Johnson's Russia List
#6232
9 May 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Contents:
1. The Independent (UK): Patrick Cockbun, Putin uses Victory Day to
rally fight against Chechen rebels.
2. AP: Soviets' WWII Actions Questioned.
3. RIA Novosti: VLADIMIR PUTIN: DICTATORSHIP ON THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE
CAN DESTROY GLOBAL STABILITY.
4. Reuters: Twenty-five dead in Russia's Victory Day blast.
5. Interfax: First shipment of U.S. poultry to arrive in St. Petersburg
in late May.
6. Reuters: Old enmity haunts NATO-Russia rapprochement.
7. The Russia Journal: Alexander Golts, Putin adopts a realistic Caspian
policy.
8. BBC Monitoring: Participants in pro-Putin Moscow youth rally interviewed.
9. Rossiiskaya Gazeta: Boris Makarenko, RUSSIANS DO NOT SEE AN ALTERNATIVE
TO PUTIN.
10. BBC Monitoring: Russian banking expert brands Putin's growth demands
"alarming"
11. Washington Times: Helle Dale, In search of Baltic security.
12. RFE/RL: Michael Lelyveld, Russia: Prospects Brighten For Becoming Key
U.S. Oil Supplier.
13. RIA Novosti: RUSSIAN MILITARY SPEAKS OUT ABOUT POSSIBLE STRATEGIC
ALLIANCE BETWEEN RUSSIA AND USA.
14. gazeta.ru: US betrayal leaves Russian rockets idle.
15. Reuters: Moldovan farmers put their faith in the Communists.
16. René Nyberg (Ambassador of Finland to Russia): The Gulf of Finland as
the new Sound; the Northern Dimension and traffic infrastructure in
North-West Russia.]
*******
#1
The Independent (UK)
9 May 2002
Putin uses Victory Day to rally fight against Chechen rebels
By Patrick Cockburn in Moscow
President Vladimir Putin used the 57th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi
Germany yesterday to defuse criticism of Russia's war in its southern
republic of Chechnya.
After laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier beneath the red
wall of the Kremlin, Mr Putin told Russian and foreign veterans that the
same solidarity shown in the Second World War was needed to vanquish
terrorism.
Mr Putin has been keen to take advantage of American preoccupation with
terrorism in the wake of 11 September by portraying the rebels in Chechnya
and the Pankisi Gorge in Georgia as similar to al-Qa'ida in Afghanistan.
As the end of the war was celebrated across Europe, authorities in Austria
deployed 2,000 police officers in Vienna to prevent clashes between left
and right-wing demonstrators. Some 30,000 protesters were expected to mark
the anniversary of Germany's surrender.
Most were likely to celebrate the end of Nazi rule, but right-wing students
laid wreaths in the Heldenplatz, central Vienna, in honour of Austrian and
German soldiers who died in the war. It was in this square that Hitler
addressed one million Austrians in 1938 after the country was annexed by
Germany.
Vienna's mayor, Michael Haeupl, said he would not allow neo-Nazi and other
right-wing militants to march through the city, saying it would be
"unbearable and scandalous".
In Russia the two-day holiday marking victory in 1945 generates less
emotion than it once did. Boris Kagarlitsky, a political scientist, said:
"It is not an issue which stirs people up, like the Bolshevik revolution,
because everybody is on the same side." While the holiday is treated with
respect, interest in the Second World War among younger generations of
Russians appears limited.
While the victory celebrations in Moscow see ageing veterans show off their
medals, every Russian institution wants to show that it had a role in
defeating Hitler. The ancient Donskoi monastery, not far from The
Independent office in south Moscow, has placed some peculiar memorials just
inside its main gate. On either side of the path are a tank and an armoured
personnel carrier, both painted white, which were donated by the Russian
Orthodox Church to the Red Army at the height of the war.
In Ukraine, celebration of victory day is a little more divisive because a
significant number of Ukrainians, mainly from Galicia, fought on the German
side. But 3.5 million Ukrainians were killed in the Red Army and in Kiev
yesterday Viktor Chernomydrin, the Russian ambassador, said: "Today we
belong to different nations, but no state can divide veterans of the war
won by peoples of the Soviet Union."
President Leonid Kuchma told a concert to celebrate victory day: "Ukrainian
people will never forget those who were killed in the defence and
liberation of their country."
Ukraine saw some of the heaviest fighting of the Second World War when
Soviet armies were surrounded and slaughtered in 1941 and when the German
armies were defeated in 1943 and 1944.
********
#2
Soviets' WWII Actions Questioned
May 9, 2002
By ERIC ENGLEMAN
MOSCOW (AP) - Amid the tide of patriotism sweeping across Russia in the
run-up to Thursday's celebration of Victory Day, a small number of
activists have been calling for a more balanced look at Soviet actions
during World War II, including some ugly aspects that were swept under the
rug for decades.
``The war is one of the most mythologized parts of our lives,'' said Yelena
Zhemkova, executive director of the Memorial human rights group. ``We need
to take a fresh look at what happened.''
In a massive parade of pride and pageantry, thousands of troops marched
across Red Square on Thursday past a tribunal filled with Russia's elite
and aging World War II veterans, to mark the 57th anniversary of the Allied
victory over the Nazis. Victory Day remains one of Russia's most crucial
holidays, with triumphant music and films filling the airwaves and streets
blanketed in building-size banners.
But many stories of the war remain untold in Russia. Zhemkova said the Red
Army's plunder of Eastern Europe as it advanced on the retreating Nazi
forces in 1944-45 is one of them - at least here, where recent western
books about Soviet atrocities have not been published.
``For years, we were taught that Soviet soldiers 'liberated' Poland and
other countries,'' she said. ``People would be shocked if they knew what
happened ... Hundreds of babies were born as a result of rapes in Germany.
No one ever talks about that.''
There is no doubt that the Soviet Union made enormous sacrifices during
World War II, also known here as the Great Patriotic War. An estimated 27
million Soviet citizens were killed in the conflict, the biggest loss of
any country. Entire populations were uprooted, and many towns and cities
were razed to the ground.
That sense of national pride is still very much alive 57 years after the
conflict ended, even as the number of surviving veterans shrinks yearly.
But a handful of Russians are pushing for a re-examination of the war in
light of new information and documentary evidence. They are drawing
attention to Soviet actions that were covered up, or simply ignored, in
official histories of the conflict.
Generations have been taught that the war started on June 22, 1941, when
Nazi forces invaded the Soviet Union - glossing over the secret Nazi-Soviet
pact of 1939, in which the two sides agreed not to attack one another and,
in a secret addendum, to partition Poland.
One of the more tragic legacies involved Soviet prisoners of war and others
used as slave labor in Nazi Germany, said Lazev Lazerev, a WWII veteran and
literary critic. Soviet dictator Josef Stalin accused them of
``collaborating'' with the enemy and had many killed or shipped off to
Siberian prison camps after the war.
``Soviet POWs were in the worst position,'' Lazerev said. ``When they came
home, they were unjustly accused, and continued their life in Soviet camps.''
Lazerev said books and articles are available to Russians who want to learn
more about World War II, but he complained that state television, still a
key source of information for many Russians, continues to show World War II
films that are short on facts.
``What worries me is that all this television and these old movies are
stirring up nostalgia,'' he said.
********
#3
VLADIMIR PUTIN: DICTATORSHIP ON THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE CAN DESTROY GLOBAL
STABILITY
MOSCOW, May 8, 2002. /From RIA Novosti correspondent/--On Wednesday, Russian
President Vladimir Putin met with veterans of the Great Patriotic and Second
World wars.
After so many years, the world still remembers that the victory over fascist
Germany "was a common victory achieved by people living in different
countries, by people of different nationalities, religions and convictions,"
the president told the veterans.
"In the post-war period, your combat fraternity remained above all political
and ideological differences. Veterans have retained the team spirit they
forged while combating their common enemy," remarked Putin. "Nowadays, just
like in the days of the anti-Hitler coalition, we are trying to overcome the
differences and reject stereotypes by uniting around a common goal. Indeed,
the united front of countries fighting against international terrorism has
become a real factor in world politics, a factor that radically changes the
whole system of international relations." Any aggression, including terrorist
aggression, is based on extremist ideology and hatred towards so-called
"infidels," said the president. He stressed that even the most advanced
countries with strong democratic traditions were facing the challenge of
extremism.
"The point at issue is that we all came to understand that an evil like
terrorism cannot be handled alone. Our common struggle against it must be
just as uncompromising as was our struggle against fascism," the president
emphasized.
He added that it was extremely important "not to make the same mistakes"
while building a new system of international security. "Any attempts at
establishing dictatorship or gaining distinct advantages over the rest are
just as destructive from the point of view of global stability as they were
six decades ago," he concluded.
*******
#4
Twenty-five dead in Russia's Victory Day blast
By Jon Boyle
MOSCOW, May 9 (Reuters) - An explosion ripped through a Victory Day parade
in southern Russia on Thursday killing 25 people, including six children,
and President Vladimir Putin described the attackers as "scum" who should
be treated like Nazis.
He blamed the landmine attack on terrorists, the usual Kremlin term to
describe separatist rebels in Chechnya, which borders the province of
Dagestan where Thursday's attack took place.
"This crime was carried out by scum who hold nothing sacred," a solemn
Putin told a Kremlin gathering after the main parade in Moscow's Red Square
to mark the defeat of Nazi Germany 57 years ago.
"We have every right to treat them as Nazis, whose sole aim was to spread
death, sow fear and to murder,"
News agencies and local television quoted police as saying 25 people were
killed in the attack. Police also said more than 100 people were hurt, 50
of them seriously, in the blast -- the bloodiest since a series of bombings
in the southern Russian town of Mineralnye Vody in March 2001 killed 23
people.
Pictures broadcast by the private NTV channel showed wrecked drums and
musical instruments scattered across a blood covered street in Kaspiisk, a
town some 20 km (12 miles) south of the Dagestan capital.
Its correspondent Ruslan Gusarev said the band was on foot, not in a bus as
initial reports suggested, and surrounded by crowds of children and World
War Two veterans when the blast erupted.
"The scene is horrifying. There are body parts everywhere and an
overpowering smell of blood," he told the private channel by telephone.
TERRORIST THREAT
The blast came just before Putin addressed the traditional Victory Day
parade outside the towering walls of the Kremlin, urging the nation to
unite to defeat the common threat of terrorism as it had done to crush
Adolf Hitler.
"Only by uniting the effort of the people and the state can we confront
these threats," Putin said.
"That was well proven by the anti-Hitler coalition. The coalition countries
defeated the enemy. And today, we are again uniting and finding allies
against a common threat.
"Its name is terrorism."
He summoned security chiefs to the Kremlin and ordered head of the FSB
domestic intelligence agency, Nikolai Patrushev, to lead an investigation
into the attack.
An Emergencies Ministry spokeswoman in Moscow said at least six children
were among the victims of a radio-controlled landmine hidden in bushes
which exploded as a marine infantry band marched to the town's Victory Day
parade.
Unconfirmed reports said the death toll could rise to 30.
"Nobody doubts that this was a terrorist act," Putin said after meeting his
top security officials.
"In the shortest possible time, we will find, convict and punish the
criminals," the presidency quoted Putin as saying.
Dagestan is no stranger to violence, bordering Chechnya where Russian
troops returned in 1999 in an "anti-terrorist" drive to restore Moscow's
control over the rebellious region.
MAY DAY CARNAGE
The May 9 Victory Day parade is the most important public holiday in Russia.
The conflict cost the lives of 27 million people in the Soviet Union and
the victory remains one of the few achievements of the Communist era which
continues to unite Russia, a vast and often fractious country.
"Today, people intended to mark a holiday of life and justice," said
Dagestan's leader Magomedali Magomedov.
"But the scoundrels have turned this into an act of vandalism. They must be
destroyed as traitors who are not letting humanity live," Interfax quoted
him as saying.
"A war was declared today not only on the law enforcement agencies...(but)
on an entire nation. And the will surely emerge as the victor of this war,"
he added.
Bombs have rocked Russian regions, mostly those close to Chechnya, since
Moscow sent troops back into the secessionist province in 1999 to bring it
back to its fold.
Although the authorities say the military phase of that operation is over,
Russia continues to lose soldiers almost daily in ambushes and bomb attacks.
On April 28, seven people died in a bomb attack on a market in Vladikavkaz,
the capital of North Ossetia which also borders Chechnya. Last November,
five people died in an explosion in the same city. In July 2000, another
five people were killed in two blasts in provinces bordering Chechnya.
The authorities have routinely blamed the blasts on separatist guerrillas.
******
#5
First shipment of U.S. poultry to arrive in St. Petersburg in late May
MOSCOW. May 8 (Interfax) - The first shipment of U.S. poultry since the ban
on U.S. poultry imports was lifted on April 15, is expected to arrive in
St. Petersburg in late May, the marketing director of the city's fishing
port Pavel Malets told Interfax on Wednesday.
He said, citing reports from the U.S., that an American ship carrying
3,500 tonnes of poultry will set out to the Gulf of Finland on May 10.
According to the Russian Agriculture Ministry, a second U.S. ship,
currently being loaded, will bring 7,800 tonnes of poultry to Russia. The
Russian Veterinary Service has issued 20 permits to import nearly 75,000
tonnes of poultry from the U.S. Importers applied for 32 permits.
The Russian annual poultry market is estimated at two million tonnes.
Russia produced about 900,000 tonnes of poultry in slaughter weight,
including about 580,000 tonnes put out by poultry farms. In 2002 Russia
imported 1.37 million tonnes of poultry, including one million tonnes of
U.S. poultry. Poultry imports last year increased by 65% against 2000.
*******
#6
FEATURE-Old enmity haunts NATO-Russia rapprochement
By John Chalmers
BRUSSELS, May 9 (Reuters) - When Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard
Shevardnadze visited the secretive headquarters of NATO in December 1989,
he became the first Warsaw Pact minister to set foot in the nerve centre of
the West's defence alliance.
The visit was nothing short of astonishing for an organisation which in the
words of its first secretary general, Lord Ismay, was created to keep "the
Russians out, the Americans in and the Germans down."
Now, NATO is preparing to open the door still wider to its former enemy,
creating a forum in which Moscow will sit as an equal partner with the
allies and have a say in decision-making on security issues from terrorism
to arms proliferation.
Foreign ministers of the alliance's 19 nations are expected to agree on the
new NATO-Russia Council at a meeting in Iceland's capital, Reykjavik, on
May 14 and 15 and it will be officially launched two weeks later at a
summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin near Rome.
NATO has come a long way since the Cold War, when the corridors of its
Brussels headquarters were lined with posters warning officials and
diplomats not to engage in "loose talk."
"We could only release press statements in those days, we couldn't comment
on them," recalls Francois Le Blevennec, an old NATO press office hand.
"There were no background briefings and we couldn't even confirm when
council meetings were on."
In the mid-1970s, two senior Soviet journalists were invited to meet NATO's
secretary-general: one wrote in his despatch later that the office they
were taken to was so down-at-heel that it must have been a fake. It is
still strikingly drab.
The new relations could bury much of the lingering suspicion between Russia
and NATO's dominant member, the United States.
That is a prize that Putin can hold up for domestic critics of his
pro-Western policy. He can tell Moscow's political and military elite that
although he cannot stop NATO's next eastward enlargement -- probably onto
the soil of the former Soviet Union -- he has at least won Russia a real
voice inside NATO.
WILL IT AMOUNT TO MUCH?
But will the new council of 20 amount to much more than the stilted
19-plus-one consultation system that NATO and Russia established five years
ago, the Permanent Joint Council?
NATO officials say it will.
But some analysts say the broad influence on NATO policy that some allies
-- in a flush of post-September 11 amity -- had proposed handing to Russia
has been pared back.
NATO has insisted on a clause allowing either side to take back any
security issue from the new council if there is no consensus, barring
Russia from any veto over its action.
The topics on the table will be limited to the fight against terrorism and
arms proliferation, management of regional crises and peacekeeping, missile
defence and search-and-rescue at sea, and only expanded as mutual trust
develops.
The two sides will skirt the controversial and focus on areas where they
know they will be able to see eye-to-eye.
Leon Fuerth, who was national security adviser to former U.S. Vice
President Al Gore, believes Washington is offering Putin too little in
return for his support for the coalition against terrorism since the
suicide hijack attacks on America last September, be it on nuclear
stockpiles, Chechnya or NATO.
"We offered a reinvented version of what already exists (between Russia and
NATO), in the form of yet another forum with circumscribed authority,"
Fuerth wrote in the Washington Post.
"Putin does have critics at home, and they have taken note of the unequal
returns to Russia on his investment in the Bush administration. If the
administration does not begin to find ways to restore a real sense of give
and take, it may lose its chance to build the solid relationship to which
it now aspires."
Putin had a weak hand. No longer a superpower, Russia has a gross domestic
product the size of Belgium's and its defence budget is roughly equivalent
to the amount by which the United States will increase military spending
this year.
Die-hards on both sides distrust each other.
According to one survey, 58 percent of Russians still believe their country
has reasons to fear NATO. The recent disclosure that the Pentagon's new
nuclear doctrine still treats Russia as a possible target can hardly help.
In NATO countries, many believe Russia's record as a pro-Western democracy
is too short to be trusted. Some former Warsaw Pact states that are now
NATO members or candidates are troubled by the idea of joining hands with
Moscow again.
MINDSET CHANGE
The establishment of the Permanent Joint Council in 1997 was a symbol of
the growing rapprochement between east and west.
But many saw it as a sop to blunt Russian opposition to NATO's expansion
behind the old Iron Curtain, which came in 1999 with the entry of Hungary,
Poland and the Czech Republic.
Moscow always grumbled that the allies "pre-cooked" issues among themselves
before the council met. Russian officials called the 19-plus-one format "19
against one."
The forum was temporarily derailed by Russian fury over NATO air strikes
against fellow Orthodox Slavs in Yugoslavia in 1999.
Western diplomats concede that, institutional niceties aside, the new
council will not be very different.
"The Russians never really wanted the old council to work," said one senior
NATO diplomat. "The real test of the new one will come after the summit in
Rome. If the Russians don't play ball, it will be a lost opportunity."
Julian Lindley-French, a senior fellow at the European Union's Institute
for Security Studies, believes that September 11 quickened a mindset change
on both sides, and both now see a real need to fight terrorism together.
"The Russians realise that if anyone is threatened by terrorism in their
neighbourhood it is them," he said. "They want stable borders to the west
and resources for the struggle against that kind of terror."
A cooperative Russia could help stabilise a vast area of eastern Europe
sweeping across Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova that NATO sees as a
potentially dangerous source of organised crime.
John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago says that while it is
fashionable to fret about Iraq's alleged development of weapons of mass
destruction, the abundance of fissile material in Russia and its neighbours
is more alarming -- and good enough reason in itself to engage with Moscow.
But Mearsheimer sees NATO's forthcoming enlargement and the enhanced ties
with Russia as fresh nails in its coffin.
"NATO is reaching the point where it is so weak and so diffuse that it is
losing any real meaning as a military alliance," he said. "The Russians
don't feel very threatened by NATO expansion...they realise it's a shell of
its former self."
*******
#7
The Russia Journal
May 6-12, 2002
Putin adopts a realistic Caspian policy
By ALEXANDER GOLTS
On the eve of the 10th anniversary of its foundation, the Russian Army
received an unexpected and valuable gift from its commander in chief,
Vladimir Putin. No, it wasn’t higher pay for the troops, or new arms and
equipment. But given the right circumstances, the bestowal could bring with
it both more arms and more money.
During his recent visit to the Caspian flotilla, Putin set its commanders a
real task based on Russia’s policy in the region. He ordered them to run
naval exercises that would involve not only the ships of the Caspian
flotilla, but also Border Guards, the Fourth Air Force Group and troops
from the North Caucasus Military District.
Putin is following sound logic here. Negotiations on dividing up the
Caspian Sea have foundered because the other littoral states, particularly
Iran, are unwilling to make concessions. In response, Russia wants to show,
without resorting to threats, that it is ready and able to defend its
economic interests.
Putin has come a long a way since his plans two years ago to send a
squadron to the Mediterranean to "show the flag" and defend Yugoslavia’s
then-president, Slobodan Milosevic. The more time that passes, the more
Putin looks intent on using the armed forces to defend Russia’s genuine
national interests rather than trying to prove at every turn that the
country is still a great military power and, in so doing, soothe the
wounded self-esteem of the domestic elite.
Most surprising is that this time, military officials are ready to carry
out the order. The Caspian flotilla is the only naval group in Russia that
has grown, not shrunk, over recent years. Several rapid-attack craft were
transferred from the Baltic and Black Sea fleets to beef up the flotilla’s
106th Brigade.
At Tatarstan’s Zelenodolsk shipyard, meanwhile, a ship that will be the
Caspian’s largest is near completion. This new ship and its modern missile
and artillery systems will give Russia the military edge in the region. A
land-site missile base has been transferred to the Caspian from the Baltic
region, and, two years ago, a marine brigade was discreetly deployed there.
The conclusion from all this is clear: Russia has what it needs to look
after its interests.
If Putin continues to follow this policy of giving only realistic orders
aimed at defending clear national interests, he will be able to concentrate
limited resources on building up the military in priority areas. This will
give Moscow the money it needs to buy new arms and raise service members’
wages.
But the top military leadership resists this approach. The brass still
prefers to argue that Russia, just like the Soviet Union, needs to maintain
an oceangoing fleet comparable to that of the United States.
Just recently, the Navy’s commander, Vice Adm. Vladimir Kuroyedov, tried to
prove that the fight would soon be on for divvying up vast resources far at
sea. This is the only logic that can explain why Russia’s Navy continues
building military vessels with the sole purpose of opposing the U.S. Navy.
At the beginning of the year, for instance, the Navy took possession of the
Gepard, a newly built multipurpose nuclear submarine designed to destroy
aircraft carrier formations. The heavy nuclear cruiser Peter the Great, the
pride of Russia’s surface fleet, was designed for the same purpose.
It’s no surprise, then, that the naval doctrine approved last fall avoids
identifying anything resembling clear-cut priorities. Like their Army
colleagues, the admirals understand full well that if they start
concentrating on real security issues and identify specific areas where
shipping or natural resources should be protected, they won’t be able to
get away with asking for so much.
This is not the only contradiction. There’s no escaping the fact that Iran
is the main stumbling block to an agreement on dividing the Caspian’s rich
resources. And though Russian officials would never say as much, Moscow’s
demonstration of force is for Tehran’s benefit. But how does this add up
with the Russian military-industrial complex’s plans to sell arms to Iran?
The Kremlin has listened to the weapons makers and backed out of an
agreement with the United States on an arms-supply moratorium on Iran. Now,
the issue of arms sales to a country Washington considers a pariah is the
biggest sticking point in Russian-U.S. relations.
What’s more, the list of what Russia wants to sell Iran includes diesel
submarines and military helicopters – precisely the kinds of arms that
could boost Iran’s military potential in the Caspian and take all the sense
out of the Russian military’s demonstration of force.
Putin is beginning to follow a rational military policy, but he will first
have to battle the selfish calculations of his own generals and Russian
arms manufacturers.
*******
#8
BBC Monitoring
Participants in pro-Putin Moscow youth rally interviewed
Source: ORT TV, Moscow, in Russian 1100 gmt 7 May 02
[Presenter] The nationwide youth organization Marching Together today
marked its second anniversary by a rally in front of the Kremlin in Moscow.
It was formed exactly two years ago, on the day President Vladimir Putin
took office. Andrey Murtazin has the report:
[Correspondent] Young people and veterans alike from 50 Russian regions
gathered together today in Vasilyevskiy Spusk to express their support for
the Russian president.
[Female participant in the rally, in front of a line of others] May God
give him many, many years of life. We all love him very much. There.
[Applauds, joined by others]
[Other voices] We wish him happiness and health.
[Vasiliy Yakimenko, Marching Together leader] We would like to join forces
with the older generation. We believe that without that union our
organization is incomplete and will be unable to accomplish all those tasks
which we have set it.
[Correspondent] Another aim of today's gathering is to persuade the young
people not to seek to evade conscription. As it transpires, however, by far
not every young man who took part in the rally is eager to serve in the army.
[Young man] At the very least, order should be established, by the very
same officers in their units.
[Another] Bullying must go, as must beatings.
[Another] When Putin came to power, I thought: That's it. Everything I was
afraid of is no longer there. I am now ready to serve, no problem.
[Correspondent] Today, the organization Marching Together, its leaders say,
already numbers more than 10,000 young Russians.
It was no accident that the organizers picked this date for the event to be
held: It is the second anniversary of the president's inauguration and the
run-up to the 9 May [Victory Day] celebrations. The spiritual unity of the
young and old, as demonstrated by the rally, is deeply symbolic of
consolidation in Russian society.
*******
#9
Rossiiskaya Gazeta
No. 81
May 8, 2002 (?)
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
RUSSIANS DO NOT SEE AN ALTERNATIVE TO PUTIN
Boris MAKARENKO, deputy director of the Centre of
Political Technologies
With Vladimir Putin's appearance in Russian politics, the
rest of political figures receded to the background, as it were.
Society does not know of other leaders but the president. This
can be seen from all sociological polls, including those
conducted by our centre.
Being on the political scene alone, the president
nevertheless has a very high rating, and it does not contradict
the previous argument but continues it. One of the explanations
of such a high rating of the president lies in the fact that,
as has been said above, there is no alternative to Putin.
People do not see any other figures on whom they could pin
their hopes for a better life. However, this is not the only
explanation, of course. Society believes that way back in 1999
he saved us from the threat of terrorism, returning to the
nation at least a certain degree of self-respect. He has not
disappointed the nation over the two years that have passed
since his takeover. In actual fact, this is a lot. The totality
of these reasons can well explain the stability of his rating.
I think that Putin has been on the rise so far. He really
works, implementing some plans. Both the elite and society see
this. They do not necessarily understand the details of these
plans, nor do they necessarily agree with them. However,
against the background of the previous president, who looked
inactive and passive, Putin stands out for his activity and
persistency. I am sure that it is still safe to speak about the
continuing rise of Putin as a politician.
There seem to be no sensible reasons for this tendency to
reverse. So far, the president has had no obvious failures and
society is yet to preserve the credit of confidence in him for
a long time.
As to more serious dangers that can await Vladimir Putin
during the next two years of his presidency, such a threat may
be the slowing down of the positive tendencies of economic
development, not counting catastrophic scenarios, which,
regrettably, are always possible in Russia. If people stop
feeling that their life becomes a little better with every
passing day - and they do not ask for something more, it is
enough for them to feel at least little improvements, - then
perhaps they will become more critical of the president.
Speaking of more serious things, the process of the
institutional restructuring of the Russian state has also been
on the rise so far. However, at some stage the problem of
strengthening the reforms that Putin has been effecting for two
years now will arise. Meanwhile, there are always more problems
with strengthening reforms and implementing laws in Russia than
with their adoption. I am sure that Putin's safety factor will
suffice for his first term.
*******
#10
BBC Monitoring
Russian banking expert brands Putin's growth demands "alarming"
Source: Ekho Moskvy news agency, Moscow, in Russian 0905 gmt 7 May 02
[No dateline, as received] The review of the parameters for the forecast of
the country's economic development is a "usual practice in market
economies", Aleksandr Khandruyev, the head of the consulting company BFI
[banks, finances and investments] and the former first deputy chairman of
the Russian Central Bank, said in an interview with Echo Moskvy radio.
Russian President Vladimir Putin on 6 May demanded that the government in
the near future submit to him the plan of main trends in the country's
development for the next four or five years.
Khandruyev said that it was important to review the forecast. "It is also
not bad that we are linking the parameters of the forecast with the
planning of the 2003 budget. The time has come for us to start medium-term
budget planning stretching two-four years ahead."
But, in the expert's opinion, it is an "alarming and dangerous" signal that
"the review of the parameters is being linked with stepping up the
country's economic growth rates".
"Growth in the conditions of the unbalanced economy is fraught with
financial bubbles which will sooner or later lead to financial crises
similar to the 1998 crisis," he said. This will also lead of the domination
of raw material industries and "the national economy's structure will get
worse instead of getting better". In addition, artificial promotion of
economic growth is always carried out at someone's expense and "most likely
ordinary people will be that someone".
Russia's economy is not capable of suddenly increasing growth rates at the
moment, Khandruyev said. "The government's aim is to create conditions for
economic growth instead of trying to dictate which economic growth rates
are the best for the country," he stressed.
*******
#11
Washington Times
May 8, 2002
In search of Baltic security
By Helle Dale
STOCKHOLM -- What a difference a decade makes. Anyone who participated
in debates over NATO and EU enlargement 10 years ago would find few
similarities between the arguments back then and the discussion at the
recent conference on Baltic Sea Region Security and Cooperation, which took
place in Stockholm in late April.
In the early 1990s, there were lots of questions. Vocal opponents of
NATO enlargement thought it would provoke the Russian military into doing
something truly crazy and cause the remilitarization of the Russian enclave
of Kaliningrad. Some worried that it would so radicalize ordinary Russians
that democratic development would be hopelessly undermined. Others worried
that NATO enlargement would create a new iron curtain in Europe, albeit one
further to the east. And then there was the cost, which no one really knew
how to quantify. In fact, some thought the United States itself might
become so overextended with new NATO commitments that we would go into a
permanent decline. Others that nuclear disarmament would come to a halt.
When the decision was finally made, however, in the spring of 1999 to
include Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic in NATO, we found that the
sky didn't fall, and the Russians didn't go berserk. Most of those earlier
arguments appear almost quaint as NATO leaders contemplate the second round
of enlargement to be decided at the Prague summit in November. Aspirants
for the second round are the three Baltic countries, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Bulgaria, Romania, Macedonia and Albania.
Today, a great many different topics are on the agenda. Poland's
aspirations as a major new member of NATO and as an influential regional
power are being acknowledged. The success of regional cooperation among the
Baltic countries and their Scandinavian neighbors is promoted as an example
of how former east and west can get along together. The war against
terrorism and NATO's role therein is a crucial subject of discussion
post-September 11. And, not to forget, so is the state of the transatlantic
relationship. Englargement itself, though, is considered a given.
Most amazing perhaps is that Russia is hardly ever talked about as a
threat. Not by the Americans nor by the Europeans. Even as the Stockholm
conference convened, the Russian and U.S. governments signed an agreement
for a Russia-NATO council, which will all but make Russia the 20th member
of the new NATO. Later this month in St. Petersburg and Moscow, Russian
President Vladimir Putin and President Bush will sign a dramatic new arms
reduction treaty, as well as a joint statement outlining the new strategic
framework. The statement will "prescribe the principles on the basis of
which Russia and the United States will build their bilateral relationship
in the long-term future," according to Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov.
The European Union, too, is entering negotiations for closer economic
links with Russia, as an anchor for Russian reforms. As Swedish Prime
Minister Goeran Persson remarked at the opening of the Stockholm
conference, "the Baltic region might become the most dynamic in Europe,
especially if Russia is included."
The Russian representative at the conference had his own agenda. In
1990s, the Russians used to hint darkly that unless NATO behaved itself
nuclear weapons might be stationed in Kaliningrad, a Russian port and
outpost formerly known as East Prussia, which borders Lithuania on one side
and Poland on the other. It has long been considered a potential trouble
spot. According to Valery Ustyunov of the International Affairs Committee
of the Russian Duma, "Kaliningrad is a common challenge for Russia and the
European Union," he said, "and if ignored will cause serious damage."
The Russian proposal is for Poland and Lithuania to waive visa
requirements for Kaliningrad residents after EU enlargement, and for the EU
and Russia to work together to make a Hong Kong of the West out of
Kaliningrad, an entry point for Europeans seeking to do business in Russia
and a model for future EU cooperation. There's a long way to go. Today
Kaliningrad is in a state of advanced decay as a military installation and
boasts the highest rate of AIDS in Europe.
As might well be imagined, the few voices raised to caution about the
rapprochement between NATO and Russia belonged to Central and East
Europeans. Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski warned that the new
formula for the NATO-Russian council must not change the role of current
NATO institutions. Cooperation should be based, he said, on the principle
that "the share of decision making should be commensurate with the share of
responsibility for implementation. " One hopes the Bush administration
listens.
The realities of a new Europe are finally taking shape, unifying the
continent and hopefully bringing peace and prosperity. It is a good thing
to see.
Helle Dale is editorial page editor of The Washington Times. Her column
appears on Wednesdays.
******
#12
Russia: Prospects Brighten For Becoming Key U.S. Oil Supplier
By Michael Lelyveld
Hopes for energy cooperation with Russia have been rising following a meeting
of ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations in the United
States. Experts say Russia could offer an alternative source to the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, but the prospect remains
uncertain.
Boston, 8 May 2002 (RFE/RL) -- Analysts are becoming optimistic about the
prospect that Russia could become a key oil supplier to the United States,
helping to reduce its reliance on the volatile Middle East.
The outlook for a link between the world's biggest oil consumer and the
second-largest producer seemed to brighten last week with a meeting in
Detroit.
The forum of energy ministers from the Group of Eight industrialized nations
gave Moscow a chance to repeat its message that Russia is prepared to play a
major role in world energy affairs.
Energy Minister Igor Yusufov declared "Russia's readiness to become the
guarantor of stability at the world market of energy resources," according to
the official news agency RIA-Novosti. Russia reportedly offered to serve as a
stabilizing supplier within a group of producing and consuming countries,
including Russia, the United States, Canada, and Great Britain.
RIA-Novosti quoted sources as saying Russia's role "could be that of a
guarantor of deliveries of energy materials to all the major economic systems
of the world in case of crises."
The offer was underscored by Mikhail Khodorkovskii, the chairman of Russia's
second-largest oil company Yukos, who said the country could boost its oil
output from 7 million to 9 million barrels per day.
Yusufov made the same points during a meeting with U.S. Vice President Dick
Cheney last week. On 7 May, RIA-Novosti reported that the two men discussed
possible imports of Russian fuel for the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
After months of Russian proposals, Western analysts have started to respond
positively to the approach.
Leon Aron, director of Russian studies at the American Enterprise Institute
in Washington, wrote last week in "The New York Times": "Americans are not in
the habit of looking to Russia for help in enhancing our security. But Russia
has been transformed in the last 10 years, and Vladimir Putin's solidarity
with the United States since 11 September has sealed that transformation."
Aron noted that Russia had promised the Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries (OPEC) last December that it would support oil prices by cutting
exports by a modest 150,000 barrels per day. He said Russia then raised its
production, "showing that it remains fully independent of OPEC."
In another commentary last week, the industry newsletter Petroleum Argus
wrote: "Much is made of Russia's potential as an OPEC alternative. But the
rhetoric could be about to turn into reality."
Both analyses cited obstacles that stand in the way. Among them is the
distance of Russia's Siberian oil fields from the U.S. market. Even so,
Petroleum Argus argued that Russia is planning new export routes that could
bring its resources closer.
The first is the Druzhba-Adria pipeline, which could pump Russian oil west to
the Adriatic through Croatia. The second is a far more ambitious eastward
line from Angarsk to Nakhodka, a project that could supply the western United
States from Russia's Far East.
One measure of the new hope for Russia's plan may be that it is being taken
seriously, despite the fact that the eastern line would stretch 3,800
kilometers and cost $5 billion, according to the investment bank Troika
Dialog. Such large numbers would have been greeted with skepticism only a
year ago.
Russia's improved ties to the United States and its oil output have both
encouraged the new outlook. In the first four months of 2002, Russia's oil
production rose 8.8 percent from a year earlier, the Interfax news agency
said this week.
But there are also reasons to be cautious about prospects for rapid change,
or the notion that Russia will supplant Saudi Arabia as the traditional
"swing producer" with the spare oil capacity to assure price stability and
steady supplies.
Russian producers like Yukos have argued for months that they cannot simply
turn their frozen Siberian oil fields on and off to suit OPEC. By the same
token, they may be unable to match Saudi Arabia's flexibility to keep prices
stable for long.
Any replacement in the U.S. market is likely to be slow. While Saudi Arabia
accounted for 18 percent of U.S. crude imports last year, Russia barely
registered as a source, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. OPEC
countries supplied 51 percent of U.S. oil imports last year.
While Russia has offered energy cooperation with the United States, it has
promised similar cooperation with the European Union. It also continues to
say that it is cooperating with OPEC, as well as individual members like Iraq
and Iran. The extent of cooperation in each case is unclear. But if Russia
tries to be all things to all countries, it may not have enough resources and
cooperation to go around.
Russia has made clear in the past week that it also has demands that may go
with its energy supplies. On 7 May, RIA-Novosoti reported that Yusufov told
the energy ministers that in return for sending more energy to the EU, Russia
expects "an adequate reply with investment, technologies and managerial
experience, as well as unimpeded transit of energy resources across Europe."
Yusufov also "warned European countries" that the opening of their energy
markets should not lead them to revise long-term contracts with Russia or
keep them from concluding new ones. The concern about EU energy policy has
been a favorite theme of Russia's gas monopoly Gazprom, but the strong
language suggests that Moscow's energy cooperation could have a high policy
price.
*******
#13
RUSSIAN MILITARY SPEAKS OUT ABOUT POSSIBLE STRATEGIC ALLIANCE BETWEEN RUSSIA
AND USA
MOSCOW, MAY 8, 2002. /RIA NOVOSTI/. - Colonel General Leonid Ivashov,
Vice-President of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems, believes talk about a
strategic alliance between Russia and the United States in the wake of the
September 11 terror attacks was probably a little too optimistic. Mr Ivashov
said this as addressing a news conference at the Novosti news agency
Wednesday.
It is not that Russia does not want the alliance, he said. Moscow's and
Washington's major strategic objectives do not merely differ, they are "at
opposite poles." Even their approaches to the common cause - anti-terrorist
fight - differ a great deal, noted the general. Moscow advocates an all-round
approach to fighting the evil, whereas Washington is taking advantage of the
anti-terror effort to establish its world supremacy and is selective about
terrorist actions, said Mr Ivashov.
Chechnya is a good example of the US approach, according to him. The US
differentiate between Arab and Chechen terrorists, for one. The American top
are known to receive so called Chechen envoys.
When speaking about the problem of strategic stability, Mr Ivashov said the
US was seeking to cement its strategic offensive and defensive arms advantage
by withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile, ABM, Treaty and deploying an
unrestricted national missile defence system, and by securing the right to
store the warheads to be cut and re-deploy them if necessary. "A compromise
on the strategic matter is impossible," believes the general.
The US says it may have to use nuclear warheads in its or its ally's
territory as an anti-missile shield.
As to the new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, START, being drafted, the
general said the document was going to set a limit on nuclear arsenals the
two countries would commit to cut. The figure has already been agreed on by
the Russian and US presidents. Apart from the START Treaty, the two leaders
are expected to sign a related protocol of intentions, according to Leonid
Ivashov.
The number of nuclear warheads is being brought down both by the US and
Russia, and that is a natural process. That is why the new START Treaty is
not going to be a strategic breakthrough, but merely a legal confirmation of
the process, said Mr Ivashov.
******
#14
gazeta.ru
May 8, 2002
US betrayal leaves Russian rockets idle
By Ivan Ivanov
Russia’s heavy-lift Proton-K rocket successfully took off from the Baikanur
cosmodrome in Kazakhstan on its second commercial flight carrying the US
communications satellite DirecTV-5. The second commercial Proton-K flight
may well, however, be the Russian rocket’s swan song, since the ILS launch
service provider, which exercises the exclusive right to use the Proton
carrier, has expressed a preference for American rockets.
The Proton-K carrier was to take off from the Baikonur launch pad at 2100
Moscow time on May 6. However, owing to technical problems the launch was
cancelled only two minutes before the scheduled blastoff. The launch was
put back 24 hours, and at 2110 on May 7 the rocket successfully blasted off
into space. Several minutes later the US DirecTV-5 satellite was safely
positioned in its orbit.
According to RIA-Novosti reports, the orbit parameters are of a maximum
distance of 245km from Earth and a minimum of 198km. Russian Space Force’s
experts said that once placed into the orbit, the satellite will then move
into the interim orbit, and later into the target orbit – the so-called
high elliptic and circular orbits with altitudes ranging from 700 to 40,000
km. In line with the experts’ estimates, the satellite will hit the target
orbit at 0332 Moscow time on May 8.
In comments for RIA, a Space Force specialist noted that the 4.3-ton
DirecTV-5 communications satellite is designated to provide digital
television services to customers in North American. Its payload amounts to
48 powerful transponders. The satellite will be taken to a geostationary
orbit where it is expected to work for no less than 15 years. The device is
meant solely for telecommunications and will not be used for military
purposes.
International Launch Services is a joint venture of Lockheed Martin Corp.
in the United States, with Russian companies Khrunichev State Research and
Production Space Center, and Rocket Space Corporation Energia. The company
was formed in 1995 to provide launch services for the American Atlas and
the Russian Proton vehicles for customers worldwide.
Tuesday’s launch was Proton’s second commercial flight this year. In
December last year, director general of Khrunichev Alexander Medvedev
optimistically said that in 2002 his company planned to launch at least 9
commercial flights jointly with the ILS. In addition to that, the
Khrunichev Centre planned to carry into space the European astrophysical
observatory Integral, Russian communication satellites Express A-4 and
Louch, three navigation satellites for GLONASS system, and several military
satellites. (Note: GLONASS -Global Navigation Satellite System- is a
satellite based radio navigation system which provides an unlimited number
of users with all-weather 3D positioning, velocity measuring and timing
anywhere in the world or near-Earth space). Altogether, Khrunichev planned
to carry out 15 Proton launches this year. That would set a new record for
the number of Proton flights, with the current record of 14 flights being
set in 2000.
But in the first four months of the current year Proton has been launched
only twice. In April, the Russian rocket travelled into space with the
communication satellite Intelsat-903 and the DirecTV device on its second
flight. To all appearances, the 2000 record will remain unbroken in 2002,
since the ILS failed to secure the planned number of orders for Proton.
It is expected that by the end of the year Proton will have placed only two
more commercial devices into orbit – the US EchostarVIII (launch scheduled
for June 16) and the European Astra-1K (August 16). The launch of the US
communications device GE-12, earlier planned for the 4th quarter of 2002,
has been postponed till 2003.
Four more satellites will be travelling into space in the near future, but
not on board Proton. Only one of those has ''flown the nest'' from Proton
to other launch service providers: the owners of AtlanticBird-1 have
decided against using Proton and are instead considering Europe's Ariane or
the US's Delta-IV as alternatives.
As for the other three satellites, ILS has decided not to launch those on
board the Russian carrier, but on board the US rocket. Asiasat-4 is to
travel into space on board Atlas IIIA in June, while European HotBird-6 and
Canadian Nimiq-2 will be on board Atlas V, the new carrier of Lockheed
Martin, in July and October respectively. As a result, the Russians will
not receive the $340 million revenue it had forecast.
By jumping ship to other carriers it seems that ILS has made a conscious
decision to give up cooperation with Russia altogether. As long as Lockheed
Martin only had the Atlas II carrier, which was not exactly renowned for
its lifting capacity, the ILS used Proton carriers to launch commercial
satellites into space, which allowed it to retain its market share. But as
soon as the US company learned to produce the more powerful Atlas III and
Atlas V launchers, ILS started to award contracts primarily to them.
The future now looks bleak for Proton. Paradoxically, the producer of
Proton, the Khrunichev Centre, under their agreement with the founders of
ILS, does not have the right to enter into contracts with foreign
customers. Moreover, ILS has the same exclusive right for the use of
another Russian rocket Angara, also developed by Khrunichev, therefore, the
same sad fate is likely to befall that carrier, too. Thus, it seems, the
Americans, who have retained their market share with the help of Proton,
are set to seal the fate of the Russian rockets.
*******
#15
FEATURE-Moldovan farmers put their faith in the Communists
By Dmitry Chubashenko
DUBASARII VECHI, Moldova, May 8 (Reuters) - Tomatoes, cucumbers, the odd
aubergine and the Communist Party will always have a place in Natalia Galea's
heart.
They go hand in hand, she says, harking back to an era when her country, the
former Soviet republic of Moldova, guaranteed there was bread on the table
and the occasional slab of cheese to accompany the vegetables grown in her
little plot.
The 45-year-old has little time for big city politics in Chisinau, the
capital where demonstrators launched daily protests earlier this year against
the ruling Communists amid fears the government wanted to force Moldova back
into the sphere of Russia.
She says she just wants stability and hopes the Communists will be allowed to
provide it.
"Last year I voted for the Communist Party. They used to care about people.
They promise to help the poor," Galea said, adding that she sells produce
from a narrow strip of land by her house at a market on Thursdays and Sundays
to earn money.
"I do not know what is happening in Chisinau. But I do not think anybody
should interfere and prevent them (the communists) from doing what they have
promised."
Thousands of people in Moldova's countryside feel the same.
They have kept their faith in the old party of power after the fall of the
Soviet Union more than 10 years ago, and voted en masse for the Communists in
a parliamentary poll last year.
And the everyday struggle of life in one of Europe's poorest countries leaves
little time to mull over politics.
ROUND-THE-CLOCK RALLIES
Earlier this year, thousands of students and nationalists protested in
Chisinau, condemning the Communists' plans to force children to learn Russian
and re-write history books amid fears that the moves would deny Moldova's
cultural links with neighbouring Romania, whose language it shares.
The Communists dropped their plans almost immediately but the protesters did
not disperse, stepping up demonstrations after leading opposition deputy Vlad
Cubreacov disappeared on March 21.
The opposition, the nationalist Christian Democratic Party, said he vanished
after a driver dropped him off outside his home. The police have found no
trace of him.
They set up tents and called for the communists to leave power 24 hours a day
-- a move which prompted the Council of Europe to step in at the end of March.
The council, concerned by growing instability in the country wedged between
Romania and former Soviet Ukraine, chaired talks between both sides in
Strasbourg and bashed out a compromise.
The Communists agreed to a moratorium on changing the country's official
language, while the nationalists agreed to stop their calls for the ousting
of the government.
Moldova's farmers, who represent about two thirds of the country's four
million population, have ignored most of the twists and turns of the saga.
For Galea, the capital might as well be 3,000 kilometres away rather than the
30 shown on the signpost from her village of Dubasarii Vechi, known across
the country for its fresh tomatoes, cucumbers, peppers and aubergines.
And spring is a time for working on the land, says fellow villager Liuba
Moftinca.
"We used to watch television in winter. But in spring, summer and autumn we
are all busy with growing vegetables and fruits," said the former doctor, who
became a farmer after the hospital where she worked closed down due to a lack
of funds.
"Vegetables are the only source of income for us," Moftinca said. "We work
from dawn until sunset and we have no time to follow the events in Chisinau."
SUPPORT FOR COMMUNISTS IS RISING
More than a half of the villagers in Dubasarii Vechi support the Communists
and analysts say the level of support is even higher in other villages and
towns across the tiny country.
According to an opinion poll conducted by IMAS, a respected independent
polling organisation with its headquarters in Romania, the Communists enjoy
the support of 73 percent of the country.
Analysts said that showed that if the Communists had agreed to the
opposition's demands and called an early election, they would have won 91
seats in the 101-seat parliament compared with their current 71.
"Today there is no reason to change the government because voters are the
same as they were a year ago. They just do not react to the arguments of the
Communists' opponents," said reformist former Prime Minister Ion Sturza.
Nicolae Chirtoaca, director of independent think-tank the Euroatlantic
Centre, agreed, saying the communists had won loyalty when they increased the
monthly old-age pension to $10 from $7 and moved to pay wages on time.
Chirtoaca said popular policies have allowed Moldovans to forget the fact
that the Communists have failed to pull Moldova out of its financial mire.
The state coffers are bare, about 80 percent of the population live on less
than one dollar a day and emigration, legal and illegal, is at a record high.
And with foreign debt payments coming up, it is not going to get easier.
The government has to pay $200 million on foreign debts this year, including
the principal on $75 million Eurobonds in June.
Foreign lenders have frozen aid to the country because of the slow pace of
reforms and the government has so far failed to unlock it.
Reforms in the country were never liked, analysts said.
"If after a decade of democratic reforms the Communists are so massively
popular, then it means our democrats and reformers have made mistakes," said
Viktor Zosu, an independent analyst.
*******
#16
Subject: PIECE ON RUSSIA/EU INFRASTRUCTURE
Date: Wed, 8 May 2002
From: "Robert Nurick"
David: attached is an interesting piece I received recently from Rene
Nyberg, the Finnish Ambassador in Moscow. It was presented at a meeting of
the "Russia in a United Europe Committee," chaired by Duma deputy Vladimir
Ryzhkov. As you will see, it deals with the infrastructure between Russia
and northwest Europe--something which has not received a great deal of
attention but which undoubtedly will have a large impact on the nature of
trade and other relations across the borders in this region. I thought it
would be of interest to readers of Johnson's List.
Bob Nurick
-------
René Nyberg
Ambassador of Finland
http://www.finemb-moscow.fi/
Meeting of the "Russia in an Integrated Europe" Committee Moscow
26 April 2002
The Gulf of Finland as the new Sound;
the Northern Dimension and traffic infrastructure in North-West Russia
My intention is to examine the infrastructure of the interface between the
enlarging European Union (EU) and Russia. My special concentration will be
on maritime traffic, but without overlooking inland waterways, railways,
road traffic, severely underdeveloped air traffic and the actions of the
customs, which are gnawing away at everything. I shall also comment on
transit traffic. My geographical attention will be on the Gulf of Finland,
which is the focal point of logistics in the entire region, and I want to
compare it to the focal point at the other end of the Baltic, the Sound
(Öresund).
The core idea in the EU's Northern Dimension policy aptly reflected the
challenges that an enlarging Union faces in North-West Europe. In only a
couple of years' time, the Baltic will become to all intents and purposes
an inland sea of the Union and Russia. This poses new and increased
challenges to the Union's policy on Russia.
The concepts on which the Finnish Government based its Northern Dimension
initiative from 1997 still reflect the situation. The most important of
them is positive interdependence. This is a thoroughly European concept. It
describes the post-war growing together of Western Europe's economy and
traffic infrastructure to the extent that, as many Germans today do not
even remember, Germany's biggest port is Rotterdam and not Hamburg. The
second central concept by means of which we wanted to emphasise the
challenge facing us was the expression normative divide. It reflects the
challenges facing Russia to integrate into the European and global
economies. The European Union and Russia agreed at their summit in Moscow
in May last year to create a Common European Economic Space.
Economic growth in the market region of Northern Europe is faster than
anywhere else in our continent. Some 50 million people live in the Nordic
countries, North-West Russia and the three Baltic States. If we add to this
the populations of the Baltic coast regions of Germany and Poland, we can
talk of an economic space containing about 80 million people.
The explosive growth that we have seen in transport and travel highlights
the importance of traffic infrastructure as the Russian and EU economies
grow together. The advice given by President Putin in his "State of the
Union" address on 18 April, namely that world-level models should be taken
as the criterion for success, is also suitable as the goal to be pursued in
its development.
The St. Petersburg region is developing into a major transport node and
logistics centre serving Russia's foreign trade. It is there that sea
lanes to the west meet railway lines and inland shipping routes from the
east and south, the Volga-Balt and Volga-Don links, the Trans-Siberian
Railway, the North-South Corridor from the Caspian Sea and Iran.
The Gulf of Finland region is already a logistics nexus. Ports in both
Finland and Estonia offer significant functional advantages for transport
to and from Russia, thereby improving the standard of service and lowering
the cost of conducting foreign trade. Natural conditions in the eastern end
of the Gulf of Finland are awkward for sea transport. Pack ice persists for
a long time after the Estonian coast and Finnish ports have been freed of
it. The shallow waters off St. Petersburg mean that shipping lanes must be
constantly dredged.
Trilateral cooperation between Finland, Russia and Estonia in the Gulf of
Finland began between the frontier guards ten years ago. The goal now is to
follow the examples of the English Channel and the Sound and create a
Vessel Traffic Management and Information System for the Gulf of Finland by
2004. As passenger traffic at right angles to the main east-west shipping
flows as well as oil transports increase, this system is essential for both
environmental protection and traffic safety in general. The project still
requires the approval of the International Maritime Organization.
Strongly positive development is concentrating on the Gulf of Finland. The
ports of Tallinn and St. Petersburg have been growing fastest. The
significance of Finnish ports is growing when goods flows are measured in
terms of value rather than tonnage. The other North-West Russian ports,
Murmansk and Archangel, are likewise developing, but mainly as exporters of
Russian raw materials. The same applies to the Latvian and Lithuanian
ports, where goods flows are significant and reflect the growing share of
these countries' own foreign trade in addition to traditional transit
traffic.
On the basis of goods volumes transported, it is possible to say already
today that a strong positive growth spiral has begun in the Gulf of
Finland, and the internal mechanisms of cargo logistics are supporting it.
One of the central factors is the number of services and links, which
commercial actors regard as a matter of key importance. Consignments are
taken to the place from which they immediately begin their onward journey.
Where there is plenty of cargo, there are also frequent services. The many
independent actors involved in a logistics chain - forwarders, railway
companies, road hauliers - channel their investments into the places where
there is already transport. These investments in fixed structures
strengthen and before long clinch the winners in competition between ports.
An example of the cross-border mechanisms that the logistics concentration
in the Gulf of Finland region boasts is the fact that today only Finland
can offer a return-freight demand for containers. Finland's very
considerable total exports (worth €47.7 billion in 2001) need empty
containers, which Russia's imports bring into the Gulf of Finland region.
The containers and trucks arriving in the St. Petersburg region and ports
in the Baltic States have to be taken away empty. But shared use of these
containers and trucks reduces the cost of trade for both Finland and Russia.
Inland waterway transport is of very great importance in Continental
Europe and especially North America. It was also hugely important during
the Soviet era. Today, Russia's extensive network of inland waterways has a
dilapidated infrastructure and is poorly integrated with other transport
modes. Russia is committed under the terms of the Partnership and
Cooperation Agreement to opening up her inland waterways to vessels from EU
countries. Finland has experience of using the Volga-Balt system, for
example to deliver large drilling rigs to the Caspian Sea.
The underdeveloped road infrastructure in Russia is hindering growth in
truck traffic. This becomes evident when one travels by car from Moscow to
the "Northern capital" St. Petersburg. Construction of a motorway meeting
international criteria has not even commenced. The main emphasis in
North-West Russia is on building road bypasses of St. Petersburg and
Vyborg. Forty per cent of Russia's import and export by road goes through
Finland.
The great bulk, about 80%, of surface transport in Russia is still by
rail. The most important recent investment from the perspective of
international transport was an upgrade of the Moscow-St. Petersburg track
and a separation of goods and passenger services between the two cities.
Goods trains now run via Vologda. The recently completed direct connection
between the Murmansk railway line and the harbours of the Gulf of Bothnia
(Lietmajärvi-Kotshkoma-Kostamus) opens up a direct connection also to
Arkhangelsk. The plan to continue the further to Perm and the
Trans-Siberian railroad is a hundred years old. What has become known as
the BELKOMUR project is of renewed interest, since it would make possible
the exploitation of the vast forestry resources of Arkhangelsk and Komi.
The decision to create a high-speed train connection, initially between
Helsinki and St. Petersburg and later also as far as Moscow is very
important. It would be the first passenger train service of an
international standard running between the EU and Russia several times each
day. The Finnish Government has already allocated the funds to build a
shortcut line from Helsinki northwards to the city of Lahti. The present
journey time of five and a half hours will be cut to only four and a half
by the year 2004, and the aim is to reduce it further to three hours by
2007/2008.
As was the case a century ago, a new crossing of the River Neva will be
needed to extend the high-speed train service to Moscow. The first railway
bridge over the river, known as the Finland Bridge (Finljandskij most) and
still in use, was built using Finnish Crown funds and following a
protracted controversy in 1913, nearly half a century after the completion
of the rail link between Helsinki and St. Petersburg. This time, the money
to build a bridge over the Neva will have to come out of Russia's state
coffers.
The most underdeveloped part of North-West Russia's infrastructure is
absolutely air services. This applies not only to St. Petersburg, but to
the entire region, from Murmansk to Pskov and from Karelia to Komi.
International air services are a central prerequisite for the development
of companies and economic life in any region. In the case of St. Petersburg
one can even talk of underdevelopment. Traffic rights are reserved almost
exclusively for Russian companies. However, air traffic does not exist for
airline companies, but rather for international trade and travel.
Based on international experience, it is patently obvious that the St.
Petersburg economic region, like the whole of North-West Russia, is
suffering from the present situation. A positive spiral like the one we
have seen in sea traffic can be accomplished also in air services. But
that will happen only by opening up and putting in place the prerequisites
for all airlines to come to St. Petersburg. As an example of differences of
opinion between the EU and Russia, let me mention the dispute that has
persisted for years on the subject of fees for overflying Siberia. The EU
would like the sums paid to be used to develop Russia's air traffic
infrastructure rather than, as is now the case, subsidising Russian
airlines. Another example is the current dispute over aircraft noise. As a
countermeasure, Russia has limited the number of flights that certain
foreign airlines are allowed to operate into St. Petersburg, among other
cities. This is already harming travel to and from the city.
The biggest common denominator in traffic between the EU and Russia is the
long shadow of the customs. It is a nuisance to truck traffic in
particular. The nub of the matter is simple. Customs services in the EU
countries and Russia have strategies that run along largely similar lines.
However, implementation on the practical level is different. This is due to
different operational cultures and economic conditions. The emphasis in the
EU is on ensuring that legal trade and traffic flow smoothly, whilst the
Russian focus is on crime prevention. When the Duma discussed the question
of customs on 11 March, the Rector of Russia's Customs Academy, Leonid
Lozbenko, reported that he had studied the operations of the customs
services on both sides of the Finnish-Russian border. In his view, the
difference is as follows: "On the Finnish side of the border, the customs
perform purely a service function: supervision through service or service
through supervision. On the Russian side, for objective reasons, customs
means the same things as 100% supervision."
The best models that President Putin has called for in the customs sector
will not prevent goods from moving efficiently across borders. In border
arrangements based on these best models there are only two authorities -
the frontier guard and the customs.
A globalised post-modern system does not emphasise sovereignty nor a
separation of internal and external affairs. The EU is an excellent example
of this, but so is the WTO. Integration is a growing together of different
countries' economies, a building of common markets and ultimately the
creation of a common economic area. This presupposes an opening up and
liberalisation of competition on all sides. As a result of competition,
some actors will exit the scene, but the economy of the region as a whole
will be stronger.
St. Petersburg's constantly strengthening status as a goods transport and
logistics centre for Russia's foreign trade is the first example of a
positive growth spiral in this country. Its close integration with the
entire Gulf of Finland region, which has the potential to develop into
another Sound, accentuates its international importance.
*******
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