Johnson's Russia List
#6580
30 November 2002
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Contents:
1. Reuters: U.S. says Russians won't force Chechens back.
2. San Francisco Chronicle: Anna Badkhen, Russia orders Chechen refugees to
return home. Human rights groups assail threat to cut off camp's power, water.
3. The Globe and Mail (Canada): Mark MacKinnon, Russian forces jittery even
on army base. Conscripted troops use drugs and drink to fight cold, fears and
homesickness.
4. The Globe and Mail (Canada): Mark MacKinnon, Fatima's life lies in
ruins,
like Chechen capital From her hospital bed, woman says war scorched her home,
family.
5. RIA Novosti: VLADIMIR PUTIN CALLS FOR PROTECTING RIGHTS OF SMALL AND
MEDIUM-SIZED BUSINESSES.
6. Interfax: Gorbachev wants Cabinet of Ministers reshuffled.
7. RFE/RL: Gregory Feifer, President Putin Plans To Visit China.
8. Baltimore Sun: Douglas Birch, Russian nostalgia feeds struggle over
monument to KGB founder. Pop star wants to return statue to place of honor.
9. The Russia Journal editorial: Media's sad state.
10. Peter Calder: Remont.
11. UPI: Robert Bruce Ware, Kant and Nick debate NATO.
12. The Electronic Telegraph (UK) book review: In vodka veritas. Charlotte
Hobson raises her glass to a Russian underground classic that has finally
made
it into English. (Maxim and Fyodor/Two Short Stories by Vladimir Shinkarev)
13. The Guardian (UK): Nick Paton Walsh, Killer who was high on mushrooms
exposes lows of life in Russian army.
14. Wall Street Journal: Guy Chazan, Russia Liberalizes Currency Laws In
Effort to Encourage Investment.
15. RFE/RL: Gregory Feifer, Foreign-Policy Elite Launches New Journal.]
*******
#1
U.S. says Russians won't force Chechens back
WASHINGTON, Nov 29 (Reuters) - Russia has assured the United States that it
will not force displaced Chechens to return to Chechnya against their will,
a State Department official said on Friday.
The United States contacted the Russian government this week about reports
that Russia planned to send home some 70,000 Chechen refugees who have been
living in the Ingushetia region since 1999, when the Kremlin sent troops
into neighboring Chechnya to crush a separatist revolt.
Russia says it is safe for them to return to Chechnya and that adequate
housing has been built. But many refugees say they are afraid to go home.
The U.S. official said: "We believe that any returns of Chechens from that
region, where they have sought safe haven, must be voluntary and without
pressure or coercion.
"Their concerns about the lack of safety in Chechnya remain a major
obstacle to their voluntary return."
"In response, the Russian government assured us on Wednesday that
internally displaced Chechens would be offered 'purely voluntary' choices,"
added the official, who asked not to be named.
In Geneva on Friday, the U.N. refugee agency urged Russia to postpone plans
to close tent camps housing the Chechens.
******
#2
San Francisco Chronicle
November 29, 2002
Russia orders Chechen refugees to return home
Human rights groups assail threat to cut off camp's power, water
Anna Badkhen, Chronicle Staff Writer
Moscow -- In a move that may force tens of thousands of civilians to return
to what essentially remains a war zone, the Russian government announced
this week that Chechen refugees living in squalid refugee camps in
next-door Ingushetia must go home before the end of the year.
To speed up the exodus, the Kremlin ordered 1,700 people dwelling in one of
the camps, Aki Yurt, to vacate their tents by Sunday, saying that on that
day local officials will turn off gas, electricity and water supplies in
the camp.
Though Russian authorities insist that no one will be forced to return
unwillingly, they also maintain that the conflict-torn breakaway republic
of Chechnya is a place where tens of thousands of refugees can safely
return to live normal lives.
The development has alarmed and outraged human rights advocates.
"Forcing (refugees) to go back to Chechnya, where the conflict is still
going on, would be against international humanitarian law as well as
conventions that the Russian Federation is party to," Poul Nielson, the
European Union's top aid official, said in a statement.
The United Nations' emergency relief coordinator, Kenzo Oshima, said that
the Chechen refugees did not want to return because of "insecurity and the
lack of shelter, basic services and economic opportunities."
Though the Russian government says it has built temporary housing for
returnees, Chechnya's pro-Kremlin government insists that is not the case.
The compensation the government has promised to pay each Chechen who
returns home - - 60 cents a day -- is barely enough to pay the cheapest
rents, and there are hardly any jobs to be had in Chechnya, where most
people survive by barter.
Human Rights Watch charged Wednesday that the refugees had been given the
choice of returning to Chechnya or moving into abandoned and crumbling
factories in Ingushetia that have no facilities whatever.
Above all, the refugees say, they are afraid to return to their homeland
because Russian troops routinely detain, torture and even kill civilians
during sweeps for suspected Islamic rebels.
The separatists, in turn, kill between 10 and 15 Russian servicemen each
week, prompting vicious responses from federal troops. The insurgents also
mine roads and factories, killing and maiming Chechen civilians.
"Returns can only be considered voluntary if no risk exists to returnees'
life, safety, liberty or health," Oshima said.
An estimated 120,000 Chechen refugees have been living in tent cities,
abandoned railroad cars, deserted houses and dormitories in Ingushetia
since Russian troops re-entered Chechnya three years ago. Almost as soon
they began arriving, however, Moscow began trying to coerce them to return
to Chechnya.
In June, Ingushetia stopped distributing meager rations of flour, cooking
oil, salt and sugar. In July, the government there threatened to cut off
electricity, gas and water supplies in the tent cities by Sept. 1 if the
refugees did not go back, effectively persuading several thousand to return
to their devastated republic.
Although the refugees continue to get gas, water and electricity, human
rights groups say the new eviction order might not be an empty threat.
"We think this time, it is very serious," said Anna Neistat, head of Human
Rights Watch's Moscow office. "It seems like the federal government has its
mind set on getting rid of the camps for good."
Observers said Russian troops had sealed off the Aki Yurt camp and had
begun evicting its residents on Monday. By Thursday, Russian officials had
put,
by varying accounts, between 24 and 30 families from the Aki Yurt camp on
buses and taken them to Chechnya.
"Here, we have something resembling life," said Zulai Khasayeva, 50, who
came to the Satsita camp after an aerial bombing destroyed her house in
Grozny two years ago. Hundreds of tents like hers sprawl across a valley as
far as the eye can see.
Khasayeva, who was interviewed earlier this month, shares her tent with her
son, daughter, their spouses and her five granddaughters, the oldest of
whom is 10. To fit her large family into the tent, Khasayeva had mounted
eight metal army-issue single beds on top of each other, creating rickety
bunk beds.
Khasayeva keeps most of her family's meager belongings packed away into
white pillowcases in the back of the tent, prepared to move. But she says
the prospect that she would have to take her family back is terrifying.
"If they force us to go to Chechnya before the war is over," she said, "we
are as good as dead."
Another camp resident, 28-year-old Roza Saydullayeva, lives in a tent with
her husband, their 2-year-old son and her two teenage nephews. It is winter
and the only source of heat is a small, rusty gas stove. On some nights, it
is too cold to sleep.
Saydullayeva says there is at least one grim bit of consolation in the life
the family is enduring.
"At least here there is no shooting. (Back home), you hear mortars whiz
over your roof every night and you wonder: 'Is my house going to be hit
tonight?' "
*******
#3
The Globe and Mail (Canada)
November 30, 2002
Russian forces jittery even on army base
Conscripted troops use drugs and drink to fight cold, fears and homesickness
By MARK MACKINNON
With a report from The Guardian
GROZNY -- The broad walkways between the newly built brick buildings are
brightly lit, and freshly planted trees line either side of the avenues.
There is a cafeteria, a convenience store, a hotel for guests and even a
public square with a fountain.
With the exception of an enormous poster of a debonair-looking Vladimir
Putin -- and the occasional sound of explosions in the nearby city of
Grozny -- the scene could almost pass for suburban North America, rather
than an army base in the middle of one of the world's most intractable
conflicts. It is a Potemkin village in the middle of Chechnya.
But despite the seeming serenity, the Russian army base at Khankala is
anything but calm. The 80,000 Russian soldiers stationed in the breakaway
mountain republic of Chechnya live jittery, on-edge lives. While federal
forces nominally control almost the entire territory by day, by night they
are frequently the victims of vicious counterattacks by an enemy that is
very much not defeated.
According to the official count, at least 4,500 Russian soldiers have died,
and more than 12,500 have been injured, since the Chechen conflict
recommenced in late 1999. Non-governmental organizations, though, believe
the number is much higher.
What is known is that the number continues to rise -- and with it the fear
of almost every young man in Russia.
In one day last week, six Russian soldiers were killed and nine were
injured. A few days before that, eight more were reported dead. Most of the
casualties are either caught in hit-and-run attacks by small groups of
rebels, or are victims of the estimated 500,000 land mines scattered around
the tiny republic.
The deaths have taken a heavy toll on the morale of Russian troops here,
most of them conscripts who will sleep this winter in tents while their
officers enjoy heated buildings on the base.
For the Kremlin, some hope may be found in plans to reform the military
with a front-line force of professional soldiers and a gradual retreat from
conscription. But for the young recruits already in the war zone, Chechnya
is nothing more than a Russian Vietnam, a place where 18- and 19-year-olds
are sent after being forcibly plucked off the streets of their hometowns
and taken to army bases without so much as a chance to say goodbye to their
families.
In private moments, most are quick to say they want to get out as fast as
possible. Some are clearly scared of the chaos that reigns over Grozny by
night. "It's not our war," one young soldier barely in the beginning of his
two-year mandatory stint said over vodka one night this week. "Nobody wants
to be here."
Another young conscript, given a chance to call his family in central
Russia on a reporter's satellite phone, almost broke down into tears while
trying to assure his family he was okay. "Don't cry, Mother," he said
repeatedly. "It'll be all right."
The conscript said later it was the first contact he had made with his
parents in four months in Grozny.
Though the troops say they do not to pay attention to it, the army's
reputation has been hit hard by allegations of war crimes committed by
soldiers against Chechen civilians. Memorial, a Moscow-based human-rights
group, recorded 10 charges in the first two weeks of this month.
Colonel Boris Podoprigora, assistant commander of the Russian forces in the
north Caucasus, defended his troops, saying many of such claims are
exaggerated.
Some say that whether or not the allegations against the Russian troops are
true, many young conscripts leave Chechnya changed people. Alcoholism is
said to be rampant both within the forces and among those who have returned
home from the war.
Others turn to drugs. A soldier stationed near the Russian border with
Georgia shot and killed eight of his colleagues yesterday during a
hallucinogenic fit brought on by eating magic mushrooms. Five others were
wounded.
"I served in the armed forces for 27 years, and I tell every Russian
mother, 'Don't let your son join the army, it's better they go to prison,'
" said Vyacheslav Ismailov, an ex-officer who fought in the first Chechen
war in the mid-1990s and now writes for the liberal Moscow newspaper Novaya
Gazeta.
"I would tell the same thing to Chechen mothers."
*******
#4
The Globe and Mail (Canada)
November 30, 3003
Fatima's life lies in ruins, like Chechen capital
From her hospital bed, woman says war scorched her home, family
By MARK MACKINNON
GROZNY -- Fatima has lived the life of an average Chechen.
Forty-eight years old, she was born in exile in Kazakhstan, where Stalin
had deported the entire Chechen nation in an effort to stamp out its inborn
nationalism. She's since lived through a traumatic return home, the
collapse of the Soviet Union, the declaration of Chechnya's independence
and the subsequent two bloody wars with Russia.
In the past eight years, the fighting has stopped only briefly in this
breakaway republic, a period during which bandits effectively ruled at
gunpoint.
Fatima has seen her city bombed to rubble, her friends killed and her own
home destroyed twice. And there's little hope her nightmare will end soon.
"Look at these buildings," she implored a visitor in her hospital room,
casting her hand toward a window that showcased the crumpled apartment
blocks and fire-scorched stores that were once downtown Grozny. "Our lives
are like these buildings. Completely destroyed."
While Fatima, who was afraid to give her last name, was recovering in
hospital from dysentery, her family was living in the last remaining room
of what was once, she said, a splendid flat. They have no electricity or
running water, and have to light fires at night to stay warm.
Her 19-year-old son left Grozny three years ago to flee the harassment that
young Chechen men -- often suspected by Russian troops of co-operating with
the rebels -- have to endure. Her daughter and only grandchild still live
at home, while her husband takes what odd jobs he can find, hoping to make
ends meet.
"It's a terrible life," she said plainly. "There's nothing good about it."
There is little evidence that anything good has happened to Grozny,
Chechnya's capital, in a very long time. Once a laid-back European city in
the foothills of the Caucasus mountains, it is now a ruin, resembling
Cologne at the end of the Second World War or the northern half of Kabul
today.
In what was once a downtown, there is not a single building left unmarred
by heavy-weapons fire. Whole apartment blocks have been reduced to piles of
smashed concrete and twisted metal. Smaller houses have been cut in half as
the war quite literally exploded into people's living rooms. Even telephone
poles are pockmarked with bullet holes.
As a result, while many here disagree with his actions, many Chechen
civilians say they understand the desperation Movsar Barayev must have felt
when he led a band of men and women that took more than 800 people hostage
at a Moscow theatre last month. Mr. Barayev's biggest demand was an end to
the fighting in Chechnya and a withdrawal of Russian troops, neither of
which looks set to happen soon.
If the Russians enjoy a firm grip on Grozny, though, it is only by day.
By night, it is the Chechen rebels wreaking havoc with small, almost
symbolic actions to make sure everyone knows they're still fighting.
Last Monday night, the doors of the main Russian military base in town
burst open so that an ambulance could whisk a soldier, 24-year-old Eduard
Ilyazov, to medical care. A victim of a land-mine blast, he was in serious
condition, with wounds to his chest and leg inflicted by what the United
Nations this week declared to be the most heavily mined area on the planet.
Astonishingly, a press release handed out to a group of foreign journalists
visiting the city this week declared that "the situation is now normal."
Even as Russian soldiers were trying to highlight for the journalists what
little rebuilding they had done in Grozny, two explosions rocked the city,
just hours apart. Three soldiers were later reported dead, killed by a
blast in Grozny's central market. Eight more were reportedly killed in a
clash a day earlier in another part of the breakaway republic. Gunfire,
interspersed with small explosions, rattled the capital every night.
Colonel Boris Podoprigora, assistant commander of the Russian forces in the
region, said that while the Chechen rebels no longer possess the capability
to fight set-piece battles, they still roam the republic in small groups at
night.
The rebels still have about 1,500 active fighters, broken up into small
groups that are often at odds with each other, Russian officials believe.
Arrayed against them are about 80,000 Russian soldiers who now control all
the major population centres, if only by day.
"When we speak of having all of Chechnya under control, we speak of the
quantity of territory under control. But as for the quality of territory,
that's another pair of shoes," Col. Podoprigora said.
Since the 19th century, when czarist forces first invaded the region,
Russia has never had full control over Chechnya. A long line of
anti-Russian Chechen resistance fighters, from Imam Shamil, who was a thorn
in the side of Czar Alexander II, to Dzhokar Dudayev, who infuriated Boris
Yeltsin with his declaration of Chechnya's independence in 1991, are still
seen as heroes in the republic. The word Chechen itself is derived from the
Turkish term for "ungovernable."
The first Chechen war was a separatist struggle, beginning in 1994 and
ending two years later with the rebels having scored a shocking victory
that won the region de facto independence from Moscow. The second war began
in 1999 after then Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin blamed a series of
mysterious apartment blasts around Russia on the Chechens. Mr. Putin, now
President, has made winning the second war, which he calls an
"antiterrorist fight," one of the priorities of his term in office.
Milana, a 20-year-old medical student, said she and her classmates are
afraid to go outside once the sun goes down, and instead spend their
evenings with their families in unheated apartments.
"The soldiers come out at night. They are the terrorists, not us," she
said, using a word that both sides bandy about with ease.
Milana told a story of one night two weeks ago when she worked at Grozny's
Hospital No. 4. Dozens of teenagers were brought in bleeding that night
after their school bus had been attacked, she alleged, by a Russian tank.
"Some of them were missing their legs," she continued, her eyes ablaze with
anger. "The tank driver was just drunk. This is what life is like in
Grozny. This is what they don't want the outside world to see."
*******
#5
VLADIMIR PUTIN CALLS FOR PROTECTING RIGHTS OF SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED
BUSINESSES
MOSCOW, 30 November 2002. /from RIA Novosti correspondent/. -Russia's
President Vladimir Putin has sent a greetings message to participants of
the forum of the all-Russia public organisation of small and medium-sized
entrepreneurship 'Support of Russia'. The forum opened in Moscow on Saturday.
In his message, the Russian leader emphasized the need for creating
favourable business development conditions in the country. Your
organization "can and must protect the rights and interests of all those
who are today called "the commercial proletariat", Vladimir Putin's message
says.
The 30-th of November is marked in Russia as the country's small and medium
business sector's birthday. Ten years ago today, Putin's predecessor Boris
Yeltsin signed a Presidential Decree "On Organizational Measures Aimed at
Promoting Small and Medium-Sized Business in the Russian Federation". This
document was meant to encourage large-scale involvement of the Russian
population in private enterprise through promoting people's entrepreneurial
spirit. The Decree instructed both the central Government and the regional
authorities to create favourable conditions for developing small and
medium-sized businesses.
The Decree made a strong impact on Russia's overall economic environment.
Small businesses promptly sprang up to existence in all sectors of Russia's
economy. Within a span of five years following the issuance of Yeltsin's
Decree, the number of small businesses in Russia amounted to 842,000.
As of 1 January 2002, there were 875,000 small businesses in the country,
employing 7.5 million people. Inclusion of sole traders brings the total
number of people employed in Russia's small business sector to about 12
million. Trade and catering industries account for the largest portion (46
%) of the country's small businesses, with manufacturing and construction
accounting for 14.8 % and 14.5 % respectively. As of 1 January 2002, the
small business sector's gross production output totaled 613,651.4 million
roubles.
*******
#6
Gorbachev wants Cabinet of Ministers reshuffled
MOSCOW. Nov 30 (Interfax) - Former USSR President Mikhail Gorbachev insists
that the Cabinet of Ministers should be reshuffled.
Some Cabinet members "have failed to pursue the course in the interests
of the majority," Gorbachev told journalists in Moscow on Saturday.
"The drawn-out issue of reform in the government" is the only point for
which Gorbachev criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Gorbachev backed Putin's desire "to change politics in the interests of
the majority."
Moreover, Gorbachev supported Putin's steps in Chechnya. Talks with
Chechen separatist leader Aslan Maskhadov are out of the question in the
wake of the hostage tragedy in the theatre in Moscow, he said. Before that,
the talks were possible "with certain restrictions," he said.
Maskhadov "went too far and talks with him became impossible," he said.
However, negotiations should be conducted with those Chechens, who are
concerned with the situation in the republic, including senior figures, the
diaspora and those who put down arms, he said.
*******
#7
Russia: President Putin Plans To Visit China
By Gregory Feifer
Russian President Vladimir Putin travels to Beijing this weekend to meet
China's newly selected leaders. Moscow is keen to improve relations with
its southern neighbor, not least to help offset U.S. power. But Russians
are wary of China, which -- with its booming economy and growing military
-- increasingly appears to be calling the shots. RFE/RL reports that
Russian analysts are saying this weekend's trip is unlikely to produce any
changes in the relationship.
Moscow, 29 November 2002 (RFE/RL) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin
travels to Beijing this weekend to meet with the new so-called "fourth
generation" of Chinese leaders. During his 1-3 December trip, Putin will
strike up relations with Hu Jintao, named Communist Party leader earlier
this month. The Russian president will also meet outgoing chief Jiang
Zemin, whose ongoing supervisory role analysts say will likely hold back
development of Sino-Russian relations for the near future.
Vyacheslav Nikonov is director of Moscow's Politika Foundation. He said he
is "not waiting for anything revolutionary from the trip." "First, nothing
revolutionary ever happens just after a change of leadership. Second, there
won't be anything revolutionary because China still has its 'old guard.'"
Nikonov said he thinks Jiang will continue to dominate China's political
climate for months, if not years.
Russia is anxious for relations to improve, not only because of China's
perceived growing power, but also because Moscow and Beijing share the
common goal of curbing U.S. geopolitical might. Both countries share a
common stance on Iraq, calling for the United Nations Security Council to
authorize any military attacks.
In an article published on 28 November in the newspaper "Kommersant,"
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, who will accompany Putin on his trip,
writes that Russia and China are like fir trees and bamboo, intertwining
for support.
Sergei Karaganov is head of Moscow's Foreign and Defense Policy Council. He
agrees that ties will likely not change in the foreseeable future --
because China's interests will remain unchanged -- but adds that Russia is
interested in a closer relationship. "We are deeply interested in not just
'really great,' but [truly] friendly relations with China. [China] is for
us one of the most important countries for our country's geopolitical
stance."
Last year, Putin and Jiang signed a friendship treaty to replace a
1950s-era agreement. But Putin caught China's leadership off guard with his
post-11 September outward embrace of Washington, which came just months
after a major U.S.-China diplomatic standoff over a U.S. intelligence plane
forced down over Chinese territory.
Ups and downs are nothing new in relations between China and Russia, both
of which once shared a communist ideology. After a brief honeymoon
following China's communist revolution in 1949, Sino-Soviet relations took
a turn for the worse amid constant border bickering which began in the
1950s and led to open conflict in the 1960s.
Relations entered a new phase shortly after the Soviet collapse in 1991,
with Russia pushing for greater cooperation in the interests of creating a
"multipolar world."
In his article, Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov mentions the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization -- including Russia, China, and four Central Asian
states -- which Moscow hopes will grow as a forum for offsetting Western
organizations. But ties have remained delicate, with Moscow wary of China's
growing power on its southeast border.
Beijing is meanwhile often dismissive of Russia's chaotic economic
development, instead priding itself on maintaining strict control over its
own capitalist transformation.
One factor straining relations is the growing number of Chinese who travel
to and settle in Siberia. Russians are often resentful of the many
businesses they set up in Russia's sprawling, decaying, and sparsely
populated Far East.
Beijing, for its part, is against Russia's long-standing goal of joining
the World Trade Organization, citing unhappiness over quotas on cheap
Chinese labor and metals and other exports.
But Moscow is keen to overcome the problems, not least because it wants to
sell natural resources, especially Siberian natural gas, to China. Beijing
is also one of Moscow's major arms-technology customers. Trade between the
two countries last year reached a record, at more than $10 billion.
Officials say topics slated for discussion during Putin's visit include
terrorism, Iraq, the United States, and pressure on North Korea to drop
plans for developing nuclear weapons.
Both countries claim to be fighting internal Muslim separatist threats --
and unlike Western countries, China does not criticize Russia's brutal
campaign in Chechnya, while Moscow backs Beijing's crackdowns against its
Uighur ethnic minority.
Among other documents, Putin and Jiang are expected to sign a joint
declaration outlining their views on foreign affairs, Russian news agencies
reported.
Following his trip, Putin will make a two-day stop in India, a close
trading partner and the other Asian country -- along with China -- with
which Russia had hoped last decade to form a tripartite coalition to offset
U.S. military and economic global domination.
*******
#8
Baltimore Sun
November 30, 2002
Russian nostalgia feeds struggle over monument to KGB founder
Pop star wants to return statue to place of honor
By Douglas Birch
Sun Foreign Staff
MOSCOW - In 1991, in an age intoxicated with newly won freedoms,
enthusiastic crowds toppled the towering statue of Felix Dzerzhinsky, the
ruthless founder of the Soviet secret police, from its pedestal in front of
the KGB headquarters on Lubyanka Square. But now, the 15-ton metal monument
is the subject of a struggle between increasingly ardent admirers.
Russia's new leaders, anticipating next year's parliamentary elections, are
wrangling over who can best honor and protect the statue and thereby profit
from Russians' increasingly fond memories of their Soviet past.
Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, a one-time reformer who helped banish
Dzerzhinsky's effigy to an out-of-the-way park, proposed returning it to
the bustling Lubyanka Square two months ago. But the move was blocked by
critics, especially intellectuals and the powerful Russian Orthodox Church,
whose priests Dzerzhinsky persecuted and killed.
"Dzerzhinsky is a Red executioner," Nobel Prize-winning author Alexander
Solzhenitsyn told the newspaper Izvestia. "Restoration of his monument
would be an outrage upon millions of those who had perished in camps."
Now Andrei Razin, a Soviet-era pop star, has proposed that if Moscow's
mayor won't return the statue to Lubyanka Square, he should sell the statue
to those who cherish Dzerzhinsky's memory. He proposes buying the statue
for $1.5 million.
"In my heart, I consider Dzerzhinsky my grandfather," said Razin, a
Communist member of the Duma, the lower house of parliament.
Razin, who became an orphan at age 1, said he is acting at the request of
the Association of Orphanages of Russia. Dzerzhinsky, in addition to
creating the secret police, established the Soviet Union's network of
mammoth, prison-like orphanages, institutions where homeless children are
still consigned.
"We were brought up according to the system invented by Dzerzhinsky," Razin
said fondly. "He was 'Iron Felix,' who became the father of all children
and orphans. He offered great hope to those who were handicapped by life."
Razin promises to erect the statue at the boyhood home of former Soviet
leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev, in Privolnoye village - a property Razin
bought in 1993. He calls the statue's current location in a sculpture
garden of fallen Soviet heroes near Gorky Park "an insult" and "a disgrace."
Razin said he made a $500,000 down payment on the statue to the mayor's
office in October but without consulting the mayor. He insists that Luzhkov
must now decide whether to return the monument to the Lubyanka as promised,
leave it in obscurity or hand it over to Razin.
Alexander S. Tantlevsky, chief of the city's Department of Preservation of
Cultural and Artistic Heritage, declined to discuss Razin's offer. "There
is nothing to talk about or comment on," he said.
When he proposed restoring the Dzerzhinsky statue to its former place of
honor in Lubyanka Square, Mayor Luzhkov talked of Dzerzhinsky's good deeds
in establishing orphanages. But Razin - like many other Russians -
suspected that Luzhkov's real aim was to please President Vladimir V.
Putin, a former KGB colonel.
Putin has shown an increasing fondness for emblems of the Soviet era. This
week he restored the red star as the symbol of the military. Earlier, he
brought back the music of the old Soviet anthem, though with rewritten
lyrics.
And perhaps no Soviet figure is more revered within Russia's Federal
Security Service, the successor to the KGB, than Dzerzhinsky. The agency's
2001 calendar - meant strictly for internal use - featured a photo of the
Dzerzhinsky monument standing in Lubyanka Square.
"When Putin meets an FSB official, he is always asked one and the same
question: 'Comrade President, will you put the statue back?'" Razin said.
"And he feels awkward that, as president, he can't do that."
Luzhkov's proposal to return the statue to Lubyanka Square was protested by
reform politicians. The Kremlin then disavowed Luzhkov's plan. "Today, some
are calling for the restoration of the Dzerzhinsky statue; tomorrow others
will demand the removal of Lenin's body from the mausoleum" on Red Square,
Vladislav Surkov, a deputy head of the Putin administration, said in
September. "Both [ideas] are equally inopportune and unacceptable to a
significant portion of the citizens of our country."
Dzerzhinsky, following orders of Vladimir Lenin, created the "Cheka," the
Extraordinary Commission for the Struggle against Counterrevolution,
Espionage, Speculation and Sabotage, on Dec. 20, 1917. Over the next
decades, that vast Soviet security apparatus changed its name several times
- to OGPU, the NKVD and the KGB - but never relinquished its sweeping power
and ruthless tactics.
Its main weapon was state-sponsored terror, and Dzerzhinsky said its
mission was simple: "We are not fighting a war against individuals; we are
exterminating the bourgeois as a class."
Now, the middle class that Dzerzhinsky had hoped to elminate expresses
nostalgia for Soviet times. For many Russians, after a decade of
lawlessness and epic corruption, reform is a bitter joke, democracy a dirty
word, while well-to-do Russians, including many children of Soviet
bureaucrats, cherish memories of their privileged youths.
Razin seems like an unlikely champion of either the impoverished or the
former Soviet elite. When he was a year old, in 1964, his parents died in
an automobile accident; he was raised in an orphanage near his home village
of Privolnoye in southern Russia. By luck, his grandmother landed a job
working as a maid in the home of an up-and-coming Communist Party chief,
Gorbachev.
When Razin was 13, he attended a Gorbachev family picnic in Privolnoye. The
future leader of the Soviet Union smiled and placed his hands on Razin's
shoulders. Someone took a snapshot, and it was given to the boy. Razin's
fortune was made. "I started to claim that I was Gorbachev's nephew, and
everybody believed me," he recalled. He had the picture to prove it.
Gorbachev brought Razin to Moscow and found him a job in the Ministry of
Culture. Razin founded the singing group "Tender May," which became one of
the most popular groups in the Soviet Union. As "the false nephew of
Gorbachev," as Razin calls himself, he said he eventually earned about $10
million.
After Gorbachev left office, in December 1991, the KGB agents assigned to
protect the former Soviet leader abandoned Gorbachev's mother. So, Razin
said, he took her in.
In 1993, she agreed to sell Razin the family home, where Razin let her
remain. In an interview with Kimsomolskaya Pravda, he accused his former
patron of neglecting his mother. Gorbachev sued to block the sale, but his
case collapsed when his mother testified against him. She died in 1995.
Today, Razin represents Privolnoye in the Duma, where he has a reputation
for flamboyant gestures and anti-capitalist oratory. That a man who earned
his wealth in Soviet times is now a champion of the secret police chief who
said he intended to exterminate the bourgeoisie seems to leave no
impression on him.
Razin is also chairman of the Fine Arts Committee of Stavrapol, which is
putting up the $1.5 million for the purchase of the statue. As the group's
chairman, he said, he will hold Moscow accountable. If the city refuses to
sell the statue, he vows, he will sue the municipality for "ignoring or
neglecting a piece of art."
*******
#9
The Russia Journal
Novenmber 29-December 5, 2002
Editorial
Media's sad state
One of the biggest canards tossed around about the Putin regime by liberals
both at home and abroad is that it is "stifling the independent media." It
is not so much that most such accusations are false, as that they miss one
basic fact – there never were any independent
media in Russia, with a few notable exceptions.
Russia is a "free" country; in fact, much freer in many mays than countries
in the West. But "freedom" does not equal "democracy." Russians have
wrested the former from a collapsing empire while not submitting to any of
the responsibilities that go with the latter. And
nowhere is this more evident than in the conduct of the media.
There are very few media outlets so idealistic as to remain under the
control of people that would have them run responsibly while serving the
larger interests of democracy, freedom, people and the nation. In the
regions, if the government wants to crack down on free speech, it has
absolutely no need to enact new laws. There are other techniques that can
be used to silence dissent, and they have been used with frightening
frequency. Murder, money, fear and favor are the law in Russia, not what
the Duma passes – as many a journalist knows to his cost.
The flip side of the coin is the criminality and sheer irresponsibility
within the media business itself. One of the first and as-yet-unsolved
contract killings in the new Russia was that of celebrated TV anchorman
Vladislav Listeyev amid a turf war for control of the state TV channel of
which he was a general director. Well-known personalities like Boris
Berezovsky were involved in that conflict.
In the years of the Yeltsin era, the oligarch-owned and operated media also
hardly lived up to journalistic ideals: They were bought and paid for,
little more than propaganda outlets for their Kremlin-connected owners.
At the other end of the spectum, the gutter press that one finds everywhere
in the Moscow metro and hawked on every street corner is unabashedly
partisan.
Up to a billion dollars of dirty money is said to be at work in the Russian
media – one-fifth of its total advertising revenue. And up to 50 percent of
all money spent in the media goes to manipulation of coverage for business
and political battles (which are often much the same
thing), not for the exercise of freedom of speech for the good of society.
It is almost too easy for the government to control any media company – as
the events of NTV have shown – because, behind most large TV and news
outlets, government funding already lurks. Why would that same government,
then, try to muzzle the "freedom" of these media companies by passing a
law? Cutting off money or changing management are much simpler and more
effective tactics.
The government and Duma claim that there has to be regulation of or
infusion of responsibility into the way media companies behave. There are
no internal binding ethical guidelines or principles on how the media
should conduct themselves in their relationships with people, corporations
and state. The October hostage crisis brought some of that irresponsibility
and unprofessionalism of the Russian media dangerously close to home as
terrorists holding 800 people in a Moscow theater became active players on
the world stage.
U.S. media outlets showed a willingness to listen to the White House when
videotapes of Osama bin Laden were transmitted in the aftermath of Sept.
11. For years, British media did not play the voices of leaders of the IRA
or even its political wing, Sinn Fein.
In Moscow, however, an anchorman on a live talk show stuck a microphone in
the face of a distraught hostage relative, asking, "What do you want to say
to Barayev?" A show of raw emotion could have enraged the terrorists and
resulted in terrible consequences. Playing in such a way with the lives of
hostages was visible in many media outlets that turned their sloppy TV
stations into playgrounds for unrestrained emotion and cheap ratings-seeking.
The media should always be aware that, as part of society as a whole, they
have a duty to their fellow countrymen and their well-being. This cannot be
sacrificed for petty personal gain or to take advantage of a show or
scandal. To that extent, at least, the government’s
criticisms of "irresponsible" media are completely correct, though its
response has thus far not been the correct one – though President Vladimir
Putin’s refusal this week to adopt new laws curbing press activity in times
of crisis is a positive development. Who knows, maybe
the Kremlin is about to move in a democratic direction after all.
It is time for the media to start adopting acceptable principles of ethical
and professional conduct. There must be self-regulation within the media
and consumer oversight as well. But that cannot happen until they free
themselves from government funding.
Step one is for the government to sell off its media holdings and let
market forces take play.
*******
#10
From: "Peter Calder"
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2002
Subject: Remont
Peter Calder
Freelance
Moscow
petercalder1944@mtu-net.ru
My Dear Girls,
In your recent letters you asked about the meaning of this ‘REMONT’ word
and sought further explanation of what was involved
So this is the story.
‘Remont,' in Russian, means ‘repairs’ and it is an extremely useful word
and has wide and constant application.
It can be used flexibly as either a verb or a noun. Mostly it is used as an
excuse. It can explain away all manner of mishaps, misadventures and
miscellany. It is as easily applied to a trolley bus as to a leaking tap.
It explains the reason for arriving late or failing to arrive at all.
Mention the word in a variety of circumstances and it is sufficient to say
no more, all will be understood or, if necessary, forgiven.
Here they are presently remonting all over the place with a surprising
degree of diligence. Roads, bridges, buildings and similar classes of
assets are all receiving attention. Perhaps at last some of those IMF
millions have inadvertently found their way into the correct bank account.
I can quote you a very local practical instance of what the actual process
can entail and the manner in which it is executed.
About 4 weeks ago painters suddenly appeared at the entrance hall of our
apartment building. Some said this was a good sign and was a promise of
better things to come. Christ knows, the painting was badly needed. Others
said it was an omen for the worse and predicted that if the painting went
ahead then some major or minor disaster would befall our collective
residential lot and it would far overshadow any benefits derived from stray
visitors in painter’s garb.
On the benches outside our entrance, there is an ever-present panel of
grandmothers who sit in judgement of the world and all who occupy it. Here
in this court, all nature of things are debated, discussed and deliberated
upon. Reputations are destroyed or enhanced, plans and promises are made
and broken, but mainly the time of day is passed in a geriatric and
relatively harmless sort of way . The opinion of this forum was that if the
distant authorities had selected our building for a turn of unsought
remonting, then at some future date, for example in the middle of winter,
we would be remembered. We would be remembered when load shedding was
needed or when the central supply of water was failing, and then we would
be called upon to pay our dues. Then all those who had welcomed this
gratuitous remont would have cause for regret and review. There would be no
grounds for formal complaint as it would be there on the record that we
were the earlier beneficiaries of a generous remont. Complaints would be
futile and even a demonstration of ingratitude. This is the Russian mind at
work in its most sober way.
On day one they did a casual survey of the vestibule and the walls of the
stairwells. Their passage was marked by apparently random applications of
plaster to areas of their professional interest. The main result of this
preliminary intrusion was to leave a large amount of plaster on the stairs
and passage ways. This material evidence of their labours readily adhered
to footwear and was walked into flats up and down the building ,blending
into the warp and weave of many carpets with disagreeable ease.
A lapse in activity then followed and it appeared that the project had been
shelved for want of perseverance. Suddenly they were back and applied
themselves to the ceiling, this time with a full application of a lean
mixture of white wash. This dilute covering was inclined to gravitate down
the walls and drip all over the floors and those who were applying it . The
net effect was worthy of some surrealist landscaper’s experimentation.
I imagine that many an unsuspecting homecoming drunk from our building,
ended up wearing clothes of a different colour after clinging to the walls
for upward support. Again all and sundry walked the mixture throughout the
building. From our entrance, down the path and to the street, you could
track the comings and goings of many pairs of white painted soles. This
earthly procession of prints remained until a moderate fall of rain erased
the various trails from view.
Here a digression is called for, as the painters themselves deserve a
mention in the interest of temporary posterity.
I chanced upon these artisans early in the programme’s course and was duly
impressed . It appeared to me that it was a mother and daughter
combination, perhaps as master and apprentice, never mind, just the two of
them. Although the outside temperature was an even zero, they were lightly
clad in rough working clothes. Perhaps the layers of paint that were
adsorbed to their working apparel had some special insulating effect and
they were thus impervious to the cold. I felt slightly ashamed of my
various layers of woollens as I passed them by. This pair, even clothed as
they were, faces and hands covered in whitewash, held a strange attraction
for me. They reminded me of a pair of made up actors from some strange and
primitive stage production. Faces ghastly white, but looks and features
unmarred by their accidental makeup.
The mother was comfortably in the mid forties, slim and graceful, with
easy, casual movements. Her hair was gathered under a rough scarf and not
even the industrial cosmetics could detract from her attractive Slavic
features. A cigarette hung casually from her mouth as she wielded her long
handled brush, which was more broom like than brush- like. Her strokes were
long and even but lacking of some respect for precision, as the paint was
generously applied. The daughter was of similar build and perhaps half her
age, but her features were more finely cast. She had an impish air that
invited challenge but I offered none other than a formal greeting . They
surveyed me with a bemused condensation that made me feel a slight
inadequacy of presence. They had about them a sort of appealing nonchalance
that did not affect their proficiency with their crude implements of trade.
Their manner was light and carefree and their casual chatter had a sort
melodic touch that put me in mind of some scene from a gypsy musical.
It is of interest to note, that here in Russia, this type of work is
frequently done by women . Perhaps the Russian male lacks the finer touch
for this sort of employment. Perhaps it is below his dignity or maybe
beyond his competence. The point is that these labouring women bring to
these jobs a certain dignity, which cannot fail to impress. To me they
invariably hold the same appeal and I could well imagine these poorly paid
and crudely dressed women, strutting the catwalks in finer fabrics and
better surroundings .
Over the course of the next several days the speed of the work seemed to
increase and each day more progress was made until the final application to
the walls. Here the civic custodians of our block, untroubled by any
consultations with the inhabitants, had chosen a shade of green that is
more commonly found upon the walls of railway toilets or perhaps the
restraining rooms of pschyiatric hospitals. This paint was notable, not
only for its depressing hue, but additionally, for its pungency of odour.
It smelt as though it was a by product of some illicit still and the fumes
that it emitted could well have induced intoxication of a pathological
kind. You could detect the whiff of it from out in the street and the
hallways and stairs were redolent with it.
An additional feature of this green stuff for walls was the drying time
involved. It seemed to remain wet and sticky to the touch for days. Again I
have a mental image of the homecoming drunks and the observations of their
wives.
It is not exactly clear when and where this remonting business will end.
Perhaps it is already completed, even though the project appears to need
more time. Certain of the finer details are yet to receive attention. For
example, the iron railings up the stairs remain mostly in their original
colour of soviet grey but now they are partly striped with green and white.
The areas that require closer attention and more skillful handling, like
widow frames, sills and doors, remain untouched. Perhaps their time will
come next week, next year. The usual thing is to paint right over small
impediments to progress, like locks, doorbells, light switches and handles.
The main aim appears to be to achieve as much big picture progress as
possible and leave the finer details till later. Who knows what will
happen. No one can give a definite forecast in such matters. Somethings
here remain closely guarded secrets invested only in the mind of some
distant and remote administrator. One thing that must be done before the
completion of this process, is the restoration of light and brightness. As
the progress has advanced, so has the visiblity upon the stairs diminished.
In their haste to improve our lot, there has been no consideration given
for the various lights that throw their impoverished rays upon the landings
of each floor.
In addition, the windows have fared badly from misapplied paint and during
these foreshortened, late autumn days, the stairwells are dim and darkish.
All of the light covers are now liberally masked with whitewash and the
general effect is to impart an errie glow, not dissimilar to the bridge of
an ocean going cruiser during hostile night manoevours. Outlines and
silhouettes, rather than visible shapes of people, grope their way up and
down the stairs. Once the dullest rays of light came from the low wattage
bulbs in the lifts, safely protected from opportunitistic theives by heavy
opaque shades. Now these lamps in contrast, shine like beacons whenever a
lift door groans open upon a landing. Progress upon the stairs is fraught
with danger under such conditions and geriatric and juvenile alike, needs
to practice extreme caution for the chance of an accidental fracture is
high . Here the concept of public liability remains unknown in post Soviet
Russia. Survival is a matter of personal responsibility and the state is
not to be held liable for its citizens’s mishaps upon the stair or in the
passage .When western type litigation gets a foothold and begins to
flourish, the state coffers will be in for some savage depletion even
without the added burden or retrospective claims.
Maybe the lights and their restoration is the work of a more specialised
team who are yet to appear . A specialised mother and daughter team who
will remove stray splashes of paint from the shades and globes. The windows
and door handles may also receive their attention. It may even be possible
that the floors and steps may be included in this after phase but I would
not hold much optimism for this. Floors and stairs are public thoroughfares
and the average Russian cares little for the preservation of either asset.
It seems to me that our particular experience of the remont has come to an
end. There has been no further appearance of any mother and daughter
combinations. Perhaps they have been transported to some new site more
deserving of attention, never to return to this job. As the Russians are
fond of saying ‘Who knows?’ It is more than usual is that the remont never
actually achieves a formal completion. There is always a bit of the
undertaking left undone. It may involve just a few of the minor items of
lesser importance being overlooked, like the replacement of the windows
broken during the actual remont itself. It may be that scarce fund and
resources are redirected to another quarter, like for example towards the
outer suburbs, closer to where the administrator has his new dacha being
constructed. In any case, if the remont is actually and precisely finished
then it would, of necessity, no longer be a remont at all. Then there would
be something vaguely missing from the big picture.
Well, I hope the above jottings help explain a few things for you and now
you have a clearer idea of how things are done or undone, hereabouts.
Much Love
Dad.
PS. There has been one final curtain call upon our stairs and I must
report, that our personal remont has transformed our immediate surroundings
into a far more pleasant place to live . Now we must wait for the not too
distant winter months , to see what toll may be levied upon us from
elsewhere .
*******
#11
Commentary: Kant and Nick debate NATO
By Robert Bruce Ware
Robert Bruce Ware is an associate professor of philosophy at Southern
Illinois University Edwardsville.
EDWARDSVILLE, Ill., Nov. 28 (UPI) -- Will an expanded NATO be a force for
international peace, or will its new rapid reaction strategy merely enforce
the current world economic order?
Both possibilities were foreseen centuries ago by two European
philosophers. Immanuel Kant would have viewed last week's events as
promising nothing less than a new age of "perpetual peace," and there is
evidence that he was at least half right. Yet Nicholo Machiavelli, the
Renaissance Italian thinker, would have seen NATO expansion as a prelude to
aggression.
Kant lived in the Prussian city of KFnigsberg. Now known as Kaliningrad,
since 1945 it has been ironically a Russian enclave in Central Europe that
has been an obstacle for NATO's eastward expansion to Russia's Baltic
borderlands.
Writing in the 18th century, Kant foresaw the emergence of a "Pacific
Union" of liberal democracies, essentially those states that share
fundamental values of individual freedom, limited government, and free
market economics. As Joseph Schumpeter, the Austrian economist, explained
at the end of World War I, one democratic electorate will be reluctant to
send itself to war against another, and will likely opt for diplomatic
solutions.
History bears this out. For 200 years liberal democracies have not gone to
war with one another.
For example, Anglo-American relations were acrimonious until the passage of
the British Reform Bill in 1832 gave real power to the British Parliament,
and turned Britain into a liberal democracy. The last serious threat of war
between Britain and the Untied States came in 1862 just after the start of
the U.S. Civil War. Five years later, Britain passed the second Reform
Bill, granting virtually universal male adult suffrage.
At the start of World War I, liberal Italy, which was then aligned with
authoritarian regimes in Germany and Austria-Hungary, switched sides rather
than fight against democracies in Britain and France.
Even though the United States had quarreled constantly with Britain over
trade, we supported our liberal cousins in that war. World War II was
billed as a life and death struggle between liberalism and
authoritarianism, as was the Cold War. That was when NATO entered the stage
as a union of liberal democracies against illiberal regimes. For the last
50 years it has been inconceivable that the democracies of Western Europe
and North America would go to war with one another.
Kant's brilliant vision was increasingly fulfilled as the world saw a
steady increase in the number of liberal democracies from the 18h century
onward.
In the 18th century the world had three liberal democracies: Switzerland,
the United States after 1789, and the French Republic from 1790 to 1795.
Yet then the number of democracies has steadily increased ever since, until
there are scores of such states today.
Since Germany and Japan became democracies at the end of World War II it is
inconceivable that we would go to war with either of them. Now that the
Soviet block has crumbled, and most of its successor states have adopted
liberal values, it is increasingly appropriate that they should join the
alliance of liberal democracies. NATO's expansion is inevitable, as even
the Russians have recognized. Now the only questions involve NATO's new
mission. If the entire world is destined to join the club, then what will
the alliance stand for, or against?
This is where Machiavelli strikes a darker chord. Analyzing the history of
the Roman Republic, Machiavelli argued that democracies are fundamentally
aggressive, and are formidable in warfare because their citizens share a
vision and fight only for their shared beliefs. The danger is that this
will also make those citizens intolerant, even belligerent, toward those
who do not share their beliefs.
Sure enough, history also sides with Machiavelli. Whether in Nicaragua,
Grenada, Panama, the Persian Gulf, or Kosovo, the United States is
increasingly quick to act against illiberal regimes. The danger is that
citizens in countries like the United States and Britain will feel that
they are automatically justified in doing so.
Inherent in democracy's promise of world peace is a prejudice that can be
readily used to justify intolerance, even aggression, toward non-liberal
states. Liberal democracies are chronically self-righteous, and that is
their weakness.
Is it a weakness today, when NATO reconstitutes itself as a rapid reaction
force with an eye on Iraq? Clearly, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein must not
have weapons of mass destruction. Yet if that is really the issue, then
there is another Middle Eastern state that has already obtained nuclear
weapons in violation of non-proliferation treaties. Of course, we would
never go to war with the liberal democracy in Israel. The question is
whether our prejudices will tempt us too quickly into Iraq.
In the 20th century, liberalism vanquished fascism and Marxism. In the 21st
century, the only ideology that still confronts free market democracy is
radical Islamism.
There is little inherently illiberal about Islam. Yet in some Islamic
societies, Western governments are supporting illiberal political regimes.
This puts local democrats at odds with the West, and opens the door to
illiberal forces in the region that wish to defend extremist
interpretations of Islam. It is in their interest to foment confrontation
between liberal and Islamic societies.
Yet if we can avoid the Machiavellian trap we may find those societies
joining us in the union of democracy.
*******
#12
The Electronic Telegraph (UK)
30 November 2002
In vodka veritas
Charlotte Hobson raises her glass to a Russian underground classic that has
finally made it into English
Maxim and Fyodor
Two Short Stories by Vladimir Shinkarev
translated by Andrew Bromfield
156pp, Seagull Publishing House, pounds 9.95
One night Fyodor, the eponymous hero of this modern Russian masterpiece, is
seized by the thirst of a ferocious hangover. Without turning on the light,
he takes up a bottle from a shelf and begins to drink. At the first gulp,
he realises that it is kerosene rather than water. However, the author
tells us, "so powerful was Fyodor's mastery of Zen Buddhism that he
discovered within himself the courage not to rectify his error and calmly
finished the entire bottle". This is Maxim and Fyodor's first appearance in
English, although it has already become a classic in Russia. From 1980, it
circulated the country illegally as samizdat - passed from hand to hand,
copied laboriously on old typewriters or written out by hand. The heroes
are two "alconauts", living in a communal flat in Leningrad in the 1970s
without visible employment apart from the consumption of port, vermouth,
beer and "snout-twister" (vodka). Most people dismiss them as winos and
slobs; even their young disciple, Pyotr, remarks that they are "pretty
stupid".
And yet, as Pyotr goes on to suggest, is not this evaluation itself
evidence of the stupidity and crassness of our materialist world? We rely
on our feeble reason alone, whereas Maxim and Fydor act instinctively, and
mysteriously, in accordance with the principles of Zen Buddhism. Zen
Buddhists aim to achieve enlightenment through meditation, by eschewing
logic in favour of intuitive understanding, and by practising contempt for
the external forms of life. Maxim and Fyodor devote their lives to the
never-ending quest for and consumption of alcohol, which occasionally leads
to moments of "satori", sudden enlightenment, usually accompanied by
incoherent shouts that cause their neighbours to complain to the housing
committee. Their conversation and the state of their apartment are ample
evidence of their contempt for rational argument and outward appearances.
They emerge, therefore, as not just any old drunks. They are, quite
possibly, no less than bodhisattvas.
At the same time, by rigorously maintaining their alcohol levels, Maxim and
Fyodor achieve a kind of freedom from the stifling corruption of 1970s
Russia. Like other heroes of Soviet literature - Venya in Venedikt
Erofeev's Moscow-Petushki, various of Daniil Kharms's characters, and so on
- they conclude that a life passed in an intoxicated stupor is more honest
and productive than the sober career of a Party bureaucrat. The novel is a
paean to freedom of expression, in particular the freedom to express
nonsense. The Russian language under Brezhnev was twisted into ever more
absurd double-speak, as the official press tried to cut reality to fit the
Party line. Yet Shinkarev resists the conventional form of socialist
realism so vigorously that his writing bursts out in a whole chorus of
different voices, from haikus to epic verse in the style of El Cid to
debates on the laws of dialectics, mindless violence, avant-garde theatre
and even a whodunnit.
Along the way, many of the dark corners of Russian life are illuminated.
Uninitiates can here glimpse the extraordinary flashes of insight and shame
that accompany a port and vermouth hangover, and the poetry (often in
tanka, unrhymed quintuplets of great and simple elegance) spoken in the
vodka queue. The beauty of a clearing carpeted with discarded bottle tops
and broken glass is captured, as is the mystery of "night-feeders" who
guzzle their neighbours' soup in the communal kitchen after dark.
Shinkarev's pithy maxims (also known as "fyodors") have long since passed
into Russian speech, and in the case of most people's conversation are far
more readily quoted than, say, Pascal, Lenin or the Bible. Even after the
fall of Communism, they are relevant to many aspects of Russian life. "You
have to be very clear about your reasons for not drinking," is a piece of
wisdom that I expect Yeltsin muttered to himself at tense moments in his
presidency. Putin, perhaps, comforts himself as he sends the troops back
into Chechnya with another of Shinkarev's gems: "There may be clever people
about, but it makes no difference."
In the 1990s, when the introduction of market economics gave Russian life
more of a materialist flavour than Marxism ever had, Maxim and Fyodor
became a bestseller. Vladimir Shinkarev took advantage of the changing
times and even became a supporter of Alcoholics Anonymous. On the other
hand, the lives of Maxim and Fyodor - and all the millions like them, in
cities and villages all over Russia - have in most cases changed little.
The Communist Party may no longer be in power, but the new, democratic
Russia can be just as suffocating for its citizens, and the precepts of Zen
Buddhism (understood intuitively) are just as necessary for a sense of
inner freedom. In the words of the Russian saying: "A drink in the morning,
and you're free all day."
********
#13
The Guardian (UK)
30 November 2002
Killer who was high on mushrooms exposes lows of life in Russian army
Nick Paton Walsh in Moscow
A Russian soldier shot and killed eight of his colleagues yesterday during
a hallucinogenic fit brought on by eating magic mushrooms.
Denis Solovyov, was stationed with a border guard unit in the Caucasus
mountains in southern Russia, close to the border with Georgia. Witnesses
said that Mr Solovyov ate some mushrooms before he started shooting at his
fellow soldiers. Five others were wounded in the incident.
Russian military officials said a preliminary investigation showed the
soldier was in a "state of narcotic intoxication" when the shooting occurred.
The incident highlights the depression and ill-discipline of the Russian
army, most of whom are teenagers not lucky enough to avoid conscription.
Some 400,000 men are forced into the Russian army each year, although many
try to get a doctor's exemption from two years in the brutal culture of a
barracks or under rebel fire in the Chechen conflict.
A recent report by Human Rights Watch exposed the practice of
"press-ganging" by the Russian authorities.
Sergei N, who did not want to give his surname, was asleep when his aunt
let the police in. He had taken a break from college for a year, and the
authorities decided this meant his exemption from conscription had lapsed.
"My mother and aunt wanted me to go into the army, and my aunt gave the
army the keys to the flat", he said by telephone. "Just before 7am one
morning I was in bed and opened my eyes to see the local policeman and an
officer standing over me. I was handcuffed and taken to the police station
and then a lorry took me to the conscription centre."
A champion trampolinist, he escaped by jumping over the station wall, and
remains on the run.
HRW says hundreds of young men are abducted each year in Moscow and St
Petersburg. "The cases we have heard about are really bad," said Anna
Neistat, from HRW in Moscow. "Last year young people who fitted the profile
of conscripts were stopped at metro stations and whisked off to barracks.
Their relatives did not even know they had been sent to the units. Our
research on abductions and conscription procedure shows the army breaks
both Russian and international law."
Dawn raids and brutal barracks beatings are worlds away from the
sophisticated, well-trained army President Vladimir Putin wants to fight
Russia's war on terror. The time has passed when Russia needed a million
troops to man the Iron Curtain. A strong nuclear deterrent coupled with
mobile and well-equipped specialist units will meet Russia's needs today,
most experts believe.
But now frightened and inexperienced conscripts, paid £1-£2 a month, become
at worst cannon fodder for Chechen rebels, or at best stay in the barracks
as a large but cheap cleaning service for Russia's military machine. Only
11% of eligible men serve as conscripts, and last month the Kremlin moved
to end the unpopular and ineffective process.
The defence minister Sergei Ivanov announced a radical plan to strip 92 of
Russia's main units of conscripts. The units would instead be staffed by
professional volunteers on contracts.
Mr Ivanov declared much of the army should be professional volunteers by
the end of 2007. He described the move as "ambitious but feasible", yet the
contract wage of £100 a month is unlikely to attract skilled soldiers, and
many fear the idea could prove too costly.
Experts say the army is still trying to maintain its Soviet-era grandeur,
despite having "a meagre budget, resembling that of a small European nation
like Italy".
One analyst, Colonel Mikhail Khodorionok, a graduate of one of Russia's top
military academies, said: "It possesses satellites in space, a nuclear
fleet, ICBMs and bombers, and it runs military operations in Chechnya. But
the army is a pauper, without prestige or favours.
"In five to six years we may have a dozen paratroopers on professional
contracts, but by then there will be no planes for them to jump out of."
*******
#14
Wall Street Journal
November 29, 2002
Russia Liberalizes Currency Laws In Effort to Encourage Investment
By GUY CHAZAN
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
MOSCOW -- In a bid to lessen state interference in business and to improve
the investment climate, the Russian government has approved a law
liberalizing the country's draconian currency controls and has promised to
remove them all by 2007.
The cabinet also passed a bill setting up a bank deposit insurance program,
considered a crucial step in restructuring Russia's weak and
undercapitalized banking sector.
Government ministers have long been under pressure from business to loosen
capital controls which have been in force since the early 1990s but were
made much tougher after the 1998 financial crisis. Companies must obtain
Central Bank permission to carry out a range of capital account operations,
and are obliged to convert 50% of all hard currency export proceeds into
rubles.
President Vladimir Putin has long criticized the current system, saying it
puts Russians at a disadvantage. The controls also have largely failed in
their main purpose, combating capital flight: The World Bank says $17
billion (€17.13 billion) flowed out of Russia last year, and $25 billion in
2000.
Discussion of the new bill dragged on for months, with liberal ministers
backed by big business demanding all restrictions be lifted while Central
Bank and finance ministry officials insisted on retaining some powers to
limit flows of "hot money" in a financial crisis. Such a rapid outflow of
speculative short-term capital helped bring on the collapse of Russia's
financial system in 1998.
The issue of currency controls is controversial in Russia . Some economists
argue that the country's banking system is still too weak to allow for full
convertibility on capital accounts. Others say that only full
liberalization will encourage the big flows of foreign-direct investment
Russia desperately needs.
Under the new bill, which must be passed by parliament, the proportion of
export proceeds subject to mandatory sale will be reduced to 30% from 50%:
and businesses will only have to notify the Central Bank of capital
transactions rather than obtain permission for them.
But the authorities will retain two levers for a financial crisis -- a
requirement that the equivalent of 20% of any incoming investment be
deposited for one year, and 100% of any exported capital for two months.
Economics Minister German Gref said the Central Bank could only impose such
measures in consultation with the government, and only if there were a
threat to the stability of the ruble and the Bank's foreign currency
reserves. All such controls, including the mandatory sale of export
proceeds, would be abolished by 2007, he said.
The government also passed a landmark deposit-insurance bill designed to
restore Russians' faith in their banking system, badly rocked by the 1998
crash when thousands lost their savings. The bill ends the monopoly of OAO
Sberbank, the only Russian bank with a state guarantee on household
deposits. Sberbank, which is state-owned, holds about 80% of such accounts.
Under the bill, participating banks will pay a premium into an insurance
fund run by ARCO, the state bank restructuring agency. Insurance payouts
initially will be limited to about $3,000 -- though that figure could rise
in line with future economic growth, officials said.
Mr. Gref said both bills would be subject to a few technical changes and be
submitted to parliament in five days.
*******
#15
Russia: Foreign-Policy Elite Launches New Journal
By Gregory Feifer
Some of the biggest guns in Russia's foreign-policy establishment have
launched an international-affairs journal they say they hope will help
finally plug Russia into the international community. Published in
cooperation with the prestigious U.S. "Foreign Affairs" journal, the
magazine is aimed at educating Russia's political elite in foreign affairs.
But it is also aimed at publicizing Russian points of view abroad and may
be used to float controversial ideas in the West.
Moscow, 29 November 2002 (RFE/RL) -- Members of Russia's foreign-policy
elite have unveiled the first issue of a new international-affairs journal
they say will help Russian decision makers better understand the world they
live in.
Published in cooperation with the leading U.S. "Foreign Affairs" journal --
from which some material will be printed -- the new magazine, called
"Russia in Global Affairs," has both official backing and financial support
from some of the country's most powerful businessmen.
Sergei Karaganov is head of Moscow's influential Council on Foreign and
Defense Policy and chairs the journal's editorial board. During a news
conference on 26 November to launch the periodical, he said the publication
is unprecedented because of its "educational character." "Its idea and main
task is to educate the Russian elite -- both current and future --
regarding what's really happening in the outside world. The main reason for
its appearance is the growing gap in the last decade between our dependence
on the outside world and our understanding of that outside world. This gap
is simply becoming dangerous, and that's precisely why we're launching this
journal."
Karaganov said up to half the journal's contents will consist of "the best"
articles from the Western press translated into Russian to augment
originally commissioned work.
Besides leading scholars, editors, and businessmen, the editorial board
includes several Duma deputies and Kremlin and government officials. Among
them are Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov and top Kremlin spokesman Sergei
Yastrzhembskii, both of whom represent themselves as individuals and not
the administration.
The board also includes a number of foreign-policy experts from Europe and
the United States. One of them is "Foreign Affairs" editor James Hoge,
another is Harvard University's Graham Allison, who contributed an article
to the first issue on the threat of terrorism.
The journal's "political board" includes metals magnate Vladimir Potanin
and oil-pipeline-monopoly chief Semen Vainshtok, among other big players. A
letter from President Vladimir Putin graces the new periodical's first page.
The editors will produce an additional English-language edition to be sent
to Western academic institutions, libraries, and other organizations.
Karaganov said the English version will have its own original articles as
well as reprints of material previously published by Russian authors who
would not otherwise see their work read abroad. The journal will be
published quarterly, although its editors say they hope to increase the
number to six times a year.
The magazine is not expected to turn a profit; many issues will be sent
free to Russian universities, libraries, and other institutions. Access to
the journal's website (http://www.globalaffairs.ru) will also be free of
charge.
Mikhail Ozerov, the editor of the English-language edition, said the
publication will also be used to publicize Russian opinion abroad. He said
ideas will be floated as "trial balloons" to gauge opinion among leaders in
other countries. "We'll see how they react to these trial balloons --
including ones tied to Chechnya, to the war on terrorism, disarmament, and
so on."
The journal's editor, Fedor Lukyanov, meanwhile said the journal's title
reflects recent changes in international relations. "'World politics' has
always existed -- it's been around since ancient times and for the duration
of all the centuries of human existence. But it has only now become -- or
is becoming -- 'global.' Because for the first time, we live in a world in
which not one country, no matter what its own policies, is in a position to
shield itself from what's going on in the world."
Vyacheslav Nikonov, director of Moscow's Politika Foundation, is another of
the journal's guiding luminaries and editorial board deputy chair. He backs
the opinion that a large gap divides Russia from the West. "For the past
80-plus years, a very serious cultural and intellectual rift has occurred
between Russia and the rest of the world. A situation has developed in
which the Russian elite and the elite of other countries practically speak
in different languages and understand each other badly even on a linguistic
level."
But Nikonov said another development is that Russian ideas are mostly
unknown outside the country. "The rest of the world doesn't know about
Russian intellectual discussions, even though our intellectual life, in my
opinion, is much richer than the intellectual life in many European
countries."
In an article in the first issue of "Russia in Global Affairs," Nikonov
writes that there are two major concepts of global politics. One claims the
United States will dominate international affairs for the foreseeable
future; the other that Washington will botch the job, leading to global
anarchy.
Nikonov proposes a third 21st-century scenario: a 19th-century
balance-of-power in which the United States is the only superpower, but one
that must contend with other so-called indispensable powers, not least of
which is Russia.
Karaganov, meanwhile, said he's happy with the journal. "It came out, in my
opinion, really well. We're very happy about that -- although of course we
can't congratulate ourselves -- but we're nonetheless satisfied. Let's see
what happens after the fifth, sixth, 10th, and 20th issues."
Stressing the periodical's "educational" character, Karaganov said its
editors will encourage other publications to reprint their articles.
******
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