Johnson's Russia List
#7201
30 May 2003
davidjohnson@erols.com
A CDI Project
www.cdi.org
[Contents:
1. The Guardian (UK): Gareth McLean, International man of mystery.
2. Reuters: Bush says supports Russian WTO bid, relations good.
3. Christian Science Monitor: Howard LaFranchi and Fred Weir,
For US-Russia relations, a more tepid tête-à-tête. No more 'goo-goo eyes,'
but plenty to talk about as Bush and Putin meet this weekend.
4. Christian Science Monitor editorial: St. Putinburg.
5. Reuters: Putin uses Czarist splendor at city birthday bash.
6. AP: Group Wants St. Petersburg Role in Gov't.
7. UPI: Martin Walker, Upper Volta with Exxon.
8. Wall Street Journal: Gregory White, Russia, U.S. Remain Divided,
Despite Healing of War Rifts.
9. Reuters: Oligarchs to win three seats on Russia UES board.
10. Stephen Schmida: RE: 7200-Lichfield/McCartney.
11. Gazeta: YABLOKO SETS ITS EYES ON FOREIGN, INTERIOR AND FOREIGN TRADE
MINISTRIES.
12. Human Rights Watch: Russia: St. Petersburg Summit Should Not Eclipse
Chechen Suffering.
13. FREEDOM HOUSE: NEW REPORT DETAILS DISTURBING DEMOCRACY DECLINE IN
RUSSIA.
President Bush Urged to Place Russia’s Democratic Performance on Summit
Agenda.
14. New Newsletter on Contemporary Art in Russia.
15. New Cambridge University Press book: Minority Ethnic Mobilization in
the
Russian Federation by Dmitry P. Gorenburg.
16. St. Petersburg Times: Governor Looking to Future of St. Petersburg.
(interview with Governor Vladimir Yakovlev)
17. Transitions Online/Ezhenedelny Zhurnal: Boris Zhukov, Fire After Fire.
(re forest fires)]
*******
#1
The Guardian (UK)
May 28, 2003
International man of mystery
By Gareth McLean
There is, as we learned from Profile: Vladimir Putin (BBC4), a pumping hi-NRG
dance song all about the Russian president:
A man like Putin
full of strength.
A man like Putin
who doesn't drink.
A man like Putin
who won't hurt me.
A man like Putin
who won't run away.
It's actually quite catchy in Russian. In fact, had Moscow slipped that in as
their Eurovision entry, they would have walked it. Instead, they persisted
with Tatu, the shrill pseudo-sapphic schoolgirls who do nothing to dispel the
idea that lesbians can't dance, and lost.
Back in Russia, it's not just in song that Putin's been immortalised. His
face also adorns T-shirts and, such is his allure, his followers -
Putinites -
wear blue, sleeveless cagoules when they're handing out his leaflets. In
merchandising terms, this doesn't come close to the Yasser Arafat
inflatable pillows
you can buy in Gaza City flag shops, but it is nevertheless impressive. You'd
be hard pressed, after all, to imagine legions of Tony Blair fans donning
deconstructed pacamacs to celebrate his leadership.
You can half-understand why Putin inspires such adoration. He has made
himself mythic. From humble St Peterburg backstreets where his
shelf-stacker mother
and factory foreman father lived puritanical lives, his ambition drove him to
excel at school, at university and then within the ranks of the KGB. He is an
intuitive opportunist and an expert liar; "dazzlingly cynical" according to
one of Profile's contributors. A natural politician, in other words.
But while Tim Whewell's film detailed the mechanics of his rise to power,
little of the Putin magic was captured. That he has turned Russia away from
the
verge of geo-political obscurity and into a re-energised global player is an
irrefutable fact, but rumours of his charisma remained just that. The
president's offer to hook up a pesky journalist with someone to circumcise
him didn't
exactly soften his tough veneer. This, presumably, is what makes him appeal
to
regular Russians - an iron determination both internationally and in the
troublesome Caucasus - but, as with many legends, you got the feeling there
was so
much still unknown: the man's icy depths. That's the problem with enigmas.
They're tricky to pin down....
*******
#2
Bush says supports Russian WTO bid, relations good
May 29, 2003
PARIS (Reuters) - President Bush said in an interview to be published
Friday he supported Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organization
(WTO), despite a minor spat over Russian barriers to U.S. meat imports.
"Russia's WTO entry does not depend on the United States alone. All I can
tell you is we support their bid," Bush said in an interview with the
French daily Le Figaro and four other foreign newspapers at the White House
ahead of the June 1-3 Group of Eight summit in Evian, France.
Bush joked that he was glad that the main dispute between the United States
and Russia -- the only major trading nation outside the WTO -- was over
meat exports.
"I am happy to see that the most serious dispute between Washington and
Moscow today is about American chicken exports to Russia. When you think
that not so long ago our quarrels were about long-range missiles, I am
pleased with the progress made," Bush was quoted as saying.
Despite recent friction over the U.S.-led war in Iraq, which Russian
President Vladimir Putin strongly criticized, Bush said that bilateral
relations remained strong.
"My personal relations with Vladimir Putin are so good that I can trust
him," Bush said.
"We need to go beyond a personal relationship to build a strategic
relationship covering all key issues. Whether it's about security, energy
or agriculture, we must resolve our differences before they become problems."
Russia's WTO accession talks have been going slowly, and Russia's top trade
negotiator Maxim Medvedkov said recently it was looking increasingly
unlikely that negotiations would be concluded by the end of the year.
Putin has made entry into the global trade body a key part of his
administration's campaign to bring Russia into the mainstream of the global
economy.
********
#3
Christian Science Monitor
May 30, 2003
For US-Russia relations, a more tepid tête-à-tête
No more 'goo-goo eyes,' but plenty to talk about as Bush and Putin meet
this weekend.
By Howard LaFranchi and Fred Weir
WASHINGTON AND MOSCOW – President Bush meets this weekend with Russian
President Vladimir Putin in the splendor of a refurbished St. Petersburg.
But all the gilt and exterior pastels of a czar's palace won't be able to
distract attention from the lost specialness and mutual disappointments of
US-Russia relations under the two leaders.
Gone are the days of gazing into each others' souls and dancing the
cotton-eyed Joe in Texas hill country. In this post-Iraq-war reality,
neither side appears to feel the need to go too far in accommodating the
other.
"It's a case of normalized diplomatic relations, where what you might call
the goo-goo eyes of early courtship are replaced by dealing with the fact
that there are differences," says William Kincade, an expert in US-Russia
relations at the American University in Washington.
In the wake of a war that Russia opposed, the initial bonding between the
two leaders will take a back seat to their respective national priorities.
Bush, say analysts, now doubts Putin's loyalty. And Putin must deal with
widespread disappointment at home that his accommodation of the Americans
on a range of issues, from canceling the Anti Ballistic Missile treaty to
the war on terrorism, has not produced much in the way of results for Russia.
"If the personal friendship factor helped spur the partnership in the
beginning," says Viktor Kremeniuk, an expert at the Institute of USA-Canada
Studies in Moscow, "the lack of it could now become a drag on relations."
Yet while no one expects any attention-grabbing breakthoughs from the
leaders' meetings - either in St. Petersburg or in Évian, France, where the
G-8 group of wealthy countries plus Russia will meet Sunday - that does not
mean neither president has an agenda in his breast pocket.
At the top of the American list is Russia's relations with Iran, including
its contract to build the Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran, and concern that
it is aiding an Iranian drive for nuclear weapons. The US also wants Moscow
to pressure Tehran to take tougher action against suspected Al Qaeda
operatives in isolated regions of Iran - something Russia says it is
already doing.
Russia has no interest in Iran becoming a nuclear power, most analysts say,
but at the same time they see little likelihood the Russians will pull the
plug on a project the Iranians are paying for with cash. Russia has agreed
to have the International Atomic Energy Agency look into concerns that
Iran's nuclear program is designed for more than generating electric power,
but otherwise it has shown no sign of backing down.
"Putin can't be seen on Iran or any other issue as the cat's paw doing
America's work for it," says Melvin Goodman, a Russian affairs specialist
at the National War College in Washington.
In addition to the Iran issue, the meetings may see Putin making some
positive gestures to Bush in an attempt to return to what Andrew Kuchins,
director of the Russian and Eurasian program at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, calls the "status quo ante" of before the differences
over Iraq.
IN THE past few weeks, Russia has made several overtures to the US that
appear aimed at winning forgiveness for its opposition to the American war
- "forgiveness" that White House National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice
has said will define the new US approach to Russia.
Russia voted for the UN Security Council resolution last week, handing most
responsibility for Iraq over to the US and its coalition allies. The
Kremlin has also rushed parliamentary ratification of a treaty signed by
Bush and Putin last year that mandates sweeping cuts in the nuclear
arsenals of both countries. (The parliament had suspended ratification
earlier this year to protest the US drive to war in Iraq.)
And last week, Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov signaled that Russia is ready
to start talking about cooperation on missile defense with the US, which,
after two decades of Russian hostility to the very concept of "Star Wars,"
represents a major shift in Moscow's geostrategic posture.
In exchange, Russia would like to see American action to advance economic
relations between the two countries. But despite Bush administration
rhetoric, US moves have been few, and Russians in the meantime have
realized that their economic future is more dependent on Germany and the
European Union in general.
In any case, any signs of renewed cooperation will be tinged by the
underlying Russian worry over American power - one factor in Russia's
opposition to the Iraq war. "The Russians' concern about the unilateral
exercise of American power in the world is strong, and it's not going to go
away," says Mr. Kuchins.
"Russia wants to be a good partner of the US," agrees Yevgeny Bazhanov,
vice-rector of the Russian Foreign Ministry's official Diplomatic Academy.
"But we will not be a junior partner. We will always be an independent
player."
*******
#4
Christian Science Monitor
May 30, 2003
Editorial
St. Putinburg
The visit of 50 foreign leaders to St. Petersburg this weekend to celebrate
the city's 300th anniversary comes at an appropriate moment. For this
beautiful, historic, and tragic city symbolizes the political situation of
its native son, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Behind St. Petersburg's newly painted and glittering facades lie crumbling
communal apartments, a dormant economy, and mafia-like corruption.
Behind the facade of Mr. Putin as the president firmly in charge is a man
struggling to maintain control of competing interests ranging from
reformers to recalcitrant regional leaders to robber barons.
That competition is illustrated by the rivalry between St. Petersburg, the
old imperial capital, and Moscow, the capital before 1703 and since 1918.
The rivalry symbolizes the tension between those, like Putin, who see
Russia's future as tied to the West, and "third Rome" nationalists devoted
to the myth that Russia can exist in isolation and develop a political and
economic model separate from both totalitarian communism and liberal market
democracy.
Putin's opposition to the Iraq war showed that dynamic at work. Millions of
Russians have not accepted the idea that Russia is no longer a superpower,
able to checkmate the United States. Putin understands this, but can't be
seen admitting it. So he aligned himself with France and Germany over Iraq
on the grounds he was upholding the principle of a multilateral world order
and opposing US "unilateralism." That was a facade, too: His underlying
motive was protecting Russia's billions of dollars of investment in Iraq's
oil industry.
But unlike President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, Putin
appears to be paying little for breaking with the US. Not only did he
strengthen ties with Paris and Berlin, he has apparently now obtained
President Bush's forgiveness. The sight of the American president and all
those other leaders coming to "Piter" to pay tribute to Russian history,
culture, and "power" should be soothing balm for the Russian psyche and
give Putin a mighty political boost.
He needs one. Facing parliamentary elections this fall and presidential
elections next year, Putin has his hands full. Corrupt ministers, powerful
oligarchs, obstinate regional leaders, and a quagmire in Chechnya obstruct
his efforts at modernization and reform. The secret-police cronies he
appointed as allies have trampled on civil rights and damaged Russia's
image abroad, tossing out foreign workers, from Roman Catholic bishops to
American Peace Corps volunteers. Reform sits stalled, leaving the economy
in limbo between total state control and a free market under the rule of law.
So Mr. Bush is right to cut Putin some slack. The Russian leader may need a
good deal more of it over the next year. For all his flaws, he's the most
viable representative of the Russian elite most friendly to the West and
democracy.
The future of Russia lies in the spirit of St. Petersburg. The US and
Europe must help Putin keep that spirit alive.
*******
#5
Putin uses Czarist splendor at city birthday bash
May 29, 2003
By Richard Balmforth
ST PETERSBURG, Russia (Reuters) - It cost $1.5 billion, a price even the
Czars might have blanched at. But for the current Russia leader, Vladimir
Putin, this is no ordinary birthday bash.
For the next three days, in grandiose style, he hosts world leaders at the
300th anniversary of his adored hometown St Petersburg, Russia's second city.
It will be a chance to inject some national self-confidence as he showcases
the former imperial capital of palaces and canals -- Russia's most elegant
city despite decades of neglect.
Designed as the country's window on the West, St Petersburg has played a
compelling role in Russian fortunes.
"This is an ideal place for reconciliation," said Alexander Afanasyev, an
aide to the governor, said referring to the big power meetings Saturday and
Sunday certain to touch on Iraq.
But for many, reconciliation is not a word that immediately springs to mind
in a city associated with autocratic Czars, cruelty and revolution.
The French aristocratic traveler Marquis de Custine who visited in 1839 was
so appalled at the disregard for human life the Czar showed his subjects
that he wrote, "In reflecting upon the terrible life of the inhabitants of
this camp of stone, one can have doubts about the mercifulness of God."
The Winter Palace, focal point of the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution and now
gleaming after a major face-lift, was built by workers many of whom
perished while toiling in absurdly high temperatures imposed so the walls
would dry more quickly.
Cradle of the "Golden Age" of Russian culture, some of its greatest artists
met sticky ends in the then capital.
PUSHKIN DIES AFTER DUEL
Russia's greatest national poet, Alexander Pushkin, died at the age of 37
after a duel fought over his spendthrift wife whom he suspected of infidelity.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky, whose brooding novels were set in Petersburg, became
mentally unhinged after being spared from execution within seconds of being
shot.
The 900-day Nazi siege in World War Two scorched an indelible mark on the
city. Even now, grandmothers refuse to speak to new generations about the
event in which hundreds of thousands starved to death, driving some people
to cannibalism.
Despite its remarkable cultural heritage and the breathtaking beauty of its
public buildings, St Petersburg remains a poor city. Its politicians say it
is getting poorer.
It has one of the highest crime rates in the country. Many of its sprawling
housing blocks are dilapidated and sanitary conditions are getting worse.
Homeless children gather for warmth round the city's Eternal Flame erected
in memory of the 1917 revolution and the later civil war, one of the few
places where the communist Red Flag still publicly flies.
As security forces moved into high gear for the arrival on Friday of the
first of the more than 40 leaders, querulous voices were raised about the
whole extravaganza.
"This is a very contradictory happening, a coin with two sides to it,"
Maxim Reznik, the local leader of the liberal opposition Yabloko party,
told Reuters.
"The VIPs will see the gloss of St Petersburg. But in reality we are going
into the next 100 years with rats multiplying in our housing blocks," he said.
(Additional reporting by Konstantin Trifonov and Claire Bigg)
*******
#6
Group Wants St. Petersburg Role in Gov't
May 29, 2003
By SARAH KARUSH
ST. PETERSBURG, Russia (AP) - After more than two centuries as Russia's
dynamic, forward-looking capital, St. Petersburg spent most of the last one
as a dusty museum of the czarist past. Yet, as the city celebrates its
300th birthday this week, some officials suggest the city should reclaim
its role as a center of power.
Advocates say moving some government bodies from Moscow to St. Petersburg
would bring investment, jobs and prestige. But many residents fear the
price would be St. Petersburg's distinctive character.
``The city would lose its soul,'' said 70-year-old Nina Ivanova, a
third-generation resident of St. Petersburg. ``There would be no more
Petersburg and no more Petersburgers.''
Ever since native son Vladimir Putin became president almost 3 1/2 years
ago, St. Petersburg's stature has been on the rise. Many members of Putin's
administration and Cabinet are from St. Petersburg, and Putin routinely
hosts summits here.
Foreign leaders began arriving in the city Thursday to take part in the
tricentennial celebration this weekend, which will put both Putin and the
city in the spotlight. Putin arrived Thursday as well, and President Bush
is expected to arrive on Saturday.
Some officials have suggested Moscow hand over a ministry or two, or
perhaps the parliament, to St. Petersburg. Most recently, Putin's envoy in
northwest Russia, Valentina Matviyenko, has suggested basing the Supreme
Court here.
St. Petersburg was founded to serve as Russia's capital by Czar Peter the
Great, who dreamed of a grand city that would serve as a gateway to the
West. It was Russia's political and cultural heart until after the 1917
Bolshevik Revolution, when Soviet founder Vladimir Lenin moved the capital
to Moscow - which was less vulnerable to foreign attack and had fewer
enemies of the new communist order.
Despite losing its status as capital, the city, known in the Soviet era as
Leningrad, continued to thrive as a cultural center. Leningrad artists and
writers were somewhat freer in their work than their Moscow counterparts
because they were monitored less closely.
The absence of government jobs in the city - today Russia's second-largest
with a population of 4.7 million - steered more people toward creative
work, said local historian Lev Lurye.
``This isolation has made the city like an aged wine. It aged because
nobody was buying it,'' he said.
Most visibly, the diminished status allowed St. Petersburg to retain its
elegance. While great swaths of Moscow were rebuilt in somber Soviet style,
St. Petersburg kept the Italian-inspired churches and graceful palaces
along its rivers and canals.
``We are lucky not to be the capital,'' said St. Petersburg resident Pavel
Ivanov, 60. ``Look how ugly they made Moscow.''
But in some ways, St. Petersburg is losing out. It has lagged well behind
Moscow in investment, its architectural masterpieces are creaky with age,
and the infrastructure needs major repairs.
The anniversary celebrations have brought much-needed attention: Historic
sites have been restored and roads have been paved. Some believe that
giving more power to St. Petersburg again would keep the focus here.
``It would be good for the city: new positions, new money, new
investment,'' Lurye said. ``Success hasn't ever hurt anybody.''
Leonid Kesselman, a St. Petersburg political analyst, said the idea,
however tempting, was unrealistic.
Using it as a place to host summits ``to demonstrate our Russian
Europeanness'' makes sense, but moving government agencies here would be
too expensive for a country struggling with complex economic and political
reforms, he said.
``This is not a serious idea,'' Kesselman said. ``This is like a balloon
that you bring to a birthday party.''
Tatyana Makarova, 55, saw a more basic problem with the idea: ``We have
enough traffic as it is.''
*******
#7
Walker's World: Upper Volta with Exxon
By Martin Walker
UPI Chief International Correspondent
WASHINGTON, May 27 (UPI) -- Back in the Cold War's final decade of the
1980s, mocking Westerners would sometimes call the crumbling Soviet Union
"Upper Volta with rockets." And as President George W. Bush and other
Western leaders gather this week in St. Petersburg for the 300th
anniversary party that President Vladimir Putin is having in his hometown,
they might want to update the old jibe.
Think of Russia today as "Upper Volta with Exxon."
Considered as an energy conglomerate, Russia is doing fine. The country's
gross domestic product has enjoyed 20-percent growth in the past three
years. Foreign exchange reserves are up six-fold to $61 billion and almost
a third of Russia's international debt has been paid off. Exports have
quadrupled since Putin came to power, real incomes are up 30 percent, and
for the first time in 50 years, Russia has become a grain exporter.
The ruble is strengthening, and U.S. Ambassador Sandy Vershbow told the
graduating class of Moscow's New Economic School last week that Russia was
about to experience a trade and investment boom with the United States.
European trade is booming already, with German, Irish, French and Dutch
hypermarkets opening around the cities and IKEA booming in Moscow and
British Petroleum buying a 50-percent stake in Tyumen Oil, Russia's
third-biggest energy group.
The problem is that outside Russia's thriving Exxon economy the non-oil
sector remains a massive disappointment and a social disaster. And this is
where most of the population struggles to get by. The World Bank reckons
that one Russian in three lives below the pitifully low poverty line. Low
birth rates and high death rates make Russia a demographic disaster. The
Novosti press service reported this week that half of today's 16-year-olds
in Russia will not live to see their 60th birthday.
In his State of the Nation address this month, Putin pulled no punches. The
economic achievements were "very modest," he said, and largely attributable
to high oil prices. Poverty was widespread; economic growth was unstable
and slowing fast while unemployment was rising again.
"The powers that our bureaucracy has remain vast," he complained. "And yet,
despite the huge numbers of functionaries, there is a severe dearth of
personnel in the country, at every level and in all structures of
government. There is a dearth of modern managers, of efficient people."
With an economy smaller than that of Holland, Russia would not be taken
seriously by Bush and the other visiting world leaders were it not for the
relics of Soviet nuclear power the Kremlin still commands, its oil and gas
reserves and its strategic location. Still the world's largest country,
with Europe to the west, China and North Korea to the East and the restive
Islamic world to the south, Russia is at the heart of some of the world's
most dangerous neighborhoods.
And like France and Britain, Russia also holds that other useful symbol of
global significance that is so comforting to formerly major powers -- a
permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council, with a veto on the world
body's decision-making. And as Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair
discovered to their frustration on the eve of the Iraq war, those U.N.
vetoes still matter.
Moreover, Russia still thinks of itself as a great power, able to play the
game of nations by forging temporary diplomatic alliances with France and
Germany and China against the American hegemony, while cozying back up to
Washington almost at will.
This week, for example, Putin spent three days with his first guest at the
St. Petersburg events, new Chinese leader Hu Jingtao. And on the eve of
Hu's arrival, Putin was wooing (and flattering) the Europeans again,
telling a St. Petersburg news conference, "If Europe wants to be an
independent and credible center of forces in the world, the shortest and
most reliable way to reach this goal is to have good relations with Russia."
The fact is that for all its courtship of the French and Germans, and for
all Putin's readiness to swallow NATO enlargement, Bush's missile defense
system and Bush's ditching of the venerable 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty, Putin has very little to show for all his gestures to the West.
The European Parliament still issues snooty condemnations of the war in
Chechnya. Russia's hopes of joining the World Trade Organization remain on
hold. The U.S. Congress still has not bothered to retire that humiliating
relic of the Cold War, the Jackson-Vannick amendment, that makes Russia's
trade with the United States conditional on an acceptable rate of
emigration for Russian Jews. And from next year, Russian visitors to the
United States will join Arabs in being photographed and fingerprinted on
arrival. (Even the French are not subjected to that kind of treatment.)
So do not take at face value all the fraternal embraces and the ringing
rhetoric of friendships and strategic partnerships that will be heard at
St. Petersburg this week. Russia is still far from being even a candidate
member of the West. Still, Putin might reflect, it could be worse -- were
it not for all that oil. Upper Volta with Exxon is an improvement on Upper
Volta with rusting rockets that might not even work any more.
*******
#8
Wall Street Journal
May 28, 2003
Russia, U.S. Remain Divided, Despite Healing of War Rifts
By GREGORY L. WHITE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
MOSCOW -- Russia and the U.S. in recent weeks have succeeded in patching up
the public rifts left after the war in Iraq. But as the two presidents meet
in
St. Petersburg this weekend for the first time since the war, there's still
little sign they will be able to get the strategic partnership, stalled by
the
war, back into high gear soon.
"On the rhetorical level, things have quieted down," says Alexei Arbatov,
deputy chairman of the Russian parliament's committee on defense and a
member of
the liberal Yabloko party. "But [the conflict over Iraq] has done very
serious
damage."
The debate over the war revealed deep rifts within this country's
foreign-policy leadership, leading to shifts in Russian policy over the
past year that
often surprised Washington. "There's a rather fierce struggle going on inside
Russia," says Sergei Karaganov, a scholar and Kremlin adviser, between those
advocating closer ties to the U.S. and traditionalists in the foreign and
defense
elite raised on decades of suspicion of the U.S.
Compounding the wounds from the Iraq debate is Russia's electoral calendar.
Russian officials have already warned Washington that parliamentary elections
at the end of this year mean Mr. Putin can't appear too pro-American in the
coming months for fear of undermining support for pro-government parties and
bolstering hardline communist factions. Helping out on the issues now high on
Washington's agenda, such as curbing Iran's nuclear ambitions, will be
particularly hard for Moscow, which has been a longtime supporter of Iran's
nuclear-power
programs.
Of course, Mr. Putin ignored a great deal of domestic opposition when he
lined up behind the U.S. war on terror in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001,
attacks,
standing aside as the U.S. military moved into Russia's traditional sphere of
influence in Central Asia, stepping up intelligence cooperation and dropping
opposition to NATO's expansion into countries once in the Soviet bloc.
That dramatic shift won Mr. Putin Washington's gratitude, which came in the
form of support on a range of economic and regional issues. Particularly
important to the Kremlin was Washington's help in Russia's battle with
separatists
in Chechnya.
But in traditional foreign-policy areas like arms control, Mr. Putin's
pro-U.S. shift didn't seem to be paying dividends. For Mr. Putin and the
team that
supported the approach, the primary motivation was pragmatic -- Russia's
deeply
diminished power meant that it would get further in the world working with
the U.S. rather than against it.
Mr. Putin's efforts to balance the new approach without alienating opponents
within the government became increasingly difficult as the debate over war in
Iraq became polarized. Fierce French and German opposition to the war left
little room for Moscow to take a more moderate position without seeming
softer on
Washington than its traditional allies. Kremlin moderates assured Washington
officials that Moscow would make sure its opposition didn't get too
enthusiastic, but other factions in Russia seemed to gain the upper hand as
Russia
threatened to block any move to war.
Tensions boiled over as the war began, with Russian officials blasting
Washington and the state media focusing prominently on civilian casualties
and U.S.
military setbacks.
But as the anti-American feeling in Moscow spiraled, it quickly became clear
to the Kremlin that the attempt to co-opt the opposition's main issue had
only
strengthened the hardliners politically. Mr. Putin and his team quickly moved
to calm the situation, and Russia's state media rapidly shifted their tone.
"It was a mistake on the part of the leadership to make the issue a domestic
one," says Mr. Karaganov.
In recent weeks, Russia has moved to reassure Washington that it wants better
relations, taking steps toward resolving a number of lower-profile but still
thorny issues, like Russian restrictions on U.S. poultry exports. Moscow also
has signaled it's open to cooperation on missile-defense programs, a major
priority for the Bush administration.
U.S. officials say the Kremlin also seems to be moving slightly closer to
Washington's alarmed view of Iran's nuclear ambitions as evidence has emerged
Iran is working on weapons as well as civilian nuclear programs. But Moscow
so
far has taken only limited steps to put pressure on Iran, although an $800
million (€673.7 million) Russian reactor project there gives the Russians
leverage.
Russian officials insist the reactor program has nothing to do with any
weapons efforts in Iran, noting that the war in Iraq has added to Iran's
sense of
vulnerability.
The Kremlin also has been slow to use its leverage on North Korea, as the
U.S. has sought, according to diplomats.
For his part, Mr. Putin has raised concerns about rising lawlessness in
Afghanistan and the surging opium-poppy crop there, which are threats to
stability
in Russia. Washington, meanwhile, still has failed to deliver on promises to
repeal Soviet-era trade restrictions that rankle in Moscow.
Mr. Arbatov, the legislator, says there's no chance Mr. Putin will be able to
pull off another pro-American policy shift as dramatic as the one he did
after Sept. 11. "If President Putin does that again, he'll sharply weaken his
domestic position," he says.
U.S. officials are trying to keep expectations of Sunday's summit modest.
"Just getting the relationship back on track is message No. 1," says a senior
U.S. diplomat.
*******
#9
Oligarchs to win three seats on Russia UES board
By Melissa Akin and Olga Popova
MOSCOW, May 30 (Reuters) - Two Russian industrial powerhouses are set to
win seats on the board of Russian power giant Unified Energy System on
Friday, giving them an official say in the future of a crucial industry.
UES shareholders, now dominated by the government and industrial consortia
MDM and Basic Element, must choose from 29 candidates for the 15-member
board at their annual meeting.
Among the candidates are a dozen linked to the government, UES's 52-percent
owner, three from MDM and Basic Element, three fund managers and sundry
independents, including a former U.S. senator, J. Bennett Johnston, an
energy expert who sits on the board of ChevronTexaco.
"Local strategic shareholders (are) likely to secure at least three seats,
up from zero, at the expense of portfolio shareholders, who might possibly
be unable to gain even a single board seat, down from three," Renaissance
Capital analyst Hartmut Jacob wrote in a research note on Thursday.
The next board is likely to set in motion the long process of breaking up
the state-controlled behemoth in a delayed government market reform project.
If the company can stick to a schedule approved by the current board on
Thursday, it will decide how to redistribute some of UES's choicest assets
-- its biggest power generators.
Next year could also be a crucial phase of a state-mandated reform when
Russia takes its first real steps toward a competitive generation market.
The government is expected to retain 11 seats, which officially include UES
Chief Executive Officer Anatoly Chubais, the main author of the reform, and
the utility's chief financial officer.
In recent years, portfolio investors, routinely abused in Russia's short
but turbulent capitalist history, have organised to vote themselves onto
company boards to defend their rights.
UES, a widely held company with a complicated restructuring on the go, was
a special target in those efforts. But as investor enthusiasm for the
reform has soured, small investors have sold out to industrial groups.
By some accounts, eight percent of UES is still freely traded, with the
rest in the hands of large industrial holders.
MDM, a coal to banking group, has nominated its two top executives. MDM was
not available for comment but is widely expected on the market to get its
candidates on the board.
Basic Element representative David Geovanis, a managing director at the
holding that owns half of Russian Aluminium, said he expects to win a seat.
"We are confident of getting on the board, given the support I've been
receiving from other shareholders," Geovanis said this week. "Our intention
is to take a very activist role in the company in order to maximise the
value of all non-government shareholders' shares."
Geovanis says Basic Element, the investment vehicle of youthful oligarch
Oleg Deripaska, sees itself as a private equity investor looking for market
returns. On the board, he said, he would push for major cost-saving
initiatives.
Worries remain that Basic Element is seeking to consolidate cheap power for
Russian Aluminium, the world's second largest producer, and that MDM wants
a captive buyer for its coal.
Amid the buyup of UES shares, deputy CEO Vyacheslav Sinyugin, who bowed out
of the board race this year, inititated the nomination of an independent,
former Louisiana Senator Bennett Johnston.
"Mr Sinyugin was in Washington and spoke to the undersecretary of the
Department of Energy for a recommendation," Johnston told Reuters. "He said
that they wanted an independent director with knowledge of privatisation of
electricity."
"I do believe Mr Chubais has a vision of corporate governance and
privatisation which is very sound...but again the details of execution are
where the question of success lies and I will be there to offer my
experience."
*******
#10
From: "Stephen Schmida" <sschmida@eurasia.msk.ru>
Subject: RE: 7200-Lichfield/McCartney
In response to Gideon Lichfield's 'McCartney in Moscow' (JRL 7200), I would
like to offer readers a different view on the McCartney concert. Maybe the
VIP section was full of thugs and mafiosi, but that is usually the case
with most VIP sections in Russia. Sit in the VIP section and you are
sitting with people who can afford to blow $1500 in an evening.
Back in the standing room only area (tickets $30), the crowd was pretty
diverse: 40 and 50 somethings reliving their youth, young people, families
with kids. Enthusiastic, but calm and friendly. It looked a lot like what
we all hope Russia will become: middle class and happy.
Nice crowd, decent music, great venue. It was a fun evening.
*******
#11
Gazeta
No. 92
May 2003
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
YABLOKO SETS ITS EYES ON FOREIGN, INTERIOR AND FOREIGN TRADE MINISTRIES
By Olga REDICHKINA, Rustem FALYAKHOV
While the Yabloko faction is gathering non-confidence
votes for the present government in the State Duma, its leader
Grigory Yavlinsky is preparing a place for himself in the new
Cabinet. He announced that "he doesn't exclude the possibility
of becoming a member of the new Cabinet, which might be formed
after the State Duma elections." However, Mr. Yavlinsky is
still not ready for a compromise: "We will not exchange our
values for positions and appointments."
On May 26, Grigory Yavlinsky announced during his visit to
St. Petersburg that "Yabloko is willing to join the government
or to cooperate with it, if the future Cabinet is the
government conducting a sound economic policy aimed at
increasing the living standards of the Russian people, instead
of being the government protecting the interests of big
business and creating favourable conditions for only an elite
part of the Russian population." Earlier, the Yabloko leader
discerned Putin's intention to force the government to resign
in the Presidential Address. He said: "this conclusion derives
from the President's remarks about new principles of forming
the government on the basis parliamentary majority according to
the results of the elections." Mr. Yavlinsky is definitely
ready to join such a government. However, he warned: "We won't
exchange the values safeguarded by Yabloko for positions and
appointments." Yabloko harshly criticizes the current
government and is ready to hand it a non-confidence vote. The
party will start gathering signatures under the relevant
document in the beginning of June.
Nevertheless, while the present government is still in
place, Yabloko has to make an all-out effort not only to
overcome the 5-percent eligibility barrier and gain seats in
the State Duma, but also to form a large enough faction there.
After all, if the idea of forming a party-based Cabinet
materializes, all posts will be obviously distributed according
to the size and influence of various factions.
Presently, the Yabloko representative heads only one
committee in the State Duma - the Committee on Education and
Sciences. According to expert opinion, Yabloko representative
Alexei Shishlov is a highly-qualified professional. It would be
quite logical to assume that in the new government he might
become a Minister of Education.
According to Yabloko's leader, aside from the Ministry of
Education, the party has set its sights on the Foreign,
Interior and Foreign Economic ministries.
The centrists were quite receptive toward the idea of
working together with Mr. Yavlinsky. Member of the General
Council of United Russia Alexander Vladislavlev told this
Gazeta correspondent: "I welcome the statement made by Mr.
Yavlinsky.
Perhaps, his second attempt will be more successful than his
first. In case of a failure, his political career will be
definitely finished."
It's not a secret that one of the main sponsors of Yabloko
is head of UKOS Mikhail Khodorkovsky. However, the analysts
tend to believe that Yavlinsky's desire to get the seats in the
government can hardly be attributed to "guidelines" provided by
the oligarch. For instance, scholar-in-residence of the
Carnegie Foundation Andrei Ryabov stated in the interview with
Gazeta: "I believe that the oligarch cannot issue direct orders
to the Yabloko leadership, but the positions of Yavlinsky and
Khodorkovsky definitely coincide. Mr. Khodorkovsky doesn't need
the government consisting of Pekhtins and Sliskas; he needs
efficient people, capable of accomplishing something." The
political scientist sees "a clear understanding of the current
situation" in Yavlinsky's statement: "The President hinted that
he is willing to part with the current Cabinet, and the leader
of Yabloko is preparing a fertile soil for himself in advance.
The party that has assembled in its ranks a fair amount of good
professionals cannot stay in opposition forever." However, Mr.
Ryabov doesn't agree with the prediction that Mr.
Yavlinski himself will join the government: "Some members of
the party might be invited to join the government, but nobody
is going to offer Mr. Yavlinsky the post of the Premier or, at
least, the Vice-Premier, and any other position wouldn't
correspond to his level."
*******
#12
Human Rights Watch
Russia: St. Petersburg Summit Should Not Eclipse Chechen Suffering
(New York, May 30, 2003) World leaders should not ignore human rights
violations in Chechnya at the upcoming summit with Russia, Human Rights
Watch said today.
The E.U.-Russia summit starts today in St. Petersburg, against the backdrop
of the city’s 300th anniversary festival. Russian President Vladimir Putin
will also welcome leaders from more than forty-five countries to his native
city, hosting a lavish program of events to mark the anniversary. President
Putin will meet with U.S. President George W. Bush on June 1.
“EU and U.S. leaders should look beyond the festivities to Russia’s
appalling human rights record in Chechnya,” said Elizabeth Andersen,
executive director of Human Rights Watch's Europe and Central Asia
division. “The number of murders and forced disappearances committed in
Chechnya makes the republic one of the most dangerous places on earth. St.
Petersburg’s splendor should not eclipse this.”
Human Rights Watch said that, despite Russia’s assurances of normalization
in Chechnya, the situation on the ground has not improved. With the Chechen
war in its fourth year, civilians continue daily to be victims of killings,
forced disappearances and torture.
According to recently released official statistics, 1,132 civilians were
killed in Chechnya in 2002, making the murder rate there more than five
times higher than in St. Petersburg and one hundred times higher than in EU
countries. Since the beginning of the conflict, hundreds have disappeared
without a trace after being detained by Russian troops. Official statistics
indicate that at least two people “disappear” in Chechnya every day, and
showed no decrease in the number of disappearances for the first three
months of 2003.
Human Rights Watch research in March documented twenty-six disappearances
between late December and late February. This was the highest rate of
“disappearances” Human Rights Watch has documented since the beginning of
the conflict. Officials have also recently admitted the existence of
forty-nine mass graves containing remains of almost 3,000 people on the
territory of Chechnya.
According to the Russian procuracy, since the beginning of the operation,
only fifty-eight cases against federal servicemen have reached the trial
stage, of those only twelve were on murder charges. Not a single case of
forced disappearance case has reached the courts.
“To date, Russian authorities have shown no commitment whatsoever to
investigating and prosecuting abuses,” said Andersen. “Summit attendees
should strongly back the need for justice.”
The Russian leadership has blatantly disregarded any recommendations made
by the international community to improve human rights compliance in
Chechnya. Russia has refused to issue invitations to key United Nations
mechanisms, including the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture and the U.N.
Working Group on Disappearances, as required by two prior resolutions
adopted by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. Russian authorities have
further failed to make available detailed information about the
accountability process, as required by the Council of Europe.
Human Rights Watch strongly urged EU and U.S. leaders to use the summit to
seek commitments from President Putin regarding Russia’s compliance with
key U.N. and Council of Europe requirements and regarding protection and
security guarantees for Chechen civilians.
“If Russia wants to be a respected international partner, it should
demonstrate a commitment to internationally recognized human rights norms,”
said Andersen. “If world leaders fail to raise the human rights situation
in Chechnya, that certainly sends a message too.”
*******
#13
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003
From: FREEDOM HOUSE <pressrelease@freedomhouse.org>
Subject: NEW REPORT: DISTURBING DEMOCRACY DECLINE IN RUSSIA
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
(212) 514-8040 x308
(917) 353-5408 (mobile)
NEW REPORT DETAILS DISTURBING DEMOCRACY DECLINE IN RUSSIA
President Bush Urged to Place Russia’s Democratic Performance on Summit Agenda
NEW YORK, May 29, 2003 -- Freedom House today released a detailed report
that reveals significant deterioration of rights and freedoms in Russia and
called on President Vladimir Putin to take steps to address critical issues
of concern, particularly in the areas of free and fair elections and
freedom of expression.
Freedom House urges President Bush to raise Russia’s democratic performance
as a priority issue for discussion during his June 1, 2003 meeting with
President Putin in St. Petersburg. Specifically, Freedom House calls on
President Bush to press the Russian leader to ensure free and fair
parliamentary elections later this year in which voters have broad choice,
media are free to provide full and balanced coverage, and candidates have
equal campaigning opportunities.
The report, included in Freedom House’s latest Nations in Transit (NIT)
survey, indicates that Russia has lost considerable ground in its
protection of basic political rights and civil liberties over the last
seven years. Despite showing some improvements in 2002, Russia has
experienced an overall decline since 1997 in most key areas tracked:
electoral process; civil society; independent media; governance; and
constitutional, legislative, and judicial frameworks.
The full Russia report is available at:
www.freedomhouse.org/pdf_docs/research/nitransit/2003/nitrussia2003.pdf
A Russian language version of the report is available at:
www.freedomhouse.org/pdf_docs/research/nitransit/2003/nitrussian2003.pdf
NIT general findings are available at:
www.freedomhouse.org/pdf_docs/research/nitransit/2003/nitcharts2003.pdf
“The long-term trends in Russia are disturbing,” noted Freedom House
Executive Director Jennifer Windsor. “Elections remain marred by serious
irregularities. Independent journalists fear retribution for solid,
investigative reporting. Corruption continues to pervade all aspects of
political and economic life in the country. Russia’s leaders have simply
failed to seize the historic opportunity of Communism’s collapse to fully
protect basic rights and institute the rule of law.”
Ms. Windsor called upon President Bush to raise the concerns over continued
poor performance in democracy and human rights in their upcoming meeting in
St. Petersburg, and “to make clear that stable and cooperative U.S.-Russian
relations ultimately depend on genuine democratic consolidation within
Russia.”
Overall, throughout the 27 post-Communist countries in Central and Eastern
Europe and the New Independent States, Freedom House found more gains than
setbacks in the last year in terms of the region’s progress in
democratization and implementation of the rule of law. Nations in Transit
2003 is produced by an international team of over thirty U.S. and European
analysts, and its findings are reviewed by a dozen eminent academics and
scholars.
The Nations in Transit report documents a pattern of disturbing trends
within Russia, including:
· President Putin’s methodical efforts to concentrate power around him and
to intimidate and co-opt political opponents;
· The absence of truly free and fair elections and viable opposition
political parties;
· A civil society that remains sidelined in public policy and decision
making and lacks the support and resources needed to sustain its activities;
· A press that is under challenge and fears retribution for legitimate
criticism of the government and honest reporting on crime and corruption;
· A weak judiciary that lacks independence and is unable to enforce its
decisions; and
· The hijacking of Russia’s wealth by an elite group of oligarchs and the
corruption and extortion that pervade life in the country.
According to the report:
“As the Russian Federation embarks upon its second decade of post-Soviet
independence, there is widespread concern in the West about the country’s
lack of commitment to democratic consolidation. Although Russia is an
electoral democracy in which the citizenry possesses formal political
rights, such as the right to vote and to compete in elections, real power
is found not in the competing branches of government or the interplay of
political parties, but in the proximity of groups to the executive. Civil
liberties are even less secure…. Overall, the country still lags behind its
Central and Eastern European neighbors in terms of democratization,
economic liberalization, and establishment of the rule of law.”
A separate Freedom House report on Chechnya tracks Moscow’s ongoing and
wide-scale human rights abuses in its military campaign in the breakaway
region. The report is available at:
www.freedomhouse.org/pdf_docs/research/nitransit/2003/chechnya2003.pdf
Nations in Transit 2003: General Findings
Throughout the region, most improvements documented this year were confined
to the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Balkans. With the
exception of the Baltic region, the majority of countries in the former
Soviet Union continued to lag behind.
The general findings are available at:
www.freedomhouse.org/pdf_docs/research/nitransit/2003/nitcharts2003.pdf.
“The results of this year’s study provide added proof that democratic
consolidation continues in a vast region that knew few freedoms just a
decade ago,” noted Amanda Schnetzer, a senior fellow at Freedom House and
an editor of the study. “Unfortunately, the gains have been uneven and
Russia in particular should be called to task for failing to lead by
example in the post-Soviet space. Its message to other leaders in the
region appears to be that democracy isn't a genuine priority.”
The Nations in Transit survey, produced annually, provides comprehensive
analysis of post-Communist transitions by tracking changes in electoral
processes; civil society; independent media; governance; corruption; and
constitutional, legislative, and judicial framework. It also provides a
unique set of comparative ratings and averaged scores for democratization
and the rule of law. The ratings are based on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1
representing the highest level of democratic development and 7 the lowest.
Gains:
· Democratization. Only one country, Bosnia, registered significant
improvements in the democratic processes tracked by Nations in
Transit. Ten additional countries registered some positive movement in the
democratization category: Azerbaijan, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia,
Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Ukraine, and Yugoslavia (Serbia and Macedonia).
· Rule of Law. Six countries experienced notable improvements in the rule
of law category: Albania, Bosnia, Hungary, Lithuania, Russia, and
Ukraine. An additional five countries also noted more modest positive
gains: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Macedonia, Romania, and Yugoslavia (Serbia
and Macedonia).
Setbacks:
· Democratization. Three countries lost significant ground in 2002:
Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan. Seven countries experienced more
modest declines: Armenia, Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Moldova, Poland, and
Russia.
· Rule of Law. Three countries also experienced notable setbacks in the
rule of law category: Croatia, Georgia, and Moldova. An additional four
countries saw more minor setbacks: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and
Poland.
Regional Trends and Highlights
Central Asia. Although many observers expected that an enhanced U.S.
military presence and increased foreign aid would lead to positive domestic
developments in the countries of Central Asia, little if anything has
changed on the ground. Indeed, the situation has deteriorated in many
respects. This year’s Nations in Transit study documents particularly
disturbing setbacks in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. As the report on
Kyrgyzstan notes, “Throughout 2002, the regime led by President Askar
Akayev… used direct and indirect pressure to silence its vocal
opponents.” In Kazakhstan, President Nursultan Nazarbaev and other top
regime figures found themselves under investigation in the West for corrupt
practices, while independent journalists and civil society activists feared
retribution for their activities as the government “intensified a clampdown
on political activists and members of the media who expose official
corruption by incarcerating them on false or trumped-up legal charges.”
Caucasus. The Caucasus also presented a negative picture in 2002. In
Georgia, local elections were characterized by violence and voting
irregularities, and independent journalists were often under attack. The
Nations in Transit report on Georgia details a highly unstable territorial
administration, weak institutional foundations, and anti-corruption
measures that have proven ineffective. Corruption is identified as a
“major obstacle to political and economic development.” Armenia remained a
“struggling nation with enormous socioeconomic difficulties, unresolved
security issues, and a deeply flawed political order.” Many observers
considered the loss by the popular A1+ television channel of its air
frequency to have been politically motivated; A1+ often aired criticism of
the Armenian government. Although Azerbaijan showed a slight improvement
in its Nations in Transit score for democratization--largely owing to
increased civic activism and the willingness of NGOs to take their
complaints against the government to international bodies such as the
Council of Europe--2002 was largely characterized by a pessimistic tone in
negotiations on the settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict,
speculation about possible presidential succession scenarios, and a
national referendum on constitutional amendments that was characterized by
fraud.
Western CIS. Although Russia and Ukraine both showed improvements in the
rule of law category in 2002, overall both countries have exhibited more
regression than forward movement over the life of the Nations in Transit
study. In the six transition categories Freedom House tracks, Russia has
experienced overall declines in all but one (corruption) since the
organization began rating post-Communist reform in 1997; Ukraine has
experienced declines in all but two categories (civil society and
corruption). Freedom House did note that in 2002, there were steps forward
in Russia, including the passage by parliament of numerous laws designed to
reform the judicial system and fight corruption. Ukraine’s parliament also
approved a series of laws and measures designed to reform the country’s
economy and legal system. In both cases, it remains to be seen whether
these legislative efforts will have a significant impact on the severe
problems facing the countries. Moldova also experienced serious setbacks,
largely owing to the efforts of parliament and the government to suppress
judicial independence and dampen political pluralism in the country.
Southeastern Europe. With some exceptions, the countries of Southeastern
Europe experienced forward movement in 2002. Although international
intervention in Bosnia remained substantial and nationalist parties gained
power, 2002 still saw a number of positive steps, including constitutional
changes that formally ended discrimination against non-dominant ethnic
groups in the protectorate’s two entities. Voters also participated in the
first national elections organized solely by Bosnian, rather than
international, authorities. Bosnia was also accepted into the Council of
Europe. In contrast, Croatia appears to have stagnated, if not
backtracked, in some respects. In particular, Croatia’s judiciary has
shown little willingness to reform and has largely failed to prosecute war
crimes cases as required by law. Macedonia showed some positive signs of
recovery from its domestic insurgency in 2001, particularly in the holding
of free and fair parliamentary elections. Yugoslavia, now officially
recognized as Serbia and Macedonia, exhibited some forward movement in
civil society, the media, and anti-corruption efforts, but was largely
characterized in 2002 by stalemate and deadlock on the political
front. Albania made the fight against corruption a top priority in 2002
and outlined a detailed plan for pursuing reforms in areas such as public
administration, public financing, and overall transparency in government.
Central and Eastern Europe. The year 2002 proved historic for most of the
countries of Central and Eastern Europe, as 7 received formal invitations
to join NATO and 8 to enter the European Union. The progress achieved by
these countries since the collapse of communism is reflected in Nations in
Transit by overall positive movement over the life of the study. Several
countries showed improvements in 2002, including Hungary, the Czech
Republic, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, and Slovenia. Both Lithuania and
Hungary showed notable improvements in the rule of law category in 2002,
largely for stepped-up efforts to combat corruption. Although Poland
remains at the top of Freedom House’s democratization rankings, some
negative tendencies in 2002 are worth noting. Particularly worrisome was
the strong showing of populist and nationalist parties in the 2002 local
elections and their uncivil behavior in parliament throughout the
year. Also problematic was the perceived increase in the politicization of
Polish media. Evidence suggested that mainstream opposition parties were
receiving little coverage on public television, and efforts by the
government to limit the concentration of media ownership drew concern from
press freedom advocates who worried that the actions were politically
motivated.
Freedom House, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, conducts an array of
U.S. and overseas research, advocacy, education, and training initiatives
that promote human rights, democracy, free market economics, the rule of
law, independent media, and U.S. engagement in international affairs. In
addition to the annual Nations in Transit survey, Freedom House also
publishes Freedom in the World, an annual global survey of political rights
and civil liberties, and the Survey of Press Freedom, an annual global
survey of press freedom. For more information, visit www.freedomhouse.org.
*******
#14
From: "Nic Iljine" <nic@iljine.net>
Subject: New Newsletter on Contemporary Art in Russia
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003
It is with pleasure that I can provide our english speaking friends with
the first Newsletter on Contemporary Russian Art,edited by Olesya
Turkina,St.Petersburg; This is a subject where information is not easily
accessible to the reader in the West and I am planning to publish two
issues per year.Feedback and suggestions are welcome.
To access this Newsletter click on: http://www.semislonov.ru
With kind regards,
Nicolas V.Iljine
European Representative
The Solomon R.Guggenheim Foundation
Eppsteiner Strasse 5
D-60323 Frankfurt am Main
Germany
Tel.: +49 69 728871
Fax: +49 69 173481
Cell: +49 171 8218425
email: nic@iljine.net
www.guggenheim.org
*******
#15
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 1
Subject: Minority Ethnic Mobilization in the Russian Federation by Dmitry
P. Gorenburg
From: Juliet Barnes <jbarnes@cup.org>
Cambridge University Press is pleased to announce the publication of. . .
Minority Ethnic Mobilization in the Russian Federation
by
Dmitry P. Gorenburg, Center for Strategic Studies-CNA Corporation,
Alexandria, VA
"Gorenberg marshals an impressive array of evidence to demonstrate the way
in which ethnic institutions shaped cultural mobilization within Russia's
republics. The result is a work that is both rich in detail and
consequential for institutionalist understandings of ethnic politics."
-Mark Beissinger, University of Wisconsin, Madison
"This study applies institutionalist analysis to the question of nationalist
mobilization in four republics of the Russian Federation. By emphasizing
distinct mass-mobilization patterns, it goes beyond previous
institutionalist interpretations that have tended to focus exclusively on
elite-level nationalism. Because of its careful empirical tracing of
mass-based nationalist mobilization, it makes a significant contribution to
our knowledge about nationalism in the Russian Federation and beyond."
-Lars-Erik Cederman, Harvard University
This book is about the spread of nationalism in the Soviet Union and the
Russian Federation in the late 1980s and early 1990s. It argues that the
structure of the Soviet state played the key role in causing the surge of
nationalism that occurred during this period throughout the Communist world.
Focusing on the emergence and development of nationalist movements in four
regions of the Russian Federation: Bashkortostan, Chuvashia, Khakassia, and
Tatarstan, it reveals that pre-existing ethnic institutions affected the
tactics of the movement leaders.
2003/312 pp./6 line diagrams/45 tables
0-521-81807-9/Hb/List: $75.00
For information about how to order this book or how to request an
examination copy for course consideration, please contact us at:
Order Dept € Cambridge University Press € 100 Brook Hill Drive € West Nyack,
NY 10994
Toll-Free: (800) 872-7423 / FAX: (914) 937-4712
http://us.cambridge.org/politicalscience/
*******
#16
St. Petersburg Times
May 29, 2003
Governor Looking to Future of St. Petersburg
The structure of power in St. Petersburg appears to be changing, as Governor
Vladimir Yakovlev has suffered a string of political defeats in recent
months. The majority of the deputies in the Legislative Assembly are in
opposition
to Yakovlev, ruling out the chance of a change to the City Charter that would
allow him to run for a third term in office. On top of that, a serious
political opponent has movied onto the political scene, in the shape of
Presidential
Representative Valentina Matvienko, who is believed by many to be the early
frontrunner in the next gubrnatorial elections. Not long after Yakovlev's
April
announcement that he was abandoning attempts to try to run for a third term,
deputies in the Legislative Assembly proposed that the elections for the
State
Duma and the St. Petersburg governor be combined, a move that would shave
almost six months off of Yakovlev's mandate. And the governor's seat could
open up
even sooner, as a number of senior political figures in the city, including
Legislative Assembly Speaker Vladimir Tyulpanov, have suggested that Yakovlev
may resign earlier. All of this discussion, of course, has come against the
backdrop of the city's 300th-anniversary celebrations. In an interview with
Vedomosti St. Petersburg bureau chief Anna Shcherbakova, Yakovlev said that a
decision regarding his retirement has not been made and that he will only
begin
thinking about his prospects after the anniversary celebrations.
Q: Legislative Assembly deputies are discussing a law that would move the
date of the gubernatorial elections forward to December. Do you think the law
will pass?
A: They will probably adopt it because they have to finish what they've
started in some way. The Charter Court has already ruled in favor. It
demonstrates,
once again, that the law can be altered in any direction in our country. The
legislative field is unfluenced by the political situation and the moods of
certain people. The president tells us to observe the law strictly but
there are
people who aren't in the habit of doing this. They probably believe that it's
always been this way in Russia and that maybe it is still that way now. They
repeat the same mistakes over and over.
Back in 1996 and 1999, I said that it would be good if we could hold the
elections at the same time so that the country could work, at least for some
period, rather than being occupied by election campaigns. In 1999, I simply
repeated: Let's hold the [gubernatorial] elections half a year earlier,
combining
them with the elections for the State Duma. Back then, everyone convinced me
that, according to the law, it couldn't be done. Today, it's the other way
round.
I've already commented on this. ... True, there is a caveat there, which says
that you actually can [stand for a third term] in certain circumstances. I
think that, if you're working full out - as you should be - for two terms,
this
is more than enough time to make a good showing and to achieve the tasks that
you have set for yourself.
I think that I have, in fact, completed a lot of these tasks. Obviously, you
can't do everything. But the work that we've done provides a serious
foundation for the person who will be the next governor. We have increased
industrial
production and seen growth in the construction sector - you can see that by
the
number of construction sites in the city. In terms of city improvement and
the roads, I think that we've surpassed all plans and expectations. The main
thing is that we've started the construction of the ring road, which people
have
been dreaming about for three decades.
Q: Do you think that the Legislative Assembly's decision is vulnerable to
appeal? Will you challenge it in court?
A: I don't know if I'll contest it. Probably not. I believe that the decision
is debatable, particularly in a moral sense. A lot of people are probably
already wondering why they elected deputies if all [those deputies] are
going to
do is decide the fate of the governor, particularly on the eve of the
jubilee.
The deputies have found themselves almost entirely on the sidelines of the
celebratory events. I think that the city's residents will get a full
understanding of who they've elected.
Q: You have been criticized frequently by federal authorities during the
preparations for the anniversary, by the Audit Chamber, for example, for
misuse of
funds and for not meeting deadlines. What do you think is behind these
complaints?
A: I think that there are simply too many people who envy the city and the
fact that things are working out for us.
Q: Are you afraid that, after the anniversary, there will be further
investigations?
A: Anything can happen. There is always a search for people to blame for
mistakes. There are a lot of people who want to celebrate successes but run
off
into the bushes if something doesn't work out, so I'm not surprised by
anything.
I think that everything that has been done has been done properly and for the
good of our city.
Q: Will you offer your public support to any candidate in the upcoming
gubernatorial elections?
A: I haven't even signed a resignation declaration yet.
Q: What do you think of the idea of a woman as governor?
A: Just go back over the history of the Russian state and remember what
famous Russian authors have written about the possibility of a woman
representing
St. Petersburg. It would make a lot of sense.
I'm not talking about today. Opinions differ. Why can't a woman be a leader?
There wasn't a female member of the city government for many years but, in
recent years, they've been called on to chair a series of committees, head
the
administrations of several regions, and there have been two female deputy
governors.
Q: Does Valentina Matviyenko have a good chance of being the next governor?
A: Valentina Ivanovna hasn't made any statements that she will run yet. I'm
not a psychologist, a sociologist or an astrologer. When I make my next move,
the real candidates will appear. Then you can ask me questions and I'll tell
you my opinion.
Q: A number of politicians have suggested recently that you might resign
prior to the gubernatorial elections, immediately following the conclusion
of the
anniversary celebrations. Are you considering this option?
A: The question itself includes a mistake and, from here, people just start
making things up - we won't be holding the elections in December, but in
September. Why not, then, in the middle of June?
Q: But in order to hold the elections in September, you would have to leave
office in June. Isn't this the case?
A: From the moment that I tell the citizens that I'm leaving, only then will
it be possible [to move the elections]. But where is all this hurry coming
from? People have been saying that a power vacuum developed after I said
that I
had no intention to run for a third term. But governors are elected for four
years. The job is temporary. I knew that I wasn't being elected for life.
Q: Have you already decided what you will do after you leave office? Will you
continue in politics or work in the private sector?
A: Not every governor gets to mark a city's jubilee, not to mention such an
important one - the 300th anniversary. I was also in office to usher in a new
century. I think that that's a lot for one person ... maybe I'll write my
memoirs. Perhaps I'll go into business, and perhaps stay in public service.
There
are a lot of questions and offers. I'm just not thinking about them until the
celebration events are over. I have a lot of responsibilities related to the
celebratory events and I'm simply not thinking about anything else. I'm just
waiting for the day when all of these events are behind us, and I can think
calmly about my future work.
Q: Are you under any political pressure to resign?
A: It's purely my own, personal decision. You decide whatever you want but I
can tell you that, in my city, I've done everything necessary to ensure
that I
don't feel any shame when I look citizens in the eye and have always made
well thought out decisions. I'll decide when to leave myself.
The people who are making comments [about my resignation] aren't mature
enough to work in management, which is hard for me to respect. [Legislative
Assembly Speaker Vadim] Tyulpanov says that the governor isn't able to do
certain
things. But, in order to make these types of statements, you have to be
able to
do something yourself. In becoming speaker, he had the support of the
presidential representative - a lot has been written about that. He's
talked about it
himself. I'm talking about people who have absolutely no experience and have
only managed [to attain their posts] through backroom intrigues.
Q: But you became governor in a fairly miraculous manner in 1996, when you
were supported by powers in Moscow.
A: I got into office in an absolutely normal manner. Before that, I'd worked
for almost my entire life in city management and had studied a lot of issues.
In order to lead the city, you need knowledge in that sphere. Nothing happens
just like that.
Q: So, you're saying that people that haven't worked in civic administration
don't have a chance?
A: Everyone has a chance, as we've seen. But in order to manage the city, you
need a base of knowledge.
*******
#17
Transitions Online
www.tol.cz
27 May 2003
Fire After Fire
By Boris Zhukov.
from Ezhenedelny Zhurnal
Editor’s note: Ezhenedelny Zhurnal is among the best political and societal
magazines in Russia. The weekly was established by the highly praised and
regarded editorial team that formerly ran Itogi, the leading Russian
political weekly throughout the 1990s.
What does the forest smell like? In spring, it smells of melting snow and
budding trees. In summer, it smells of sap. In the fall, it smells of
fallen leaves and mushrooms … and almost always of smoke. The fire season
starts in Russia’s woods in February when the snow disappears from the
southern slopes of the mountains (especially in the Caucasus) and it ends
at the end of November or the beginning of December, when the snow finally
falls on the mountains of the Primorsky krai in the Russian Far East. But
within that endless extravaganza of fire, there are some moments when
things come to a head, and one such moment is in late spring. Every year,
immediately after the snow melts, smoke fills the Russian skies just like
in wartime and TV correspondents start using military terminology.
THE ‘ABORIGINES’ OF TIERRA DEL FUEGO
Unlike other seasonal disasters, this one is completely manmade: Only one
in a thousand forest fires is started without any human participation (for
example, by lightning strikes). The most common causes are unextinguished
campfires, discarded cigarette butts, or matches. And in just under half of
all cases, the fires are started intentionally.
True, it’s very rare for a forest to be the target of such arson attacks.
(Although this can also be the case: Fires are very convenient for covering
up illegal logging). Usually everything begins with the burning of old, dry
grass and weeds left over from the previous year [a tradition in the
Russian countryside so that livestock can start eating the new grass
earlier--TOL] not far from the forest. The people who do this, if you ever
catch them, come up with various reasons for their actions: “so the new
grass will grow better” (although they have no livestock), “so it won’t
burn when I’m not here and take my house with it,” etc. In the Khasansky
region of the Primorsky krai (famous for suffering from fires every year),
fire inspectors were astonished that children had been taught to set dry
grass on fire in village schools--supposedly as a means of combating
tickborne encephalitis. And, of course, children don’t really need any
special training to start fires, just give them matches and wait until the
grass dries …
The St. Petersburg-based journalist Viktor Tereshken, who served in the
Leningrad region’s firefighting brigades in the 1980s, tells a grotesque
story. The firefighters received a call that all 48 buildings in a village
had burned down in a fire. There was nothing left to save, the destruction
simply needed to be reported.
“What caused the fire?”
“They burned dry grass …”
“And what is the name of the village?”
“Novye Pogoreltsy [New Victims-of-a-Fire].”
The firefighters were taken aback.
“Where did that name come from?”
“They built the village around 15 years ago after a fire.”
“What started that fire?”
“The burning of dry grass …”
“And what was the place called before?”
“Just Pogoreltsy [Victims-of-a-Fire].”
“Why?”
“It burned down once before, right after the war. Probably also from
burning grass …”
In the course of some three or four decades, the residents of that unlucky
village lost the roofs over their heads, their possessions, and risked
their lives three times, but still did not learn any lesson from such
dangerous entertainment.
This evidently unreasonable behavior (which is not, however, a strictly
Russian peculiarity--just remember the horrible forest fires in Indonesia,
two “black Christmases” in a row in “civilized” Australia, and similar
incidents) has deep cultural roots. Mass pyromania has been inherited from
ancient cultivators of the land, who continuously struggled to free their
homesteads from a continuously encroaching ocean of forests. The real crime
is that the situation has been reversed over the last 100 years: Today
forests exist only as isolated islands surrounded by inhabited areas, by a
manmade landscape. These forests and their inhabitants have almost no
chance of being saved.
Almost all of Myravevsky Park--the only non-state forest reserve in Russia,
a kind of research range for sustainable forestry and agricultural
techniques--burned to the ground at the end of April. The park burned
together with the nests of the endangered Daursky crane. The cause of the
fire was standard: burning grass on a neighboring property. The park had
struggled with this every year, but this year the situation proved too
much: The dry weather and strong winds that settled over the south of
Eastern Siberia made the fire impossible to contain. As the Emergency
Situations Ministry delicately put it, current data “allows for a prognosis
for 2003 of forest fire risks above the average yearly level.” What the
“average yearly level” is can be judged from last year’s statistics, when
43,400 fires ravaged 2 million hectares of land, two-thirds of which was
forest. Last year was mediocre, with an average number of fires and area
damaged by forest fires. Only in Central Russia were the fires unusually
strong, but their impact on this “holiday of fire” was minimal.
FIREFIGHTING DISORDER
“Understand,” the press officer of the Emergency Situations Ministry
hammered out his point to me, “that we take over when a fire either has
already reached a settlement or when a huge area is burning and the smoke
reaches a city. We cannot handle every little fire.”
On the one hand, the spokesman was completely right. The ministry’s air
fleet is short on mobile strength. The water dispenser attached to an Mi-8
helicopter releases 5 tons of water, the one attached to an Mi-26, 15 tons.
This type of helicopter can refill at the nearest large source of water
without returning to base or even touching the ground. According to the
crew of the Mi-8 that was working in tandem with an Mi-26 that crashed
recently, the latter managed to refill five or six times from the nearest
river, the Ingoda, in an hour and a half. The ministry has about 50 of each
type of helicopter and also possesses Ilyushin-76 airplanes that can carry
up to 42 tons of water (now that Minister Sergey Shoibu has grounded all
the helicopters until the reason for the recent crash can be ascertained,
the Il-76s are the only airborne firefighting equipment available). But
airplanes can only obtain water at airports and their accuracy is nothing
compared to that of the helicopters.
Currently, there are 560 source fires in Russia. It is clear that
helicopters and airplanes can only be used to complete the largest of
tasks--fighting the largest fires, saving settlements, and so on.
However, the Emergency Situations Ministry has more than just an air fleet.
Recently, regular firefighting services were also included in its mandate.
The ministry’s proud position is reflected in the orders sent down to the
Moscow region’s firefighting department: “Don’t go after grass fires.”
Evidently, those at the “emergency situations” ministry wait until a
situation becomes an emergency …
This is not due to laziness. The resources of the firefighters--people,
equipment, fuel, etc.--are limited. They can be increased, but that takes
money. Money, of course, will be found, but not before the fire and smoke
has reached settlements and regional centers, which happened last year in
Moscow and has already happened this year in Irkutsk. Identifying the
source of a fire and putting it out before it spreads would be inexpensive
and effective, but for some reason there is no money for such activities.
It is reckoned that preventive measures and liquidating smaller fires
should be handled by the Forestry Service, which is part of the Ministry of
Natural Resources.
This may be impossible in the middle of Siberia where the tracts of forest
are huge, but it is completely realistic in Central Russia. The way the
Forestry Service is organized, however, does not leave the forest rangers
enough time and strength to carry out these responsibilities. With monthly
salaries reaching only a few hundred rubles [100 rubles is a little more
than $3], they are forced earn money through commercial logging
enterprises, a practice euphemistically called “forest treatment” [cutting
and selling wood under the pretense of caring for the forest]. Fighting
small source fires is not a task that can be handled in the time not
devoted to their chief duties.
The forest is endangered by this conflict of interests … as are those
people who end up in the path of the fires, either through circumstance or
professional responsibility.
Translated by Maria Antonenko.
*******
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