#12 - JRL 7282
From: Gordon Lichfield <gideonlichfield@economist.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2003 12:29:43 -0000
Subject: Gideon-Moscow 33 - From the horse's mouth
We spent several minutes just arguing about what to call him. "A
senior member of the presidential administration" - no, too
specific. "A source close to the president" - even worse. "A
senior
member of the government" - well, strictly speaking the presidential
administration is not part of "the government". "A federal
official" - too vague. "A state official" - too tautological.
"A senior Moscow
official" - what, the mayor?
At last we reached a verdict. Over the next few days several leading
foreign publications ran inside accounts of how the Kremlin sees the
ongoing battle between Yukos and the prosecutors, attributed to "a
senior Russian official." The Russian daily Vedomosti promptly
announced that we had all met with the man usually considered to be
Vladimir Putin's grey cardinal, the reclusive head of the
presidential administration, Alexander Voloshin.
I, of course, can neither confirm nor deny. I swore to keep it a
secret, and wild Cossacks will not beat it out of me.
The briefing, which was given to a select group of the leading
English-language publications and news agencies, demonstrated a few
things. One, that someone had realised that the Yukos affair could do
some serious damage to how foreign investors view the country. Two,
that it took them a month. Three, that they were right, because we
all came (one even cut short his holiday abroad). Four, that for all
the solidarity Putin displayed with "Old Europe" over the Iraq war,
he doesn't really give a fig for what the French and Germans think,
because the only non-English-language publication there was Agence
France-Presse and they publish in English too.
And five, that the senior Russian official, whoever he was, he was
deft enough to spend four hours patiently fielding non-stop questions
from the cream of the Moscow foreign press corps until our computer
batteries had run out, our hands were aching, our bladders were
bursting and our eyelids were being held up by matchsticks, and leave
us absolutely none the wiser as to what was going on.
I thought I might at least get a new conspiracy theory to add to my
collection; but no. He claimed, in fact, to be as mystified as we
were. Luckily none of us believed him. If it were true that even
those at the very top could not figure out who is behind the affair,
it would be even more worrying.
There was one, very tentative, conclusion that I drew from the
meeting besides what appears in this week's Economist article
(below). Somebody asked about the idea of an amnesty for the
oligarchs - say, a statute of limitations on economic crimes
committed before a certain date. This idea has been kicking around
Moscow and in the press for several weeks. It would draw a line under
the privatisations of the 1990s. It would mean saying that however
many frauds were committed then, the future stability of the economy
and guarantees of property rights were more important. It would
certainly go a long way to reassuring both Russian and foreign
investors that companies they put their money into won't suddenly be
broken up, renationalised or otherwise crippled because of their past.
Our senior official replied that he hadn't even discussed the issue
with Putin. If that's so, perhaps it isn't very important to them.
Perhaps it's more important to have the threat hanging over the
oligarchs' heads, in case they misbehave again in the future. And
perhaps that's not so surprising. To impose an amnesty would be to
give up a huge amount of arbitrary power in one go, in effect taking
a great big step from an authoritarian to a law-run system. When
you're used to having authority and when the rest of the laws don't
work too well, that isn't easy. It would be the right thing to do,
but it's probably too much to expect.
Finally, for those still reading: two more pieces, one from last week
on pension reform, which sounds boring but actually highlights with
frightening clarity the extent of Russia's demographic meltdown; and
one on the Azerbaijani presidential dynasty, which sounds exotic but
actually highlights with frightening clarity how easy it is to write
about a country when you've never been there.
Non-Economist articles Copyright 2003 by Gideon Lichfield
- Disclaimer: these opinions are mine entirely. The Economist does not endorse
them.
- To subscribe, send a blank email to gideonlichfield-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
- To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gideonlichfield-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Previous bulletins are at groups.yahoo.com/group/gideonlichfield
Aug. 9, 2003:
#7282 • JRL Home
- Back to the Top -