev began composing the opera during World War II when Russia's victory
over Hitler's invading forces was far from a sure thing. His completion of it
was really a gift to triumphant Mother Russia, but its production was held up
by Soviet authorities who demanded "politically correct" revisions. Act 1 was
finally performed in Leningrad in 1946, but a performance of Act 2 was
withdrawn for more revisions in 1947.
The uncut 13-scene version finally had its premiere in Moscow in 1959, six
years after the composer's death. The libretto is by Prokofiev and his
mistress (later to become his second wife) Mira Alexandrovna Mendelson.
It represents a reduction of Tolstoy's complex 1,500-page, 500-character
novel to a single plot line - teen-age Natasha Rostova's betrayal of her
older but dashing and deeply enamored fiancé, Prince Andrei Bolkonski, for a
fling with a notorious (and married) cad, Prince Anatol Kuragin, played out
against the French invasion of Russia.
Under the baton of Russian conductor Gurgiev, the Met orchestra met with
flying colors the demands of Prokofiev's score for a harmonically pungent
orchestral style punctuated by strange and exotic instrumental sounds. George
Tsypin is responsible for the remarkably fluid settings and James F. Ingalls
for creative lighting, and Tatiana Noginova designed the sumptuous period
costumes and colorful military uniforms.
Outstanding performances are being given by young Siberian baritone Dmitri
Hvorostovky, a particularly ingratiating Prince Bolkonski, tenor Oleg
Balashov as Kuragin, the veteran contralto Elena Obraztsova as a society
hostess, mezzo-sopranoVictoria Livengood as Kuragin's conniving sister,
Helene, and Gegam Gregorian as her decent, good-hearted husband, Count Pierre
Bezukhov.
Only baritone Vassili Gerello as Napoleon, gave a lackluster performance and
even managed to look uncomfortable on his well-mannered steed.
*******
#4
Vedomosti
No. 32
2002
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
RUSSIAN ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE: OUTLOOK BLEAK
Alexander FRENKEL, Lyudmila ROSHCHINA, Olga MATVEYEVA,
Natalia RAISKAYA and Anna LOBZOVA from the Economics Institute
of the Russian Academy of Sciences
The Russian economy performed much worse this past January
than had been predicted. First of all, this can be explained by
the power-industry slump and that inside the machine-building
sector. Industrial output increased by a mere 2.2 percent in
January.
The State Committee for Statistics has already published
its data for the January 2002 period; in fact, specific
forecasts exceed such statistics by 100 percent. This was
mostly caused by a recession now plaguing the machine-building
industry and the power industry, as well. By all looks, these
two sectors don't seem to be very popular nowadays just because
the corporate financial standing has deteriorated considerably.
The State Committee for Statistics estimates that basic
sectors, i.e. the industry, the construction sector,
agriculture, transportation and retail trade, have expanded
production by just 3 percent this January (on the January 2001
period, that is, when a 6.7-percent increment was registered).
Industrial output rose by only 2.2 percent, whereas the January
2001 increment was 7.8 percent. The volume of basic capital
investment increased by 0.5 percent as compared to 8.1 percent
in January 2001. Wage arrears increased 9.6 percent over the
January 2002 period, rising by 1.8 percent on January 2001
levels. True, real-life available popular cash incomes have
soared by 8.5 percent; meanwhile the relevant January 2001
increment was 7.2 percent. At the same time, the retail trade
turnover grew up by 10.1 percent and 6.1 percent, respectively.
One gets the impression that the real economy's
performance has deteriorated considerably. The Russian industry
is a case in point; among other things, this is proved by the
results of a January 2002 poll involving the managers of 1,200
basic industrial enterprises that was conducted by the Russian
Government's Economic Situation Center. Among other things, the
number of respondents, who think that their sectoral
performance is either good or satisfactory, has diminished from
81 percent in December 2001 to 77 percent this past January.
Industrial output plunged from plus 4 percent in December 2001
to just plus 1 percent in January 2002. Ferrous metallurgy
accounts for the majority of all factories, which have posted
the greatest recession of them all (31 percent).
Business fears also continued to mount. The afore-said
Economic Situation Center believes that the business-confidence
index totalled minus 6 percent this past January, dwindling by
2 percent on December 2001. First of all, this can be explained
by subsiding demand. This index became negative for the first
time since September 1998, totalling minus 2 percent this past
January, whereas the December 2001 index was plus 1 percent. 59
percent of all Russian enterprises used to sell their products
in line with "normal" demand in December 2001; however, their
share totalled just 57 percent this past January. This can
mostly be explained by less substantial demand for ferrous
metals and electricity. The corporate financial standing also
tended to grow worse; for example, corporate-fund volumes stood
at minus 8 percent. True, those businessmen, who were polled by
experts, are too optimistic, saying that an industrial recovery
will set in already this spring. The Transitional Economy
Institute estimates that projected overall production-growth
parameters will skyrocket by 20 percent, all told, during the
next 3-4 months.
The projected economic recovery is linked with more substantial
investment activity on the part of industrial enterprises and
greater consumer demand. Moreover, the foreign-economic
situation would be expected to improve, with the Government
also checking the current export decline. In our opinion, such
optimism seems completely groundless. Inertial economic growth
will continue, eventually tapering off at 3-3.5 percent.
Basic industries will expand production by 3.3 percent
over the first quarter of 2002 (on the corresponding 2001
period). It should be mentioned for comparison's sake that the
relevant production increment totalled 4.9 percent during the
first quarter of 2001. Industrial output will increase by 2.2
percent over the January-March 2002 period; the relevant
January-March 2001 production increment was 5.2 percent. The
food industry will continue to lead the way here (just like in
2001), expanding production by 6.9 percent. The fuel industry
will place second with 6 percent. For its own part, the
chemical and petro-chemical industry will expand production by
2.8 percent. Meanwhile the building-materials industry will
chalk up a 2.4-percent production increment. The timber,
wood-working and pulp-and-paper industry will expand production
by 2.1 percent. And, finally, the light industry will post a
1.1-percent production increment. At the same time, the
ferrous-metallurgy sector continues to suffer from a recession,
which began in August 2001; sectoral output will plunge by 1.5
percent during the first quarter of 2002. The power industry
was also marked by sustained negative trends, whose symptoms
were first manifested in September and November 2001. In fact,
sectoral output will decline by 0.9 percent over the
January-March 2002 period. The machine-building sector and the
metal-working industry will curtail production by another 3.8
percent. It therefore goes without saying that the December
2001 sectoral recession wasn't a pure coincidence.
Russian exports will continue to dwindle during the first
quarter of 2002. As a matter of fact, such exports will be
reduced by 7.8 percent, totalling $23.5 billion. At the same
time, imports volumes (including sporadic shuttle trade) will
soar by 35.1 percent, reaching the $15-billion mark.
********
#5
Georgia Finally Gets U.S. Attention
March 2, 2002
By MISHA DZHINDZHIKHASHVILI
TBILISI, Georgia (AP) - The former Soviet republic of Georgia long has
courted the attention of the United States to make up for the seeming cold
shoulder offered by neighboring Russia.
In the decade since the Soviet Union's dissolution, Georgia has battled
massive economic troubles, become awash in corruption and crime and seen its
Pankisi Gorge used by alleged al-Qaida members and rebels fighting for
Chechnya's independence from Russia.
Now, after eight years of trying, Georgia is getting what it wants. Pankisi,
a sparsely populated, 36-square-mile patch of rocky mountains bordering
Chechnya, could become the next front in the U.S.-led war against terrorism.
In line with President Bush's vow to hunt down terrorists everywhere, between
100 and 200 U.S. troops are headed to the region to start training Georgian
forces in anti-terrorism tactics for use in Pankisi and other regions.
The Americans will work with four Georgian battalions of 300 men each in a
$64 million program that could last up to a year. U.S. troops will not be
deployed in Pankisi.
The plan also includes equipping Georgian infantry and border guards with
communications equipment, light weapons such as pistols and rifles,
ammunition, and vehicles, according to a western official in Moscow speaking
on condition of anonymity.
``We have waited a long time, eight years, for the United States to activate
cooperation with Georgia in the military sphere,'' Georgian President Eduard
Shevardnadze said Thursday.
U.S. officials hope to start training by mid-March.
Georgia is primarily interested in the United States as a counterbalance to
Russia, whose offers of help to crack down in the gorge were refused.
Shevardnadze on Thursday lashed out bitterly at Moscow, which he accused of
leaving Georgia without defenses.
``The Americans are thinking how Georgia can be strengthened. Why doesn't
Russia think about this? Russia pulled out everything that could be taken
from Georgia,'' he fumed.
``There was a lot of equipment here, thousands of tanks, two air divisions
with planes.... And what remained? Rusted weapons, nothing else.''
The United States is deeply interested in the security of the Caucasus
region, which straddles gas and oil deposits. Several pipelines run through
Georgia itself.
The United States also is troubled by the porous borders allowing alleged
terrorists to transport weapons and money and smugglers to spirit out
radioactive substances.
Shevardnadze's government has virtually ceded control of the gorge to
criminal gangs.
``Georgia is an interesting country for the United States, since it's flanked
on one side by Russia, and on the other it's in proximity to Iran and Iraq,''
Georgian security expert David Darchiashvili said.
The latter two nations were dubbed by Bush to be part of an ``axis of evil''
with North Korea.
Although many Russian officials grumble that the United States is invading
their traditional sphere of influence, President Vladimir Putin said Moscow
backs any efforts to control the Pankisi Gorge situation.
``If we are talking about a fight against terrorism in the Pankisi Gorge,
then we support this fight no matter who is participating in it,'' Putin said
Friday after meeting with Shevardnadze at a summit of the 11 former Soviet
republics, according to Russia's Interfax news agency.
Russia has long accused separatist rebels in Chechnya of being Islamic
terrorists linked to Osama bin Laden's al-Qaida network.
Georgia long denied that rebels were in the gorge, but Shevardnadze conceded
in June that 200-300 Chechen fighters might be there.
U.S. military aid to Georgia predated the new program. Georgian Defense
Ministry spokesman Miryan Kiknadze said Friday that Georgian armed forces
already had received about $50 million in U.S. assistance to boost their
defense capability.
The most visible donations have been the 10 U.S. Iroquois military transport
helicopters transferred to Georgia last October.
The program also included training Georgian helicopter pilots and providing
uniforms and other supplies, Kiknadze told The Associated Press. Anywhere
from 20 to 30 U.S. military instructors are in Georgia on a rotating basis to
aid the country's military reform, he said.
The United States also has provided about $45 million in assistance to
Georgian border guards since 1998, including three patrol boats and equipment
intended to prevent the smuggling of radioactive devices.
*******
#6
Russian minister calls on USA to put cards on table over Central Asia
ITAR-TASS
Rome, 2 March: Russia has been pursuing a line of wide-ranging cooperation in
the fight against terrorism since the attacks of 11 September, Russian
Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said today in an interview for the Milan-based
newspaper Corriere della Sera. Ivanov is currently paying a visit to Italy.
"We have been saying for a long time that terrorist organizations are
operating in Afghanistan, and that there is a link with Chechnya, but,
unfortunately, we had to wait until a tragedy took place for the West to
believe us," the Russian foreign minister noted.
"As far as intervention in Afghanistan is concerned, we considered it
absolutely normal for countries such as Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to offer
the USA and other members of the coalition back-up support," Igor Ivanov said.
But now, he continued, with the war almost over and a temporary government in
Kabul, the situation has changed. "There are those who think that the USA
wants to use the fight against terrorism as a pretext for strengthening its
position in Central Asia, where there are strong geostrategic and oil
interests. Are they right? The answer must come from the USA," the Russian
minister pointed out.
********
#7
Washington Times
March 2, 2002
Karimov to back U.S. stay in region
By Nicholas Kralev
Uzbek President Islam Karimov will urge the United States during a visit
to Washington this month to maintain its military presence in Central Asia
because it guarantees regional stability and serves U.S. transportation and
energy needs, senior Uzbek officials said yesterday.
Mr. Karimov, who will meet President Bush on March 12, plans to point
out the hardships that the former Soviet republic, which borders Afghanistan,
has endured from being on the front line of the war on terrorism.
But he will ask for no monetary compensation because "our understanding
is that we are allies and we should go together in this war — this is not a
business for us," Rustam Azimov, Uzbekistan's first deputy prime minister,
said in an interview.
The Uzbek leader, however, will ask Mr. Bush to encourage American
investors to venture into the predominantly Muslim nation of 25 million
people, whose territory is slightly larger than that of California.
"Our security relationship with the United States is in good shape," Mr.
Azimov said. "Now we should pay more attention to our economic cooperation,
which will help accelerate economic reforms and the flow of capital."
Mr. Azimov, who is in Washington to prepare for Mr. Karimov's visit, is
the third-highest-ranking official in the Uzbek government after the
president and Prime Minister Otkir Sultanov.
The United States will provide $60 million in assistance to Uzbekistan
this year, plus a one-time contribution of $100 million, a State Department
official said yesterday.
In spite of consistent pre-September 11 criticism by the United States
of Mr. Karimov's autocratic methods of governing, Uzbekistan was quick to
join the anti-terrorism coalition and opened its territory to U.S. aircraft
and forces during the military campaign in Afghanistan, which began on Oct. 7.
A senior Uzbek official said his country had to pay huge amounts of
money for airport insurance after U.S. planes started landing there. The
American insurance company whose services the Uzbek government uses increased
the premium about 60 times, he noted.
The Bush administration has repeatedly thanked Uzbekistan for its
support in the global anti-terrorism effort while continuing to demand
democratic reforms, freedom of speech and respect for human rights.
But the Uzbek official insisted Mr. Karimov is fully committed to
bringing democracy and market economy to his country, which declared
independence on Sept. 1, 1991.
"Unlike other former communist states, Uzbekistan never had a democratic
tradition, so we had to start from scratch," the official said. "At the
beginning, there was no rule of law and we were forced to be strong —
otherwise the forces that took over Afghanistan would have done so in
Uzbekistan."
He said Mr. Karimov is "creating a system of democracy, which is a
complicated process."
His country has chosen to side with the West and wants to educate its
youth — half the population is under age 18 — in the spirit of the values
that have been promoted by the United States as "the heart of the democratic
world."
During his Washington visit, Mr. Karimov will also meet with Secretary
of State Colin L. Powell, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Treasury
Secretary Paul H. O'Neill and congressional leaders, the official said.
********
#8
The Russia Journal (US Edition)
March 1-7, 2002
Solving the Great Russian Investment Puzzle
By Robert Guldin
Call it the great Russian investment paradox. While the U.S. and Japan are in
the economic doldrums, Russia is a fount of positive economic news. Economic
growth has been solid for three years, the stock market is up, and the
country has a strong trade surplus.
Still, foreign investment in Russia is minuscule. There's less foreign
direct investment going into Russia than into the tiny Czech Republic!
Russia currently attracts less than one-half of one percent of the world's
total FDI. In 2000, out of a global total of $1,270 billion in FDI, Russia
attracted $4.4 billion, while China drew $46 billion.
Why does Russia get so little respect from international investors?
In search of answers, we talked to several Western experts on the Russian
economy, and heard some surprisingly upbeat news. There's a growing feeling
that Russian assets are seriously undervalued. If President Putin can keep
the nation on a steady political course and if economic reforms continue,
Russia may be in for an influx of Western capital in several key economic
sectors.
The reasons for low foreign investment in Russia since 1991 constitute a
well known litany of dysfunction: disastrous corporate governance,
unenforceable contracts and property rights, capital flight, corruption, an
opaque tax code, a weak banking sector. But most of those were tied to the
unpredictable and ineffective administration of Boris Yeltsin.
The Putin presidency has changed that. As Keith Bush, the research
director at the U.S.-Russia Business Council in Washington, sees it, "Putin
has provided two years of political and economic stability. Stability is a
very precious commodity. You may not agree with his views on the media or
Chechnya, but stability attracts investors like nothing else."
In addition, Russia today boasts many features that investors love.
Christof Rühl, chief economist of the World Bank's Russia office, told the
Russia Journal, those include "a growing economy, an increasingly
well-defined legal framework, a large internal market, rapid growth of real
income and purchasing power, a very well educated workforce, and still
relatively moderate costs for natural resources and energy and labor."
Russia's state finances look increasingly good to Western business too.
Tim Seymour, the president of Troika Dialog USA in New York, deals with lots
of investors interested in Russian markets. He notes that "the flat tax has
been a real boon for the government. There's less dependence on oil, so that
last fall, when oil prices spiked downward, tax collections were still up 7
percent." He adds, "The sovereign's ability to service their old debt and
actually prepay the outstanding debt" boosts investor confidence.
There's good news, too, in corporate governance. Western investors were
all too aware of the ways Russian corporate insiders stripped companies of
their assets and ignored minority shareholder interests in the 1990s, but
that has begun to change. Five large Russian corporations, including
Vimpelcom, Aeroflot, Rostelecom and Sibneft, have agreed to be rated on
corporate governance by Standard & Poor's. The evaluations cost them money,
but are bound to improve their images in the securities markets.
When and if new investors come into Russia, they'll be joining some of
the West's best-known firms who have been there for years.
Western interest in Russia's oil and gas is deep and growing. ExxonMobil is
putting $4 billion into offshore oil and gas fields off Sakhalin, part of a
four-nation consortium. The project is expected to result in $12 billion in
total capital investment, which would make it the largest foreign direct
investment ever in Russia. Four oil companies, including ChevronTexaco, have
put $2.5 billion into the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, which recently started
pumping oil from Kazakstan to a Russian port on the Black Sea.
Anders Aslund, a noted expert on the post-Soviet economies at the Carnegie
Endowment for International Peace in Washington, believes that there are big
areas of the Russian economy that are ripe for Western investment. Aslund
says that investors should stay away from the big Russian energy firms, which
are cash-heavy and don't want foreign investors, as well as "very big
enterprises" from Soviet times which carry "all kinds of social and financial
liabilities."
That leaves areas like light manufacturing, consumer goods, and retail sales
as promising sectors. "There's an enormous boom in big stores, retail trade,
in Moscow and St. Petersburg," he says, "but really only those two cities.
IKEA opened its first store and had tremendous demand; it's now opening a
second store in Moscow. There's a fast-rising middle class and foreign
companies are tapping into that."
"The tobacco sector has been taken over by foreign companies," Aslund says,
throughout the former Soviet Union. "Philip Morris is probably the biggest
U.S. investor in Russia, but obviously they don't want to talk about that
because it would raise public health concerns. Philip Morris has 80 percent
of the tobacco market in Kazakstan also." The U.S. firm R.J. Reynolds is a
major player too. "They're both making enormous money," says Aslund. "This is
the biggest and earliest success story, but it's not talked about."
One of the best areas for European corporations has been beer brewing, Aslund
adds. Interbrew of Belgium has about 20 percent of the Russian market.
Russia's biggest brewer, Baltika, is jointly owned by Scottish & Newcastle of
Britain and Carlsberg of Denmark.
American firms McDonald's, Coca-Cola and Procter and Gamble are all strong in
Russia, Aslund notes. The Swedish mobile phone manufacturer Ericsson tripled
its sales in Russia last year, and many consumer goods companies doubled
their sales, Aslund says. "And then, of course, you have the question, if we
have such big sales, why don't we produce in Russia?"
Aslund is convinced that auto manufacturing is Russia's next big thing: "mass
production of relatively cheap cars, costing $8,000-$10,000 in current
dollars. The question is who will produce them?" GM, Fiat, Renault, and Ford
have all ventured into the field, though some firms, like Daimler-Benz and
Renault, have had tough sledding. Whoever makes them, Aslund predicts auto
production will grow from about one million cars per year now to 1.5 million
in three years - almost all of them new models.
Add This to Your Portfolio
American observers also see the Russian stock market as an excellent buy
right now. Says Keith Bush of the U.S.-Russia Business Council, "It's a good
time for portfolio investment because the shares are desperately undervalued.
The perceived risks are more than outweighed by the perceived opportunities."
Both Bush and Aslund point to the disparity in price/earnings ratios between
Russian and U.S. firms. Russian corporations often have P/E ratios of 5:1 or
less, while American firms often trade at 50:1 or higher. Says Bush about
Russian shares, "They're going to go up, I'm sure."
Troika Dialog USA deals primarily as a broker and investment banker for
medium and large funds, and, Tim Seymour says, it's "right in the middle of
the appetite for Russia risk by institutional investors."
He says the people he works with feel very comfortable investing in Russia
now. "I don't see any investors who are overweight Russia making any
substantial moves out of Russian assets. They may be reallocating among
sectors, or between different companies with more value, but not out of
Russia."
Seymour does note that investor confidence depends heavily on the reform
process led by Putin. "The risks are consolidated in one man. Putin's ability
to make or break Russia is significant."
Getting down to specifics, Seymour sees both Gazprom and UES, the giant
electric utility, as potential buys, though with some caveats. There's a
"two-tiered trading structure" for Gazprom shares, in which foreigners are at
a disadvantage, but if that comes down, Seymour believes it's worth buying.
"It's about tariff improvement, corporate governance, it's about the new
management team and the extent to which the government is finally taking
control of one of its wealthiest assets." He concludes, "You have to own
Gazprom, it's the biggest gas company in the world."
On United Energy Systems, Seymour comments, "It's the most liquid stock in
the market. It's a bit of a momentum play on Russia; it's also a play on
restructuring and tariffs and to what extent the government is following
through on its plans for the monopolies."
Aslund, on the other hand, specifically warns non-Russians not to get into
utilities, "because utilities are highly political. The more political a
sector is, the less likely it is to be profitable for foreigners, because
foreigners are bad at politics for obvious reasons."
There are also a couple of Russian oil companies, Seymour reports, that "have
significant international strategies that would at least involve joint
ventures with Western oil majors, especially for access to their distribution
capacity. Yukos has been exploring partnerships with TotalFina." He also
notes that West European companies like Ruhrgas are likely to get into
distribution deals or production-sharing arrangements to keep the energy
flowing. "That's Germany's greatest motivation now-to keep the spigot on."
Seymour says that privatization of land ownership, when it comes to Russia,
"will be a lightning rod for FDI, producing much greater allocations by
Western investors." Real estate, agricultural business and pulp and paper
would all benefit, he says.
Seymour also likes the cellular phone industry, "even though this isn't
necessarily a sexy sector any more." He sees Vimpelcom and MTS, the two
largest cell phone companies, as growth companies because infrastructure for
landlines in Russia has been lagging.
WimmBillDan, the juice and dairy company recently listed on the New York
Stock Exchange "met with remarkable interest from the investment community,"
Seymour notes. "It was five to six times oversubscribed." This is a good sign
for other consumer product companies that are selling to Russia's rising
middle class, he says.
Looking at overall Russian stock market performance, Seymour warns that
investors are still cautious after the default, devaluation and market crash
of 1998. Back in 1997, he says, "some people were moving into second- and
third-tier stocks that were way off the radar screen, because they thought
everything was a one-way ticket up. What will be different about this rally
is that it will be concentrated in 10 or 15 blue-chip stocks."
Second-tier companies that may have value, like Tomsk Energo, will not "get a
bid just because people haven't caught on to it yet." Seymour also sees some
regional telecoms, or an automotive sector firm like AvtoVaz, as having
potential to "emerge out of the second tier."
"It's still a momentum play for a lot of stories," Seymour says of investing
strategies for Russia. "So when you think there's going to be great
restructuring clarity in the banking sector you want to buy Sberbank, even
though it may not be a story that is ready yet."
Bond Market: A Sign of Life
A relatively new and small but growing part of the Russian investment
world is the corporate bond market. Christof Rühl, chief economist of the
World Bank Russia office, explains that because of the absence of a
functioning banking system, "you have a number of new smaller companies or
would-be entrepreneurs who are desperate for credit." So since the crash of
'98, a bond market has emerged which is growing exponentially. Rühl observes,
"Cash-rich companies are willing to invest - that's a sign of life here."
And some of those bond purchases are coming from abroad. Most are from
Cyprus, widely recognized as Russian overseas capital returning. "This is
natural," Ruhl says. "Bonds are risky, but Russian investors are going to be
the first to invest in them, because they know the market."
Foreign funds entering the bond market came to $31 million in 1999, $145
million in 2000, and $292 million in the first nine months of 2001.
The return of Russian flight capital also produces an investment pattern
that might be regarded as bizarre if one didn't know getter - for the first
three quarters of 2001, tiny Cyprus is by far the largest foreign investor in
Russia. The top foreign sources for total investment for that period are:
Cyprus $1,874 million; U.S. $1,226 million; Netherlands $914 million and
Germany $845 million. Most of the Cyprus investment is going into bonds and
long-term trade credits. Looking solely at foreign direct investment, Cyprus
is the third-largest player, behind the U.S. and the Netherlands.
Though overall foreign investment in Russia is still very low, economist
Anders Aslund says that fact may be normal at the present stage. "In general,
FDI takes place late in an economic takeoff. If you take Poland, which has
been the most successful post-communist conversion - the country had growth
of 6 percent for years before foreign investment took off in '97-'98. Most
often FDI comes in late, after you've cleaned up [the economy]."
Is Russia finally approaching that stage? All the signs are pointing
upward, but the crash of 1998 still casts a shadow. As Troika Dialog's Tim
Seymour observes, "Times are good right now in Russia, and investors have
short memories, but the psyche is still fragile."
*******
#9
The Guardian (UK)
2 March 2002
The Guardian Profile: Mstislav Rostropovich
An icon for our times
By John O'Mahony
His family once had to beg for a room, but he now owns homes in six cities.
One of the great musicians of the past century, he was exiled from Russia as
a dissident and returned to fight opponents of Yeltsin's reforms. John
O'Mahony on the cellist and conductor for whom music and religion are twin
strengths
A disquieting incident occurs at the tragic end of Prokofiev's ballet Romeo
And Juliet in Valencia's Teatre Principal. From the orchestra pit -
strategically placed between two dancing areas, so that the musicians are
visible throughout - the solitary figure of conductor Mstislav Rostropovich
rises slowly, pale and ghostlike. At first there is a suspicion that he has
simply come forward too early for his curtain call. Then, as it becomes clear
that the episode has been choreographed, there is a fear that an evening of
faultless musicality and some sublime dancing will be marred by a mawkish
gesture. But as the audience holds its breath, Rostropovich steps forward,
kneels down and clasps the lovers' hands together with a poise and simplicity
that couldn't be more dignified.
It is difficult to imagine any other conductor pulling this off. Simon Rattle
- with his cheeky grin and wild hair? Daniel Barenboim - whose panache might
transform a carefully measured moment into a celebrity turn? Definitely not.
And if Rostropovich's fellow countryman, the international star Valery
Gergiev, dared to extend his iron grip from the pit to the stage, it would be
roundly denounced as more evidence of his reputed megalomania.
Rostropovich has got "that grain of genius and prodigious energy that,
combined, makes a great musician," says his colleague and friend, the
conductor Sir Colin Davis, who this month will participate in a gala concert
at the Barbican to celebrate Rostropovich's 75th birthday. "But he also has
very profound feelings, particularly about his time in Russia and the
suffering that so many musicians endured there. The idea of the joining of
hands couldn't possibly mean more to him."
Mstislav Rostropovich has led an extraordinary life. He is a cellist who has
not only performed some of the most important music written for the
instrument in the 20th century but has also been directly involved in its
creation. His close friendship with Dmitri Shostakovich inspired both of the
composer's masterful cello concertos, which are dedicated to Rostropovich:
"What I value most of all in his playing," Shostakovich wrote, "is the
intense, restless mind and the high spirituality that he brings to his
mastery - a phenomenal virtuosity combined with a noble and ravishingly
beautiful tone."
A subsequent friendship with Sergei Prokofiev led to the composition of his
Cello Concertino and Symphony Concerto for Cello and Orchestra, both
dedicated to Rostropovich. Britten composed both of his solo cello suites for
Rostropovich as well as the intoxicating symphony for cello and orchestra.
And he has commissioned work from a generation of younger composers, such as
James Macmillan and David Matthews, leading one critic to proclaim that he
has single-handedly doubled the repertoire for the cello. "He has shown that
there is a primacy and priority to be made in the relationship between
performer and composer," says Macmillan. "He has recognised that the vital
life blood has been maintained by living composers. And that has been a great
encouragement to composers since Britten and Shostakovich, because he has
maintained his links with the younger generation."
As a conductor, Rostropovich has repaid his mentors with lifelong devotion to
their work, presenting Prokofiev's opera War And Peace for the first time in
the composer's original version, prompting Shostakovich to comment: "The
opera sounded as it should sound... Here at last was a real conductor on the
rostrum, a real musician and interpreter of immense talent." And during his
long association with the London Symphony Orchestra Rostropovich has overseen
festivals dedicated to Shostakovich, Prokofiev and Britten.
However, it is as a political dissident - and now almost a modern icon - on a
par with Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov that Rostropovich has
made the most impact on the wider public consciousness. In 1974 he received
an award from the International League of Human Rights for sheltering
Solzhenitsyn in his dacha outside Moscow, a courageous act which sent
Rostropovich into exile, and even today, in the complex atmosphere of
post-Communist Russia, causes resentment among the majority who remained
silent during the Soviet era. A concert Rostropovich gave in 1998 to
commemorate Solzhenitsyn's 80th birthday seems to have served as the catalyst
that brought these frustrations to the surface:
"The whole point of the concert seemed to be to show our most prominent
cellist kissing the great Russian writer," jeered one critic, "and since it
was possible to see this kiss on television, there was no real need for
people to come to the concert at all."
The ferocity of the critical reaction, which generally accused Rostropovich
of "fastening on to any opportunity" for a Russian comeback, led him to vow
never to play in the Russian capital again, resulting in a second,
self-imposed exile: "I will not look for any more 'opportunities'," he
lamented, "I don't want to 'punish' anybody with my concerts."
Known to all by the diminutive "Slava", Rostropovich's warmth and ebullience
are legendary. In 1967, he formed a life-long friendship with the far more
reticent Solzhenitsyn, by barging into the writer's Ryazan apartment and
bellowing: "I'm Rostropovich. I've come to embrace Solzhenitsyn." Since then,
scores of musicians, writers, politicians and journalists have found
themselves crushed by Rostropovich's bear-hugs and enraptured by his charm.
He is a sparkling raconteur. His eyes fill unashamedly with tears as he tells
the story of how his impoverished family was helped on their arrival in
Moscow by an Armenian woman. They fill again with tears of laughter as he
launches into long, hilarious accounts of youthful amorous adventures in
Russia's far east. "He could have been a great clown," Davis says, "he has
such a sense for the essence of what is entertainment."
Clive Gillinson, the LSO's man aging director and a former cellist himself,
recalls Rostropovich's contribution to a birthday celebration some years ago:
"Halfway through the party, this gorilla burst in, apparently a gorilla-gram,
and it swung from the door and all the usual stuff. Then somebody picked up a
cello and handed it to the gorilla and said, 'Now Clive, to remind you of
your past as a cellist, the gorilla will play you something.' But the gorilla
didn't know which way round to hold the cello and made a complete hash of it.
So I had to show it how to hold the cello, which I did rather patronisingly.
And it suddenly played Happy Birthday unbelievably. It was Slava."
Rostropovich is also a shrewd businessman who collects cars, paintings and
Russian antique furniture, and owns homes in six cities around the world,
including a Maida Vale mansion in London. His 16th arrondissement apartment
in Paris, which recalls how Russian aristocrats must have lived in the 19th
century, is crammed with Tsarist-era furniture and porcelain. He is also
deeply religious and carries with him on his travels a collection of
authentic miniature icons: "It is very important for me," he says. "It is the
same as my devotion to music. Music is a contact with another world."
His beliefs, he says, are also behind his continued support for his old
friend Boris Yeltsin, despite the excesses and corruption of the Yeltsin
years: "I think Yeltsin was sent by God's will. The destruction of the Soviet
Union could have resulted in the destruction of the planet, because every
Soviet republic had its own nuclear forces. If it wasn't for Yeltsin, we
would definitely have witnessed a civil war." Rostropovich also believes that
the divine has played a role in his own destiny: "When I was told to kick
Solzhenitsyn out of my apartment, it would have been logical to do so, to
have rented another apartment for him. But someone up there told me, 'don't
do this'. If I had, my career would have been very different. I would never
have been sent out of the country, I would have received even more honours.
But instead, when I left, another era started for me. An even better time
began. So, it is best to rely on God's opinion."
Mstislav Leopoldovich Rostropovich was born in Baku, the capital of
Azerbaijan, on March 27 1927. His father, Leopold Vitoldovich, had been a
child prodigy who gave his first cello recital aged 12, graduated from the St
Petersburg conservatory with a gold medal, and later studied the cello in
Paris with Pablo Casals. During a concert engagement in the city of Orenburg
in the Urals Leopold fell passionately in love with his piano accompanist,
Sofia Fedotova, and they married in 1922. After the birth of their first
child, Veronika, the Rostropovich family moved in 1926 to Baku, where Leopold
became professor of music at the conservatory and Sofia taught piano.
Shortly afterwards, Sofia found that she was pregnant for the second time,
but decided that she would prefer not to have another child: "She confessed
this to me years later that she tried some makeshift, domestic way to get rid
of me," Rostropovich says now, with a certain amount of glee. "When it failed
she invited the gynecologist to give her medication so that I wouldn't live.
I really had to struggle for life."
Despite evident talent, Leopold Rostropovich's career failed to ignite: "It
was a tragedy in a way," his son says. "He was a genius. I still think that I
haven't reached his level on the cello. My mother would criticise him when he
wouldn't arrange a concert. And he said, 'If they want me they'll come to
me.' And I have to say, nobody came." Much of the family's ambitions were
transferred to young Slava, who displayed precocious musical abilities and
whose energetic character couldn't have been more different from his
father's.
At four Slava began studying piano. When he was five, the family moved to
Moscow so that he could have an adequate musical education. However, they
were so poor that they couldn't afford to rent a room and were forced to
approach strangers in Moscow's streets for help: "The four of us - my
parents, me and my sister - were standing by the 'Chinese' wall. Everything
my parents had brought from Baku was in two big cases. My father was
approaching people, saying: 'I am sorry to disturb you, but I have a very
talented little son and we just arrived and we have a little bit of money,
maybe you could suggest where we could spend the night?'" Eventually, an
Armenian woman named Zinaida took pity on them and offered her own cramped
communal apartment, "two small rooms so small it was like a train
compartment" where they lived for the next two years.
To support the family, Leopold took jobs in various provincial orchestras,
sometimes as far afield as Ukraine, often taking his young son with him: "He
would take me to rehearsal. I would sit in the orchestra looking at all the
instruments and dreaming of become a conductor." However, his father was keen
to steer him towards becoming a cellist. Slava began studying under his
tutelage when he was eight and by 13 he had made his solo debut playing the
Saint-Saëns concerto in Slavyansk. A year later, as Hitler's armies advanced
on Moscow, the family was evacuated to Orenburg, where both parents taught at
the local music school and Leopold formed a trio to play in cinemas.
However, within a year, disaster struck, as Leopold was beset by a serious
heart complaint and died shortly afterwards, in 1942, aged 50: "It had a
devastating effect," Rostropovich recalls, "and for a time I too became very
ill." At 14, he found himself the family breadwinner. He took over his
father's teaching job as well as many of his appointments with a local
operatic ensemble. Then, when he was 16, he was accepted by the Moscow
conservatory and moved back to the city with his mother and sister. One of
his first objectives was to enroll in Class No. 35, then taught by
Shostakovich.
"It was after his Seventh Symphony and he was at the height of his career,"
remembers Rostropovich. "It was impossible to get a place in his class. I
asked my cello professor to ask Shostakovich if he could find half an hour so
that I could show him the score of a piano concerto I had written.
Shostakovich asked me to play it, but I was so embarrassed that I played it
unbelievably fast. But he took me into the class."
At the conservatory he had also been introduced to Prokofiev several times
"but he kept on forgetting me". However, when he performed the composer's
cello concerto in January 1948 it marked the beginning of a close friendship
and working relationship. "He was in the audience," Rostropovich recalls,
"but as I was playing without my glasses I couldn't see properly and could
only make out his bald head. I played five encores, each time directing the
applause to this blurry bald head in the front row. When I returned after the
fifth encore I saw Prokofiev standing backstage. He growled: 'Young man, how
long are you going to wander around the stage?' It turned out the bald man
wasn't him at all."
However, just weeks after this concert, the entire musical establishment was
rocked by a new wave of cultural repression. Having already purged
literature, theatre and film, Stalin's cultural strongman Andrei Zhdanov
turned to the Soviet Union's leading composers, including Shostakovich and
Prokofiev, accusing them of the mortal sin of "Formalism", defined by the
authorities as "anti-democratic tendencies alien to the Soviet people and
[its] artistic tastes". Almost overnight, both composers were excised from
the repertoires in Moscow, and their classes at the conservatory emptied.
Having already experienced similar vilification in 1936 for his opera Lady
Macbeth Of Mtsensk, Shostakovich took the new onslaught with a certain amount
of equanimity. But for the more naive and less sociable Prokofiev, who had
been lured back to the USSR in the 1930s with promises of prestige and
privilege, the abrupt fall from grace was deeply distressing. "He couldn't
understand what had really happened and he didn't understand what they wanted
from him," says Rostropovich. "He would say 'I have such a great technique as
a composer, you tell me which style you like and I will compose in that
style'. He imagined that people were pointing at him in the street and
saying: 'There goes that bad formalist composer'."
Throughout this period, Rostropovich was one of the very few to remain
steadfast. While working with Prokofiev on his cello sonata during sessions
at the composer's dacha, Rostropovich was his only friend. He formed a bond
with Shostakovich that endured until the cellist himself was forced into
exile in the 1970s. He continued to champion the work of both men, premiering
the final version of the Prokofiev in 1950.
One of the reasons why Rostropovich survived unscathed appears to have been
his status as a rising young star and potential cultural export. In 1945 he
had won the cello gold medal in the first Soviet Union competition for young
musicians, and in 1947 travelled to Czechoslovakia and Poland. In 1951, he
was among the first musicians from Russia to visit Italy since the 1917
Revolution. In 1961 he made his debut as a conductor in the town of Gorky,
presiding over Prokofiev's Fifth Symphony.
Rostropovich's personal life also began to blossom during this period, when,
during a tour to Prague in 1955, he first met the soprano Galina
Vishnevskaya, already an established name at the Bolshoi Opera. The two met
in a restaurant during a government reception: "I had never heard him play,"
says Vishnevskaya, "and he hadn't heard me sing. So it was not about glory or
fame. He decided on the spot that I was for him, and he set to work arranging
a series of surprises. The next morning, when I got up and opened my closet
door, I discovered my clothes had been completely covered with lilies. The
following day I found orchids in all four corners of my room. The third day,
the floor was strewn with boxes of chocolates. On the fourth day we decided
to get married." They have two daughters, Elena who is a pianist who lives
outside Paris, and Olga, a cellist living in the US.
Back in Moscow, Rostropovich took over as Vishnevskaya's rehearsal
accompanist so they could spend as much time as possible together. He also
conducted her in productions of Tchaikovsky's Eugene Onegin and Prokofiev's
War And Peace at the Bolshoi. Throughout the 60s the pair lived next door to
Shostakovich and his wife in Moscow's House of Composers and, after meeting
Benjamin Britten at a concert in London in 1961, struck up a friendship which
led the great English composer to write his cello concerto for Rostropovich
and the soprano part of his War Requiem for Vishnevskaya.
However, this stellar soviet success story was soon to come to an abrupt
halt, in a manner that would have seemed desolately familiar to
Rostropovich's mentors. In 1967 the cellist met the dissident writer
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, whose novella One Day In The Life Of Ivan Denisovich
had caused a sensation when published in 1962 during the Khrushchev "thaw".
In 1969, he discovered that his new friend was living on the outskirts of
Moscow in a shack without heat or running water and insisted that
Solzhenitsyn move to the Rostropoviches' considerably more sumptuous dacha.
By this time, however, Solzhenitsyn had been expelled from the writers' union
and could only publish his work abroad or in hand-typed samizdat [underground
editions]. The decision to award Solzhenitsyn the Nobel Prize for Literature
in 1970 further antagonised the authorities and Rostropovich came under
increasing official pressure to evict him from the dacha: "I was summoned by
the minister of culture and the interior minister," he says, "and they told
me that if I wouldn't throw him out I was going to be in big trouble. They
wanted me to throw him out on to the street in winter. I simply refused."
Instead, Rostropovich decided to write an "open letter" to the press in
defence of his friend. He wrote: "Can it really be that the times we have
lived through have not taught us to take a more cautious attitude toward
crushing talented people? Not to speak in the name of an entire nation? Not
to force people to utter opinions about things they have never read or
heard?" he asked. "Each human being must have the right to think for himself
and to express his opinion without fear."
Vishnevskaya, who was more acutely aware of the consequences, advised
caution: "I said, 'If you want to write a letter, you know that I will always
be by your side no matter what.' But I knew what we were risking and knew we
would be persecuted." Almost immediately, Rostropovich's name disappeared
from the billboards of Moscow's and St. Petersburg's most prestigious venues,
and even engagements in lesser halls, such as an invitation to conduct Die
Fledermaus at the Operetta theatre, were subject to capricious cancellation
because of his "decline as a musician".
To occupy his increasing free time, Rostropovich began to collect porcelain
figures, now kept in a magnificent cabinet in his Paris apartment. Though
Vishnevskaya was initially allowed to continue performing, her name was
expunged from reviews: "I sang the lead role in The Gambler by Prokofiev on
the stage of the Bolshoi Theatre and my name wasn't even mentioned in the
press. It was like the lead character didn't exist," she says.
Solzhenitsyn's arrest and expulsion from the Soviet Union in February 1974
made the family's situation untenable and shortly afterwards they were
granted permission to leave the Soviet Union. Initially, they thought their
exile would be temporary: "We were always postponing returning home because
we thought the situation in Russia would change," says Galina, "We never
planned to stay abroad. Russia is our home. I love the country, the people
with their strange ways, the horrible but beautiful history. I love it all."
However, while watching television at their home in Paris in 1978, they
learned that their Soviet citizenship had been rescinded: "We were cut from
our country, as if by a sharp knife," says Rostropovich. "It was a big
shock."
On a financial level as well, the move abroad was initially fraught: "When I
came over to the west I had nothing," Rostropovich says, "I didn't have any
contacts and I had no concerts set up." Soon, however, offers came flooding
in and he became chief conductor of the National Symphony Orchestra in
Washington, where he presided for 17 seasons. He also built links with the
LSO that eventually led to his Prokofiev and Shostakovich seasons of the 90s.
However, just as he had given up all hope of ever returning to Russia, the
political landscape began to change again, as Mikhail Gorbachev's reforms
began to transform the Soviet bloc. When the Berlin Wall fell, Rostropovich
borrowed the private jet of a sympathetic millionaire and, as the concrete
barrier was torn down, played his cello in the shadow of the wall through the
night, tears streaming down his face.
However, his boldest gesture of support for democratic reforms came with the
Moscow White House siege in August 1991, when Boris Yeltsin barricaded
himself into Russia's government buildings to thwart a coup aiming to roll
back the changes. Rostropovich says: "My daughter called me early in the
morning and said: 'Father, something is happening in Russia'. And as soon as
I understood that they were trying to bring back the soviet system, I thought
I must go there. Galina was in London, and I wrote her a letter saying
goodbye. I was sure they were going to kill me. So, I turned up in Moscow
without even so much as a visa. At the airport, I convinced them that I was
part of a delegation of emigrants."
Yeltsin's welcome was little short of ecstatic. He wrote in his memoir The
View From The Kremlin: "Inside and outside the White House, many people found
their nerves were giving out. Some just didn't know how to behave in such a
stressful situation. There were hysterics. Suddenly, Rostropovich walked in
and everything fell into place. All the trivial concerns and inanities fell
away. Of course, Rostropovich was a great man who performed a magnanimous,
bold deed: he asked for an assault rifle and was loaned one for a time, even
though every firearm was needed." Some say Rostropovich's arrival in the
White House was a factor in the coup plotters' decision not to shell the
building. Even now, however, he has declined offers by the Russian government
to restore his citizenship and he and Vishnevskaya travel on a special Swiss
passport for foreign nationals.
After a quarter of a century he has become accustomed to wandering the globe
from concert to concert. On the eve of his 75th birthday, his wife would
prefer him to slow down a little: "He says that he can't turn down any offer
to work," she laments. "I think he has to learn to say no. I'm not saying he
has to quit music - this is his life. But I worry for his health and
therefore I think he has to slow down."
So far, Rostropovich has ignored these entreaties, and continues a punishing
schedule. Over the past few weeks, he has performed in Rome, London, Paris,
and Barcelona. The birthday celebrations will see concerts at the Barbican
and in New York. He is presently in Baku to open a Rostropovich museum in the
house where he was born: "I think I can keep up the pace that I am working at
now," he says. "Music gives me strength. When I come to a performance, I feel
a bit tired but with the first bars I am fresh again. I have no intention of
going on vacation until that final and longest of all possible vacations."
Life at a glance Mstislav Leopoldovich Rostropovich
Born: March 27 1927, Baku, Azerbaijan.
Education: Moscow conservatory, 1943-46.
Married: 1955 Galina Vishnevskaya (two daughters Olga b. 1956, Elena b.
1958).
World premieres and commissions include: Prokokiev Symphony Concerto for
Cello and Orchestra, 1952; Shostakovich Concerto No1, '59, Concerto No 2 '66;
Knipper Concerto '62; Britten Symphony for Cello and Orchestra '63; Dutilleux
Tout un Monde Lointain '69; Lutoslawski Cello Concerto '70; Berio Il Ritorno
degli snovidenia '76; Bernstein Three Meditations from Mass for Violoncello
'77; Penderecki Concerto No 2 '82; Matthews Romanza '90; MacMillan Cello
Concerto '96.
Awards include: Stalin Prize, 1951; Lenin Prize, '64; International League of
Human Rights award '74.
· Performances in the Rostropovich 75th birthday concert series are at the
Barbican, London EC2Y 8DS on March 14,15, 16, 19, 20, 24 and 27
********
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