Johnson's Russia List
#6264
23 May 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Contents:
1. AP: U.S. Concerned About Russian Ties.
2. AP: Poll: Favorable View of Russia.
3. New York Times editorial: Russia's Compass Points West.
4. Rossiiskaya Gazeta: BUSH: UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA ARE NO LONGER
ENEMIES.
5. RIA Novosti: RUSSIA RANKS FIRST IN THE WORLD ACCORDING TO NUMBER
OF STUDENTS.
6. RIA Novosti: ONLY 10 PER CENT OF HEALTHY TEENAGERS IN RUSSIA.
7. Moscow Times: Pavel Felgenhauer, Making Summit of Nothing.
8. Luba Schwartzman: ORT Review.
9. gazeta.ru: Moscow to purge Northern capital.
10. Financial Times (UK): Robert Cottrell, The refined custom of
bribery.
11. RFE/RL: Francesca Mereu, Russia: Public Opinion Divided Over
Expectations For Bush-Putin Summit.
12. Moscow News: Sergei Sossinsky, Waiting in Line.
13. Marina Kalashnikova: travelling passport.
14. Baltimore Sun editorial: Potemkin village.
15. Newsday: Dimitri Simes and Paul Saunders, U.S., Russia Getting
on One Accord.
16. Washington Post: Sharon LaFraniere, Russia's Well-Connected
Patriarch. As Church Enjoys Revival of Influence, Its Past Remains
Clouded.]
*******
#1
U.S. Concerned About Russian Ties
May 23, 2002
By DEBORAH SEWARD
MOSCOW (AP) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has firmly steered his
country toward the West in the last year, but his ambitions in the East
trouble Washington and could lead to some testy talk at this week's
U.S.-Russian summit.
Putin moved quickly to condemn the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the United
States, and that goodwill helped pave the way for the arms control
agreement to be signed Friday in the Kremlin and a new NATO-Russia
agreement to be initialed next week in Rome.
In another effort to improve relations with his country's former enemies in
the West, Putin will seek better economic, transport and energy ties at a
European-Union-Russia summit that comes only a day after the NATO-Russia
summit.
Putin will press for even closer economic relations with the West at the
G-8 summit in Canada in late June, where he will meet Bush for the sixth time.
``The series of summits in May and June may help get rid of the legacy of
the Cold War, ending Russia's isolation and bringing it back into Europe,''
Sergei Markov, director of the Institute for Political Research, said this
week.
While some of the Russian political and military elite continue to smart
over Russia's loss of superpower status a decade after the Soviet collapse,
a new generation of pragmatists led by Putin see a chance to recover some
of the country's international influence through improved ties with the West.
``There is a chance now for real partnership,'' Sergei Rogov, the head of
the USA-Canada Institute said Wednesday.
But while Putin is actively pursuing better economic and political ties
with Europe and the United States, he also has been busy tending to
relations with three nations in the Middle and Far East which Bush has
called ``the axis of evil'' - Iran, Iraq and North Korea.
Just two days before Bush's arrival in Russia, North Korean Foreign
Minister Paek Nam Sun was in Moscow for talks that Foreign Minister Igor
Ivanov said were of ``exceptional significance'' and were believed to have
included discussions of Russian help for building a nuclear power plant.
While Russia has somewhat cooled its relations with Iraq and no longer is
openly objecting to proposed new sanctions, any U.S.-led military action
against Baghdad could lead to new strains between Moscow and Washington.
``The United States ignores our opinion in a less obvious way compared to
what it does to its closest allies,'' analyst Vyacheslav Nikonov, head of
the Politika think tank, said, referring in part to plans of military
action against Iraq.
And Russia's continued nuclear cooperation with Iran remains a source of
tension between Moscow and Washington.
Putin and Iranian President Mohammad Khatami strengthened their own
personal relationship during a summit of Caspian Sea leaders last month.
Russia insists that the United States has no business interfering with the
pursuit of what Moscow considers its legitimate interests in Iran,
including nuclear agreements.
Russia also seems increasingly uneasy about the growing U.S. military
presence in Central Asia and recently has taken new steps to increase its
own diplomatic and military activity in that vital region.
Despite U.S. disapproval, Russia in the past year has taken significant
steps to strengthen its relationship with China, signing a major new
friendship treaty last summer to solidify reconciliation between the two
neighbors.
*******
#2
Poll: Favorable View of Russia
May 22, 2002
The Associated Press
More than six in 10 Americans hold a favorable view of Russia and consider
the country a friend of the United States, says an ABC poll released
Wednesday.
That's the public's most favorable view of Russia in a decade. Seventy-two
percent approved of the way President Bush is handling relations with Russia.
The ABC News poll of 1,043 adults was taken May 15-19 and has an error
margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points.
The poll also found:
Education had a strong influence on views of Russia, with two-thirds of
those who have been to college and less than half of those who haven't
finished high school feeling positive about the country.
Men were more likely than women to have a favorable view of Russia.
Only six in 10 Democrats approved of the president's handling of relations
with Russia, while nine in 10 Republicans felt that way.
******
#3
New York Times
May 23, 2002
Editorial
Russia's Compass Points West
Ever since Peter the Great looked to Europe in the late 17th century as a
model for modernizing Russia, the integration of Russia and the West has
been an alluring but unfulfilled dream. This week, as President Bush visits
Moscow and St. Petersburg, the splendid city by the Baltic that Peter
founded, he can bring that dream closer to realization. Building on the
political and economic changes that have rolled across Europe since the
cold war ended, Mr. Bush and President Vladimir Putin of Russia have
brought Russia to Europe's doorstep. With further work, they can guide it
across the threshold.
The events of Sept. 11 united Washington and Moscow in new ways, and Mr.
Putin's supportive call to Mr. Bush just hours after the terror attacks
helped seal the friendship that was developing between them. The nuclear
arms reduction accord that the two leaders will sign in Moscow, followed a
few days later in Italy by the confirmation of a new relationship between
Russia and NATO, are the most tangible symbols of a growing partnership.
Underlying these achievements are powerful historical forces that have
drawn East and West together since the demise of Communism and the collapse
of the Soviet empire.
It has not always been a pretty process. The introduction of democracy and
free markets to Russia after 1,000 years of tyranny has produced painful
economic and social dislocation. The sudden contraction of Russia's
military power and global reach has left the nation stunned. Even now,
vestiges of Russia's historic ambition can be seen in Moscow's nuclear
assistance to Iran, its misbegotten romance with Saddam Hussein and
lingering bitterness over NATO's war with Yugoslavia three years ago. Yet
through these years of turbulence, Russia under Boris Yeltsin and Mr. Putin
has been drawn westward by the gravitational pull of trade, financial
markets and democracy.
As Russia and the West converge, Washington and Moscow are approaching a
state of nearly normal relations, free of the high drama — and
disappointments — that so often marked cold-war summit meetings. Once the
arms treaty is signed, committing the nations to cut their arsenals of
long-range nuclear weapons by two-thirds by 2012, Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin
will have to turn to the tough business of controlling the spread of
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, combating terrorism and enhancing
economic cooperation.
For Mr. Putin, that means setting aside longstanding secrecy about the
Soviet Union's elaborate biological weapons program so that Moscow and
Washington can work together to inventory, secure and ultimately destroy
remaining armaments and the germ labs used to make them. Mr. Bush, for his
part, must not shrink from publicly distinguishing between a carefully
managed battle against terrorism, like the war in Afghanistan, and Moscow's
brutish military campaign to suppress Chechen separatists. Mr. Bush should
also speak up on behalf of a free press and the rule of law, principles
that Mr. Putin has often been quick to bulldoze.
Fully integrating Russia with the West will take years, and a great deal of
skillful diplomacy by American, European and Russian leaders. Strong-arming
Russia will not work, and a disdain for international treaties, like Mr.
Bush's renunciation of the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, will not
help. But with enlightened leadership on all sides, the visit of an
American president to Moscow may someday seem little different from a stop
in Paris or Berlin.
*******
#4
Rossiiskaya Gazeta
May 23, 2002
BUSH: UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA ARE NO LONGER ENEMIES
Author: Mikhail Gusman
[from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]
ON THE EVE OF THE VISIT TO RUSSIA, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH HAS
GRANTED AN INTERVIEW IN WHICH HE SPEAKS ABOUT HIS EXPECTATIONS AND
HOPES, HIS FIRST THOUGHTS AND ACTIONS AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, AND HIS
PERSONAL LIFE. PRESIDENT BUSH SAYS HE SUPPORTS THE RAPPROCHEMENT OF
NATO AND RUSSIA.
George Bush: I trust President Putin
On the eve of the visit to Russia, President George W. Bush
granted an interview to ITAR-TASS first deputy director general
Mikhail Gusman.
Mikhail Gusman: Thank you for this unique opportunity to meet
with you on the eve of your historic visit to Russia. Mr. President,
with what mood are you embarking on this visit? What do you hope to
achieve during the meetings with President Putin?
George Bush: Well, first, we have never been to Russia before.
Russia is a great country and we gladly look forward to seeing it. We
look forward to visiting Moscow, visiting St. Petersburg. So... even
from the point of view of expanding the mental outlook, our world-
view, this will be a wonderful experience.
Second, an important visit is at hand, as the world will make
certain that the US and Russia are no longer enemies, that we are
friends. I hope to sign an important document that will make this
clear.
Third, I would like the world to learn that we are real friends
with President Putin. I like him and I trust him. We have good talks.
And this will be an opportunity to talk... to discuss our relations
again.
All this is important for the world to see, as Russia is a great
country and the US is a great country. And when two great countries
are friends and get along well, this helps to calm down... may
contribute to peace in restless districts of the planet. This is
important.
Mikhail Gusman: Mrs. Bush, what would you like to see in Moscow
and St. Petersburg?
Laura Bush: Of course, it will be interesting for me to see your
beautiful country, all the splendor of its culture - the pictures of
the Hermitage, ballet - in a word, everything I am enthusiastic about.
But it will also be interesting for me to be a guest of Mrs. Putin.
Mikhail Gusman: Mr. President, this will be your fifth meeting
with President Putin, it seems. How are your personal relations
developing?
George Bush: Well, well indeed. As you said, this will be the
fifth meeting. And if there had been no personal understanding or it
had been bad, there would have been no the five meetings, there would
have been only one. But will be meeting for the fifth time, which in
itself testifies, first, to the meaning of these relations, and
second, to how well we are getting along with each other.
We have much in common with President Putin. First, we both love
our wives and daughters. We love our motherlands, love physical
exercises, love being in the fresh air.
Mikhail Gusman: Let me touch upon two political topics: nuclear
arms reduction and the Russia-NATO relationship. In brief, what do you
expect for these topics from the upcoming summit?
George Bush: After the visit to Russia we are departing for Italy
to the NATO forum in which Vladimir Putin will participate. I hope the
"twenty" format relationship will be codified and registered there,
which will secure Russia a unique and important status in relations
with NATO. This will be extremely important.
I support the "twenty" mode for Russia. I think this will be...
As they say, Tony Blair and I have long been working on this and
Vladimir Putin knows about my attitude to this matter.
Second, I want us to codify reduction... considerable strategic
arms reduction. This is important, to show the world that we are no
longer enemies, that we do not clutch at the stores of those terrible
arms, that new interrelations are beginning to develop.
Mikhail Gusman: Mr. President, let me go back to the September 11
tragedy. What were your first thoughts, words, decisions after the
terrorist attack?
George Bush: Get them.
Of course, this was a stab right in my heart. See, I was sitting
at that time in a school classroom in Florida. Before this, I had been
told that the airplane had crashed into the building. I was sitting
and listening a story of how kids learn to read. And then my chief of
staff came up to me and said, "America has been attacked".
I talked to Vladimir Putin at the very beginning too. This meant
much for me. For in previous times, if the US had sounded the alarm,
Russia would have also sounded the alarm. This might have created a
problem. But Vladimir Putin knew that our alarm did not pose a threat
for Russia. And his call was very gratifying, comforting, and very
important.
Mikhail Gusman: From where did you derive your inward strength
that frightful day? Do you have a feeling that it is given to you from
on high?
George Bush: Yes, I have. I trust in Providence. And I prayed.
Asked to give me strength, wisdom, and comfort, of course.
Mikhail Gusman: Mr. President, you are the second president in
your family. What influence did your father have on you, as a man, a
symbol in a way?
George Bush: You know, this is an excellent question. I get along
well with myself - it seems to me that is primarily because I accept
myself as I am. I do not try to change myself, to pretend that I am
somewhat different in fact.
It seems to me this is because my mom and dad unconditionally
loved me. Nothing can be better than mom and dad's love. And my
parents loved me. As a young man, I sometimes was difficult to love,
but they did. The main thing my mom and dad gave me is love.
Mikhail Gusman: I remember at the meeting in Austin you mentioned
your mother's name six times. And I could never forget her tears when
at the inauguration she was standing between the two presidents - the
husband and son. She had six sons. What it was like for the eldest son
and brother to grow up in such a big family?
George Bush: It seems to me the eldest son may have... in many
respects unique relations with his mother. I am close to my mom, my
dad. You know, in Texas they said about me: he has his dad's eyes and
mom's tongue. Of course, I inherited a great deal from my mother and I
thank fate for this.
We are a loving family. Family is very important to us. For Laura
and me, and my next relatives. My brothers treat Laura as a sister. As
for Laura, she had no brothers and sisters of her own, but she
received a big family into the bargain.
Laura Bush: And this is so pleasant.
Mikhail Gusman: Well, Mr. President, what were your first
impressions on meeting Laura?
George Bush: I was overcome. This was love at first sight. I was
head over heels in love. And as Laura just said, we did not need much
time to understand that we are made for each other. We married in
three months - a very brief courtship.
(Translated by P. Pikhnovsky)
*******
#5
RUSSIA RANKS FIRST IN THE WORLD ACCORDING TO NUMBER OF STUDENTS
MOSCOW, May 22, 2002. /From RIA Novosti correspondent Galina Filippova/. -
According to a number of students Russia ranks first in the world - of 10,000
Russian people 340 are students. The data was given by Russian Minister of
Education Vladimir Filippov in the course of the State Duma (lower chamber of
the Parliament) plenary meeting.
At the same time he explained, that "the standard number of students must be
170 on every 10,000 of population and the Federal budget must pay for their
education".
The present-day number of students - 340 on every 10,000 of population - is
the highest mark in Russia during the reformation years, Vladimir Filippov
stressed. According to the Minister, in the times of the Soviet Union this
mark estimated at 220 students on every 10,000 of population.
At the present day 621 higher education and 2595 secondary professional
education State institutes function in Russia, the Minister said. 7,2 mln
students study at the higher and secondary education institutes. Annual
entrance of students into higher and secondary education institutions amounts
at more than 2 mln people.
At the same time, with the recent worsening of the social and economic
development, the young people do not always have a chance to realise their
right for education, the Minister said.
Having spoken about the social status of students of higher and secondary
education institutions, the Minister said, that the average maintenance
allowance in Russia estimates at 200 roubles a month. Those students, who are
studying well, receive extra state social maintenance allowance of 300
roubles a month.
The Ministry of Education is taking all necessary measures to fulfil a
complete state provision for orphan-teenagers, who are studying in higher and
secondary education institutions.
According to the survey of the Ministry of education, 95% of students receive
financial aid from their parents, 35% - from part-time jobs, and 10% are
being sponsored, the Minster stated.
The Ministry plans to take a number of measures, concerning an improvement of
students' social status. According to the Minister, it is planned in autumn
to adopt an act of purposeful social support for the needy students of higher
and secondary education institutions.
The Ministry also proposes for the draft of the 2003 Federal budget at least
a double increase of maintenance allowance. At the same time the Minister
outlined, that the maintenance allowance in Russia have not been raised for
2,5 years.
The Ministry of Education proposes for the draft of the 2003 Federal budget
to yield 24,1 bln of roubles for the social support and invigoration of
students.
*******
#6
ONLY 10 PER CENT OF HEALTHY TEENAGERS IN RUSSIA
MOSCOW, May 22, 2002. /from a RIA Novosti correspondent/. - According to
doctors, there are only 10 per cent of healthy teenagers and young people in
Russia, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov said, opening a regular
governmental meeting on Wednesday. The premier noted that these numbers are
negative from demographic point of view. "Speaking about demography of
citizens, we should take into account these numbers," he said. According to
Kasyanov, the Wednesday meeting should thoroughly consider measures, which
are to be taken for popularization of sport, physical culture and healthy way
of life in Russia.
The project of sub-programme of physical and sportive education of children,
teenagers and young people for 2002-2005, an aspect of Russia's Youth
programme, is one of the key issues at the today's meeting.
*******
#7
Moscow Times
May 23, 2002
Making Summit of Nothing
By Pavel Felgenhauer
This week's summit in Moscow between Presidents George W. Bush and Vladimir
Putin has, for more than half a year, been Russia's main foreign policy
priority. A lot of political capital has been invested in making the summit a
success and many careers in Moscow hinge on the outcome.
Russian diplomats say they have done a great job and prepared a "serious
package of documents" for the two presidents to sign. Now the Foreign
Ministry is doing its best to sell this package to the country and to the
political elite in Moscow. Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov has been lobbying the
as yet unpublished agreements in the State Duma, telling deputies that the
treaty limiting nuclear warheads may be short and lacking in detail but it's
the best deal Moscow could have hoped for.
The Bush administration from the outset wanted its hands free in forming
future U.S. defenses. The Kremlin pressed for a legally binding treaty and
got one in the end. But under the terms of the treaty, U.S. experts say in 10
years time the United States could still have some 4,600 warheads (partially
deployed, partially stored for rapid deployment), while Russia will manage
fewer than 1,500.
Ivanov says this is a "compromise" and certainly the accord reflects new
realities much better than previous U.S.-Russian agreements signed in the
1990s that were built on the false premise that some equality still existed
between the former Cold War adversaries.
Ivanov also told Duma deputies that Washington has agreed to limit its future
missile defense shield and that such a pledge is included in a special
nonbinding political declaration the presidents will sign in Moscow. Of
course, that's a very liberal interpretation of the text. The declaration
only states (as Washington has stated many times before) that missile defense
is not aimed at Russia.
In general, the desire to create for public consumption the image of a great
breakthrough at the summit has pushed government officials on both sides of
the Atlantic to publicize lots of vague ideas that will create false
expectations, as has happened over and over again during previous
U.S.-Russian get-togethers, to the detriment of long-term understanding
between the two countries.
Word has come from highly placed sources in Washington that the United States
will offer to cooperate with Russia in the building of future missile defense
systems and may share technologies. The response in Moscow was instantaneous:
Cooperation with the rich and mighty United States is always understood in
Moscow as a handout of U.S. taxpayer money to impoverished Russia and its
dilapidated defense industry.
But U.S. Congress rules on spending taxpayers' money are strict: No foreign
entity can get a contract if there is a valid American bidder. Washington has
never managed to run a major joint defense production and procurement program
in cooperation with its closest European allies, let alone Moscow.
U.S. companies that are today developing missile defense have already stated
categorically that they do not need or want Russian subcontractors. The idea
of sharing missile defense technologies will most likely boil down to
Washington inviting Russia, together with Japan and NATO countries, to foot
part of the missile defense bill by buying some U.S.-made components to
install on their territory.
Attempts to find ways to reward Russia for good behavior have much
preoccupied decision-makers in the West of late. It's argued that without a
visible payback Putin will be severely attacked by domestic critics and may
get frustrated with his present pro-Western policies. And then someone in the
West may be accused of "losing Russia" again.
In reality, many generals only get the shivers when they see bigger and
brighter Western smiles. If the Russian military finally loses its NATO
enemy, many of them will surely lose their jobs.
The producers of lousy cars in this country do not want World Trade
Organization membership -- they want protective tariffs. Russian arms makers
and traders want a "multipolar world" to promote exclusive export contracts
with China, Iran and India. No additional smiles or rewards (especially
dubious ones) will ever convert the institutional opposition to the West in
Russia.
The future of U.S.-Russian relations will be decided in Moscow, not at the
summit, but in an increasingly bitter confrontation between the forces of old
Russia and the new emerging capitalist classes. And Western involvement in
this fray often produces detrimental results.
Pavel Felgenhauer is an independent defense analyst.
*******
#8
ORT Review
www.ortv.ru
Compiled by Luba Schwartzman (luba7@bu.edu)
Research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology and
Policy at Boston University
HEADLINES,
Wednesday, May 22, 2002
- The Press Center for the celebration of the 300th anniversary of St.
Petersburg was opened today.
- Georgian President Eduard Shevarnadze admitted that terrorists have made
the Pankissi Gorge their main base of operations.
- US President Georgia W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush will arrive in
Russia tomorrow on an official visit.
- Russian President Vladimir Putin chaired today's meeting of the State
Council. The effect of current international events on Russian politics,
Russian foreign policy and Russian-American relations were at the top of
the agenda.
- President Putin presented outstanding scientists, soldiers, politicians,
teachers, and artists with state awards at the Kremlin today.
- Kyrgyz Prime Minister Kurmanbek Bakiev, the head of the presidential
administration Amanbek Karypkulov, and most members the Kyrgyz government
resigned today in connection with the tragic events of 17-18 May. First
Deputy Prime Minister Nikolai Tanaev was appointed acting Prime Minister.
- Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov criticized the work of the
defense department leadership. In particular, Ivanov was unhappy with the
progress on goals set for the winter training period.
- The trial of five Chechen terrorists who took part in the June 1995
attack on Budennovsk began in Stavropol. The men fought under Shamil
Basaev's command.
- Federal Security Service Director Nikolai Patrushev arrived in
Makhachkala to meet with members of the interdepartmental group
investigating the terrorist act that took place in Kaspiysk on May 9th.
- Deputy Prime Minister Aleksei Kudrin and Minister of Trade and Economic
Development German Gref met with the leaders of centrist parties of the
State Duma to discuss reform of taxes on small- and medium-sized business.
- State Duma deputies accepted the presidential amendments to the
electoral law in the final reading.
- Yabloko leader Grigoriy Yavlinsky received a certificate from the
Justice Ministry confirming the registration of his party. There are now
18 parties that can participate in the upcoming Duma elections.
- The Russian Cabinet reviewed a draft of the federal program of
agricultural social development through 2010.
- Large-scale border infractions have been registered in the Far East.
Hundreds of Chinese citizens were entering Russia illegally to collect
ferns that no longer grow in China.
- Forest fires continue in Siberia and the Far East. Russian Emergency
Minister Sergei Shoigu has set off for the region. Two special
fire-fighting airplanes have been dispatched. Almost 3,000 people, about
400 bulldozers, and 32 aircraft have been mobilized.
- Three soldiers died and seven others were wounded when their military
armored vehicle hit a landmine in the Kurchaloi Region of Chechnya.
- Japanese doctors are fighting for the lives of Russian Border Troops
General Vitaly Gamov and his wife Larisa. The prognosis is not favorable
-- the general has burns over 95 percent of his body surface, his wife,
over 87 percent.
*******
#9
gazeta.ru
May 22, 2002
Moscow to purge Northern capital
By Makar Stechkin
Interior Minister Boris Gryzlov has ruled on the establishment of an ad-hoc
task force to ensure “the decriminalization of the situation in
St.Petersburg”. In the opinion of some experts, the real aim of the
campaign is actually to help oil giants to take control of the city network
of filling stations.
The head of the operational-investigative bureau of the chief directorate
for combating organized crime (GUBOP) Vladimir Bulatov told a news briefing
at the Interior Ministry on Tuesday that in the near future his
subordinates would set out for the Northern capital to combat organized
criminal groups, controlling lucrative business spheres throughout the
city, as well as minor gangs engaged in theft and robbery.
Special emphasis will be given to enterprises of the fuel and energy
industry in St.Petersburg. To combat economic crime, a special operational
headquarters will be established in the city and experts from Moscow and
St.Petersburg will gather and process relevant data.
It is not the first time that the Interior Ministry has resorted to such
action against organized crime, a GUBOP official explained to Gazeta.Ru.
Moscow experts regularly go to Russian regions to assist in investigations
of especially serious and complicated crimes. But usually, such joint
investigation groups are established not at the ministerial level but by
chiefs of the local Interior Ministry’s directorates.
GUBOP representatives report that the Minister’s decision on a
St.Petersburg taskforce was prompted by reports that ''enterprises in the
fuel and energy complex are extremely criminalized''. Currently, according
to GUBOP officials, the St.Petersburg police alone are not capable of
coping with the wave of crime in this sphere. That is why federal
investigators will lend a helping hand to their colleagues in the Northern
capital.
According to GUBOP officials, the purpose of the ''cleanup'' operation in
St.Petersburg is to establish control over business activities ''of certain
representatives of the fuel and energy complex of St.Petersburg'' and to
eliminate criminal groups operating in that field. However, the anti-mafia
agency officials have provided no further details of the operation.
According to Gazeta.Ru sources, the cleanup will not affect the major
energy firms of St.Petersburg, such as the city power grid Lenenergo and
St.Petersburg’s TEK (Fuel and Energy Complex).
Unofficial sources believe GUBOP investigators will focus on the city’s
petroleum business, as this sector has of late been subject to
unprecedented pressure from criminal groups trying to wrest control of the
city’s network of filling stations. In 2000-2001, several employees of the
Neste and Balt-trade filling stations were killed in St.Petersburg.
It transpires that the cleanup campaign about to be launched is aimed at
clearing the way in the city’s petroleum market for oil giants such as
Lukoil, Sibneft, Tyumen Oil Company and Tatneft. Some of the oil majors
have already encountered serious difficulties attempting to enter the market.
Slavneft was one of the first oil firms to venture into the city’s network
of filling stations, establishing links with local company Faeton. Faeton
already owned 35 stations in St.Petersburg. While the parties were
negotiating a deal on the joint construction of another filling station,
Faeton encountered its first problems. They found that somebody was adding
tar to their petrol tanks. The saboteurs turned out to be tramps paid 200
roubles to spoil the fuel. Those financing the vandalism, however, were
never caught. In a more serious development, police found and defused a
bomb equivalent to 1.5 kg of TNT planted at a filling station earlier this
year. Luckily, the blast was averted.
It is apparent that major oil firms are encountering serious difficulties
in St.Petersburg. It cannot, therefore, be ruled out that those major oil
companies, hoping to break into the Northern capital’s fuel distribution
network, have initiated the special police campaign launched by the
Interior Ministry. In other words, if the task force from Moscow discovers
that the present owners of St.Petersburg’s filling stations are guilty of
any kind of criminal activity, they are likely to be driven out of business.
*******
#10
Financial Times (UK)
23 May 2002
Inside Russia: The refined custom of bribery
By Robert Cottrell in Moscow
Corruption in Russia is such a tired subject, and one so hard to address
without sounding patronising, that I would stay away from it even now were it
not for a brilliant presentation on May 21 by Georgy Satarov -a big, bearded
man who used to be an adviser to President Boris Yeltsin, and who now runs a
think-tank called Indem.
Satarov was unveiling the results of what must rank as the most exhaustive
survey yet of corruption in Russia, based on interviews with 700 businessmen
and 2,000 people from other walks of life. The project was supported by the
Danish government and the World Bank. "There are virtually no experts on
corruption in Russia", Satarov began. "We only have refined practitioners."
I cannot pretend the general conclusion -there is a lot of corruption in
Russia- ranks as particularly surprising. However, I have never heard the
mechanics and psychology of it so confidently analysed, nor figures put on it
so persuasively, as Satarov managed this week. Nor have I ever heard anybody
else be quite so funny, or so sad, about it all.
For the sadness, try this reply from Satarov when asked if he himself had
bribed anybody recently.
Yes, he said, in February. "An elderly auntie of my wife's who is living with
us fell at home, bashing her head against the door frame. We had to take her
to hospital at night. Adoctor came up to us and said "What a wonderful auntie
you have got! Such a pity I will have to sew her up with our Russian threads,
because they will rot in her body and then it will be hard to get them out of
there. But there are also foreign-made threads -and if you find 500 roubles,
there will be no problem."
Needless to say, Satarov found 500 roubles - a little more than $10.
And his wife's aunt got her foreign surgical thread - illustrating another
main conclusion from the research, namely, that the satisfaction rate from
bribing in Russia is extremely high. In only two per cent of cases, people
said, had they given bribes and failed to get the agreed favour. This 98 per
cent success rate makes bribery, in Satarov's words, a "very efficient and
dependable market... the most efficient services market in our country".
It may also be the largest market in the country. Based on the data
volunteered by interviewees, private citizens pay at least $2.8bn a year in
bribes, and businessmen pay at least $33bn. Those figures are, respectively,
roughly half what the government collects in income tax from individuals; and
almost equal to what it collects in taxes from businesses. If one assumes
that the individuals interviewed - and especially the businessmen- would
understate their own propensity to bribe, then Russians may well pay more in
bribes than they do in taxes.
The main reason individuals paid bribes, the research found, was to get
medical treatment or a bed in a supposedly free clinic or hospital. The tale
of auntie's stitches is probably all one needs to know about the dynamics
here.
In second place came bribes paid for entry or exam success at institutes of
higher education. Corruption was so general here, Satarov said, that "If a
person cannot pay a bribe, he will not apply". One oddity of this market was
that parents who bought university places for sons did not even do so mainly
with education in mind. They wanted the deferment of compulsory military
service that went with a university place. Russia's war in Chechnya, the
nightmare of every conscript's mother, is not only wreaking death and
devastation. It is also driving up the black-market cost of higher education.
The most striking point about the bribes paid by businessmen was that 99 per
cent of them went to civil servants. Only one per cent went to judges and
lawmakers. As Satarov observed, this says a lot about how Russia is really
run. Only one per cent of the time does the rule of law prevail. The other 99
per cent of time, what matters is the decisions of bureaucrats, which is why
they get 99 per cent of the bribes.
I said at the outset there was always the risk of sounding patronising when
talking about corruption in Russia. It is easy to insinuate that it forms
part of the Russian character, rather than a necessity of Russian life, and I
do not want to leave that impression.
It is worth, for example, pondering a point Satarov makes about the pitiful
pay scales in public health and education, the two places where bribing by
individuals is most common. The staff in these sectors certainly make more in
bribes than they earn in wages - and without the bribes, they could not live.
"In a sense we should be grateful for it", says Satarov. "If it were possible
to control all education and health care personnel so that they could not
take bribes, then under the present pay scales we would have neither higher
educational nor health care institutions left."
I note also that to gauge the feelings of its interviewees about having to
pay bribes, Indem offered them various possible answers. The one you might
have expected to come out top, based on a cynical observation of Russian
life, would be this one: "I'm used to it, it doesn't bother me". But in fact
this finished a poor second. The most common feeling by far was this one: "I
hate our system of government which puts people in such situations".
Indem's work continues. It promises annual refresher surveys to determine
trends in corruption. And in September it promises a survey ranking
corruption in Russia's regions.
I can't wait. Then again, I wonder what it would cost an image-conscious
region to buy a nice, low place in the table.
Whoops. Only joking, Mr Satarov.
*******
#11
Russia: Public Opinion Divided Over Expectations For Bush-Putin Summit
By Francesca Mereu
This week's U.S.-Russia summit is the talk of the town in Moscow. U.S.
President George W. Bush arrives in the Russian capital tomorrow for talks
with Russian President Vladimir Putin. On Friday, Bush and Putin are due to
sign a nuclear-arms reduction accord that calls for large cuts in the U.S.
and Russian arsenals. But a recent public-opinion poll shows that Muscovites
are divided about whether the summit will actually achieve anything of
lasting value.
Moscow, 22 May 2002 (RFE/RL)-- According to a recent poll by the VTsIOM
Russian public-opinion center, 36 percent of Muscovites say they expect this
week's summit between U.S. President George W. Bush and Russian President
Vladimir Putin to yield positive results, while 39 percent believe the summit
will end with little to show. Eight percent say the summit will bring only
negative results for Russia.
Aleksandr Golov, a sociologist who helped conduct the poll, spoke to RFE/RL
and offered his explanation for why so many people in Russia have negative
feelings about the summit.
"Now people are very disappointed with the reforms [that are going on in our
country]. And the U.S. is partly accused of being used as a model for these
reforms. So people put the blame on [the U.S.] about [the failure of] their
domestic problems. People are simple, and they are worried about themselves
and their relatives. Their attitudes toward America are, in general, very
distant. They don't travel a lot. So America is a kind of symbol [for them].
You cannot blame yourself [for your own failure], so people look for someone
else [to blame]," Golov said.
Raisat Gadzhiva is a 41-year-old vendor from Chechnya. Gadzhiva left the
neighboring republic of Daghestan three months ago to find a better life in
the prosperous Russian capital.
Gadzhiva sees the United States as an unreachable country. "I just would like
to get the chance to look at it with my own eyes," she said.
Commenting on the summit, Gadzhiva said normal Russian citizens won't
benefit, since Putin and Bush won't be thinking about them.
"It would be very good if [the summit] brought some results. But I don't
think it will bring positive results. [Both presidents] think about
themselves; they will achieve their goals. But neither of them thinks about
people. If they only thought about the people, our people wouldn't live in
misery. Let's look at the situation in the Caucasus. If they only tried [to
do something] for the people, [the war] would stop there. But an economic war
is going on there, and people are suffering," Gadzhiva said.
Rosa Oryol, a 16-year-old law student, also doesn't expect much from the
summit since, she said, the U.S. is not interested in helping Russia become
the superpower it used to be.
"On the surface, it seems that everything is going well in relations between
Russia and the U.S. But [if we look] inside, everything is very bad. I think
that it will continue this way. There will be meetings [and] presentations;
there will be talks, but they will bring absolutely nothing. The U.S. is now
the strongest and the most powerful country, and Russia is just a former
strong and powerful country. Now our president is trying to raise our
country. Bush pretends that he wants to help us. But inside, I don't think
that now is a convenient time for the U.S. to help Russia get back to the
level it used to have," Oryol said.
Golov said Bush is not very popular among Russians. He said 45 percent of
respondents say they don't like the American president, with only 25 percent
saying they have a positive opinion.
Fifty-eight percent of Russians believe Putin will use this week's summit to
try to bring U.S and Russian relations closer, while only 17 percent think
Bush will try to achieve the same goal.
"I was a bit surprised that just a few people thought [Putin] will play a
selfish game with Bush. People believe that he can defend some common
interests -- common to Russia and America. And Bush doesn't have such trust.
People have a very good opinion of Putin. Putin is seen as ingenuous,
incapable of deceiving. Bush is going to deceive, but Putin won't deceive.
[Putin] is a simple soul. [People] have such ideas about him," Golov said.
Golov said Russians seem to see Putin as the last hope to restore their
country.
Arkadii Shaginyan, a 32-year-old engineer, said he trusts that Putin can
achieve positive results during the summit.
"I really hope that there will be positive results. I believe in Putin, and I
believe that he can find a point of contact with Bush. The most important
thing is world stability. If you have it, it means a flourishing economy and
a normal life both for Russian and American citizens," Shaginyan said.
Twenty-one-year-old Boris Korolev is a medical student in Moscow who said he
also feels positive about this week's summit.
"The relationship [between Russia and the U.S.] should get better, since
these kinds of meetings bring some results, some positive results. For this
reason, I think that something will move forward in our relations," Korolev
said.
According to Golov, Russians are suspicious about the U.S. government but
believe that ordinary Americans are down-to-earth and humble, much like
themselves. He said that while Russians appreciate America's democratic
values, when it comes to politics, most Russians believe Moscow "should take
them by the ear."
******
#12
Moscow News
May 22-28, 2002
Waiting in Line
By Sergei Sossinsky
If there was one distinctive feature of life in the socialist countries, it
was queues.
There were lines in shops, reception offices, post offices, health
facilities, ticket offices and just about anywhere else where people were
attempting to obtain goods and services or other privileges. It is too soon
to say that queues have disappeared from Russia, but at least in cities one
no longer has to waste two hours to get a piece of sausage or some oranges.
In the past, though, the queue played an important role in life. Indeed, most
citizens spent, if not the larger, frequently the most active, part of their
lives in lines. The queue was an important component of the grape vine, a
source of information and a place where people could speak if not with full
impunity at least with the hope that their interlocutors would not
necessarily drop whatever they had to do and run to the KGB to inform on them.
In the countryside queues are still more common than in the cities. This week
I rode on my cart to Medvedki, the nearest village to my house which has a
food shop. It was a wickedly cold day with the sun out. Spring had finally
come, but as it always happens at this time of year, there had been cold
nights that held the apple trees back from blossoming fully.
I found a line in the shop that would provoke nostalgia among most people who
have lived under the Soviet regime.
One of the ladies in the line was the head of the administration, a youngish
woman of an impressive build. She was giving the local peasants a pep talk
concerning the issue of new passports of the Russian Federation instead of
the old ones that still bear the old name of the country - the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics. One of the peasant women objected: in our village
of Kishino no one ever asks you for your passport. You have to change your
passport all the same, said the administration head with Soviet sternness.
Well send a photographer to your village, but youll have to pay for the
passport and the gas for the car thatll take the photographer there.
Another old woman had gotten her groceries, and she said in a peasant fashion
to the shop keeper: God bless you, I wish you to have a good husband. I dont
need a husband, I need a suitor. Husbands only make things bad for you,
replied the young shop keeper. Nowadays, you can live without registering
your marriage, the administration head reiterated.
But you do need a passport, she insisted.
A younger lady said that the local newspaper had reported that the new
passports as they were being issued were invalid, since they did not contain
a line indicating the number of the old passport. The bureaucracy had bungled
things up again, and citizens would have to pay for the mistake by spending
many more hours in line at the passport office.
I walked out of the shop so much the wiser. My next stop would be the
Susanino poultry factory. I needed to buy some chickens that would hopefully
provide me with eggs.
I had visited the poultry factory several years ago and written about it. It
was one of the few enterprises in the district that remained afloat, but only
just. I noticed that the side gates were wide open, although there was no one
there. The guard on duty at the central gates was an energetic young man. Not
only that, but he was actually very helpful. In Russia helpful people are
about as common as tigers in the Russian Far East.
Moreover, the guard was full of information concerning the factory. The
statistics came pouring out. He could be working at the factory book-keeping
office. Each box contains 560 eggs, and the factory produces eight boxes a
day, thus the money from sales was about 90,000 rubles.
In between figures he made runs into the factory to find the lady who could
help me buy the chickens, warning me to stay at the gates. There are places
in the factory even Im not allowed to go into, he said. Its serious stuff, he
admonished me. If something goes wrong, and its my fault, theyll bury me.
But theres no fence in the back, he informed me. Theres no sense in having
one guard. Anyone can walk in from the back. What you need is a barbed wire
fence with dogs on the loose inside. But the employees are not interested in
stealing, since each poultry worker gets 60 kopeks per egg. The factory gets
180 kopeks or more. The wage is still very low. If there were another
enterprise to work at for women in Susanino, all the employees would be gone
tomorrow.
Finally, the lady I wanted appeared and sent me to the factory office to pay
money and obtain a receipt, actually even two receipts. Nothing had changed
since I had bought eggs here several years ago. It was still the same
cumbersome Soviet system, although allegedly the factory was now the property
of stock owners.
Soon my long wait was over. The five chickens were safely tucked away in a
bag and a box, and I was all set to go home. The way back was much warmer,
the suns rays had warmed up the cold earth and cool air.
The next morning, I had four fresh eggs at home.
******
#13
From: Marina Kalashnikova
Sent: 5/22/02
Subject: travelling passport
Dear David:
I've forwarded this letter to George W. Bush today.
I believe that it may be of some interest for JRL readers as
well.
Dear Mr. President!
Let me ask you for protecting my basic rights. I'm not
political dissident or Chechen refugee. If I had been one of
them I wouldn't have requested for help of any of Western
states, which now tend to take superficially their problems.
My case is as much distinct as it involves the U.S.
Government. That's why I've already addressed to the high-
ranking American officials, but got only bureaucratic rebuff.
So, I appeal to you as the highest authority.
In the end of March I applied for a new travelling passport in
one of the Moscow Ministry of Interior branch (OVIR). The
Russian law gives no more than 30 days for issuance the
document. I haven't got it so far.
Head of the branch told me, that the Russian security
service, the FSB, had declined issuing the passport because
of my previous work at the US Embassy, Moscow. In May
1998 - March 2000 I was a senior media advisor in the
Embassy's press office. 'American Embassy is a red rag for
FSB, and you will pay for that job for the rest of your life', -
the official added. 'FSB doesn't stick with the law nowadays,
referring to the national security'. He didn't recommend to
claim to the court, because 'FSB would block the lawsuit. No
wonder - under Putin FSB has risen up', - he encouraged
me. Such openness is understandable regarding traditional
competition between Ministry of Interior and the Secret
police in this country.
I asked the U.S. Ambassador for help in settling this
problem. Instead, human resources officer replied, that the
Embassy wouldn't be involved, and 'issuance of passport is
a matter between me and the Russian Government'.
This situation clearly constitutes direct violation of both
Russian and international law, which guarantee freedom of
travel. Still, it has no visible ways out. Maybe you could
suggest one.
Very sincerely,
Dr. Marina Kalashnikova,
Political Observer,
'Nezavisimaya Gazeta', Russia
*******
#14
Baltimore Sun
May 22, 2002
Editorial
Potemkin village
SO FAR THIS month, the Cold War has already ended twice: once when the
Russian and American presidents announced an arms-cut treaty, and then
shortly afterward when Russia signed up to take an honorary place at NATO's
table. Tomorrow, George Bush goes to Moscow to meet Vladimir Putin, and
before his four-day visit is done someone is bound to try to end the Cold War
yet again.
Enough already. It's over with. Finito. The Cold War ended at least 11 and
maybe 13 years ago.
So why does everyone keep talking about it? Do they just like the way it
sounds?
Sadly, no. Dredging up the Cold War, only to bury it again, is a way to focus
on Russia as a great power, as a nuclear heavyweight, and now as a new
partner with the West. It's a way to pretend that this is all about
geostrategy and a lot of other mumbo-jumbo. It's a distraction, to keep
attention away from what this summit is really about.
Mr. Putin, clearly acting in what he believed to be Russia's best interests,
took an enormous gamble last fall when he aligned his country with the United
States in its war on terrorism. It was a logical but by no means inevitable
move. And it is too soon to say whether the gamble is going to pay off.
But it's already clear that Russia is going to need help. The economy, which
grew the past two years, is crumbling. In the country's most productive
regions - the Urals and along the Volga - output is down. Wage arrears are
growing again. Some signs suggest the ruble may be in for another nose-dive.
This is new territory for Mr. Putin.
What Russia wants from the United States is stability. This explains, in
part, why Russia conceded so much on the questions of missiles and nuclear
arms. Russia badly needed a treaty, and gave up most of its bargaining
positions to get one. By slashing the number of nuclear warheads, it will be
able to reduce its ruinous military spending - and, incidentally, make itself
look a lot more inviting to Western investors.
But Mr. Putin also doesn't want to see the United States go off half-cocked
against the axis of evil. Mr. Putin apparently fears that the unintended
consequences of an American attack on, say, Iraq could end up giving Russia a
severe case of whiplash (by way of various unsteady neighbors and an Islamic
terrorist or two).
The Kremlin has recognized that it can't fight the United States. Mr. Putin
is going to have to try to sway Mr. Bush through charm and persuasion. He has
to make the summit look like Russia's grand re-entry into the civilized
world. He has to make it look like the end of the Cold War.
The American president would do well to go along. Mr. Putin is still popular
among ordinary Russians, but the sorts of people who infect the echelons of
power are decidedly less enthusiastic about him. A foreign policy disaster or
an economic debacle could set loose any number of unhelpful forces. There are
those within the Russian military who would be only too happy to make trouble
for American soldiers now in Central Asia and Georgia.
An overtly hostile Russia would make U.S. foreign affairs indescribably more
complicated. Does this mean that Washington must tie its Russian policy to
the fate of one man, a former KGB agent who rose precipitously to power? No,
far from it. That has been America's mistake in Russia for far too long. But
here is a case where America's own interests will best be served if Mr.
Putin's gamble turns out to be a winner.
********
#15
Newsday
May 22, 2002
U.S., Russia Getting on One Accord
By Dimitri K. Simes and Paul J. Saunders
Dimitri K. Simes is president of the Nixon Center in Washington. Paul J.
Saunders is the center's director.
The U.S.-Russian summit that begins tomorrow in Moscow represents a major
opportunity not only in U.S.-Russian relations, but also in American foreign
policy. Yet, interestingly, this opportunity lies less in the substance of
the meetings - which have been orchestrated over the course of the last
several months - than in the evolving basis of the relationship.
One of the summit's principal "deliverables" is expected to be an
arms-control treaty that slashes U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals to 1,700
to 2,200 warheads each. In reality, the treaty changes little: It essentially
codifies force-reduction decisions that each government took independently
for its own reasons while preserving each country's ability to adjust its
force structure.
In Russia's case, the Kremlin will be able (if it chooses to do so) to cut
costs by loading additional warheads onto heavy missiles. Still, because the
treaty utilizes existing verification procedures established by the START I
agreement, it promotes predictability and transparency.
However, as President George W. Bush is reported to have noted recently, few
Americans currently lose sleep over the possibility of a U.S.-Russian nuclear
exchange. Of far greater concern in the 21st century, and expected to be
discussed at the summit, is the danger of nuclear "leakage" - the possibility
that terrorists or "rogue states" could obtain nuclear warheads, materials or
technology from the massive and disintegrating Russian nuclear-weapons
complex. Improved U.S.-Russian ties are a real help in this area. It is
self-evident that collaboration on such sensitive matters would be sharply
limited if Moscow viewed the United States as an adversary.
This issue - cooperative efforts at nonproliferation - is one of the
essential elements of the new agenda for U.S.-Russian relations. U.S.-Russian
cooperation on missile defense can also be a key part of the new agenda;
though Russia's contribution is likely to be modest, offering to work
together in this area could mitigate Russian concerns about America's future
deployments while increasing Moscow's long-term stake in an emerging
partnership.
Russia's new relationship with NATO could have a similar impact. While Moscow
will not wield great influence within the alliance, it will have a voice in
deliberations on important matters, including counter-terrorism. Taking into
account that a new Soviet-style threat to Europe is unlikely, Russia can be a
proud partner in what may become a central aspect of NATO operations.
Changes in the economic agenda have been even more important. Russia no
longer asks for the massive credit packages and international bailouts that
dominated economic discussions in the 1990s. Instead, the United States and
Russia will talk about what they can do for each other, including U.S. help
on Russian membership in the World Trade Organization and greater American
investment and Russia's possible contribution to reducing U.S. dependence on
Persian Gulf energy supplies.
Moving beyond strictly bilateral issues, Russia has abandoned its
intransigent position on Iraq and has supported a new U.S. "smart-sanctions"
plan. Moreover, while Russians do not support an American effort to depose
Saddam Hussein, there are signs that this issue need not do major damage to
the relationship, particularly if the United States is appropriately
sensitive to Russian interests in Iraq, including existing energy contracts.
Our own recent meetings with Russian officials, parliamentarians and opinion
leaders in Moscow suggest this as well.
Remarkably, Russia's position on the Israeli-Palestinian dispute has drawn
closer to Washington's perspective than that of many European governments.
This is in large measure a reflection of the fact that Israel has absorbed
more than 1 million Russian-speaking immigrants from the former Soviet Union.
These new Israeli citizens have maintained strong personal and economic ties
to Russia. Many Russians have also come to view Israel's predicament with new
sympathy as they have come to see their own country as a victim of terrorism
at the hands of Islamic extremists.
Growing cooperation in these areas could imbue an expected agreement on a
"strategic framework" with real substance. This agreement will not establish
an alliance, but it could well build a realistic road to genuine partnership.
There will, of course, always be limits to the U.S.-Russian relationship so
long as Russia remains, as Vladimir Putin himself has described it, a "guided
democracy." Working with Russia to advance important individual and joint
interests should not suggest either that Washington does not understand these
limits or that it expects the sudden introduction of American-style freedoms
and norms. On the contrary, the United States government should explain
tactfully that a true alliance with Moscow, or its NATO membership, will be
difficult to achieve before Russia has demonstrated a real commitment to
democracy and a fully free press.
Yet, as in dealing with other important U.S. partners, American comments on
Russia's domestic situation should be presented tactfully and without
patronizing posturing. Lecturing Russia on how to conduct its affairs will
not be welcomed even by the country's reform-oriented leaders, who believe
that Russians should make their own decisions on such matters. As, in fact,
they must.
*******
#16
Washington Post
May 23, 2002
Russia's Well-Connected Patriarch
As Church Enjoys Revival of Influence, Its Past Remains Clouded
By Sharon LaFraniere
Washington Post Foreign Service
MOSCOW -- Beneath the stone arches of the Church of St. Sofia of God's
Wisdom, in the courtyard of the former KGB headquarters in central Moscow's
Lubyanka Square, the patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church joined the
hierarchy of the Federal Security Service in early March for a prayer.
There, in what served during Soviet times as a warehouse, Patriarch Alexy
II asked God's blessing for the leaders of what was once the KGB's dreaded
internal security arm. He asked the church to help ensure Russia's safety
"in the face of external and internal ill-wishers, if not enemies" and
prayed that the little chapel be spared further "storms and ordeals."
For the man who has run Russia's dominant church for the past decade, it
was a classic patriarchal performance: steeped in patriotism, tinged with
mistrust of the wider world and remarkable for what was left unsaid.
Nowhere in his blessing did Alexy note that it was from the same Lubyanka
address that Stalin's KGB ordered the imprisonment and execution of
millions of innocent people branded enemies of the state -- including much
of the clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Skeptics say Alexy's remarks mirror the greater irony of his 1,000-year-old
church. After being subverted, penetrated and virtually remade as an arm of
the Soviet state during seven decades of communism, the Russian Orthodox
Church has been reborn under the leadership of its strong-willed,
73-year-old patriarch. Alexy has created 12,000 new Orthodox parishes,
rebuilt hundreds of majestic onion-domed churches once used as Soviet
animal pens and garages, and parlayed a religious revival in free Russia
into a dramatic renewal of the church's public authority and political
influence.
But at the same time, Alexy's many critics say, the newly empowered church
has found it difficult to shed or even admit key aspects of its communist
legacy. Under Alexy's leadership, they say, the church has continued to
walk in near lockstep with the secular Russian state, parroting the Kremlin
line on issues as diverse as the war in Chechnya, NATO relations, poultry
imports and the conduct of this winter's Olympic Games.
The critics describe the church as fiercely nationalistic and deeply
suspicious of outsiders, and they say it uses its political clout to throw
up barriers to other faiths, from the Jehovah's Witnesses to the Roman
Catholic Church, with which it split in 1054. It has retained its penchant
for secrecy, they say, refusing to disclose its income from such activities
as tax-free cigarette sales, which amount to government subsidies.
Most painfully, they say, it has balked at publicly expiating its own
Soviet past, including compelling evidence that Alexy was for decades an
important asset of the KGB.
Church-State Ties
Many Orthodox priests were forced by the Communists into relationships with
the Soviet police, often under threat of execution. Researchers say that
evidence indicates that Alexy rose to power in part as a reward for his
service as a KGB informant, and that he was decorated for that work as
recently as 1988, two years before church leaders elected him patriarch.
Alexy declined repeated requests for an interview for this article. But the
Rev. Vsevolod Chaplin, deputy head of the church's foreign relations
department, said in an interview in March that clergymen had no choice but
to report to Soviet authorities. As long as they did not turn in fellow
believers and priests, he said, they did no moral wrong.
"To reject Soviet power as something totally bad, and to blame someone just
for being in good touch with Soviet authorities, I think is a highly
politicized approach," he said. Many Russians share the church's attitude
that to explore the Soviet Union's grisly past would be useless and painful.
In an interview 18 months ago with the Britain-based Keston Institute,
which monitors religious freedom in Russia and other countries, Chaplin
said that the church and the state continue to have common concerns, such
as Russia's greatness and the church's role in the world. "We don't
consider that everything which was done in that [Soviet] period was
incorrect," he said.
There is no doubt that the Russian Orthodox Church and its believers
suffered grievously under Soviet rule, and that some of those wounds, such
as the loss of the church's assets and some of its flock, could take years
or decades to heal. Still, some religious activists and critics say the
church remains in many ways influenced by the Soviet experience.
"In a very real sense, the patriarchate of Moscow is the most Soviet
institution in Russia today," said the Keston Institute's director,
Lawrence Uzzell. "It is the only institution whose top leadership has not
changed since the fall of Soviet Union."
Alexander Nezhny, who frequently writes about religion, said Alexy
represents the Soviet-era bishops who want "to make religion subordinate to
state ideology" and to sound a message of "national and religious
superiority."
Others say Alexy is captive to far more conservative bishops whose power he
cannot challenge. Unlike the Catholic Church's pope, the Russian Orthodox
patriarch serves at the pleasure of a council of bishops. Some contend that
Alexy is not as hard-line as some of the church's bishops, but reflects
their views.
"He conducts the line of the majority of the bishops, and today the
majority of bishops are people of yesterday," said Anatoly Krasikov,
director of the Center for Social and Religious Studies, funded by the
Russian Academy of Sciences. "Inside and outside the church, there are
people who want the church to take the place of the former Communist Party
as the keeper of ideological unity, ideological purity in Russia."
The Russian Orthodox Church has never represented itself as a solely
religious institution. It has long been lashed to the state, with its moral
power used to legitimize czars and justify state policies.
Those ties are much less pronounced now, with the Russian constitution and
a comprehensive religion law guaranteeing freedom of worship. Still, the
church sees itself as Russia's semi-official religion and, to a certain
extent, is treated as such by the state.
Roughly half of Russia's 144 million citizens now call themselves Orthodox
Christians, as do millions more in such former Soviet states as Ukraine and
Belarus -- although only a small percentage of those in Russia attend
church services.
Modern Russian leaders, from former president Boris Yeltsin to Moscow Mayor
Yuri Luzhkov, have treated the patriarchy with special deference. Only
Alexy is called upon to bless august state occasions, such as Yeltsin's
transfer of a briefcase containing secret nuclear codes to Vladimir Putin
on Dec. 31, 1999. Chaplin, the church spokesman, said that Putin regularly
consults Alexy on domestic issues and that church leaders talk almost daily
with Putin's aides.
The patriarch "has managed to elevate the status of the church within the
state. He is a politician," said Maxim Shevchenko, a journalist here who
has written about religion for years.
Cigarettes, Bottled Water
The relationship Alexy has built with the government appears to have worked
to both sides' political benefit -- and for the church, financial gain. But
that has not come without controversy.
The church emerged from communism a pauper, stripped of riches it had
accumulated over a millennium. While the Kremlin has since returned many
Orthodox churches, it has held on to other assets, including land and
schools, arguing that such property always belonged to the state.
Partly as compensation, the Kremlin allowed the church in the mid-1990s to
import between $75 million and $100 million worth of cigarettes duty-free.
About the same time, the church acquired 40 percent of MES, an oil-export
firm whose quotas on foreign oil sales, like all such allowances, were set
by the government. The company estimated its revenue in 1996 at $2 billion.
The government canceled the cigarette concession in late 1996. The church
lost oil as a source of income about four years ago when MES went out of
business.
"Of course the church was in a tough position financially after the
disintegration of the Soviet Union. But people saw that the church was
tarnishing its reputation by that sort of activity," said Krasikov, of the
Center for Social and Religious Studies.
Now, the church survives partly on a bottled water business and
contributions from wealthy enterprises, including the state-controlled
natural gas monopoly, Gazprom, and Lukoil, an oil company that is partly
owned by the state. At Lukoil's behest, Alexy expressed his gratitude to
the firm for its patronage in a television commercial that aired in November.
While there is no indication that government favors have shaped church
policy, Alexy is unquestionably a strong and reliable supporter of the
Kremlin. After Yeltsin decried NATO's 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia, also a
predominately Orthodox country, Alexy condemned the air war as a "criminal
act" and a challenge to God.
Yet he is unflinchingly behind Russia's war in the rebellious southern
region of Chechnya. Two years ago, he denounced a vote by Council of
Europe's parliamentary assembly to suspend Russia's voting rights because
of widespread human rights violations in Chechnya. Alexy said biased
Western delegates had blackened the reputation of Russian troops while
ignoring terrorist acts by Chechen rebels.
Sergei Ivanenko, a Russian board member of the International Association
for Religious Freedom, argues that Alexy is no Kremlin puppet, especially
on issues of how to deal with the West or other religions. "The church is
trying to resist the expansion of Western ideals," Ivanenko said. "Our
president is much more liberal."
Still, the church's support of the Kremlin has earned it a degree of state
protection against competition from other religions. Prodded by the church,
Yeltsin signed legislation in 1997 that raised a daunting series of
bureaucratic hurdles for other faiths that have come to Russia seeking
adherents.
Since then, the Mormon Church, the Salvation Army and others have had to
fight for the legal status to rent space for worship and hand out
literature. The Orthodox Church has linked arms with hard-line local
officials, warning against the danger of religious sects.
Catholicism is still regarded as a threat, almost 1,000 years after the
1054 schism that severed the Orthodox and Catholic churches over issues of
doctrine and authority. Although Pope John Paul II has begun to mend fences
with other estranged faiths, he has yet to be allowed to visit Russia,
largely due to Alexy's objections. After the pope delivered a short prayer
via satellite to a Moscow cathedral in February, Alexy denounced it as a
"spiritual invasion."
More recently, Orthodox groups have mounted what Catholics call an
organized campaign against them. One of Russia's four Catholic bishops was
stripped of his visa last month. A group linked to the Orthodox Church
recently organized a nationwide protest after the Vatican upgraded its
Russian bureaucracy, creating dioceses like those in almost all other
nations. Orthodox leaders have a ready explanation for their close ties to
the state: The church needs the government's protection and its support to
recover from more than 70 years of Communist persecution.
Critics agree that the state owes the church at least an apology for the
wrongs of the past. But they argue just as strongly that the church owes
its flock an explanation of its own complicity in the Communists'
persecution of believers. The church set up a commission in 1992 to
investigate its ties to the KGB, but no report was published.
A Questioned Past
The questions begin with Alexy himself. A wealth of recent research
strongly indicates that he was recruited by the KGB in 1958 when he was a
28-year-old priest in his homeland of Estonia and served as an agent for 30
years. Documents unearthed in Estonia's capital, Tallinn, describe how the
KGB planned to reward a priest code-named "Drozdov" by making him bishop
there; Alexy received the post in 1961. Although the priest's real name is
not given, Alexy was the only priest in the Estonian diocese who matches
the KGB's description, according to the Keston Institute, which reviewed
and published the records.
Alexy said in a 1991 newspaper interview that he was "sometimes forced to
give way" to Soviet authorities. He apologized for "such concessions, the
failure to speak out, the forced passivity and expressions of loyalty of
the church leadership."
Chaplin, the church spokesman, said in March, "Nobody has ever seen a
single real document that would confirm the patriarch used his contacts
with Soviet authorities to make harm to the church or to any people in the
church."
That doesn't satisfy Vera Afanasyeva, 56, a former cultural center
director. She paused to discuss her faith one recent Saturday as she sat in
Moscow's Catholic cathedral, contemplating whether to convert.
"I think Orthodoxy has tainted itself. And it won't change until Orthodox
priests repent before people and prove they are totally different from the
past," she said. "They are all former KGB. They need to renounce the Soviet
ideology."
*******
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