Johnson's Russia List
#6125
10 March 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Note from David Johnson:
DJ: This edition of JRL is brought to you from the Hotel Chelsea
in New York.
1. Washington Post: Dana Hedgpeth, Book Lovers Pay Their Final Respects.
Evicted Owner of Rockville Shop Still Hopes to Save Rest of Russian-Language
Stock.
2. Reuters: Russians criticise reported U.S. nuclear planning.
3. Interfax: USA has "lost touch with reality" since 11 September attacks -
senior Russian MP.
4. AFP: Russian lawmaker cautions against showing film linking agents to
bombings.
5. Newsweek International: Christian Caryl, Putin’s Next Test. Enemies
accuse
Russia’s president of bombing his own countrymen. But that’s not his biggest
challenge.
6. Washington Post: Jim Hoagland, Human Rights and Our Allies. (re
Uzbekistan)
7. UPI: Chechens at PACE irk Russian official.
8. Izvestiya: Semen Novoprudskiy, Empire of Good. (Commentator Sees United
States Creating 'Empire' in Post-Soviet Area)
9. Izvestiya: Russia's Gaydar Argues With General Staff General on Army
Manning Reform.
10. Washington Times: Natalia feduschak, Capitalism takes root in Ukraine.
11. eurasianet.org: INCOMING GEORGIA NATIONAL SECURITY OFFICIAL "KNOWS THE
AMERICAN THINKING." A Q&A with Tedo Japaridze, Georgia's New National
Security
Council secretary.
12. Baltimore Sun: Douglas Birch, Drying out in 'Village of Fools.'
Sobriety:
A businessman uses his wealth to create a free addiction treatment center in
rural Russia.]
*******
#1
Washington Post
March 10, 2002
Book Lovers Pay Their Final Respects
Evicted Owner of Rockville Shop Still Hopes to Save Rest of
Russian-Language Stock
By Dana Hedgpeth
Tamara Woolf, 44, couldn't bear to think of a Dostoevski novel burning, so
yesterday she took one of her students and went to the Victor Kamkin Inc.
bookstore in Rockville to buy a shopping cart full of history, art and
Russian classics -- almost all in Russian.
The Kamkin inventory -- estimated to be as many as 2 million books -- had
been slated to be sent to the Montgomery County incinerator tomorrow
because the owner is behind on the rent and faces eviction.
"The idea of burning books brings to me a memory of the Nazis burning
books," said Woolf, a resident of Rockville who teaches Russian at St.
Albans School for Boys. "It's unimaginable to me that this would happen
here. I'm stunned and shocked."
There was word late yesterday of a possible reprieve for the vast
collection of books, which includes limited editions and rare volumes.
Rep. Constance A. Morella (R-Md.) said she talked with Montgomery County
Sheriff Raymond M. Kight and County Executive Douglas M. Duncan about
saving the books.
A possible solution Kight has agreed to calls for taking the books -- in
trucks and Dumpsters, as the landlord had arranged -- to the county's
transfer station on Shady Grove Road. The books would be stored there for a
few days while the search for a permanent home continues, thereby avoiding
the incinerator.
The store's owner, Igor Kalageorgi, who was recently released from a
hospital after suffering from bleeding ulcers, said yesterday that the
Kalageorgi said he had to take the phone off the hook so he and his staff
could take care of the influx of shoppers who had only just learned of the
store's imminent closing. The store will also be open today.
"I'm happy that people still remember us," Kalageorgi said. "It's a bit
overwhelming," he said.
The store, off Boiling Brook Parkway in Rockville, sells books and
magazines that detail almost every aspect of life and history in the Soviet
Union. Since its opening 50 years ago, it has been frequented by
researchers, spies and CIA agents, among other Sovietologists. The store
was said to be the nation's premier supplier of materials from the U.S.S.R.
But with the fall of the Soviet Union, interest in Russian-language books
fell, and so did sales. By last year, Kalageorgi couldn't pay the $15,000
monthly rent.
He is now $200,000 behind. His landlord, Allen Kronstadt of Randolph
Buildings L.P., began the eviction process in December.
Usually in an eviction, everything left in the rented space is piled up at
the curb. But sheriff's deputies said putting nearly 2 million books on the
street would be an overwhelming task.
The landlord said he tried to make a deal with Kalageorgi late Friday to
have him relinquish the books to him, but Kalageorgi "refused to
negotiate." If he had gotten the books, Kronstadt said, he would have tried
to find a specialty library or publisher to take them. But he had already
tried a few and not had any luck.
Kalageorgi, the great-nephew of the store's founder, Victor Kamkin,
estimated that by late afternoon yesterday, the store had tallied $14,000
in sales -- about five times that of a typical weekend day.
"I have never seen it this crazy," Alexander Markovych, the store's general
manager, said as he rang up customers.
By mid-morning, the line had stretched down the warehouse aisles and into a
hallway crowded with tapes and CDs to the one cash register.
In the back of the warehouse, parents with toddlers searched for children's
books by Alexander Pushkin. Retired federal bureaucrats hunted for military
history novels. Russian scholars grabbed copies of dictionaries and thick
books on Soviet economic policies and foreign relations of the 1920s.
Even for those who didn't speak or read Russian, buying books at Victor
Kamkin felt as if they were getting a piece of history, or at least
something interesting.
"I don't even read Russian, but I knew I'd find good stuff," said Dan
Edwards, 58, of Rockville, who has shopped at Victor Kamkin for eight years
for items to sell in his side job as a dealer specializing in books on
Central Asia and Tibet. He waited an hour and a half to pay for his stack
of books, which included a $1.90 paperback on Tibetan Buddhism printed in
Moscow in 1977. "In 15 or 20 years, it may be worth more," he said.
"People say this is like old Russia before the wall fell," Edwards said.
Pat Onufrak, 42, an editor for a transportation magazine and a resident of
McLean, was stocking up on sheet music for the balalaika, a triangular
guitar. She also bought a copy of Konstantin Simonov's novel "The Living
and the Dead."
"This place was a mecca for Russian-language majors," she said. "It's like
going to the funeral of an old friend."
*******
#2
Russians criticise reported U.S. nuclear planning
MOSCOW, March 9 (Reuters) - Russian commentators on Saturday criticised a
reported U.S. move to prepare contingency plans to use nuclear weapons
against Russia and other countries.
With Russia in the middle of a three-day holiday weekend, there was no
official comment on the Los Angeles Times report that the Bush administration
had ordered the Pentagon to draw up the plans.
The paper said its story was based on a classified Pentagon report which
mentioned China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Libya and Syria. The
Pentagon refused to comment.
Dmitry Rogozin, an influential member of Russia's parliament, said Washington
could be trying to intimidate Russia after months of closer cooperation.
"We have to understand that the United States has many strategic nuclear
weapons trained on Russia and draw our own strategic conclusions," Rogozin,
head of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the lower house of parliament, told
NTV television.
"This is the policy of the big stick, a nuclear stick intended to intimidate
us and put us in our place."
NTV also quoted Leonid Ivashov, a former top Defence Ministry official and
now an influential observer, as saying the report showed that the United
States saw post-Soviet Russia as a "geo-political rival."
The Los Angeles Times said it was the first time that an official list of
target countries had come to light.
Russia and the United States have greatly improved relations after a rocky
start when President George W. Bush came to power last year.
Cooperation drew closer when Russian President Vladimir Putin endorsed the
U.S.-led war on terrorism and the Kremlin allowed Central Asian states to
help Washington.
Putin has been accused by military hawks and the Communist Party, which still
secures 25 percent of the vote, of giving away too much to Washington and
receiving too little in return.
The two leaders are to meet in Russia in May with the aim of clinching an
accord on reducing strategic nuclear arsenals.
Vyacheslav Nikonov, president of the Politika think tank, told NTV the report
would call into question all U.S. motives in international relations.
"If America wants to cooperate in military operations... if it intends to
reduce strategic nuclear warheads, the Bush directive is a very negative
signal which will be received in an appropriate fashion by Russia's
leadership," he told NTV.
*******
#3
USA has "lost touch with reality" since 11 September attacks - senior
Russian MP
Interfax
Moscow, 9 March: A senior Russian parliamentary deputy, in a radio interview
aired today, argued that a story in the Los Angeles Times about a supposed
White House order to draw up a nuclear attack plan was a Pentagon attempt to
see how Russia would react.
The story was a deliberate leak, indicating "that the Pentagon has decided to
check the reaction of the Russian military and Russian politicians", Dmitriy
Rogozin, chairman of the lower house's [State Duma] International Affairs
Committee, told Moscow's Ekho Moskvy radio. But "our American colleagues
should be careful both with their public statements and with their
information leaks", he said.
"Attempts to move nuclear weapons from the political category into the
category of weapons that can be used in warfare are dangerous for the United
States itself." "After [the terrorist attacks on the United States on] 11
September, they [the Americans] have somewhat lost touch with the reality in
which they live. And their euphoria after the war in Afghanistan is also
deluding them somewhat because the war in Afghanistan is only just beginning."
Nuclear weapons are "decorative weapons" and "cannot in principle be used by
any sane leader of any state", Rogozin said. "No military expert will
guarantee that the small-scale use of nuclear weapons will not grow into a
large-scale war."
As for Russia, the country "is absolutely securely protected", the deputy
said. "Only a lunatic could plan any nuclear intimidation of the Russian
Federation or an attack on it."
******
#4
World: Russian lawmaker cautions against showing film linking agents to
bombings
Agence France-Presse
MOSCOW (March 9, 2002) - A top Russian lawmaker warned Saturday
that legal action could follow the public performance of a film that links
Russia's security service to a wave of bombings that sparked the war in
Chechnya.
Two Russian parliament deputies said earlier this week that they intended to
air the documentary, which was filmed by two French journalists and was
presented in London last week by exiled mogul Boris Berezovsky.
However, according to Pavel Krasheninnikov, former justice minister and now
chairman of the lower house of parliament's law committee, the deputies could
import the film but would be responsible for its contents.
"If they publicly distribute this information and if it is not proved to be
true, they will violate both civil and criminal law," Krasheninnikov told the
Moscow Echo radio station.
Still, if the film's claims were true, the deputies Sergei Yushenkov and Yuly
Rybakov would have no problems with the law, he added.
The documentary accuses security services of being behind bombings that
killed some 300 people and were officially blamed on Chechen separatists.
They led to a wave of nationalism that swept Putin to the presidency half a
year later on a pledge to crush Chechen "terrorists" in a lightning offensive
that has since degenerated into protracted guerrilla warfare.
The FSB security service denied Berezovsky's claims, hitting back with
accusations that Berezovsky financed an armed incursion of Chechen rebels
into the southern Russian republic of Dagestan in summer 1999.
Investigators also suspect the millionaire is linked to the kidnapping and
murder in Chechnya that year of Russian general Gennady Shpigun.
Berezovsky was a close ally of former president Boris Yeltsin during his
reign at the Kremlin, but fell out with Putin and turned his media empire
against him.
The one-time oligarch, currently in self-imposed exile in London, is now the
subject of an arrest warrant alleging he embezzled funds from the Aeroflot
airline.
*******
#5
Newsweek International
March 18, 2002
Putin’s Next Test
Enemies accuse Russia’s president of bombing his own countrymen. But that’s
not his biggest challenge
By Christian Caryl
Boris Berezovsky is working hard. The man who once was Russia’s most
powerful business tycoon and political kingmaker lives in London, exiled
under a cloud of growing criminal investigations. Yet he’s doing his best
to stay a player. Recently he told one French newspaper that he would
“struggle to the death” against his former political protege, Vladimir
Putin. And last week he delivered what he clearly hoped would be a body
blow to the Russian president, launching a TV documentary alleging that the
Russian security service, the FSB, staged a spate of bombings in Moscow and
other cities, which claimed 300 lives in 1999.
AS EVERY RUSSIAN knows, Putin blamed the atrocities on Chechen
terrorists—and promptly launched a brutal military campaign to subdue them.
If the president helped engineer the plot as a pretext for his crackdown,
killing innocent Russians, wouldn’t that be treason? Berezovsky poses the
question bluntly, as he told NEWSWEEK in London. “Putin says the Chechens
are responsible but has never given any evidence,” he says. “No one is in
jail, nor has there been a proper investigation.”
This wasn’t the first time the ousted oligarch has tried to mix up
Kremlin politics by remote control. When Putin was asked to comment on one
of the tycoon’s earlier broadsides from abroad, he responded laconically:
“Boris Berezovsky? Who’s that?” This time around he didn’t even trouble to
reply. The reason is simple enough. On the face of things, Putin has never
looked stronger. Public-opinion surveys show the president’s approval
ratings at around 75 percent. The economy is looking back on three years of
solid growth at a time when most of the world is still in recession. The
government is doing its job with an aura of businesslike calm that stands
in stark contrast to the tumult of the Yeltsin years. The long and
unpopular war in Chechnya has fallen from the headlines, even if it’s not
over. Internationally, the picture is even rosier. Putin is the new friend
of America and Europe, credited with transform-ing traditional Russian
xenophobia into a newly promising strategic alliance with the West.
Yet look again. For all his recent success, Putin stands at the
threshold of daunting new challenges. Now comes phase two, the really hard
part: cracking down on a massively corrupt police force; rejuvenating a
hidebound state bureaucracy, judiciary and tax authority; reassuring
military elites who do not trust him or share his vision of the future,
even as he prods them to reform. Small wonder that Putin has lately come
under some surprising attacks, of which Berezovsky’s is but one. Nor have
the doubters been protesting the issues of yore—hungry workers fearing
economic disruptions, or intellectuals objecting to the Chechnya war. These
days, the voices are the far more powerful constituencies of the Russian
ruling class—the elites of the very institutions that Putin seeks to change.
It’s highly unlikely that Berezovsky would somehow be able to foment
such opposition. Last week’s docudrama added little to the mystery
surrounding the 1999 bombings, and certainly did not provide a smoking gun
pointing to Putin. Indeed, it is hard to imagine how anyone could dare
right now to confront the president, let alone topple him, as Berezovsky
seeks to do. But make no mistake. There are dangers aplenty. Consider the
economy. Putin and his team have pushed some striking reforms through
Parliament. Among them: measures to reduce government red tape, simplify
the tax system and allow the sale of land. But the tasks to come are even
trickier. One is the upcoming plan to hike prices that Russians pay for
housing maintenance and utilities. That will hit households right in the
pocketbook. Another is desperately needed banking reform. Creating a bona
fide money market will challenge some of the country’s biggest vested
interests—including the Central Bank, a bureaucratic behemoth whose
murkiness is extraordinary even by Russian standards.
Putin must tread warily as he enters another minefield as well.
Topping his agenda for the future is reform of Russia’s civil
service—cripplingly inefficient, hopelessly unresponsive and legendarily
corrupt. That’s a very tall order, especially in the face of presumably
stiff opposition from the bureaucrats who have so much to lose. “Putin does
face huge resistance from the middle and upper levels of the bureaucracy,”
says political analyst Tom Adshead of the Troika Dialogue brokerage in
Moscow. The bureaucrats will fight back, he predicts, either by failing to
implement laws that have been passed, or by putting in place rules of their
own that confuse or thwart the intent of legislation approved by
Parliament. Some civil servants are already fighting an effective
rear-guard action, lobbying deputies in the Russian Parliament—many of them
former bureaucrats themselves—to reject or water down Putin’s forthcoming
legislative program.
Nothing is more dangerous than Putin’s strategic alliance with the
United States. He has supported U.S. military action in Afghanistan and
signed on to an expanded American presence in Central Asia. An expanded
NATO is no threat, he’s said, even if it includes the Baltic states. He has
moderated Russian resistance to U.S. policy on Iraq. In return, he has
hoped for concrete economic benefits—for example, Washington’s support for
Russia’s bid to join the World Trade Organization. He’s also gambled that
NATO will bring Russia into a closer partnership at some of the alliance’s
decision-making conclaves. Putin has also sought to present his countrymen
with a dramatic cut in strategic nuclear arms at a planned summit with
George W. Bush in St. Petersburg and Moscow in May.
So far, Putin has mostly come up empty. Last week Moscow’s WTO bid
came under threat after the Bush White House hiked tariffs on imported
steel from Russia. That prompted the Kremlin to announce countermeasures
against U.S. poultry imports, raising the prospect of a trade war. In the
talks on nuclear-arms cuts, the United States insists that any warheads
removed from its missiles be merely stored, not destroyed. What’s the point
in talking about “drastic cuts,” the Russians respond, if the warheads in
question aren’t really being eliminated? No compromise appears to be in the
offing. As for the prospect of Russia’s being integrated into NATO, it’s an
on-again, off-again affair, with a satisfactory formula for participation
eluding even those in favor of the idea.
All this could sooner or later result in a nationalist backlash and a
stark reversal of policy. Anatoly Kvashnin, head of the Russian General
Staff, recently seized on a big military maneuver in Poland and Norway as
renewed evidence that NATO is still up to its cold-war shenanigans. “Is it
all being done for practicing so-called peacekeeping operations on the
territories close to Russian borders? Further comments are not necessary,”
the general acidly remarked. Suspicions of U.S. intentions have deepened
with the announcement that as many as 200 American soldiers would soon be
heading to the former Soviet republic of Georgia. The professed aim: to
help the government cope with the deteriorating security situation in the
Pankisi Gorge, a canyon along the Russian border that has become a refuge
for Islamist guerrillas from adjacent Chechnya (as well as some non-Chechen
fugitive members of Al Qaeda, according to U.S. officials). The
announcement triggered a wave of indignation among Russian politicians, who
accused Washington of maneuvering to expand its influence in Russia’s
strategic backyard. Putin’s personal intervention, calling it “no tragedy”
if Americans helped with a problem that worried Moscow as well, defused the
storm. But it is an artificial calm on an issue that will continue to
smolder. Twenty retired generals had already lambasted Putin’s acceptance
of a U.S. presence in formerly Soviet Central Asia in a letter to a
communist newspaper shortly before the Georgian fracas broke—yet more
evidence that anti-American sentiments run deep in the largely unreformed
military. Meanwhile, needless to say, Putin’s ambitious plans for
transforming Russia’s bloated armed forces into an effective professional
military threatens to put plenty of generals out on the street.
As things look now, Putin’s opponents are fragmented and without real
voice. The country’s Neanderthal communists, who object to Putin as
insufficiently nationalist and excessively promarket, have little in common
with the liberal democrats who accuse him of moving toward dictatorship.
And neither of those groups has much in common with the civil servants or
the restive regional leaders whose own economic interests will be
threatened by planned reforms. But if the economy should weaken, or if
Putin finds himself forced to back off from his embrace of the United
States, he could find himself in the sort of trouble that would make a
Berezovsky slaver.
With William Underhill in London
*******
#6
Washington Post
March 10, 2002
Human Rights and Our Allies
By Jim Hoagland
Islam Karimov's harsh and pervasive repression of political dissent has
made Uzbekistan a pariah state for more than a decade. Even in the rough
neighborhood of the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, the Uzbek
president's crackdown on Islamic moderates and fanatics alike has seemed
extreme.
This is Uzbekistan, described in the laconic prose of the State
Department's admirably honest annual report on human rights, released
earlier this month:
"On October 16, in Tashkent, police arrested two brothers, Ravshon and
Rasul Haitov, on suspicion" of belonging to Hizb ut-Tahrir, an outlawed
fundamentalist organization. "On October 17, police returned the body of
Ravshon Haitov to his family, which showed clear signs of torture;
authorities informed the family he had died of a heart attack. His brother
Rasul was beaten so severely that he became an invalid."
The report notes several dozen reported cases like this in Uzbekistan last
year. It also notes that a police investigation into the handling of the
Haitov case was opened, at least in name.
Uzbekistan's failure to move out of the Soviet era and toward modern
democracy and free markets was for 10 years a peripheral matter for U.S.
foreign policy. Now that failure is one of the most urgent items on the
Bush administration's agenda, for three overlapping reasons:
Uzbek Muslim warriors are almost certainly helping command and fight in al
Qaeda's bitter-end resistance against the current U.S. offensive in eastern
Afghanistan. The leaders of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) played
key roles in promoting the rule of the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
They helped found and run the terror camps there and propagate Osama bin
Laden's nihilistic and savage version of jihad. Karimov's most dangerous
enemies are George W. Bush's enemies as well.
Karimov will arrive at the White House tomorrow to be honored by Bush for
his quick decision to let U.S. planes use Uzbek air bases in the war on
terrorism. Karimov will use this rare high-profile welcome to seek U.S.
help in what he will describe as a fresh political and economic start.
Karimov has earned a hearing from the administration and the American
public. But that hearing must nonetheless be skeptical -- and conditioned
on the Uzbek's political actions at home matching his words in Washington.
Uzbekistan and Central Asia will help establish -- for better or worse -- a
new balance between U.S. support for human rights abroad and the price
local regimes demand for help in prosecuting the war on terrorism.
In the wake of Sept. 11, many have assumed that human rights would be
subordinated to the war on terror and would lose any meaningful role in
U.S. foreign policy. It is just possible that it will work the other way --
that the expanding American presence in Central Asia, the Caucasus and
Africa will push repressive governments in more moderate directions.
That case is made articulately by Karimov's deputy foreign minister and
special envoy, Sodyq Safaev, who said in Washington last week that his
government has just given legal recognition to Uzbekistan's first human
rights organization in Tashkent. This is part of a modernization drive that
will include Uzbekistan's currency becoming convertible this July, Safaev
said.
"Our problem has been the nonpresence of the United States. We needed
practical steps of cooperation as well as lectures to enable us to move
forward," Safaev said of the period of isolation and turmoil that began
when Boris Yeltsin cast Central Asia adrift by abruptly dissolving the
Soviet Union in 1991.
Similar arguments, of course, were used throughout the Cold War to justify
U.S. aid and short-term fixes that turned around to bite Americans. An
example of the latter is detailed in Ahmed Rashid's illuminating new book
on Central Asia titled "Jihad." It says the CIA helped draw Uzbeks and
other Asian Muslims into its anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan -- and was
therefore present at the creation of the al Qaeda-IMU terror nexus.
But even in the Cold War, when U.S. financial and security support was at
times lavished on murderers and thieves who possessed only disdain for
democracy, the argument contained this paradoxical truth: The arrival of
American troops, bureaucrats and/or politicians brought a new concern and
visibility for human rights and reform locally, even if it was only to
record their absence.
Sept. 11 and the war on terrorism do not bring an end to the human rights
era or, conversely, automatic progress in Uzbekistan or elsewhere. The Bush
administration will have to resist such blanket judgments and sort out,
nation by nation, those who would use American involvement to move ahead or
simply to cling to power.
*******
#7
Chechens at PACE irk Russian official
MOSCOW, March 9 (UPI) -- A senior Russian lawmaker lashed out at the European
Parliament Saturday after learning a group of Chechen emissaries was invited
to attend hearings on Chechnya scheduled next week by the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe.
"We will handle the situation in North Caucasus on our own, without any
outside interference," Dmitry Rogozin, the chairman of the State Duma's
Foreign Relations Committee said in an interview with Moscow's independent
Ekho Mosvy radio station.
Rogozin reacted to a news report posted on the rebel-funded chechenpress.com
Web site that heralded the trip of three Chechen envoys to Strasbourg,
France, where they will participate in the March 14 hearings on the breakaway
province.
"They (PACE) would better resolve the stacks of problems they face in Kosovo,
Northern Ireland and Spain," Rogozin added, alluding to separatist movements
in respective regions and countries.
The 52-year-old Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly, or PACE, is
holding the hearings out of concern for human-rights violations over the
course of the Chechen conflict.
"Russia did not act in line with the Council of Europe's principles and
values in the conduct of its military campaign," PACE said in a January
statement. It also condemned human rights violations committed by Chechen
fighters as well as the continuing plight of refugees.
The Russian official said that the invitations handed to Chechen emissaries
exposed the policy of "double morals," applied by the Parliamentary Assembly
"behind Russia's back."
Rogozin added he will reiterate his position at the March 27 forum on
international terrorism in St. Petersburg that will include a delegation from
the European parliament.
The Web report that outraged Rogozin said Bart Staes, the chairman of the
European parliament's delegation on Russian affairs, had invited three
ministers from outlawed Chechen leader Aslan Maskhadov's self-styled
government to attend the discussions on Chechnya next Thursday.
The invitation included Akhmed Zakayev -- a move sure to especially irk
Moscow, considering the senior rebel representative's meeting Thursday with
the chief prosecutor of the International Crimes Tribunal for former
Yugoslavia, Carla del Ponte.
The two met for an hour of talks on the sidelines of the Slobodan Milosevic
trial in The Hague, Netherlands, upsetting Russian officials who condemned
del Ponte's decision to host Zakayev.
The meeting was set up by British actress and human rights activist Vanessa
Redgrave, who recently shot a documentary about the children of Chechnya and
raised money on behalf of the widows and children of the crewmen of Russia's
sunken Kursk nuclear submarine.
Zakayev later said he hoped Russian generals would be brought to justice for
the crimes in Chechnya and added that Russian President Vladimir Putin could
end up in the same way as Milosevic if he kept overlooking atrocities,
allegedly committed by Russian troops.
Civil rights campaigners and organizations continually criticize Russia's
human rights record in Chechnya, accusing the Russian military of abuse of
civilians and detained rebels.
Russia's senior military officials deny the charges, maintaining that the
troops' conduct is within the legal framework.
In 1999, the dispute led to the suspension of Russia in PACE, but certain
improvements of its human rights record later saw Moscow restore membership
in the assembly.
Previous appearances of Maskhadov's envoys in Strasbourg prompted the Russian
authorities to charge PACE with sponsoring Chechen terrorism and aiding a
non-existent, unconstitutional regime.
Currently, the troubled province is ruled by a pro-Kremlin government which
has difficulty bringing life back to normal as Chechen rebels frequently
harass Russia's federal troops, inflicting casualties almost on a daily basis.
Moreover, the greater part of the province is in ruins, with destroyed
infrastructure and bombed out homes that require substantial funding to
complete numerous reconstruction projects in order to provide housing for
thousands of Chechen refugees who fled the conflict and settled temporarily
in neighboring provinces.
Within the last eight years, Chechen separatists have attempted twice to
break away from Moscow, plunging the region into destruction and poverty.
Their insurgent raids into neighboring Dagestan in fall 1999 provoked what
the Kremlin had labeled "an anti-terrorist operation launched to restore the
constitutional order."
*******
#8
Izvestiya Commentator Sees United States Creating 'Empire' in Post-Soviet
Area
Izvestiya
6 March 2002
[translation for personal use only]
Article by Semen Novoprudskiy: "Empire of Good"
Yesterday I had a dream. I dreamed I was watching
TV and the TV was showing a coup d'etat in Belarus. A mob of furious
students, supported by regular army units who had gone over to their
side, was taking power in the country. The next item was a US State
Department statement of readiness to give support, up to and including
military support, to the victorious anti-Lukashenka-ites. Of course that
dream is verging on delirium -- I must be working too hard. But there is
the reality too: The United States of America, by an irony of world
history, is embarking on recreating the Soviet empire. And within almost
the same geographical borders. The specter of the UACR -- the Union of
American Capitalist Republics -- haunts the rudderless post-Soviet area
with increasing persistence.
Events are developing rapidly. In practically all the new independent
states the first post-Soviet regimes are approaching their logical end.
In some because of the inevitable impending demise of lifetime leaders;
in others because of a change of political elites or the absence of such
elites. In this context the United States is rapidly supplanting Russia
in the role of "big brother" to the remnants of the Soviet empire.
America has forcibly drawn into the orbit of its direct geopolitical
interests -- along with Afghanistan -- the Central Asian states on the
territory of the former USSR, and has established a military presence
there. Now the same fate (or fortune?) awaits Georgia. Ukraine and
Moldova will, one way or another, be sucked by the political vacuum
cleaner into the maw of the Western world -- most likely together with
Eastern Europe. Azerbaijan and Armenia also have no political reasons to
resist the American influence. Rather the reverse, they have reasons to
solicit it, although their reasons are totally different. It is
important for Azerbaijan to regain full control over its territory and
ensure the greatest possible diversity of export routes for its oil.
Armenia needs to preserve its statehood amid a hostile environment.
Basically only Russia and Belarus remain "unenfolded." In the six
years that have elapsed since the signing of the first version of the
Union Treaty their single state has not become any less of a utopia.
Given decent relations with America, the role that is in store for Russia
is that of "village number two." That is, the kid in the yard who always
tags along with the king of the mob and helps the strongest one to
maintain order. In this sense Russia's entire foreign policy in recent
years has amounted to groveling as elegantly as possible and channeling
its ambitions into overcoming its own ruin. All our self-reliance,
boldness, and resolve will come to a natural end within the geographical
limits of Russia today.
The Americans, at Ronald Reagan's prompting, used to call the Soviet
Union the "Empire of Evil." But America itself, for all its undisputed
political, economic, and military might, has hitherto not been a
classical empire. The rapidly unraveling knot of recent history is
pushing the States toward the traditional destiny of a world leader --
toward the status of an imperial power. Naturally America will become
the Empire of Good, that is, the exclusive exporter of liberal values to
the savage outposts of the modern world.
This mission is extremely dangerous -- not so much for the "colonies"
or "pseudo-colonies" that will become pearls in the American crown, as
for the States itself. Hitherto in the history of mankind no
ultra-strong state has managed to withstand the temptation to spill over
its shores, overflow into the outside world, and become the center of a
superpower with a great many component parts. And no such state has been
able to maintain itself in that superpower form.
The costs of empires are not, of course, comparable. Great Britain
parted with its imperial status fairly lightly. Italy, Turkey, and
Russia, after the imperial greatness of the "three Romes," became
second-ranking (let us not flatter ourselves -- second-ranking) states.
But all, without exception, of the metropolitans that have become the
centers of world empires have eventually lost their might and influence.
The "white man's mission" has always turned against him.
So the new world architecture that was supposed to spring up after the
breakup of the socialist camp, the destruction of the Soviet empire, and
the emergence of a mighty, if fragmented, Islamic civilization as one of
the key factors in modern-day politics is becoming increasingly clear.
The American "Empire of Good" will be the main piece in the new political
map of the world. That is neither good nor bad -- it is a given, in
which we must exist for the coming decades. It's the motherland, son...
*******
#9
Russia's Gaydar Argues With General Staff General on Army Manning Reform
Izvestiya
6 March 2002
[translation for personal use only]
Article by Union of Right-Wing Forces Cochairman Yegor Gaydar:
"Stable Traditions"
An animated debate on methods and deadlines of
military reform is continuing in society. One of the active
participants in this debate, Lieutenant Vasiliy Smirnov, deputy chief of
the Main Organization and Mobilization Directorate of the General Staff,
spoke out on this issue in Izvestiya not so long ago. Let me comment on
his arguments in favor of postponing indefinitely a sharp cut in the
period of compulsory service and radical reorganization of the Armed
Forces manpower acquisition system.
The first argument is of financial nature. V. Smirnov believes that it
is impossible to hire a contract serviceman for less than 7,000 rubles
[R] a month and that since we do not have enough money for this we should
not even plan any transition to contract service. As proof (if you
disregard references to the Chechen experience, and the pay of units
engaged in combat is apparently a special case), he cites the experience
of NATO countries. "In Great Britain, they get $1,200-$1,600 monthly.
And what do you think? They are also dissatisfied, it is not enough for
them."
In terms of economic theory, it is an interesting argument. It implies
the presence of a global, open, and integrated international market of
labor force, where a guy from Tambov or Ryazan has a problem with
choosing between job offers for driver in New York, docker in London,
waiter in Paris, and contract soldier in the Russian Armed Forces. In
reality, there is no global market of labor force. It makes sense only
to discuss the situation in national labor markets. $1,200 a month is
actually not so much money in Great Britain but $50 a month is a huge and
respectable salary in Afghanistan. In NATO countries, which the
esteemed general cites as an example, the pay of beginner contract
servicemen usually ranges between the minimum wage and the national
average wage. In countries with high unemployment (such as France),
this pay is closer to the minimum but it moves close to the average in
countries with lower unemployment (Great Britain).
A survey conducted by the VTsIOM [All-Russia Center for the Study of
Public Opinion on Social and Economic Questions] last year shows that to
man the Army with contract servicemen, a private beginning his service
should receive about 1.2 times the national average wage in Russia. It
is much. This wage is more than 50 percent higher than the average pay
in an overwhelming majority of Russian regions. These figures reveal
that society is aware of the complicated situation inside the Armed
Forces. One can hope that over time -- as military reform advances, the
situation in military units improves, and economy grows -- the proportion
of the required pay for contract soldiers and the national average will
be more similar to that characteristic for the NATO countries.
Nevertheless, we should adopt a realistic position today. Actually,
this is what we do by proposing our estimates of military reform
expenses.
As for the R7,000 pay mentioned by the general, let me remind you the
following: The present monthly pay of a major general, a division
commander, amounts to R6,333. This is, of course, not enough. Yet,
the Russian Army does not experience any acute shortage of generals
today. It is a shame that the proposed program of pay increase provides
for the smallest increase in wages for rank-and-file contract servicemen.
It is planned to continue keeping those wages below 50 percent of the
national average. With this kind of policy being carried on, one can
only complain about the low quality of contract soldiers and the absence
of ways to increase their number. The general is being devious when
saying that he does not know when we would manage to fill 50-60 percent
of rank-and-file and NCO positions with contract servicemen or start
reducing service time for draftees. He knows very well. With the
present level of pay for contract servicemen and the planned pace of
increasing it -- never.
The second opinion expressed by Vasiliy Smirnov is equally interesting.
Let me quote him: "We would not only have to pay wages to contract
servicemen. We would also have to provide them with housing, give work
to their wives, and send their children to kindergartens and schools...
Apart from social issues, we would need to decide how to organize combat
training for them. If we pay a man for his work, we should enable him
to prepare for the performance of his service duties."
In my opinion, the esteemed general does not fully realize the sense of
what he said. We call up our young compatriots to fulfill their
patriotic duty for two years. According to the present law, it can as
well be a graduate from a higher education institution who has his own
family. But since he is drafted into service, nobody cares whether he
has a wife, whether she will need to get a job and both of them housing,
or what will happen with their child. Moreover, as a subordinate man,
will one need to provide him with the possibility of combat training?
Let him sweep the yard or build a dacha [for a general]. It is a
different situation, however, when an 18-year-old young man serves half a
year and then signs a contact. This creates an obligation to think
about his wife, children, and combat training. All this is reminiscent
of lamenting among the Russian gentry shortly before serfdom was
abolished: "Does this mean that I will not even be allowed to flog my
menials? Am I supposed to call them 'mister' or what? Everything will
fall apart!"
And the last thing. Society should understand that the debate on
deadlines of the military manning reform does not at all have only a
technical nature. The demographic situation in 2002-2005 will create
favorable conditions for conducting military reform. The cycle of lower
birth rate, which started in 1988, will sharply reduce the draftee base
beginning from 2005. If society lets itself to be persuaded that this
issue is not pressing and that one should first thoroughly prepare
everything, experiment, and put off real reform measures for about three
years or so, the growing crisis will soon confront us with the need to
abolish all kinds of deferments for students, postgraduate students, etc.
I do not rule out that this is exactly the goal that some of our
generals are seeking to achieve.
*******
#10
Washington Times
March 10, 2002
Capitalism takes root in Ukraine
By Natalia A. Feduschak
KIEV — For Volodymyr Avramenko, the surest barometer of Ukraine's
economic health is how well his company's high-end chocolates sell.
Three years ago, his confectionery company, AVK, struggled to sell
boxed, luxury chocolates. Last year, however, the Donetsk-based enterprise
posted $75 million in revenues, a modest increase from the year before.
"People have more money to spend," said Mr. Avramenko, who plans to
expand his business. "Things are getting better."
While Ukraine continues to be criticized for sluggish reforms and
Western governments voice concerns that its March 31 parliamentary
elections will be manipulated to favor the ruling elite, a bright spot is
emerging — the economy.
To be sure, Ukraine's economy still faces many problems. The country's
standard of living lags behind those of Russia and other Eastern European
nations, legislators haven't passed a rational tax code, and foreign
investment lags.
Yet with a 9 percent growth rate in 2001 and inflation at 6 percent,
Ukraine had one of the fastest growing economies in Europe last year.
January's inflation in Ukraine was 1 percent, down from 1.6 percent in
December, the State Statistical Committee told Ukraine Interfax. In
contrast, the country was battered by inflation of 26 percent in 2000 and
19 percent in 1999.
Small-business ownership is on the rise nationwide, while small and
medium-size privatization is virtually complete. And late last year, after
nearly a decade of stalemate, Ukraine's parliament finally approved private
land ownership.
"Ukraine has had 24 months of consecutive growth," said Michael
Bleyzer, chief executive officer and president of SigmaBleyzer, a
U.S.-based equity-investment fund with significant investments here. "This
is not a fluke when the rest of world is slowing down."
The state of the economy, and how competing political parties see the
economic situation on the eve of the election, was discussed at an
international roundtable last week.
Ukraine took several important steps in recent years to bring its
economy out of the doldrums, particularly after the 1998 meltdown of the
Russian economy, which sent shock waves through the region.
Kiev instituted fiscal discipline, reduced barter operations, passed
deficit-free budgets, eliminated government intervention in the
agricultural market and successfully restructured its external debt,
according to Edilberto L. Segura, former head of the World Bank's mission
here.
The government of former Prime Minister Victor Yushchenko, whose
political group, Our Ukraine, is expected to make a strong showing in this
month's elections, also eliminated indebtedness to pensioners and partially
settled its debts with government employees.
"Implementation [of reforms] is the most important thing now," Mr.
Segura said. "The situation in Ukraine is more favorable now than in the
last 10 years."
The country's parliament, however, still has not been able to push
through a Western-style tax code, which has hampered growth and foreign
investment. The economy is expected to take center stage during the
elections.
"We are concerned the pace of growth could slow dow ... without a
major revival of investments," said Mr. Segura, who is now Sigma-Bleyzer's
chief economist and teaches at Oxford University.
Foreign direct investment reached $584 million in 2000, up from $437
million the year before. Total foreign investment in Ukraine's economy
since independence has reached $3.9 billion, with the food sector being the
largest investment recipient.
Some cautious investors have been scared off by a series of political
scandals, including allegations that President Leonid Kuchma was involved
in the death of Internet journalist Georgiy Gongadze, who reputed
corruption within the administration.
But foreign investors already in Ukraine complain of layers of
bureaucracy and arbitrary application of laws.
"The lack of rule of law and an independent judiciary is still
Ukraine's greatest challenge," said Mark Iwashko, vice president of the
Western NIS Enterprise Fund, a venture capital fund that invested $8
million in AVK and is now involved in a nasty lawsuit with one of its
portfolio companies over non-payment of debts and violation of corporate
governance rights.
Prime Minister Anatoliy Kinakh said he recognizes more must be done to
protect foreign investors.
"To better the investment climate, we need to increase the level of
protection of foreign investors," he said. "And that will depend on how
effectively the three levels of government will be able to work together."
With government officials often at odds over reforms, many of
Ukraine's regions have implemented their own programs to foster economic
growth, some with surprising results.
The Donetsk region in eastern Ukraine, for instance, has gained a fair
degree of autonomy from Kiev.
******
#11
eurasianet.org
March 8, 3003
INCOMING GEORGIA NATIONAL SECURITY OFFICIAL "KNOWS THE AMERICAN THINKING"
A Q&A with Tedo Japaridze, Georgia's New National Security Council secretary:
President Eduard Shevardnadze appointed Tedo Japaridze on March 5 as
Georgia's new National Security Council (NSC) secretary. He succeeds Nugzar
Sajaia, who died February 25 from a gunshot wound to his head. [For more
information, see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Japaridze is currently
Georgia's ambassador to the United States, Canada and Mexico, having served
in Washington DC since November 1994. Before arriving in Washington, he
worked for two years as a national security advisor to Shevardnadze. From
1989-1992 he worked at the Georgia Foreign Ministry serving as both Deputy
and First Deputy Foreign Minister. Japardize also worked at the USA-Canada
Institute in Moscow from 1972-1989.
News of Japaridze's March 5 appointment has been broadly welcomed in Georgia.
Japaridze will assume his new duties at a time when Georgia is facing several
national security challenges, including instability in the Pankisi Gorge and
making peace with the separatist-minded region of Abkhazia. Japaridze should
also be in position to help coordinate the activities of US military
advisors, who are expected to arrive in Georgia soon to train Georgian troops
in anti-terrorist operations. Japaridze spoke to EurasiaNet contributor Zeyno
Baran on March 6 about Georgia's national security challenges. The text of
his comments follows:
EurasiaNet: Why do you think President Shevardnadze appointed you as the next
head of the NSC?
Japaridze: As the President explained, I have been closely involved in the
discussions and planning of US military assistance to Georgia for
counter-terrorism training. The President had meetings at the White House in
October, and since then I have delivered several letters from him to the US
administration. Given the beginning of a new level of cooperation with the
United States, the President wanted the new head of the NSC to be someone who
knows the American thinking.
EurasiaNet: What message does your appointment send to the world?
Japaridze: Shevardnadze appointed as the head of NSC a man who has been his
messenger and key interlocutor with the United States and the West for more
than seven years. This gestures that Georgia is committed to the Western
orientation, to Western values, democracy, market economy and regional
cooperation.
EurasiaNet: How will you balance relations with Russia?
Japaridze: I would like to assure you that we are not talking about an
anti-Russian or pro-American policy. By the way, I would like to admit that
Russia itself is going through a very painful and turbulent process of
transformation towards democracy and market economy. A peaceful and stable
Russia is in the interest of the world community, an in Georgia's interest,
but this will not happen unless Georgia and other states neighboring Russia
are peaceful too.
We are declaring one more time that Georgia foreign policy is about Georgia's
commitment to Western values and orientation. It is about what is best for
Georgia. Of course we want to have normal relations with all our neighbors
and want to take their interests into account. But what we are talking about
is the strategic price beyond which Georgia cannot go, and that is our
independence, sovereignty and commitment to a Western orientation. That is
also what Russia wants for itself. The transition for our country is really
very painful with many bumps along the road.
EurasiaNet: How would you like to run the NSC?
Japaridze: I will need to talk to my President when I get back in detail
about this, but as I understand, he would like me to create a new concept of
national security. Under Mr. Sajaia the NSC had an oversight function over
the power ministries, the new model will be more like the NSC in the United
States. As we embark on a joint mission to fight terrorism with the United
States, it will also be easier to work together if we have similar systems.
Our NSC can of course not be an exact replica of the American NSC because we
have different problems and different priorities, but the concept will be
similar.
EurasiaNet: What will be the main difference?
Japaridze: I guess I will be a very untraditional NSC advisor because I will
not only work foreign policy and security, but also domestic issues. Today
the domestic challenges we face are the main threat to Georgia, and they are
closely linked to our foreign and security policies.
EurasiaNet: Corruption is seen as one of Georgia's main domestic problems.
Will the NSC be involved in anti-corruption work?
Japaridze: When I identified the main threat to Georgia as internal, then of
course I had corruption in mind. Today this is our number one problem we need
to solve. It is not an unidentifiable concept, there are individual people we
need to catch and bring to justice. We need also to forcefully identify and
fight sources of corruption, its institutional and organizational roots. We
will have to take some unpopular measures, but this is the only way. Survival
of my country depends on this fight.
EurasiaNet: What is your position towards Abkhazia?
Japaridze: I want the NSC to be involved in discussions with all the parties.
We need to find a political solution; there is no other way. The process is
starting slowly, and there are a lot of zig-zags and obstacles, but we need
to find a modus-vivendi of peaceful coexistence.
EurasiaNet: How about other separatist regions?
Japaridze: I want to travel to different part of Georgia and talk to people.
Not just to satisfy my curiosity, but to understand the issues so I can make
good policy recommendations to my President. As I said, the internal
situation in Georgia will be a key priority of the NSC.
EurasiaNet: The Georgian people have suffered a lot over the years and they
need to believe in a better future. Do you consider relations with the public
an area for the NSC to be involved?
Japaridze: Definitely. A friend of mine asked me what I want to accomplish in
this job, and I said that I want to tell the truth, not manipulate the
people. I need to tell the truth to my President when I offer him policy
options, but I also need to tell the people the truth. It is not an easy job
and may not make me popular, but that's how I have identified my mission.
EurasiaNet: What are some of the truths you want to communicate?
Japaridze: The truth is, while we are still a weak state, we have
accomplished a lot over the years, which people often tend to forget. I am
not excusing our shortcomings, but I think it is important to give people a
sense of history. I want to communicate to people that state-building is a
painful process and takes a long time. People need to better understand the
purpose of their sacrifice, which is to achieve our goals of independence,
sovereignty and a pro-Western orientation. This message is very hard to
communicate because we also need to deliver in the short term.
EurasiaNet: This makes me think of the Balku-Tbilisi-Ceyan and Shah Deniz
pipeline projects-Georgia has committed itself to projects that are
strategically important, sometimes at the expense of short-term gain.
Japaridze: I have been involved in the pipeline projects from the beginning
alongside with my good friend Giorgi Chanturia, president of GIOC. These
pipeline projects are not just to deliver oil and gas, but they are strategic
for us. They will strengthen our independence and sovereignty and make us
less dependent on Russia. And it will also help Russia identify its real
interests in Georgia. Georgia is still a weak state and without diversified
energy supplies we also cannot have strong foreign and security policies. And
that is also what I mean by the price. We experienced gas and electricity
cut-offs from Russia. It would have been easier to reach contracts with
Russia, but we were willing to pay the price of our independence and security
of long term supply and decided to wait for the Azeri gas. Which, by the way,
does not exclude cooperation with Russia in multiple energy projects.
Editor's Note: Zeyno Baran, is the Caucasus Project Director at the Center
for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC. He conducted the
interview with Ambassador Japaridze on March 6.
*******
#12
Baltimore Sun
March 10, 2002
Drying out in 'Village of Fools'
Sobriety: A businessman uses his wealth to create a free addiction
treatment center in rural Russia.
By Douglas Birch
DURAKOVO, Russia - In this nation of dying towns sheltering people too old,
too poor or just too drunk to escape, there is no other place like
Durakovo, the "Village of Fools."
In fields and forests south of Moscow, Durakovo's residents saw logs, tend
sheep and build window frames. The main street winds past new brick
stables, a cottage built in English Tudor style, a stone castle and the
foundations of a new Orthodox Church. Alcohol is forbidden. Everyone has a
job.
The industry, prosperity and sobriety come as a shock.
Why is Durakovo thriving? Because it has found a new purpose. A Russian
businessman who moved here almost a decade ago has used his wealth to turn
the 400-year-old agricultural settlement into a free addiction treatment
center for scores of desperate Russians.
In this historically hard-drinking country, addiction has taken a terrible
toll. Soviet authorities decreed that alcoholism was caused by capitalism
and so didn't exist. As a result of this official blindness, millions of
alcoholics went untreated, and many died. As Russian society came under
greater pressures in the 1990s, drug and alcohol use rose still higher.
Durakovo offers a rare avenue of escape. Its residents include a
67-year-old who has spent 44 years in prison for alcohol-inspired thefts
and a 15-year-old boy trying to break a glue-sniffing habit. "You work hard
to save yourself and glorify God," said Alexei Boysenko, 27, who spent
seven years as a heroin addict before he came to the village in 1999.
Mikhail Morosov, 47, is the village's principal landowner, organizer and
guiding spirit. He marches around his village followed by a small entourage
of employees and villagers that he calls his "children."
Stopping in one of his stables, he examines the hooves of a big white
horse, then gives the animal a kiss on the nose. He leads the way to the
town's stone banya, or sauna, used by residents each week for purification
ceremonies.
"Luxe, no?" he says.
He strolls past the garage, where some of his 12 Land Rovers are parked.
Why so many? "It's a symbol of something that's not easy to reach," he says.
Village residents revere him. "Mikhail Feodorvich is not only a serious
friend; he's like a mother and father both to me," says Andrei, 32, a
recovering drug addict from the city of Kursk, who asked that his last name
not be used. For two years, Andrei has worked in Durakovo's cattle barns.
When he arrived, he craved a drink and considered running away.
"At first, it was hard to live by the rules," he says. " 'Don't go here.'
'Don't do that.' It was hard to stand. But later you come to understand
that all these restrictions do you a lot of good."
A decade ago, Durakovo was like any other Russian village - an island of
farm life that hadn't changed in hundreds of years. It got its name, says
local legend, after an aristocrat won it from another in a card game called
"Fools."
It has an eerie, Disneyland-like look. The farm animals live in showcase
barns. Every cottage has its own pets. (Morosov keeps an owl, raven and
stork in his office.) The architecture is out of a fairy tale.
That's deliberate, says Morosov, who designed the new buildings himself.
"Many of the people who live in Durakovo don't have any idea what a proper
childhood is," he says. "We make the village like the childhood they lost."
His own childhood was painful. Morosov's father, a trolley car conductor,
was a heavy drinker, and when his parents separated for a time, he lived
with his grandmother. When the boy was 9, his 24-year-old uncle drowned
while swimming, drunk, in the Moscow River. Mikhail swore he would never
touch alcohol. But he was drinking by the time he was 14.
It didn't seem to hurt him. With his salesman's gift to cajole and
persuade, he defied the Soviet system and made a lot of money manufacturing
and selling souvenir lapel pins. Drinking was always part of doing business.
"Alcohol was a kind of assistant, in friendship, in business, in life, in
everything," he says.
But business dried up. He moved into a guard's hut and drank all day, every
day. Just as the Soviet Union collapsed, Morosov realized his life, too,
was collapsing. He turned to the Orthodox Church, enrolled in a treatment
program and began to yearn to escape the alcoholic haze of his life in
Moscow.
Visiting a friend, he drove through the fields of Durakovo in 1993 and
found an old Orthodox shrine, its cupola smashed and filled with a stork's
nest. He took it as a sign from God. Morosov built a small cottage and
launched a business in a nearby town - building a factory to mass-produce
Russian Orthodox icons.
As he brought friends and acquaintances with alcohol problems for
increasingly lengthy visits, he transformed the place from just another
Russian village into an informal treatment center.
"Rumors spread," he says. "That's how people learned about us."
Treatment is free in Durakovo, but not easy. Recovering alcoholics are
expected to work in the village from 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. without pay, doing
everything from building the new church to grooming horses.
There are no radios, stereos or television. Smoking is prohibited outside a
single room. Communication is limited: Morosov reads everyone's outgoing
mail.
The aim, the residents say, is to banish anything that might tempt them or
distract them from religious studies.
People are free to leave any time. And many do. Others just try to cheat.
Once a few villagers slipped into the surrounding fields at night and
tapped the milky juice of the wild opium plants - so they could dry the
liquid and smoke it.
All the toilets in the village are stinking, unheated outhouses. Otherwise,
Morosov says, residents would be tempted to drink or inject drugs behind a
bathroom's locked door.
He and his most trusted residents monitor everyone's movements. "Everybody
here was once a thief," says Morosov. "When they didn't have money for a
drink, they stole it."
Each night in Durakovo's communal dining hall, which resembles the great
hall of an Arthurian castle, more than 30 men gather to atone for their
sins. Their shoulders are slumped, their eyes filled with sadness. It
starts as all Alcoholics Anonymous meetings do, with a round of ritual
confessions.
"Vasily is an alcoholic," says middle-aged Vasily. (The Russian word is
pronounced "alkagolick.")
"Andrei is an alcoholic."
"Alexander is an alcoholic."
"Artyom is an alcoholic."
Artyom, 22, a hairdresser and recovering heroin addict, wears stylish black
clothes when tending Durakovo's sheep. The first two months were the
hardest, he says: he was miserable and sick. Then one day he was overcome
with a wave of euphoria. "You develop a completely new relation with the
world," he says.
Morosov once told him something he has never forgotten. "Alcoholics and
drug addicts will save the world," he said.
Artyom says he didn't understand. But over the past two years, he has
helped Morosov make the village a showcase of Russian craftsmanship and
ingenuity. He saw, he says, the deep spiritual changes in the people around
him, and in himself. And he realized that the people of Durakovo seemed
more focused, more responsible and more determined than many nonalcoholics.
"At first I laughed," Artyom says. "Now, I understand."
******
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