text:
The Global Intelligence Files,
files released so far...
Index pages
by Date of Document
Our Partners
Al Akhbar - Lebanon
Al Masry Al Youm - Egypt
Asia Sentinel - Hong Kong
Bivol - Bulgaria
Carta Capital - Brazil
CIPER - Chile
Dawn Media - Pakistan
L'Espresso - Italy
La Repubblica - Italy
La Jornada - Mexico
La Nacion - Costa Rica
Malaysia Today - Malaysia
McClatchy - United States
Nawaat - Tunisia
NDR/ARD - Germany
Owni - France
Pagina 12 - Argentina
Philip Dorling - Fairfax media contributor - Australia
Plaza Publica - Guatemala
Publica - Brazil
Publico.es - Spain
Rolling Stone - United States
Russian Reporter - Russia
Ta Nea - Greece
Taraf - Turkey
The Hindu - India
The Yes Men - Bhopal Activists
Sunday Star-Times - New Zealand
Community resources
courage is contagious
The Global Intelligence Files
On Monday February 27th, 2012, WikiLeaks began publishing The Global Intelligence Files, over five million e-mails from the Texas headquartered "global intelligence" company Stratfor. The e-mails date between July 2004 and late December 2011. They reveal the inner workings of a company that fronts as an intelligence publisher, but provides confidential intelligence services to large corporations, such as Bhopal's Dow Chemical Co., Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security, the US Marines and the US Defence Intelligence Agency. The emails show Stratfor's web of informers, pay-off structure, payment laundering techniques and psychological methods.
[OS] 2011-#199-Johnson's Russia List
Released on 2012-10-12 10:00 GMT
Email-ID | 4649110 |
Date | 2011-11-03 16:43:10 |
From | firstname.lastname@example.com |
To | firstname.lastname@example.com |
List-Name | email@example.com |
Johnson's Russia List
3 November 2011
A World Security Institute Project
JRL homepage: www.cdi.org/russia/johnson
Constant Contact JRL archive:
Support JRL: http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/funding.cfm
Your source for news and analysis since 1996n0
A minimum contribution of $25 is suggested. $50 is the normal
level of support. Business-users should pay more.
You may send a check made out to WSI to:
The World Security Institute Attention: JRL
1779 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036-2109
You can make a credit card contribution thru Paypal by going
to this location:
Or you can make a credit card contribution by contacting Judy
Edwards of the WSI at 202-797-5260.
In this issue
1. Bloomberg: Abramovich Says He Feared Russia's Murderous Aluminum Business.
2. Reuters: Putin hails Russian boy as world's "7 billionth"
3. www.russiatoday.com: Putin surges up Forbes 'most powerful people' rankings.
4. www.nytimes.com: Masha Gessen, Medvedev's Time.
5. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: PROTEST TECHNIQUES. LEVADA-CENTER: RESULTS OF OPINION
6. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: 'Direct Democracy' Proposals Seen as Election Technique.
7. Kommersant: Support for Russian Nationalism Growing, Parties Are Interested.
8. Moscow Times: Actor-Priest Promotes Soft Nationalism. (Ivan Okhlobystin)
9. Interfax: Half of Russians Want Ethnicity Restored to Passports - Poll.
10. Moscow Times: Margarita Simonyan, Why We Hate Each Other.
11. RFE/RL: Russian Leader's Honors To Critical Journalists Raise Eyebrows.
12. Novye Izvestia: HAZARDOUS OCCUPATION. Journalists in Russia are regularly
threatened and assailed.
13. Moskovskiye Novosti: MONITORING. Online-media content is to be examined for
14. Rossiiskaya Gazeta: NETS TO REMAIN OPEN. An interview with Minister of IT and
Communication Igor Schegolev.
15. New York Times: Russia Stays Transfixed by a Switch at Birth.
16. Moscow News: Life on Mars the trial version.
17. Interfax: Right Cause concerned about possibility of totalitarianism comeback
in Russia.
18. RIA Novosti: Gulag Cultural Center to open in Moscow.
19. Vladimir Shlapentokh: Putin's Regime: A Firm Future So Far.
20. Reuters: Russia set to end 18-year wait to join WTO.
21. Moscow Times: Russia and Georgia Strike WTO Deal. ("Below is a breakdown of
how entry into the WTO will affect some of the biggest sectors of the Russian
22. Russia Beyond the Headlines: WTO membership will improve Russia's investment
23. Moscow Times: Russia Rises in Bribery Score, Still Last.
24. Vedomosti: OIL, GAS, BRIBES. International experts: Russia is a major
exporter of corruption.
25. RIA Novosti: Russia's Poor Corruption Record Linked To Pressure On Gazprom -
26. Interfax: Expert Confident Russia Will Reduce Corruption In Coming Years.
(Yelena Panfilova)
27. Russia Profile: What Triggers Capital Flight. New Figures From Russia's
Central Bank Show That Foreign and Domestic Investors Are Pulling Their Money Out
of Russia.
28. Valdai Discussion Club: No visible results of "economic modernization on the
Medvedev track." (interview with Sergey Aleksashenko)
29. RIA Novosti: Medvedev tells G20 debtor states to cut spending.
30. RIA Novosti: Russia to weather worst of EU turbulence.
31. Moscow News editorial: Coupling in Cannes.
32. RIA Novosti: Russia Us Differences Over ABM Boil Down To Politics - Experts.
33. Center for the National Interest: Task Force Prescribes Steps to Advance U.S.
Interests in Russia.
34. Russia Beyond the Headlines: Eugene Ivanov, The ambassador of better will.
McFaul's appointment as the next American ambassador in Moscow indicates a shift
in the U.S. policy toward Russia.
35. AFP: US jury finds Russian 'merchant of death' guilty.
36. www.russiatoday.com: A Bout face: Moscow lobbies for Bout's return.
37. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: For the US the Russian mafia is worse than the yakuza.
US is expected to tighten visa requirements for Russian citizens.
38. Interfax: Russian Oil Companies Resuming Operations in Libya - Kremlin Envoy
For N. Africa.
39. Kommersant: Russian Pundit Examines Usefulness of CSTO Despite Its Apparent
'Helplessness.' (Aleksey Malashenko)
Abramovich Says He Feared Russia's Murderous Aluminum Business
By Kit Chellel
November 3, 2011
Billionaire Roman Abramovich had to be persuaded to invest in Russian aluminum
plants in 2000 because "every three days someone was murdered in that business,"
he told a London court.
Abramovich, testifying in the $6.8 billion legal fight with his former business
partner Boris Berezovsky, said he got into the aluminum business in spite of
worker disputes and the presence of criminal gangs after being pressured by Badri
Patarkatsishvili, an associate of Berezovsky.
"I didn't want to have anything to do with a business like that without Badri,"
the 45-year-old billionaire owner of Chelsea Football Club said. "I wouldn't have
poked my nose in there."
Abramovich was part of a group who bought the assets, including one of the
largest aluminum smelters in the world, for around $550 million in 2000.
Berezovsky says Abramovich could never have taken part in that deal without his
help and political connections and that he wasn't paid enough for his stake in
the business. The aluminum assets eventually became part of what is now United
Co. Rusal.
Berezovsky claims in his lawsuit that Abramovich bullied him into selling his
stakes in Russian oil and metal companies, including OAO Sibneft, for far below
their real value by telling him the government would seize his shares if he
didn't sell. The London trial has provided insight into how two of the world's
richest men made their fortunes in the chaos following the collapse of communism,
and how their friendship soured after Berezovsky fled Russia in 2000.
Offering Krysha
In witness statements filed at court, Abramovich argued Berezovsky's role had
been to provide "krysha," or protection, in the "dangerous and risky" environment
of Russia after the fall of communism, and that he held no shares.
He said he paid Berezovsky and Patarkatsishvili hundreds of millions of dollars
for physical and political protection before eventually giving them $1.3 billion
in 2001 and 2002 to break off the arrangement.
In the 1990s, the fight for market share often involved violence and dozens of
people died in the "aluminum wars" of the time. OJSC United Co. Siberian
Aluminium, or Sibal, in late 2000, merged with the aluminum business of Sibneft,
a company by then controlled by Abramovich, to form Rusal. Rusal in January
raised HK$17.4 billion ($2.24 billion) in the first initial public offering by a
Russian company in Hong Kong.
The case is: Berezovsky v. Abramovich, High Court of Justice, Queen's Bench
Division, Commercial Court Case No. 09- 1080.
[return to Contents]
Putin hails Russian boy as world's "7 billionth"
November 2, 2011
KALININGRAD, Russia (Reuters) - Prime Minister Vladimir Putin hailed a two-day
old Russian boy as the world's seven billionth person Wednesday, weighing into a
bizarre scramble to claim a title that is almost impossible to verify.
Russia's Pyotr Nikolayev was born on Oct 31, two minutes after midnight in a
maternity hospital in Russia's Western exclave of Kaliningrad, wedged between
Poland and the Baltic Sea.
"How did you manage to do it on the very 7 billion mark?" Putin, who is running
for president in a March election, asked the child's mother in front of a group
of television reporters.
"It was all down to him. I am just a normal mum," Yelena Nikolayeva, replied as
she handed the boy to Putin, Russia's paramount leader. The pictures were aired
on state television at peak viewing times.
The United Nations says the population reached the 7 billion mark on Oct 31 -- 13
years after reaching 6 billion, and has tried to use the sharp increase to draw
attention to the problems of population growth.
Though it is almost impossible to say which person was actually the midnight's
child of this billion, there have been claims to the title from people in
countries such as the Philippines, India, Sri Lanka and Britain.
Local officials in Russia's Far East even awarded a certificate to the mother of
another boy, Alexander, that purported to confirm his title as the world's seven
billionth person.
A spokesman for the United Nation's Population Fund could not be reached for
[return to Contents]
November 3, 2011
Putin surges up Forbes 'most powerful people' rankings
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, the early favorite in next year's presidential
elections, was listed by Forbes magazine as the second-most powerful man in the
In 2010, Putin ranked number four on the Forbes list of most powerful people.
The annual list is a who's who of the world's movers and shakers from the world
of entertainment to politics. Among some of the people who appeared on the list
were Chinese President Hu Jintao, who ranked third behind Putin and US President
Barack Obama, who holds the top spot.
Both Obama and Putin will be running for the presidencies of their respective
nations in 2012, which could make for some colorful politics if both are voted
into office. Incidentally, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who forged the
reset in US-Russian relations with Obama, took the 59th spot in the list.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel remains the most powerful woman in the world at
No. 4 on the list, followed by Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, Saudi King
Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, Pope Benedict XVI, US Federal Reserve Chairman Ben
Bernanke, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and British Prime Minister David
According to Forbes, the ranking takes into account four factors. "First, how
many people a person has power over; second, the financial resources controlled
by each candidate, whether that is revenues (for a company), GDP (for a country)
or net worth (for a billionaire); the third criteria considers whether a
candidate is influential in more than one arena or sphere.
Finally, Forbes magazine took into consideration "how actively the candidates
wield their power." This measure excludes "heirs to great fortunes, semi-retired
industrialists and former heads of state."
In all, 70 individuals made the final list, or, to put it another way, one for
every 100 million people on the planet.
[return to Contents]
November 3, 2011
Medvedev's Time
By MASHA GESSEN
Masha Gessen is a journalist in Moscow. Her book "The Man Without a Face: The
Rise and Crimes of Vladimir Putin" will be published next year.
MOSCOW "What time is it?" asked Ksenia.
"My cellphone says it's 9 a.m., and the wall clock says it's 10. Can anybody tell
me what time it really is?" This, from Alexander.
And from Alexei, in London: "Dear Moscow colleagues, please bear in mind that I
am now four hours behind you, not three." And in case that wasn't clear enough:
"That means when it's 11 in Moscow, it's still 7 in the morning where I am!"
On Sunday, October 30, Russian speakers the world over were preoccupied with the
most quotidian of questions.
Another two dozen comments on the topic of time rounded out my Facebook page that
Sunday the first day in 30 years that Russia did not turn its clocks back in the
autumn. Now Russia will be frozen indefinitely in daylight savings time. In
winter, the sun will rise long after most people have arrived at work or school.
And making one's way in the dark every frigid morning will likely be the enduring
legacy of Dmitri Medvedev's four-year term as president.
When Vladimir Putin's handpicked successor took office in May 2008, he seemed
full of good, even grand, intentions. He planned to fight corruption. He promised
to reform the country's ineffective and often brutal law enforcement services. He
said he would draw human rights groups and other noncommercial organizations into
the governing process. He claimed he would find ways for the Russian state
finally to acknowledge the crimes of Stalinism and honor its victims. He also
mentioned wanting to do something about the fact that Russia spans 11 time zones
the only issue he planned to tackle about which no one but the new president
seemed at all concerned.
The fight against corruption did not get very far. Between 2007 and 2010 (the
last year for which figures are available), Russia dropped from 143rd to 154th
place in Transparency International's annual Corruption Perceptions Index out of
a possible 178. Of the many outrageous stories of Russian corruption, the most
heartbreaking happened on Medvedev's watch. A young accountant named Sergei
Magnitsky uncovered an embezzlement scheme in which tax officials and police
officers swindled the Russian treasury out of $230 million in taxes. Apparently
in retaliation for this, Magnitsky was arrested and held in conditions best
described as torture, until he died in prison in November 2009, at the age of 37.
Medvedev promised to identify those responsible for Magnitsky's death and have
them punished. Two years later, this still has not happened, and the accountant's
executioners continue to serve in law enforcement. The only thing that has
changed is a name: what used to be known as the militia is now the police.
Medvedev's cooperation with human rights activists and nongovernmental
organizations has not gone well either. His own committee of just such people,
the Presidential Council on Human Rights, investigated Magnitsky's death and
issued a report detailing the torture to which he'd been subjected and listing
those responsible. But its findings have been all but ignored. And despite
Medvedev's promises, victims of Russia's earlier regimes have fared no better.
For two years now he has been expected, and has failed, to sign a decree finally
establishing a national museum devoted to the memory of victims of Soviet terror.
The only goal Medvedev set for himself and actually fulfilled is decreasing the
number of time zones in Russia from 11 to nine and canceling the seasonal
resetting of the clock.
Time zones are a reflection of cultural values almost as much as they are a
reflection of physical reality. China has only one: The entire country lives on
Beijing's clock, much as it lives by Beijing's rules in other ways. Austria,
which is geographically located in Eastern Europe, maintains Western European
time to indicate that it belongs to that part of the continent.
The Russian president has moved Chukotka one hour closer to Moscow but has moved
Moscow one hour farther away from Berlin, Paris, London and New York just as it
has moved Moscow farther and farther away from such Western cultural values as
transparency, human rights and the rule of law.
[return to Contents]
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
November 3, 2011
Author: Denis Volkov (Levada-Center sociologist)
Most Russians would have backed the return of the box "Against
Everyone" on voting bulletins. According to Levada-Center
sociologists, 73% Russians would have backed it and 12% would have
objected. The population is grossly dissatisfied with the
parliament. At least 64% Russians would have liked to see the
parliament overhauled, and 69% accused lawmakers of the failure to
keep their promises to voters. Trust in political parties turned
out to be at an all-time minimum level over the last 15-20 years.
More than 50% Russians intend to turn up at their respective
polling stations on December 4. Of the remaining nearly 50%, most
will stay at home because of their dissatisfaction with the
political system installed in Russia. Twenty-eight percent told
sociologists that not a single political party of the seven
officially registered in Russia represented their interests.
United Russia rates high among the Russians determined to
vote on December 4 for a number of reasons. The arrangement of
forces is shaped long before the election, when steps are taken to
prevent some political parties from participation in the
parliamentary race. The People's Freedom Party, Rot-Front, and
some other political parties were denied registration and with it,
official status. As things stand, no new players will appear on
the political terrain without the authorities' approval. What
parties of the so called opposition are permitted to participate
in the parliamentary race are deliberately weakened by spoilers.
Fair Russia is one, a mix of several political parties that ended
up with a part of the traditional Communist electorate. By and
large, United Russia political enemies are there to absorb protest
Retaining control over TV networks, the Russian state is
quite effective at indoctrination en masse and on the nationwide
scale. Nearly 90% Russians watch news programs; about 30% learn of
news from newspapers; and 18% or so use the Internet. It follows
that the people and the events TV channels do not cover for some
reason or other remain unknown to practically all. Studies
meanwhile show that United Russia is mentioned by TV networks much
more regularly than all other political parties.
Nearly every fourth Russian dislikes the political system
installed in Russia. First and foremost, they are urban dwellers
who use several information channels at once, people with
university diplomas, self-sufficient and therefore less dependent
on the state. It is these Russians who are skeptical of Vladimir
Putin's intended comeback. It is mostly these Russians who
contemplate immigration. Approximately every third within this
group subscribes to the opinion that a boycott is the best form of
protest. Every fourth reckons that voting any party other than
United Russia is the ticket, and as many believe that spoiling the
bulletin is the best way.
Opposition activists and leaders (Boris Nemtsov, Vladimir
Ryzhkov, and others) who would like to appeal to the Russians to
spoil bulletins or at least take them home have no access to TV
networks. Moreover, those who purport to speak on behalf of the
powers-that-be regularly and faithfully belittle and condemn these
politicians... In any event, most Russians suspect that the
opposition in the country is about criticism of the powers-that-be
rather than about anything else, and that betterment of living
standards in Russia is the least of their worries.
Up to 80% Russians believe in the meantime that the powers-
that-be in Russia are corrupt.
In a word, it seems that there will be no organized protests
in the parliamentary race come December. Most Russians who have a
reason to dislike the status quo and the existing political system
will probably stay at home. In 2007, approximately 3% Russians did
go to polling stations and spoiled or tore up bulletins.
[return to Contents]
'Direct Democracy' Proposals Seen as Election Technique
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
October 28, 2011
Report by Ivan Rodin, under the rubric "Politics": Direct Democracy at the Height
of Fashion -- There Will Now Be Public Discussion of Important Draft Laws on the
Internet Site of the Ministry of Justice Too
The main slogan of the current moment for the Russian government is -- more
direct democracy. Vladimir Putin's ONF (All-Russia People's Front), Dmitriy
Medvedev's expanded government -- these are all direct elements of it. One after
another departments are opening special sections on their websites for
all-people's debate. Even the Ministry of Justice joined them recently. The
experts note that all the talk about democracy today is just part of the election
The Russian Ministry of Justice announced yesterday that there will now be public
discussion of important draft laws on its Internet site too. Let us recall that
there are already such rubrics on the Internet page of the Russian Government,
the official site of the State Duma, and in a number of ministries and
Furthermore, the civilian society already has experience participating in
all-people's debates on this or that law. The best known of them is the draft law
on the police. The most lengthy is perhaps the new version of the law on
protecting citizens' health. The most scandalous was the law on paid fishing.
However, the Ministry of Justice's work-up presented to the court of public
opinion will hardly set any records.
Because this department for some reason decided that people would be interested
in its proposals for bolstering state regulation of the activities of NKOs
(non-commercial organizations) and public associations. For the Ministry of
Justice has discovered that they commit numerous offenses in their symbols. But
in principle there is nothing important in the law, it is just that the officials
want to make the public structures obey them.
In this way the Ministry of Justice essentially repudiates the meaning of
all-people's debates. But they are, as we know, an element of so-called direct
democracy. And the idea of developing it is very popular with the party of power
and its leaders today. Let us recall that the People's Front was formed on the
initiative of Premier Vladimir Putin. The expanded government was developed at
the suggestion of President Dmitriy Medvedev. United Russia itself is going into
the elections under the slogan of more popular participation in politics. And to
confirm this it shows a list of candidates that were gathered by the results,
once again, of popular voting. But Medvedev and Putin are still ordering the
party to get more active in dealing with people.
Among the experts polled by Nezavisimaya Gazeta, however, the attitude toward
various elements of direct democracy differed. Although Vyacheslav Glazychev,
member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, thinks that through
public discussion of draft laws the population becomes better informed, which is
important in itself. Of course, he notes, there is an element of PR in the sudden
increase in attention to people's opinions. But he insists that civilian forces
should not refuse even the slightest opportunity to influence the authorities.
According to him, "One little tweet on Twitter will not, of course, be enough;
without serious public pressure on the bureaucracy nothing will come of it."
Yelena Panfilova, director of the Center for Anti-Corruption Studies and
Initiatives of Transparency International, generally compared herself with the
machine that serves tennis balls to players in training. She said with respect to
the anti-corruption expert studies being delivered to high levels: "That side,
which is to say the government, is simply buried in these balls today, but not
one has come flying back to us." And as for direct democracy being in fashion,
Panfilova suggested that the film be turned back four years or eight years. And
it will be seen that it arose in exactly the same way in 2007 and in 2003. "The
People's Front, the 'big government,' these are pure election topics that have
almost become traditional." And that is not surprising, she observes, since after
all, "parliamentary activity has long since turn ed into a bad dream."
Ivan Melnikov, first deputy chairman of the TsK CPRF (Central Committee of the
Communist Party of the Russian Federation), spoke just as sharply; "I cannot say
that any kind of transition is taking place in our country from representative
democracy to people's democracy. Essentially, we do not have either the one or
the other. Because the one is impossible without a normal institution of the
referendum, and the other is impossible without honest elections." Melnikov
believes that this "gives rise to disguised people": "The party of power founded
the People's Front, called the program a 'people's' program, and almost speaks of
the government as a people's government." He is sure that you cannot talk of
public discussion of laws if no comments are taken into account: "The thread of
dialogue between the government and the real society has been broken, but the
government appoints its own representatives as 'society' and keeps on talking
with itself."
[return to Contents]
Support for Russian Nationalism Growing, Parties Are Interested
October 25, 2011
Report by Andrey Kozenko; The Russian Demarche -- Before the State Duma
Elections, One-Third of Russias Citizens Support the Slogans of the Radical
Sociological studies show record high levels of nationalist sentiment among
Russian citizens. Up to 35% of the citizens support the slogans of the organizers
of the Russian March, which is planned for 4 November in Moscow and other cities.
The leaders of the ultra-rightists say that they will call on people to vote in
the State Duma elections for any party except United Russia. In the absence of a
political party that would represent the interests of the nationalists, the
existing participants in the election campaign that is starting are actively
fighting for their votes.
The surveys show that before the start of the State Duma election campaign,
nationalist slogans are among the most in demand. Sociologists determine the
record: according to data from the Levada Center (1,600 people over the age of 18
in 130 populated points in 45 regions of the country were surveyed), the number
of people who consider the basic cause of nationalism to be "the provocative
behavior of representatives of other nationalities" almost doubled, rising from
25% in September 2002 to 47% in September 2011. That 20% of the population that
feels "hostility toward representatives of other nationalities" readily speaks in
favor of "Russia for Russians." Fifty-two percent of those surveyed are sure that
the number who share nationalist slogans is growing all the time. The Moscow
Prosecutor's Office claims that 25% of the older Moscow students approve of the
actions of their nationalist-minded peers. In October data from a private survey
ordered by the Moscow Mayor's Office got into the media. It follows from it that
35% of the inhabitants of the capital support the nationalists to one degree or
The slogans that a significant part of the population today subscribes to could
only be heard on the Russian March in past years; even a year ago the average
statistical voter would not have agreed to be associated with them. But this time
it is planned as a pre-election event. Aleksandr Belov, one of the organizers,
told Kommersant that the basic theme of the action will be the attitude of
nationalists toward the State Duma elections. The only party that the leaders of
the ultra-rightist will not tolerate is United Russia, which personifies the
The organizers of the Russian March in Moscow are promising to bring no fewer
than 20,000 people into the streets. The application for permission to conduct
the action has been submitted twice, but to this point it is not known whether it
will be authorized. The nationalists are demanding a march through the center of
Moscow, but thousands of young people chanting about Russia for Russians is
probably the most frightening thing that the Moscow authorities could see in the
streets on 4 November. The first application for the march was returned to the
organizers on formal grounds -- because of a misprint. After the application was
submitted for the second time the Russian Federation Investigations Committee
opened a criminal case against one of the main figures in the organizing
committee, Dmitriy Demushkin. According to the investigation's version, he gave
an interview in which he talked about "the superiority of the Russian nation over
others and called for his comrades to riot." Mr Demushkin himself claims that all
he did was to lay out the slogans of the upcoming march. The march organizers
yesterday submitted a corrected application (without the participation of Dmitriy
Demushkin), but they are prepared for the possibility that the Moscow authorities
will not authorize the march. In that case the nationalists will call on their
supporters to come into the streets for an unsanctioned action. They already have
experience with such actions.
The first march took place in 2005, soon after the State Duma, on United Russia's
initiative, abolished the work-free day in celebration of the revolution of 7
November 1917 and named 4 November a state holiday called National Unity Day. At
the time it was done to spite the Communists, b ut instead of them the
government, which simply did not give the holiday any meaning, got much more
serious opponents. After the first march on 4 November 2006with the participation
of thousands of skinheads, the Russian March was banned. In the end, the events
in the center of Moscow that day resembled combat operations: the nationalists
fought against both the associates of law enforcement organs and the
anti-fascists. Since that time the position of the authorities has been unchanged
-- the Russian March has the right to exist, but the farther from the Kremlin,
the better. Lyublino, for example. Now, a month before the State Duma elections,
the nationalists want very much to go to the Kremlin, and it will be hard to stop
them. In the last five years, of course, the law enforcement organs have become
well versed in breaking up unsanctioned rallies such as the rallies on Triumphal
Square on the 31st day of the month. But their first reaction to larger mass
actions is confusion. That is how it already was in December 2010 when the
ultra-rightists went out on Manezh Square.
The authorities do not intend to reach an agreement with people from the Russian
March organizing committee, even less to legalize them in politics. The criminal
case against Mr Demushkin is another confirmation of that. In the year that has
passed since the 2010 Russian March the court, on a petition by the Moscow
Prosecutor's Office, banned one of the most influential ultra-rightist
organizations, the Slavic Union, as extremist. The pointed support of the
participants in the rioting on Manezh Square became the cause for a similar ban
on the Movement Against Illegal Immigration (DPNI). At first glance these court
rulings make little sense. In all their history of existence the DPIN and the
Slavic Union have not even tried to get state registration at the Ministry of
Justice as public organizations or, even less, political parties. But at the same
time these court rulings do not permit their leaders, as "extremists," to pursue
a career in system politics. But Mr Demushkin and former DPNI leader Aleksandr
Belov dream of exactly that kind of career. "What the Kremlin is doing to us is
crazy," Mr Belov is certain. "If we had just 10 of our representatives in the
State Duma, there simply would not be any actions on Manezh Square. Who would
dare to hide something in the Yegor Sviridov file (the murder of the Spartak fan
was the occasion for the actions on Manezh Square -- Kommersant), if the
investigators had known: the case is under government control."
Understanding the popularity of the slogans and the electoral potential of the
nationalists, the most varied political forces are trying to take them as allies.
The report of the Sova (Owl) Anti-Extremist Legal Defense Center on the activity
of the ultra-rightists in the summer and fall of 2011 shows that practically all
the parties are seeking support from the nationalists. The first is the LDPR
(Liberal Democratic Party of Russia) -- the leaders of a dozen rightist
organizations are guests at all party events where the topic of nationalism is
raised. It is true that not a single nationalist got on the party's election
list. In several Russian regions Just Russia is collaborating with the
nationalists. Back in the stage where it was headed by billionaire Mikhail
Prokhorov the Right Cause Party got into a high profile scandal. The leader of
the Moscow branch of the party, Boris Nadezhkin, admitted that "we want to take
up the Russian issue," and he had to justify himself. The All Russia People's
Front was joined by the Congress of Russian Communities of Dmitriy Rogozin, who
is known as one of the few politicians who openly holds nationalist views but
still does not fall outside the political system.
"The collaboration of the system parties with the ultra-rightists is leading to
their nationalist discourse rising to a higher level," the Sova experts
summarize. "The system parties themselves do not intend to move to radical
positions, but on the other hand they are implanting nationalist attitudes within
the political system. This is beginning to work toward raising the general level
of xenophobia."
However, the weakness of the nationalists is that they are just as implacably
fragmented as the liberal opposition, which simply did not know how to reach
agreement on a unified strategy before the State Duma elections. Even the main
event of the year, the Russian March, is being organized by one alternative group
alongside the basic organizing committee. The ultra-rightists do not need much to
start arguing: Mr Demushkin's ordinary train trip to Chechnya cost him hundreds
of supporters. The attempt to enlist Aleksey Navalnyy, the corruption fighter, in
organizing the Russian March is also failing at this point. The nationalist
milieu considers a person moving over from the Yabloko Party to be an alien. No
more than 400 people came to the "Stop Feeding the Caucasus" rally on 22 October,
where Navalnyy was listed as one of the main speakers.
There is no one center of nationalists, and this opens up broad opportunities to
manipulate them. Their failure to turn out for elections will only make it easier
for the authorities to achieve a result that suits them. And the participants in
protest voting will most likely give their preference to the LDPR, which gives no
doubt of its loyalty to the Kremlin.
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
November 3, 2011
Actor-Priest Promotes Soft Nationalism
By Alexander Bratersky
Russian nationalism has many faces. Most are familiar stock characters, either
populists on a Kremlin leash or caveman Hitler aficionados. But how about a
hipster in John Lennon-style color glasses who is also an Orthodox priest and a
sitcom star?
Meet Ivan Okhlobystin, 45, known to the general populace as Dr. Andrei Bykov, an
ironic Russian counterpart to Gregory House, M.D., cracking salty jokes to
patients in TNT's hit show "The Interns."
Off-screen he advocates a doctrine of "aristocratic national-patriotism." Just
last month he spoke to an enthusiastic audience of 20,000 at Moscow's Luzhniki
stadium. Last week, he requested that Patriarch Kirill allow him to join the
Russian March, the notorious annual ultranationalist rally set for Friday.
"I have legitimized the term 'national-patriotism,'" the pony-tailed Okhlobystin
said with pride in a recent interview with The Moscow Times.
"It was the weekend, and everyone was at their dachas," he continued softly,
offering a tongue-in-cheek explanation of how he got away with the massive,
politically charged event in central Moscow, where such happenings are very much
frowned upon.
He sported jeans and a battered leather jacket during an interview at a Moscow
cafe last month. It is a far cry from the priest's frock he was entitled to wear
until recently and may yet don again, once he winds up his acting career.
Okhlobystin made a name for himself as an actor in the 1990s and early 2000s,
when he starred in a dozen-plus films, peaking with the main role in cult classic
"Down House" (2001), a surrealist take on Dostoevsky's "The Idiot."
But he took a sharp career turn at the end of that decade, announcing in 2001
that he was ordained into priesthood by an Orthodox Christian bishop in
Uzbekistan's capital, Tashkent.
He served as a priest for several years in Moscow, but his restless nature got
the better of him, and he returned to the movie set, first as a screenwriter a
short story of his was behind the grim action film "Paragraph 78" (2007) and
then as an actor.
Some of his roles resonated well with his newfound faith he starred, for
example, in Pavel Lungin's "Tsar" (2009), a spiritual study of a despot's soul.
But even there, he played a fool, while in the made-for-TV "Conspiracy" (2007),
he depicted Grigory Rasputin.
Okhlobystin also embraced mass culture again, starring in "The Interns,"
appearing at musical awards shows usually in his trademark orange glasses and
even taking up the job of a creative director at mobile phone retailer Yevroset.
Church hierarchs eventually demanded that he choose between the laity and the
clergy, and Patriarch Kirill suspended him from priesthood. But he still has the
option of returning to being an active priest, and indicated he intends to do so
just not right now.
"I'll remain devoted to the church even if it declares me an anathema, because
this institution played a formative role in my life. Because of it, I have a
strong family," said Okhlobystin, a father of six.
During his speech in Luzhniki, Okhlobystin declared the late Metropolitan Ioann
Ladozhsky, a nationalist-leaning Orthodox Christian bishop, as his "teacher."
Ladozhsky, known for his anti-Semitic views, became an icon for the nationalist
movement after his death in 1995.
In the meantime, Okhlobystin took on the role of a secular preacher. In
September, he gave a lengthy speech on nationalism, addressing a crowd at
Luzhniki from atop a huge white pyramid in a flashy scripted show.
Russia is "the only force that protects West and East from colliding," the
white-robed Okhlobystin announced during the show, which bore the cryptic title
"Doctrine 77."
"We have to collect the nation again, the one that owns everything here. We will
create the new national society, a big family an empire, in the end," he read
out. "This is the only chance for the Russian man to exist."
His two-hour speech was too cryptic, however, to be defined as a clear political
agenda and hard to place in the spectrum of typical nationalist rhetoric. His
main point was that Russia's God-given task was to save the world from being
taken over by any one nation, including Russia itself a sort of divinely
appointed international counterweight.
While seemingly aimed at the United States and complete with a denouncement of
liberal values, his diatribe also came tempered with tolerance. Okhlobystin
professed his love of all people, including Jews and those from the North
Caucasus, while proclaiming that Russia was born "to fight wars."
This caused some head-scratching among the crowd, as most every other proponent
of militant Russian nationalism has some enemy in mind be it Americans,
Europeans, Chechens or Jews.
Still, Okhlobystin voiced calls about the "destruction of society" paving the
road to a newer, better Russia. He told the Times that his organization, the
Aristocratic National Patriotic Movement, is biding its time for a revolution.
"We are the only party that retains a taste for revolutionary activity. Sooner or
later it will happen," said the actor, flashing the emblem of the unregistered
group a metal pin of an eagle holding the number "77" in its talons.
At Luzhniki, the actor spoke out against family planning and gay marriages and
says his group advocates monarchy and the "revival of the glory of the Russian
empire," and the right to bear firearms. But he said the movement, which he plans
to get registered by December, does not have a full-fledged program yet.
Okhlobystin confessed he drew inspiration from the banned National-Bolshevik
Party, a radical anti-Kremlin vehicle of prominent writer-turned-politician
Eduard Limonov, which combined hard leftist slogans with a nationalist slant.
"From some point, they are alien to me. But they're the only one to really pull
off some action that resonated with people's feelings, like in Sevastopol," he
said, referring to Limonov's group's short-lived 1999 takeover of a naval club in
a Ukrainian city in Crimea, which Russian nationalists insist belongs to Russia.
Okhlobystin tread more carefully in a one-on-one chat than when facing a crowd,
telling the Times that his calls for destruction were "just an attention
"Our task is not to allow that. We have to create a new society from the ground
up, but we follow the Criminal Code," he said, quoting a famous Soviet-era
satirical novel, "The Little Golden Calf."
He added that a model member of his movement would be Prince Myshkin, the
kind-hearted and guileless hero of Dostoevsky's "The Idiot." "You have to be a
bit mad to join, because if authorities would rule us dangerous, you'd be
persecuted," he said.
Independent political analyst Stanislav Belkovsky, who knows Okhlobystin well,
said he would not likely follow the militant and self-destructive path of the
Okhlobystin is a showman, not a destroyer, Belkovsky said by phone.
"He wouldn't agree with me, but I think he went to priesthood because there were
no roles for him to play in the 1990s," he said.
The show in Luzhniki was indeed impressive, and the event enjoyed exquisite PR
stagecraft, as the actor announced ahead of it that he would run for president.
He changed his mind soon after the rally, citing the church's disapproval, but by
then, his statement had been made. "Doctrine 77" was not televised, but videos of
it garnered more than 500,000 views on YouTube.
Critics have even slammed him for making money on patriotism, after it turned out
that cell phone operator Beeline introduced a tariff called "Doctrine 77" some
weeks before the event.
Company spokeswoman Anna Aibasheva confirmed that a niche tariff with that name
is on offer in Yevroset shops, but denied that Beeline was behind the Luzhniki
The actor denied cashing in on the Luzhniki show, which he said he booked with
his own money. He says his political activism has not harmed his relationship
with TNT, which focuses on entertainment. A spokesperson for the channel agreed,
saying by phone that the channel is not concerned with how Okhlobystin spends his
free time.
That did not stop the actor from attacking television bosses in general. "You
have no way of knowing how corrupt these people's minds are," he said.
"But they don't have any leverage to stop me. The box office overrides ... their
fear," he added.
Church officials have not reacted negatively to his involvement in "The Interns,"
Okhlobystin said.
"They are a very educated audience that understands I am a very sincere person,
as far as my political views are concerned," and regardless of his day job, he
Okhlobystin has not fully come to grips with his past, however, judging by a
recent appearance on Vladimir Pozner's show on Channel One. When a viewer
reminded Okhlobystin of his "shameful" past love of absinthe, he bristled,
insisting that the matter "was not intended for a public discussion."
Still, Okhlobystin called himself in the interview "an experienced PR
strategist." Indeed, he dabbled in political consultancy in 1990s, and even ran
for the State Duma in 1999 with Kedr, a tiny green party that he freely admitted
was just a spoiler for the Communists, then a real political force.
"It was strictly business, and I've never denied it. I was sailing on the last
ship of 'black PR.' We all were Jack Sparrows at that time," Okhlobystin said,
referring to the pirate captain from Walt Disney's "Pirates of the Caribbean"
movie series.
But he stood by his words at Luzhniki, insisting the "Doctrine 77" show was the
real deal, regardless of the promotion surrounding it.
"I have raised questions that have been discussed for a long time before in
basements and gyms," he said, naming two popular kinds of hangouts for
Okhlobystin's potential audience is sweeping. According to an August poll by
Levada Center, 45 percent of the Russian populace believed that people from other
countries treated them with hostility, and 46 percent admitted feeling such
hostility toward other nations themselves.
The slogan "Russia for Russians" is catching up with the public, but nobody knows
quite what it entails. Radical nationalists hardly ever go beyond proposals to
expel Caucasus natives and other non-Russians, even while entertaining dreams of
a new Russian empire.
Loyal nationalists, such as Vladimir Zhirinovsky, head of the Liberal Democrats,
or Dmitry Rogozin, Russia's envoy to NATO, are even less focused, sticking to
vaguely hawkish bashing of the West.
Much of the uncertainty comes from the fact that Russian nationalism is largely
an outlet for social discontent, with disenchanted small-town youth with few
career prospects a downside of the country's bureaucratized, oil-dependent
economy looking for an enemy to vent their frustration on.
Nevertheless, the situation is believed to worry the Kremlin, which has employed
a dual strategy of denying independent nationalists their own legal political
organizations while creating government-linked movements to contain the
nationalist vote.
No stable pro-Kremlin nationalist group, however, exists at the moment, and
Okhlobystin's show which could not have been staged without tacit government
approval prompted talks that it was a new project by Vladislav Surkov, the
Kremlin's political mastermind.
Okhlobystin denied ties to Surkov but said his speech might be welcomed by the
ruling authorities.
"This is why, I think, I'm still a free man," he joked.
Indeed, political activists who fall on the wrong side of the Kremlin are
regularly banned and hit with criminal charges, though very few are jailed.
Apparently encouraged, Okhlobystin made his bid to join the Russian March, asking
Patriarch Kirill to sanction his participation and promising to lead out 500,000
to the streets. Kirill has yet to comment on the issue.
That plan had even more pronounced political undercurrents because the Russian
March that Okhlobystin was invited to competes with an event organized by
well-known Kremlin opponents, including radical nationalists Dmitry Dyomushkin
and Alexander Belov, as well as whistleblower Alexei Navalny.
Organizers of the "alternative" rally said they envisage Okhlobystin as a
counterbalance to Navalny. Neither man whose popularity with the middle class
stands at comparable levels has commented on the attempt to pit them against
each other. Navalny was not available for comment Wednesday.
Analyst Belkovsky agreed that Okhlobystin's activity is not a Kremlin stunt.
"He is not played by anyone. He is himself a player," Belkovsky said.
He added that authorities have largely ignored Okhlobystin's attempt at public
discussion about the rise of nationalist sentiment in the country, but said they
"They think that nothing would change from what he said. I believe it's a
mistake," he said.
While the Kremlin has never commented on Okhlobystin's political antics, the
church has been more vocal. Vsevolod Chaplin, spokesman for the Moscow
Patriarchate, said in September that he feels "sympathetic" toward some of the
issues Okhlobystin raised.
"He's raised some questions that have been silenced, and he's done it right.
There's an issue with [rights of] Russians in the country," he said on an NTV
talk show.
But Okhlobystin said his point was to make sure that the nationalist question was
being addressed.
"My task was to create a public climate for a discussion of these issues," he
said. "If an issue is not taken up openly, sooner or later it would swell up like
an abscess, and disaster would ensue."
[return to Contents]
Half of Russians Want Ethnicity Restored to Passports - Poll
MOSCOW. Nov 2 (Interfax) - Almost half of Russian citizens polled recently (48%)
said Ethnicity (phonetically Nationality) should be returned to Russian
passports, the Levada Center pollster has reported.
Since February 2010, the share of those supporting this idea has increased by 10
percentage points, Levada Center said after polling 1,600 respondents in 130
populated areas of 45 regions in late October.
The share of those who think this category is redundant has shrunk from 45% to
The idea of restoring ethnicity to Russian passports was recently proposed by the
Communist party leadership. In the Soviet-era, the inclusion of a passport
holders "ethnicity" was mandatory.
Head of the Kremlin Human Rights Council Mikhail Fedotov does not think the
Communists' proposal makes sense. "According to the Constitution, no one can be
forced to state his ethnicity. If this category is restored and becomes
mandatory, the Constitution will be violated. But if it remains optional, what
the big idea?" Fedotov earlier told Interfax.
"The main category in our passport is where we state our nationality. It is of
crucial importance for us to feel that we are citizens of a single and united
country," he said.
Rights veteran and leader of the Movement for Human Rights Lev Ponomaryov
assailed the Communists' initiative as "dangerous." "Pedaling the nationality
problem is counterproductive to maintaining the country's integrity," Ponomaryov
told Interfax.
"The ethnicity category is not needed in the passport, as each citizen has the
right to decide on his ethnicity on his own, he said.
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
November 3, 2011
Why We Hate Each Other
By Margarita Simonyan
Margarita Simonyan is editor-in-chief of the Russia Today television channel.
This comment appeared on "From the Pulpit" ("Propoved"), a joint television
project between Dozhd TV and The Moscow Times. "Propoved" can be seen on
"Nine migrants from the Caucasus attacked a journalist in Yekaterinburg."
The first thing my car radio told me a few days ago. It upset me, and I spent the
rest of my journey trying to pinpoint when I last heard about migrants, say, from
the Vladimir region beating up somebody. I concluded I'd never heard anything
like that. Could it be that migrants from the Vladimir region are not rowdy?
Investigative Committee head Alexander Bastrykin said recently that extremist
rhetoric is on the rise. He also said extremists are often provoked into such
rhetoric because of the outrageous number of scandalous crimes that immigrants
In my native Krasnodar region, we once had a situation where an entire ethnic
group, Meskhetian Turks, was thrown out. For years, they had not been allowed to
register as residents and were denied jobs, denigrated and demonized on regional
television. Local authorities refused to renew their passports. In short, they
were hated so much that one day they packed their things and moved to the United
States all of them, making Russia look terrible in the eyes of the world.
But the point is, local residents often justified hatred of Maskhetian Turks by
claiming they were all criminals. I asked police for official crime statistics
while covering a story in the region, and it turned out that only 1 percent of
all crime in the area was committed by Maskhetian Turks, though they represented
10 percent of the population. Moreover, they had not been responsible for any
grave crimes for a number of years. Most offenses related to forged documents or
altercations with police.
That's when it first occurred to me that it is not a matter of crime. What's
more, it is not a matter of immigrants. It was not immigrants who killed Russian
football fan Yegor Sviridov but Russian citizens who happen to be from the
Caucasus. Moscow is their capital as much as it is for all Russians.
Immigrants are not the real problem. The real problem is much more serious:
intolerance and hatred of indigenous ethnic groups. You can prohibit immigration,
but what can you do about non-
Russian ethnic groups living in their native territories in Russia? What are you
going to do about Dagestan, Sakha, Tatarstan, Adygea and other regions that make
up half of Russia? Allow these regions to secede and require that their residents
obtain visas to enter the rest of Russia?
I recently attended a meeting with Russia's chief mufti, Ravil Gainutdin, and
here's what I told him: The root cause of xenophobia in Russia is not religious
differences between Muslims and Christians. Nor is it crime. The root cause is
the terrible education that children acquire on the street, at school and at
Last weekend, I happened to be at the Kazansky Station where I witnessed a
disgusting scene: Three young men from the Caucasus were taunting female train
conductors standing on the platform. "Hey babes, are all women in Moscow as
beautiful as you are?" they jeered. Then they joined hands and began yelling, "We
are from the Caucasus!"
Not long ago, I watched a wedding cortege block traffic by stopping their cars in
the middle of a busy highway. Revelers got out of their cars and started to
dance, sing and shout. An Armenian flag was proudly displayed on the rear window
of the most expensive black limo. I was disgusted and ashamed.
Why do some from the Caucasus behave this way in Moscow? Do they behave in the
same way in their native regions? Of course not. They respect their countrymen.
But they have no respect for Muscovites or Russians in general. If those young
men at the Moscow train station had dared to taunt "their own" in such a crude
manner in the Caucasus, somebody certainly would have broken their jaws.
The disgusting truth is that some of the less-educated families in the Caucasus
hate and despise Russians simply because they are Russian, just as some
less-educated Russian families feel the same way about people from the Caucasus.
Many boys in the Caucasus are brought up to think that all Russian girls are easy
and trashy, and hence it is acceptable to treat them as such. They feel superior
to Russians because that is how they have been educated at home. Likewise, some
Russian boys are raised in homes where they are taught to believe that people
from the Caucasus are backward and subhuman "beasts" as they are dubbed in
Russian hate speech. In many homes in the Caucasus, parents bad-mouth Russians
over dinner while their children listen. Similarly, many Russian parents
denigrate non-Russians in front of their children.
Caucasus children reared in such families see it as normal to treat Russians with
open contempt, whereas Russians who grow up in similar circumstances see nothing
wrong with airing their prejudice toward those from the Caucasus.
I do not mean to say every family in the Caucasus indulges in Russophobia, but
far too many families do. Anyone who stems from the Caucasus knows such families
or comes from one. Nor do I want to suggest that every Russian family is
xenophobic or racist, but a great many are. Russian children typically hear
racist and ethnic slurs against Caucasus natives at home before hearing it on the
The problem has nothing to do with Russian Orthodoxy, Islam or crime. We have no
objective reasons for such hatred and bigotry. It all springs from subjective
perceptions and personal prejudice.
That said, we are indeed dramatically different. In one culture, bride abduction
is a time-honored custom, whereas people of another culture may see it as
barbaric. By the same token, one culture may be tolerant about marrying
non-virgins, while it is absolutely taboo in another. Unfortunately, all too
often we lack the wisdom to accept such diversity and move on. Instead, we obsess
over ethnic differences, aversions and grudges. This will only lead us down a
self-destructive path.
When our grandparents were children, they paid little or no attention to their
classmates' ethnicity. Our parents, however, grew up at a time when hate speech
against other ethnic groups became commonplace. Today, our brothers and sisters
are using knives to settle scores with other ethnicities on Russian streets.
Unless we prevent this trend now, we might see our own children resorting to
[return to Contents]
November 2, 2011
Russian Leader's Honors To Critical Journalists Raise Eyebrows
By Lyubov Chizhova
MOSCOW -- For three years, Mikhail Beketov has been a symbol of the impunity with
which journalists critical of the Russian authorities could be silenced. But now
Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has recognized Beketov's contribution to
civil society with a state award and a 1 million-ruble ($32,000) prize.
Beketov's name appeared among those of 10 journalists -- mostly critical
reporters and editors from nonstate publications -- on a list of prize laureates
that was quietly posted on the Russian government's website on October 31.
The announcement has independent journalists and civil-society activists
wondering whether they should accept such honors -- and the cash -- from the
person they view as the architect of the authoritarian political system they have
been battling.
Although the list of honorees includes such well-known journalists as Sergei
Parkhomenko and Irina Petrovskaya, Beketov's case has attracted the most
On November 13, 2008, Beketov -- the uncompromising editor of a newspaper in the
Moscow suburb of Khimki -- was found unconscious and bleeding on the ground near
his apartment building. He was in a coma -- having been beaten to within an inch
of his life and then left lying in the cold for nearly two days before he was
Three years later, the case remains unsolved, but supporters are convinced the
attack was ordered because of his critical reporting on corruption in the local
administration of Khimki.
Beketov himself is in extremely poor health and undergoing constant treatment in
Israel. Khimki activist and Beketov colleague Yevgenia Chirikova says Beketov
lost one-third of his brain, a leg, and three fingers from the attack and is
unable to speak or type.
Award From 'Creator Of The System'
Chirikova -- who herself has been persecuted for her activism in opposition to
the construction of a highway through the protected Khimki forest -- is
unimpressed with the Russian government's decision to honor Beketov.
"The man bestowing this prize [Putin] is one of the creators of a system in which
an activist can be smashed over the head and end up an invalid for the rest of
his life," Chirikova says.
"And it is in that very system that the man who we believe 'ordered' the attack
on Mikhail remains in power [Khimki Mayor Vladimir Strelchenko], runs the city,
continues his construction projects, and has not undergone any punishment for his
People close to Beketov say he has not yet been informed about the award.
"Kommersant" quoted the head of the Russian Union of Journalists, which
recommended the prize winners to the government, as saying that the jury voted
overwhelmingly to include Beketov, who was nominated by the independent newspaper
"Novaya gazeta."
'Absolutely Unacceptable Political Cynicism'
Sergei Parkhomenko, editor of the magazine "Around The World," was also among
those honored by Putin. Parkhomenko -- who in the 1990s was the founder and
editor of the respected daily "Segodnya" that was closed down in the early days
of Putin's presidency -- says he will accept his prize on behalf of his magazine
but will donate the money to charity. He adds that he will not attend the
presentation ceremony in the Kremlin.
But he's also critical of the decision to honor Beketov. "I think this is a
mockery and a manifestation of absolutely unacceptable political cynicism,"
Parkhomenko says. "A man who was crippled because of his opposition to the
Russian authorities is now getting a handout from them."
Parkhomenko adds that the prize might have been more useful for Beketov's
colleagues who are still working.
Valery Yakov, editor of the often-critical daily "Novye izvestia," was also on
the government's list and says he will accept the prize. "Probably, I would have
been uncomfortable if the list of laureates included people that I don't respect
much," he says. "But when I heard the names of Mikhail Beketov, Ira Petrovskaya,
and Sergei Parkhomenko, I was pleased because I respect these journalists and
being in the same rank with them does not discredit my name, my work, or the
position of the newspaper in any way."
Yakov adds that he interprets the prize as the government's acknowledgment that
his newspaper's criticism of its policies is "fair and objective."
Political analyst Vladimir Pribylovsky says he believes Putin issued the awards
largely to boost his image in the West in the wake of his recent decision to seek
a return to the presidency.
Activist Aleksei Simonov, the longtime president of the Glasnost Foundation, says
he won't criticize Beketov if he accepts the money, "because he is undergoing
treatment in Israel, where they are trying to help him speak again. Each day
there costs him more than $1,000, so he really needs this prize."
Fellow Khimki activist Chirikova says the prize is too little, too late. "If this
prize is enough money to return one-third of a man's brain, return his leg
somehow, give him his fingers back, allow him to work once again, then that would
be great," she says. "But if not, if it isn't enough money, then for me, to be
honest, it is just a cynical game."
RFE/RL correspondent Robert Coalson contributed to this story from Prague
[return to Contents]
Novye Izvestia
November 3, 2011
Journalists in Russia are regularly threatened and assailed
Author: Dmitry Alayev
According to Pavel Gusev, Public House Commission for
Communications, Information Policy, and Freedom of Speech, upwards
of 150 journalists were threatened or actually assailed and beaten
in Russia between January and October 2011. Gusev said, "And yet,
practically no criminal proceedings were instigated."
The Center for Journalism in Extreme Situations in the
meantime counted 319 episodes between January and October when
journalists were threatened or assailed and battered. According to
its estimates, 3 journalists were murdered, 41 assailed, 23
arrested, and 163 found themselves facing criminal charges. Center
specialists recorded 89 episodes when journalists and media
outlets had been put under pressure. "I'd say that the figure
mentioned by Gusev only accounted for the journalists subject to
violence. Say, when some journalist covering a rally or
demonstration had his camera smashed... As for us, we only keep
track of the episodes when journalists are harassed in connection
with performance of their duties," said Center analyst Irada
The Duma recently adopted in the second reading a
presidential amendment to the Penal Code stipulating penalty for
attacks on journalists performing their duties. When the amendment
is finally adopted, this felony will entail up to five years in
Boris Timoshenko of the Glasnost Protection Foundation said,
"Why assail journalists in the first place when there are more
effective and less violent mechanisms? The Penal Code includes the
notorious Article 282 that deals with extremism and that is easily
applicable to absolutely every individual... particularly a
[return to Contents]
Moskovskiye Novosti
November 3, 2011
Online-media content is to be examined for extremism
Author: Vyacheslav Kozlov
The Russian authorities tighten control over Internet media
outlets. A special software to be presented and launched next
month will examine online-media content for extremist materials.
Contest for the right to design the extremism-monitoring
software was organized on March 15. The contract had been
estimated initially at 15 million rubles, but the state eventually
paid only 4.6 million rubles for it. Software was designed by
Data-Center, a company that pledged to deliver the end product by
December 15.
Data-Center software specialist Aleksei Shilo said, "The
software will examine both texts and graphic materials."
According to the Roskomnadzor (Federal Service for IT and
Communications Oversight), 555 Internet media-outlets were
registered in Russia in 2008, 700 in 2009, nearly 1,500 in 2010,
and 943 in 2011. Roskomnadzor Assistant Director Konstantin
Protopopov said, "We only have twelve people to scan the whole
lot. They are doing it manually. Considering that new and new
Internet media-outlets appear all the time, we'd better design
some software to handle it."
Journalists and representatives of the human rights community
are skeptical. They do not think that the software will be
efficient. Said Novaya Gazeta Chief Editor Dmitry Muratov,
"Installation of the software will hurt the Ours movement that
employs countless Internet-trolls who regularly leave all sorts of
nasty comments on the web sites of Novaya Gazeta, Moscow News,
Kommersant, Vedomosti, and other newspapers..."
[return to Contents]
Rossiiskaya Gazeta
November 3, 2011
An interview with Minister of IT and Communication Igor Schegolev
Author: Olga Dmitriyeva
Baroness Neville-Jones, adviser to the HMG on cyber security
issues, said on the eve of the conference in London that Russia
and China had been behind countless cyber attacks. Here is an
interview with Minister of IT and Communication Igor Schegolev.
Question: Was Russia accused in connection with cyber attacks
at the London conference as such?
Igor Schegolev: No, it was not. Neither at the conference nor
during the debates in the break. In any event, this whole issue is
kind of paradoxical. On the one hand, Russia is invited to the
cyber security conference in London. When the Russian delegation
comes, however, it turns out that Russia is a suspect. I'd say
that this is something organizers of the forum should give a
thought to.
British newspapers themselves admit that there is no evidence
proving any malicious intent on Russia's part. It is in order to
prevent such awkward situations in the future that we suggest
common rules and mechanisms, instruments of interaction between
individual states that will enable us to trace the origins of
cyber threats... and counter them.
Question: Russia would not sign the so called Budapest
convention, a document dealing with cyber crime. Why? Some Western
observers reckoned that Russia was afraid of losing its
Igor Schegolev: If I'm not mistaken, 47 countries prepared
that conference and participated in it. Only 34 of them actually
joined the convention. The faults Russia found with this document
are as follows. On the one hand, the convention promotes supremacy
of law. On the other, it includes the mechanisms that cannot help
undermining supremacy of law. Here is an example. Subscribers to
the convention are given the right to hunt cyber criminals on the
territories of foreign states without informing their authorities.
What is that if not an encroachment on national sovereignty? You
understand of course that this is not something we are comfortable
with or will ever accept. We never forget the Budapest convention,
a document signed eleven years ago but the world is different now,
changed from what it was like back then. New threats and
challenges appeared in the world. We believe therefore that the
Budapest convention ought to be revised... upgraded if you prefer.
Perhaps, some premises ought to be omitted from the upgraded
version and some others added to it.
* * *
The conference in London reiterated Russia's importance in
the cyber sphere. Regrettably, there is in the West some
misunderstanding and even lack of knowledge of the rules Russia is
playing by. Some observers and commentators abroad erroneously
believe that Russia is after tight control over the Internet.
Shuvalov dismissed it as innuendo. He said that the Russian
authorities never even contemplated shutdown of Twitter or
Facebook social networks in the event of mass disturbances and
riots whereas some European countries had said that this was the
first thing they would do.
Schegolev said, "We are convinced that there is no way to
shut down the Internet or impose censorship on it."
The Russian delegation in London suggested that the
international community work out a code of conduct that will
prevent (or at least make more difficult) the use of IT against
the interests of individual countries or the world in general. In
fact, some proposals were worked out already. Schegolev said that
the document could become legally binding, adopted in the form of
UN convention.
Schegolev said that not all foreign countries were prepared
to sign a legally binding document yet. In any event, he said, the
very nature of the Internet was such that there could be no
effective results without everybody playing along.
[return to Contents]
New York Times
November 2, 2011
Russia Stays Transfixed by a Switch at Birth
By ELLEN BARRY
MOSCOW For several weeks, Russian television has followed the story of two
12-year-olds in the Siberian city of Kopeysk: pale, light-eyed Anya, who is being
raised by a Tajik man according to the precepts of Islam; and black-haired Irina,
the beloved daughter of an ethnically Russian blond woman.
They would have remained so if Irina's father had not been convinced that he had
been cuckolded. His refusal to pay alimony led to a DNA test, which led, in turn,
to the revelation that two girls, born within 15 minutes of each other to teenage
mothers in adjacent hospital beds, had been delivered to the wrong women. Their
story has spilled out on television, Jerry-Springer-style.
On Monday, a judge in the Chelyabinsk region awarded each family compensation of
3 million rubles, or about $100,000, an unusually high judgment in Russia. Yulia
A. Belyayeva, who has raised the dark-haired girl as her own, said they would use
the money to build houses next to each other, so they can look after the children
"You know what I wanted to say in my closing statement?" Ms. Belyayeva told
reporters, after the verdict was read. "Give our children back to us, the way
they should have been. Then we would have no need for money. No amount of money
can be compared with the gaze of a child on her mother."
The case has stirred up complaints about Russia's "birth houses," high-volume
operations where women are often treated brusquely. After Ms. Belyayeva's first
interview, on the talk show "Let Them Speak," commentaries poured into the show's
Web site from women who said they had caught nurses mixing up babies. One said
she and another woman had become lifelong friends after they were delivered each
other's babies for feeding and began yelling simultaneously.
"You may laugh, but when I was giving birth to my first daughter, I kept a black
marker in my hand, and as soon as she was born, I put a mark on her hand," wrote
a woman named Yelena. Another viewer, also named Yelena, said she was not allowed
to see her baby until a day afterward, and then she found him tagged with the
wrong name. "I was yelling, 'Where is my baby?' and the answer I got was, 'Come
on, Kopelevich, Korolevich, what's the difference?' "
Though similar cases have surfaced in recent years, courts have granted much
smaller awards. The story of Irina and Anya stands out because the girls' parents
have spoken compellingly about it. Naymat Iskanderov said when Ms. Belyayeva
contacted him this fall, he at first refused to consider the possibility that
Anya was not his biological child, but when he saw a photograph of Irina he
"almost fainted." He showed up, carrying flowers, to meet Ms. Belyayeva.
"We sat in a pizzeria and wept and tried to figure out what to do," Ms. Belyayeva
said. Later, when she laid eyes on her biological daughter, Ms. Belyayeva said
she "wanted to grab her and run away as fast as I could."
Neither wanted to exchange daughters. They have come to a tentative
understanding, though Ms. Belyayeva testified in court that "according to Shariah
law, we Russians are unbelievers, and women, according to Shariah law, are a
lower race of Muslims, who are raised to become married, bear children and teach
them bake bread." Mr. Iskanderov, for his part, has said that "for so many years
I've been raising her in the Muslim tradition. To change it all of a sudden would
be unbearable suffering."
When the case was first made public, the midwife who oversaw the ward when the
two girls were born told a television reporter that she could never have done
such a thing, though she went on to say that the babies' "last names were almost
identical." A gynecologist at the Kopeysk maternity ward made a television
appearance to give his side of the story, and he seemed reluctant to assign full
responsibility to the hospital.
"To be honest, it is very difficult for me to understand how, after you have
received your baby, after it was brought to your breast, how could you accept
another baby that is brought to you," said the doctor, Aleksandr Andryenko,
before he was shouted down by the studio audience.
[return to Contents]
Moscow News
November 2, 2011
Life on Mars the trial version
By Natalia Antonova
As world overpopulation concerns loom, a simulation of a human journey to Mars
comes to an end this week in Moscow and experts say this is an important step in
humanity's exploration and conquest of nearby planets.
The Mars-500 experiment simulated a 520-day mission to Mars on the territory of
the Russian Academy of Sciences, at the Institute of Biomedical Problems.
Six male volunteers, hailing from Russia, France, Italy and China took part in
the ambitious project, which saw them cut off from the world and communicating
with mission control with a 20-minute delay. Tasks included donning full space
gear for simulated "walks on Mars," dealing with equipment failure and "magnetic
storms" that cut off communication, and maintaining their surroundings.
The project was criticized for the fact that volunteers did not get to experience
weightlessness, which comes with its own host of physical challenges, but
organizers have pointed out that the medical effects of weightlessness were
nevertheless dealt with by the participants.
"The participants sleep with their heads down, at an angle of 15 degrees," Doctor
Alexander Suvorov, executive head of the project, told Rossiiskaya Gazeta. "They
experience the same symptoms as they would during space flight: a rush of blood
to the head, nose congestion, feeling as though their faces were swelling, lack
of oxygen.
"The guys wore special compression outfits during daytime hours, so that this
condition would not go away."
The project was an attempt to determine whether or not a human space crew would
be able to endure a grueling mission to Mars as well as the long journey home.
"The answer is yes," Patrik Sundblad, the human life sciences specialist at the
European Space Agency, was quoted as saying on the agency's official website.
"They have had their ups and downs, but these were to be expected," Sundblad said
of the participants. "In fact, we anticipated many more problems, but the crew
has been doing surprisingly well."
The Mars-500 experiment comes to an end the same week that the population of
Earth has officially reached 7 billion a coincidence that has not been lost on
observers. With overpopulation concerns in the headlines, some have suggested
that humanity may deal with lack of room on Earth by setting up shop on Mars
though the staggering costs of space travel will pose a whole new host of
"A one-man expedition to Mars and back would cost, it safe to say, over $3
billion," Igor Lisov, an expert at Cosmonautics News Magazine, told Russia Today.
"Preparing for these flights would cost 30 or 50 times more than a two-way ticket
in other words, we are talking about colossal expenses."
Though such figures are particularly sobering to contemplate during a worldwide
financial crisis, enthusiasm for space travel remains high among industry
"Everybody realizes that it's time to reach out and explore the universe beyond
low Earth orbit," NASA astronaut Mark Polansky told Russia Today.
According to Polansky, humanity has spent enough time working on the
International Space Station in Earth's orbit and capitalizing on its experience
following the lunar landings and that it is time to go farther.
The success of the Mars-500 mission is giving scientists hope that a real-life
mission to Mars is imminent.
The crew is doing "well," according to executive project head Alexander Suvorov.
"This is evident based on the guys' own reports, and according to their medical
According to Suvorov, the crew was able to remain calm all through the challenges
that have been heaped on them since last June. "Autonomy was probably the most
important of the experiment's conditions," Suvorov told Rossiiskaya Gazeta. "[The
participants] had to make their own decisions and take responsibility for them."
[return to Contents]
Right Cause concerned about possibility of totalitarianism comeback in Russia
MOSCOW. Nov 3 (Interfax) - The Right Cause Party called for the urgent
de-Bolshevization of Russian society. The appeal was released at a Thursday press
conference at the Interfax main office.
"We are absolutely positive of the necessity of the explicit historic evaluation
of totalitarianism as a system and the minimized possibility of comeback in our
history and everyday life. We demand the soonest de-Bolshevization of the society
with legislative amendments, which will rule out the possibility of
totalitarianism," the party said.
The party also proposed to re-bury Vladimir Lenin and open a museum in the Lenin
Mausoleum to commemorate all the victims of the Civil War, collectivization and
industrialization in the Soviet Union.
The party said it was concerned about the possibility of recurrence of
totalitarianism in Russia.
"The resurrected ghost of totalitarianism, which manifests itself in the public
feelings and statements by public officers, connives with corruption and impunity
of bureaucrats and deprives this country of prospects. Totalitarianism for this
society is not a remnant of the past but a probable alternative, which frequently
gains enthusiastic support of the young, those who have never lived in a
totalitarian state," the party said.
[return to Contents]
Gulag Cultural Center to open in Moscow
MOSCOW, November 3 (RIA Novosti)-A Cultural Center commemorating Soviet Gulag
labor camps will be opened in Moscow, the head of the city's Culture Department,
Sergei Kapkov, said on Thursday.
Kapkov said that Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin ordered the opening of a Gulag
Cultural Center that would be a main venue for events commemorating victims of
Soviet labor camps and political purges.
<<The Gulag is a big, very complicated topic. I talked about it with Alexander
Solzhenitsyn's widow. She is ready to be one of the organizers of the project,"
Kapkov said, referring to Natalya Solzhenitsyna, the widow of Russian writer
Alexander Solzhenitsyn known for his book Gulag Archipelago, a chronicle of the
Stalin-era atrocities and mass arrests of innocent people and their deportation
to labor camps.
Solzhenitsyn was declared a "betrayer of the Fatherland" after publishing his
anti-Communist book in Paris in 1973. Only in September 2009, Gulag Archipelago
was included in the list of compulsory books for studying at schools across
During the Stalinist purges, millions of people were executed on fake charges of
espionage, sabotage, anti-Soviet propaganda or died of starvation, disease or
exposure in Gulag labor camps in Siberia and the Far East.
Up to 500,000 people had passed through the camp between 1936 and 1953.
Some 16,000 people perished in the camp.
[return to Contents]
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011
From: Vladimir Shlapentokh <email@example.com>
Subject: Putin's Regime: A Firm Future So Far
Putin's Regime: A Firm Future So Far
Vladimir Shlapentokh
[Professor of Sociology,Michigan State University]
[Footnotes not here]
Executive summary
The numerous negative trends in Russia today have prompted many Russian and
foreign analysts to predict the imminent collapse of Putin's regime. These
prognoses were fueled recently by Putin's decision to return to the position of
president, and his clear intention to rule the country "forever," which, in the
opinion of many observers, only made it even more likely that the end of his
regime would come soon. I very highly doubt the accuracy of these prognoses.
The negative trends have not manifested the mechanisms that need to be present
for there to be a real, direct threat to the regime. There is no serious
political opposition in the country, while the political elite is united and is
mostly against a change in the regime. Even more important is the fact that there
is no public discontent coming from ordinary Russians whose material lives
improved greatly under Putin's rule. Russians' satisfaction with their lives is
quite high, and Putin's high ratings are a sign that the masses link their
relative prosperity to him. At the same time, Russians, although they generally
appreciate democratic institutions, are confident that they have no ability to
impact political life in the country. They do not want to challenge the Kremlin,
which controls the media and the police, preferring to be absorbed with their
private lives, rather that confronting the authorities. What is more, Putin's
regime not only relies on the satisfaction of Russians with their material lives,
but also on the involvement of ambitious Russianspeople with a position in the
bureaucracy, together with their relativesin corruption and even criminal deeds.
By encouraging corruption and providing immunity from prosecution to the
corrupted people, Putin created a powerful social base that will help him resist
attempts to change the regime.
So far, the greatest threat to the regime lies in the economic sphere, not in
politics. Dynamic oil and gas prices are a key factor that could determine the
fate of the regime. However, even an abrupt decline in the standard of living
would not necessarily make the fall of the regime unavoidable. Of course,
negative trends in Russia can undermine the regime, creating a basis for the
opposition to challenge it with real political actions. Several sudden shocks
could also deliver serious or even mortal blows to the regime. In any case, the
American government has to expect that the probability of dealing with Putin as
the supreme master of Russia is quite high, for at least another decade.
There is an unbelievably large chasm, even by Russia's historical standards,
between the picture of society that has been accepted by the majority of
Russianswhich is full of Putin's propagandaand the perception of society put
forth by critics of the regime.
The Positive Picture of Putin's Russia
According to the governmental description, the Russia that the majority of
Russians has accepted as true is a prosperous and stable society; one that even
the global economic crisis cannot stymie. There are several facts supporting this
view. The personal income of Russians has doubled in the last ten years.[1]
Incidence of poverty has declined significantlythe number of families with income
below the poverty line declined from 29 percent in 2000 to 13 percent in 2010.[2]
The number of cars per person has increased three-fold in the same period. In
addition, more than half of all Russians are regular users of the Internet;
eighty percent have a cell phone. Russian society is much more orderly than it
was in the 1990s. It is much safer to walk on the streets of Russian cities today
than it was before Putin's regime. Russians no longer live in a country facing
the threat of disintegration, as they were in the 90s. Putin has practically
eliminated the separatist movements that were so visible in 1990. Although the
North Caucasus has not been appeased, most Russians are indifferent to the
turmoil in the North Caucasian republics, and it does not spoil their mood. In
2011, one-quarter of Russians said that they would be glad if Chechnya, the most
militant republic, left the Russian Federation, while only 27 percent said they
would be sad if that happened.[3] Russians are mostly concerned with the federal
subsidies to the North Caucasus being cut, and are not accepting the official
argument that they are necessary for the keeping this region inside the Russian
Russians' Acceptance of Putin's Political Order: The Lack of Drive to Change It
Russians' attitudes toward political life in the country are much more ambivalent
now, when compared with the past. This ambivalence illustrates the willingness of
the majority of the people to adjust to the reality, which they cannotor do not
want tochange. No doubt, a considerable part of the Russian population would like
to live in a truly democratic society. In the Levada survey of 2011,
three-quarters of Russians indicated that they want a true political opposition,
and approximately the same numbers want a real, competitive election. But at the
same time, they are aware that the authorities will not permit either real
opposition or an honest election. More than half of Russians have expressed their
belief that the "election will be not real."[4]
Keeping in mind their inability to change the political order, Russians prefer to
say "yes" to the existing system and its leadersas they did in the pastonly
allowing themselves to be critical of individual aspects of the system, or of
single bureaucrats. In the 2011 Levada survey, almost no one mentioned a lack of
democracy in the country as a problem, among a discussion of the flaws of the
government.[5] With the rejection of any public actions against the regime,
Russians concentrate on their private lives, to a degree they never have in their
The Satisfaction of the Majority with Their Lives and Their Leaders
Russians feel quite comfortable with their improving quality of life and the
acceptance of the existing political system. In the 2011 study, the average
monthly salary of Russians was 700 U.S. dollars; in Moscow it was $1,400.[6] Also
in 2011, 79 percent of Russians (according to another polling firm, it was 92
percent) were satisfied with their lives (versus 54 percent in 2000), and 75
percent considered their personal material situations to be good or relatively
These data are congruent with the high approval ratings of the Russian rulers. In
September 2011, only 18 percent of Russians disapproved of the activity of
Premier Minister Putin, and 14 percent of President Medvedev. What is more,
two-thirds of Russians feel positively toward their governors.
Of course, we need to treat these data with a grain of salt. Certainly, the aura
of power and a fear of the authorities influence the ratings, as is always the
case in an authoritarian society. As soon as the boss quits his office, the
attitudes towards him will change overnight. Moscow's former mayor Yuri Luzhkov
illustrates this very nicely. The day after he was fired, he lost what had seemed
to be an ironclad popularity among Moscow residents.[8] It is true that in the
last few months, particularly following Putin's September 24th declaration of his
intentions to stay in power as president for the next 12 years, criticism of the
regime, Putin, and Medvedev have magnified. The stream of satirical songs and
sketches about the Russian leaders in the few oppositional outlets and, mostly,
on Internet (but not on official TV channels) increased significantly. They have
had little impact, however, on Putin's standing in public opinion.
Still, no matter what circumstances sway the peoples' ratings of their rulers,
these ratings reflecteven if in a distorted waythe climate of society. They also
inform the rulers of the degree to which they can rely on conformity, and how
much they will need to resort to violence to keep their power.
A Negative Picture
The analysts who are critical of the regime offer the public a very different
picture of contemporary Russia. They place the focusand very reasonably soon the
most negative elements of Russian society. Here is an incomplete list:
In politics: the authoritarian political system and its empty imitation of
democracy; the omnipresent corruption from the top to the lowest levels of the
bureaucracy; the inefficiency of the state and its law enforcement agencies; the
lack of independent courts; and the feudalization of the country, which is
identified by the phenomenon of many regions of the country acting independently
of the whole.
In economics: the total dependence of Russia on oil and gas exports; the
de-industrialization of the economy and de-professionalization of the labor
force; the lack of free competition; unrestrained state intervention in the
economy; the aging of the transportation systems and production equipment (which
are exacerbated by new technological disasters); and the decline of science and
In social relations: gigantic social inequality; the continuing emigration of the
country's best minds; the atomization and demoralization of society; and the
growing severity and prevalence of ethnic conflicts.
Any of these negative trends, whether by themselves or in some combination,
serve as the basis for the myriad gloomy prognoses made by several dozen critics
of the regime, who may lean to the right or the left, and who come from both
inside Russia and abroad. These prognoses promise political crises, revolution,
economic catastrophe, anarchy, political turmoil, the disintegration of the
Russian Federation, and ethnic wars. Many liberals have forecast a Russian
version of the "Arab spring". While the critics differ in their predictions of
when the aforementioned calamities will take place (in a few months, a few years,
or even longer), they are unanimous in their prognostication of the imminent fall
of the Putin regime.
Lilia Shevtsova, a respected analyst, writes that Putin's regime "is doomed," and
will drag "the state which it represents" into the abyss. She added that
"everything in society has started to disintegrate" and that "even people working
with the regime talk about the approaching catastrophe." The final sentence in
her article sounds particularly gloomy: "The agony is approaching faster than we
are able to understand its irreversibility."[9] Mikhail Deliagin, a famous
economist, agrees with Shevtsova; he also contends that "the agony of the regime
has already started."[10] Following Putin's decision to re-appoint himself as the
next president, Andrei Piontkovsky, a prominent Moscow analyst, exclaimed that
"the day when Putin solemnly proclaimed his eternal rule is the day of his
end."[11] The same prognoses of a highly pessimistic future for Putin's regime
have recently been made by politicians and analysts, like oppositional
politicians Gary Kasparov, Boris Nemtsov, and Mikhail Kasianov, or political
scientists like Sergey Belanovsky and Mikhail Dmitriev from the Center for
Strategic Decisions.
Found among the gloomy forecasters are moderate critics of the regime, some of
whom have even worked in collaboration with it, such as Vladislav
Inozemtsevdirector of the Center of Post-Industrial Societywho insists that now
"Russia enters a new era of perturbations."[12] Also among those who have
predicted the demise of the regime is Mikhail Gorbachev, who talks about "the
degradation of the state and the demoralization of society," and possibly of "a
new disintegration of Russia."[13]
The ominous prognoses for Putin's regime are mostly inspired by the wrong idea
that negative trends will lead directly to the collapse of the regime. The fact
is that even the most dismal developments do not always bring a regime down.
Negative trends can only destroy the existing political order from the inside if
they can create and put into motion one or all of the mechanisms that have the
ability to destroy the regime directly: 1) a revolt of the masses in the streets;
2) a powerful opposition with charismatic and honest leaders; and 3) a split
inside the ruling elite. Of course, as has happened on the eve of all of the
grand revolutions that have ever occurred, the combination of all these
mechanisms make the salvation of the regime impossible. However, when the
negative trends are not able to build the mechanisms necessary to destroy the
regime, the regime can maintain power for quite a long time. Consider two
examples from recent Russian history.
The Case of the 1990s: No Mass Protests
The deterioration of the quality of life in the country in the 1990s was
catastrophic, and almost all the politicians and analysts predicted mass
disturbances and the fall of the regime. Indeed, in the early 1990s, no less than
one-half of all Russian workers stopped receiving salaries. In addition to the
delay in payments to workers, the Russian government was unable to pay pensions
on time. Moreover, by the end of 1992, official data indicates that Russians lost
70 percent of their savings. The decline in personal income was about 50 percent.
One can hardly imagine the surprise of the new Russian regime, as well as experts
on mass movements around the world, when they discovered almost absolute
passivity among the Russian masses in the 1990s. Although there had been large
miners' strikes in 1989 and 1991, such activity was virtually absent after 1991.
There were no assaults on any police stations or local governments, nor were
there large protest marches or demonstrations. In the first half of 1993, there
were only 34 strikes with 20 thousand total participants, in a country with
hundreds of thousands of enterprises and millions of workers. Even the
participation of Russians in political meetings decreased in 1993-1994, in
comparison with the previous period.[14]
The Collapse of the Soviet Order
Even as they ignore the Russians' passivity during their tribulations in the
1990s, contemporary analysts predicting future gloom like to refer to the
collapse of the Soviet order, suggesting that Putin's Russia will follow the same
fate. They are, however, confusing two dates in their reasoning: 1985 and 1991.
By 1985, Soviet society was suffering from many chronic diseases, such as an
inefficient economy, technological retardation, a relatively low standard of
living, the permanent shortage of consumer goods, and simmering ethnic conflicts.
Yet, none of these societal ills presented a direct threat to the Soviet regime
or made the collapse of the Soviet order inevitable. Whatever the character of
the negative developments prior to1985, they did not generate mass public
protests (strikes, demonstrations, riots, ethnic rebellions, etc.), nor a climate
where the opposition was able to lead the people to the street, nor a serious
split inside the Soviet political leadership. Decisions about reforms were taken
up by the Politburo, which supported Mikhail Gorbachev's proposal of innovations,
because the leadership was concerned about the USSR losing its military parity
with the USA. By 1991, the reforms had led to the weakening of the state, the
destruction of the economy, chaos throughout the country, and, ultimately, to the
collapse of the system.
So Far, the Negative Trends have not Generated a Direct Threat to Putin's
It is typical that, among all those granting a negative prognosis for Putin's
regime by enumerating dozens of dismal tendencies in contemporary Russia, none of
them can point to any of the elements that would bring about a revolution: public
protest actions, serious political opposition, or an internal struggle inside the
ruling elite. Indeed, how can the negative trends that are so publicized in the
Russian and foreign press, such as the decline of science or the growing
emigration of active people from Russia, or such developments as the alienation
of people from the political process in the country, or the triumphing
corruption, hurt Putin's regime directly? We have no evidence of even one serious
strike among workers in the country over the last ten years. The biggest protest
actions of the liberals gathered, at best, a few thousand people, who were easily
dispersed by the police. The most serious danger to the regimethe nationalist
movementis, so far, almost completely under the control of the Kremlin, which
even sees it as a potential ally in case of emergency. The spontaneous
nationalist riot in downtown Moscow in December 2010, a very rare event in
contemporary Russia, was crushed without any serious resistance by the
participants, who were mostly teenagers. The few inter-ethnic conflicts in other
cities (for instance, Kondopoga in 2006) were also neutralized without any
serious effort. Some analysts treated the case of the so-called Far East
partisans (a group comprised of a small number of young people who declared war
on the local police in 2010) as a harbinger of all people warring against the
state, but it turned out to be a singular event.
In sum, the various negative trends have not helped to build serious political
opposition to the regime. In September 2011, the Russian Reporter newspaper made
a list of the ten most active public figures. All of them provided help in
developing civil society in the country, but none had anything do with a threat
to the regime. The list of prominent public figures was headed by Olga Romanova,
a brave journalist who, with the determination that her businessman-husband would
be released from jail, actively denounced the Russian justice system. However,
she was unable to create any public organization or a movement to fight the
corrupt courts. Peter Shkumato, the next on the list, created the "Blue Bucket"
public movement, which grew to tens of thousands of members. The goal of this
movement, however, while certainly useful in its own right, was only to fight the
abuse of high officials in using their privileges (e.g. the use of a special
blinking signal on the roof of their cars, which allowed them to ignore common
traffic rules). The third public figure on the list was Fedor Gorozhanko, who
created an internet network that started to denounce city authorities for not
helping people to eliminate leakage from the roofs of the multi-story houses in
which they lived. Other people on the list are also engaged in small actions of
the same apolitical character.[15]
There is no one public figure in Russia, aside from Putin and Medvedev, who could
gain the support of more than 1-3 percent of the population. Putin's regime was
very successful in denigrating the opposition and
making it irrelevant to the current political process. In addition, many
oppositional politicians are despised by the majority of the population. For
example, Mikhail Kasianov, former premier minister and now an oppositional
politician, developed a reputation as a bribe taker when he was in the
Thus, against the expectations of many analysts, the negative trends have not
generated any serious splits inside the ruling elite so far. The recent attempts
of some liberal journalists and politicians to find a crack between Putin and
Medvedev, as well as between their non-existent clans, ended in a farce when
Medvedev proclaimed Putin the next president, and when he declared that there is
a full consensus between the two of them on all political issues. In fact, not
only the ruling elite but also the absolute majority of the bureaucracy are
against a change in the regime, and despise all sorts of liberal reforms.
People's Corruption: The Strength, Not the Weakness of Putin's Regime
Those who are making gloomy prognoses clearly underestimate the might of the
social basis of Putin's regime. In the 1950-70s, the concept of "people's
capitalism" was quite popular in the USA. The major idea of "people's capitalism"
lay in the dispersal of stockholding opportunities among the population, which
was supposed to change the nature of the American economy and American society in
general. This idea had many important defenders in the business community, as
well as among American politicians and intellectuals. James Albus, a prominent
engineer, published a book entitled Peoples' Capitalism: The Economics of the
Robot Revolution (1976), in which he laid out a plan to broaden capital ownership
to the point where every citizen would become a capitalist with a substantial
income from personal ownership of capital assets.[16] The idea of "people's
capitalism" practically vanished from American debates on economic order in the
1980s. Two decades later, Boris Nemtsov, a young reformer in post-Soviet Russia,
tried to regenerate it without any success.[17]
Ironically, it was Putin who implemented the idea of "people's capitalism,"
albeit in a new form. He opened access to an illegal stream of income to a
considerable part of the Russian population. To grant everybody shares as
promised, he gave the most ambitious people access to a powerful source of
corruption. In fact, Putin superimposed the feudal model of government on
society, which supposes that holders of power in all spheres of life consider
themselves to be feudal officials who possess their own fiefs. (Russians use the
term "kormlenie," or "feeding," which points to the fact that each position
"feeds" its holder with illegal revenues). In exchange for the fief, the holder
grants their loyalty to the central administration, guaranteeing, for instance,
the desired outcome of an election (the Soviet system resorted to the same social
strategy, although less successfully, when it made one-third of the adult
population "little bosses"[18]).
Feudal (or Vertical) Corruption
Two major strata comprise the contingent of those who enjoy Putin's "all people's
corruption." The first, the "feudal" layer, is comprised of the "office holders,"
who have lucrative positions in the state apparatus: the top leaders and
administrators at all levelsdown to the chief of a small village. This layer also
includes the generals and high officers in the army, police and Federal security
agency, as well as the managers of various institutions, like school or hospital
directors.[19] This first stratum also includes people in business who, being
protected by the government at the national and local level, can extricate
illegal revenues, receiving a variety of privileges from the state, including
semi-legal and illegal government loans, and contracts that are granted without
bidding. They also pay government officials for help in destroying their rivals,
through tactics such as "raiding," which is the illegal seizure of a rival
The size of the first stratum, whose members enjoy some of the benefits of
corruption, is about 5-6 million.[20] But if their relatives are added to this
number, it grows to tens of millions of people.
The Relatives of Officials as Another Bulwark of the Regime: Omsk's Case
Innumerable data show how almost every member of the bureaucracy extends various
privileges to their close and remote relatives, including second and third
cousins. See, for instance, what happened in the last years in the Omsk region,
where Governor Leonid Polezhaev's clan was comprised of all his relatives, a
typical phenomenon in most Russian regions, including small administrative units
such as small cities and villages. In 2011, one of his sons, Konstantin, then a
hospital director, was caught buying medical equipment fraudulently; he never
suffered any consequences for his actions.[21] In the same year, the governor's
daughter-in-law, Natelle, privatized a hospital and health resorts for herself,
violating various laws. Another of the governor's sons, Alexei, using his
father's connections in the oil and gas business, became a billionaire. Alexei's
wealth is equal to the two-year budget for the entire Omsk region. What is more,
this businessman founded a company in Cyprus, which controls the water supply in
Omsk. The company regularly raises the tariff for water in the region, which is
prohibited by law. The same governor's son has real estate in Florida, a fact
which was hidden from the Omsk citizens. Polezhaev also protects his distant
relatives, such as his niece and several of his own spouse's remote relatives.
Some of them are members of the Omsk legislature and the owners of companies
located in Omsk, greatly exploiting their connections with the governor. Friends
are not forgotten by the governor either. As the local media found, his old
friend, Valerii Kokorin, embezzled budget money the governor had given to him to
build a club for business people.[22]
It is obvious that a great chunk of the population were delighted by Putin's
decision to stay as Russia's president forever. As one author in a Moscow
newspaper noted, "the members of the country's bureaucratic class, having
prospered in the cesspool of corruption created and deepened during Putin's rule,
are more than glad to have their license to steal renewed for another six or more
years." [23]
The Second Horizontal Layer of Corrupted Citizens: People without Office
The members of the second layer, the "little bribers," are much more limited in
the ways they can abuse their small power, when compared to the members of the
"feudal layer," because they do not have their own offices and are under the
strong control of their own bosses. Still, in a lawless society, these "little
bribers"teachers and professors, medical doctors and nurses, clerks who issue
various official papers for people (e.g. foreign passports or the documents
necessary for buying or selling apartments), sanitation and fire inspectors who
could, at-will, certify your shop as meeting standards (or not), and traffic
officers, along with a host of otherscan extricate additional income from the
ordinary people who depend on them; they could easily spoil these people's lives
if the bribes are not paid. While the illegal income of these little bribers is
quite small compared to what "office holders" get, it still comprises a
substantial part of the "little bribers'" budgets. Of course, the participants in
"horizontal corruption," with their modest illegal income from the bribes they
receive, minus the amount they must pay out to bribe others of course, are not as
loyal to the regime as the "office holders." Still, having adjusted well to the
existing order, they are far from being active protesters.
A special large group of participants in the corrupt activities are the hundreds
of thousands of employees in private companies who get along with an official
salary, and a "gray salary" (a "salary in an envelope", in Russian terminology),
which helps the company significantly reduce the taxes they must pay. These
employees are well aware of their participation in illegal activity and do not
shun it.[24]
The Most Ordinary Russians are Very Tolerant of Corruption
The strength of Putin's regime not only stems from the active support of its
"office holders," and the mild support of the "little bribers," but also in the
Russian population's indifference toward corruption. It is remarkable that while
critics of the regime, liberal or Communist, label corruption as a leading
problem in society, the population delegates it to the bottom of the list of
problems. Indeed, in a March 2011 survey with open-ended questions about the
major problems of Russian society, only 8 percent named corruption, compared with
30 percent who mentioned a low standard of living, and 22 percent who mentioned
Russian sociologists were amazed to find that the majority of Russians "are not
upset with corruption," and that they are indifferent to the movies and other
materials that denounce corruption. Paradoxically, the absolute majority of
Russians, no less than 70-80 percent, assume that corruption embraces all spheres
of social life, yet the same number of people also believe that corruption is "a
normal phenomenon;" they see it as being the same as it was under Yeltsin, as
well as under Putin, and expect that corruption will only be higher in the
future.[26] At the same time, many Russians are sure that corruption helps to
solve many problems in everyday life, and that the struggle against corruption is
hopeless.[27] It is remarkable that the most famous crusader against corruption
in Russia today, Alexei Navalnyi, could only garner the support of a few percent
of the population. [28]
The numerous negative trends in Russia have prompted many Russian and foreign
analysts to predict the imminent collapse of Putin's regime. These prognoses were
recently fueled by Putin's decision to return to the position of president, and
his clear intention to rule the country "forever," which, in the opinion of many
observers, only made it even more likely that the end of his regime would come
soon. I very highly doubt the accuracy of these prognoses.
The negative trends have not manifested the mechanisms that need to be present
for there to be a real, direct threat to the regime. There is no serious
political opposition in the country, while the political elite is united and is
mostly against a change in the regime. Even more important is the fact that there
is no public discontent coming from ordinary Russians whose material lives became
much better under Putin's rule. Russians' satisfaction with their lives is
extremely high, while Putin's high ratings are a sign that the masses link their
relative prosperity to him. At the same time, Russians, although they generally
appreciate democratic institutions, are confident that they have no ability to
impact political life in the country. They do not want to challenge the Kremlin,
which controls the media and the police, preferring to be absorbed with their
private lives, rather that confronting the authorities. What is more, Putin's
regime relies not only on the satisfaction of the Russians with their material
lives, but also on the involvement of ambitious Russianspeople with a position in
the bureaucracy, together with their relativesin corruption and even criminal
deeds. By encouraging corruption and providing immunity from prosecution to the
corrupted people, Putin created a powerful social base that will help him resist
attempts to change the regime.
So far, the greatest threat to the regime lies in the economic sphere, not in
politics. Dynamic oil and gas prices are a key factor that could determine the
fate of the regime. However, even an abrupt decline in the standard of living
would not necessarily make the fall of the regime unavoidable. Of course,
negative trends in Russia undermine the regime, creating a basis for the
opposition to challenge the regime with real political actions. Several sudden
shocks could also deliver serious or even mortal blows to the regime. In any
case, the American government has to expect that the probability of dealing with
Putin as the supreme master of Russia is quite high, for at least another decade.
[return to Contents]
Russia set to end 18-year wait to join WTO
By Timothy Heritage and Amie Ferris-Rotman
MOSCOW, Nov 3 (Reuters) - Russia is on the verge of ending its 18-year wait to
join the World Trade Organization after accepting a trade deal with Georgia, the
last big obstacle to membership of a club that will seal its integration into the
global economy.
Russia's accession will be the biggest step in world trade liberalisation since
China joined a decade ago, making its $1.9 trillion economy more attractive to
investors 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
After nearly two decades of tortuous negotiations with the 153-member club,
Russia's last challenge was to reach a deal with Georgia to stop its entry being
blocked by the former Soviet republic with which it fought a short war in 2008.
Russia's top negotiator said late on Wednesday that Moscow had accepted the terms
of a compromise deal proposed by Tbilisi on monitoring mutual trade, and a
Georgian negotiator said on Thursday he expected the agreement to be signed
within a week.
"We are happy that Georgia supported the draft agreement and that finally an
agreement has been reached," Russia's WTO accession negotiator Maxim Medvedkov
told Reuters by telephone.
Georgian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergi Kapanadze, whose country does not have
diplomatic relations with Russia, told Interfax news agency: "Everything should
reach its conclusion ... by the 10th of November."
This is the date for a meeting of a WTO working group which can then draw up a
final document for approval by WTO trade ministers in Geneva on Dec. 15.
Entry also needs the approval of Russian parliament, which is likely before an
election next March that is expected to return Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to
the presidency.
Russia's entry will secure membership of the biggest economy still outside the
WTO and send a signal to companies and investors that Russia is starting to move
closer to a rule-based system of doing business.
Putin can expect little in the way of electoral gains from an issue that analysts
say does not interest voters.
But although he has shown signs of frustration with the long accession process,
Putin has made clear he regards WTO entry as vital to fostering economic growth
and development by attracting foreign investors and lowering trade barriers.
The World Bank says WTO entry could increase the size of the Russian economy by
3.3 percent in the medium term and 11 percent in the long term.
"WTO membership will have no immediate impact on economic growth, the day-to-day
operations of Russia's corporations or on the risk premium investors apply to
investment in the country," said Chris Weafer of Troika Dialog investment bank.
"However, membership does establish a powerful catalyst for a more serious
approach to creating economic reform and industry efficiency."
Traders say a clear indication of a deal for entry could boost Russian stock
markets by more than 5 percent, offering some potentially positive news for
investors worried by volatility linked to the euro zone debt crisis.
The WTO, which sets out to supervise and liberalise trade between its members and
solve trade disputes between them, was once viewed by Moscow as an instrument of
capitalist hegemony.
Opponents in Russia now say international companies will use their clout to
stifle domestic producers although Russia says it has fended off attempts to
split up gas monopoly Gazprom , the world's largest natural gas company.
Firms in aerospace, the auto industry and local manufacturers of tradable goods
could suffer, analysts say.
"Concerns span fears about domestic industries losing against more competitive
foreign counterparts, households finding it more challenging to adjust to the new
environment, and Russia standing little to gain quantitatively," said Ivan
Tchakarov of Renaissance Capital investment bank.
He dismissed the concerns as showing a lack of understanding of the size of the
potential gains.
Georgia, which had been under pressure from its Western allies to reach a deal
with Russia, offered what it called a final compromise trade agreement last week.
Under a proposal worked out with Swiss mediation, Medvedkov said Russia had
accepted the use of an independent company to audit data on trade between Russia,
two rebel regions backed by Moscow, and Georgia.
"Russia and Georgia, as members of the WTO, would have to pass this data to an
integrated database," Medvedkov said.
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
November 3, 2011
Russia and Georgia Strike WTO Deal
By Anatoly Medetsky
Russia reached an agreement with Georgia on a bilateral deal late Wednesday night
that paves the way for its much-anticipated entry into the World Trade
Organization, Reuters reported.
"We are happy that Georgia supported the draft agreement and that finally an
agreement has been reached," said Maxim Medvedkov, Russia's top negotiator in
accession talks, Reuters reported.
Russian entry, which now looks all but certain to take place by the end of the
year, would come after 18 years of negotiations and represent the biggest step in
world trade liberalization since China joined a decade ago. Russia, the largest
economy outside the WTO, has an economic output of $1.9 trillion, or about 2.8
percent of the world economy.
After Wednesday's agreement, the next step on the path to membership will be a
previously scheduled meeting of the Working Party on Russia's Accession, chaired
by Stefan Johannesson, on Nov. 10 and 11. The group intends to complete its work
and forward recommendations to a ministerial conference due Dec. 15-17 for making
a final decision about approval of Russia's entry.
Russia then will have to sign a protocol of accession stating that it accepts the
approved "accessions package." The parliament will have to ratify the protocol,
usually within three months from signing. Thirty days after, the applicant
government notifies the WTO Secretariat that it has completed its ratification
procedures, the applicant government becomes a full member of the WTO.
Below is a breakdown of how entry into the WTO will affect some of the biggest
sectors of the Russian economy.
Russia reserved the right to mete out subsidies to farmers after entry, but the
amount of money will gradually decrease by 2017, President Dmitry Medvedev said
in July. The government will also retain the right to increase import duties on
some agricultural products to help the domestic sector, he said.
Oil and Gas
The impact of WTO accession is likely to have only a limited impact on the
industry which provides 40 percent of government revenue, the exportation of
natural resources. Oil and gas are exempt from import tariffs by other countries.
But Ildar Davletshin, an oil and gas analyst at Renaissance Capital, said that
membership in the WTO could usher in some minor changes to the sector. There may
be new pressure to lower natural gas prices from the European Union, which is
seeking to reduce Gazprom's stranglehold on the supply market. And the oil and
gas services industry, which provides equipment, may become more competitive.
Davletshin stressed that any changes would be "marginal" and would occur "in
steps rather than in one go."
Consumer Goods
With Russia's entry, imported consumer goods will become more accessible for
shoppers, Alfa Bank chief economist Natalia Orlova said.
Most foreign goods in Russia are currently sold at 30 percent to 40 percent
mark-up from their original prices on the average because of high import tariffs.
WTO membership will eventually make prices on consumer goods more compatible
since new products will appear on the market and importing goods will become
cheaper, Orlova said. But an overnight "collapse" of prices is not likely, she
Russia's accession could result in domestic steelmakers increasing exports to the
European Union, since the current restrictions for exporting Russian rolled steel
to Europe are likely to be canceled, said Dmitry Smolin, an analyst at UralSib
Domestic steelmakers have been limited to exporting a certain amount of rolled
steel to Europe annually since the European Union introduced quotas regulating
Russian supplies in 2002.
"Theoretically, the WTO entry might result in canceling these quotas," Smolin
The companies are allowed to export a total of 3.3 million tons of rolled steel
this year, compared with 3.4 million tons in 2010, he said.
However, it might take more than three years after Russia joins the organization
for the restrictions to be canceled, since the WTO entry doesn't mean that the
quotas will be canceled automatically, Smolin said.
Another problem is that demand for rolled steel in Europe hasn't fully recovered
after the 2008 crisis and is likely to remain weak for the next two years, he
Planes and Trains
Aviation and railways represent a mixed bag.
"There's no straight answer because there are both positives and negatives for
every company," said Vladimir Dorogov, an analyst with Alfa Bank.
In aviation, Aeroflot will lose at least a large portion of the fees it currently
charges European airlines overflying Siberia.
The company does not reveal how much it makes from the practice, but the European
Commission has said the fees cost airlines flying to Asian destinations $420
million in 2008.
At least part of the losses will be made up for by cheaper access to new planes
and pilot hire, which will also benefit other airlines. But the impact will not
be immediate: Medvedkov, Russia's chief negotiator on WTO accession, said last
month that reforming the fees would be unlikely before 2013.
For aircraft maker Boeing, which has been at the forefront of lobbying for
ascension in both Moscow and Washington for more than 15 years, the news will
come as something of a victory.
"Boeing fully supports Russia's accession, as it has supported other countries in
the past in the interest of free trade," said a Boeing Russia spokesman in an
e-mailed statement.
Import tariffs on wide-body aircraft will be reduced from 20 percent to 7.5
percent in the four years following accession, according to data compiled by
David Tarr, consultant and former lead economist at the World Bank. Russia has
agreed to substantial tariff reductions in construction, agricultural and
scientific equipment, as well as medical devices, he said in "Russian WTO
Accession: Achievements, Impacts, Challenges." Tariffs in these sectors will
average 5 percent.
Ascension will have little if any impact on Russian Railways, which is
"physically and institutionally" isolated from Europe, but international
documentation may ease transit of goods between Asia and Europe, said Dorogov.
Foreign and local drug makers are excited about Russia's accession, which is
expected to facilitate sales of innovative drugs in the domestic market and
increase its investment attractiveness.
After Russia joins the organization the data exclusivity regime aimed at
protecting the data of pre-clinical and clinical trials of innovative drugs will
start working locally.
This will result in foreign and domestic drug makers getting six years of patent
protection for innovative medications to be sold locally, said Vladimir Shipkov,
executive director of the Association of International Pharmaceutical
The lack of data protection in current legislation makes foreign drug makers
reluctant to register new medicines in Russia, since producers of generic drugs
can use the data of original drugs' trials, causing losses for manufacturers of
original medications.
"Getting the data exclusivity regime working in Russia is a longtime dream of
foreign drug makers,' Shipkov said.
Russia will significantly increase its commitments to multinational insurance
providers. It will allow 100 percent foreign ownership of non-life insurance
companies upon accession to the WTO. Russian prohibition of foreign participation
in mandatory insurance lines as well as Russian restraints on the number of
licenses granted to foreign life insurance firms will be phased out five years
after accession. Russia had restrained the amount of foreign investment in the
sector to about 15 percent of total investment; but as part of its accession
commitments, Russia agreed to increase this limit to 50 percent.
Staff writers Khristina Narizhnaya, Irina Filatova, Roland Oliphant and Howard
Amos contributed to this report.
[return to Contents]
Russia Beyond the Headlines
November 3, 2011
WTO membership will improve Russia's investment climate
Investment incentives, lower taxes and the possibility of imminent WTO accession
mean an improved business climate for Russiaeven the World Bank agrees.
By Anna Andrianova
Russia is aware of the damage its reputation is inflicting on the country's
ability to attract foreign direct investment and trade partners, according to
Deputy Minister of Economic Development Stanislav Voskresensky.
In his keynote address at the recent Russian Business Investment Summit (RBIS) in
New York, Voskresensky stated that the Russian government knows that the
country's dependence on commodities coupled with the widespread belief that it
has an unfavorable business climate has hindered its economic growth, but that
the government is working to improve the climate as well as the perception.
Another barrier to trade has been the country's exclusion from the World Trade
Organization (WTO), although that may be about to change. Just as the business
summit opened in New York, it was announced that Georgia had reached an agreement
clearing the way for Russia's WTO membership, which observers say will jumpstart
trade and investment.
"It will be a surprise to everybody when in a few years Russia will move into
the world with its young management and its world-class companies. Russian
companies will do very well internationally," said John Conner, a portfolio
manager at Richmond-based Third Millennium Russia Fund (TMRFX) who attended the
RBIS conference. He added that Russian steel companies are already entering the
world market, and that Russian oil companies will be next.
Investment Incentives for the Wary Investor
There is a general consensus that the Russian economy will be fine as long as oil
prices remain high. However, Voskresensky said that the government has conducted
a stress test and is prepared for a scenario in which oil prices drop below $80,
or even below $60. He also stated that, with a debt-to-GDP ratio of 10 percent,
the Russian economy is more than prepared to resist financial turmoil.
Russia has one of the world's lowest corporate tax rates at 20 percent, and this
year the inflation rate is predicted to remain below 7 percent. Combined with WTO
membership, these figures should make Russia an attractive place to do business.
Voskresensky said that Russia's top-listed companies have reduced their debt by
20 percent over the last three years and their foreign exchange debt by 40
percent, which demonstrates the companies' readiness for a range of scenarios on
the global financial markets as neighboring Europe fights high levels of debt.
The World Bank's latest "Ease of Doing Business" report also named Russia one of
the countries that has "improved the most over time." In its evaluation, the
World Bank looked at new regulations and measures that apply to
small-and-medium-sized business, including the procedures required to start a new
business, the tax rates, and the difficulties of obtaining permits, getting
credit and registering property.
This year, Russia improved its score by launching electronic procedures and
reducing the cost and documentation required for import and export transactions.
A revision and reduction of utility tariffs also boosted the business rating.
"We know our problems, we are not ideal, we are who we are, but I think we are on
the right track," said Voskrensensky.
Clinching the WTO membership could have an immediate and even startling impact,
business insiders say. Russia has been trying to get into the world trade body
for 18 years, but from time to time the Russian leadership seemed to stop caring
about WTO accession. This time the nonchalance seems to be working. "Without
Russia, the WTO cannot be said to be a really universal organization," said Prime
Minister Vladimir Putin in October. "It has managed without us and will continue
to do so. But we are still a country that today produces and sells more oil than
any other and it would be better if we were a member of the organization."
In recent months, Georgia has been the only state still opposing Russia's
accession to the WTO. Although the substance of the new Georgian proposal has not
been disclosed, Russian business daily "Kommersant" reported that the main
difference between this deal and previous ones is the status of breakaway
republics Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Until now, Georgia has insisted that trade
between these regions and Russia be legally considered trade with Georgia.
Moscow, which recognizes these two territories as independent countries, does not
agree. According to Kommersant, Georgia has proposed joint monitoring of trade
operations on the borders with Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The deal came as a
result of Georgia's consultations with the European Union and Switzerland. Russia
signed off on the deal Nov. 2.
According to the World Bank, the economic effect of entry for Russia will be a
3.3 percent increase of the annual GDP over the next several years approximately
$53 billion dollars. In the longer term, the gain may exceed $150 billion.
Michael O'Flynn, managing director at UFG Asset Management, which focuses on
Russia, said that the immediate impact of WTO accession will be felt in the steel
sector, where Russia is the cheapest producer. He added that share prices of
stocks like SeverStal and Evraz could surge well ahead of entry date as investors
"game" the situation.
Overall, business insiders agree that U.S. and Russian business will be
encouraged as American multinationals already wildly successful in
RussiaMcDonalds, Pepsi and Ford, among others will find the rules-based,
WTO-enforced business environment far more predictable and legally viable.
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
November 3, 2011
Russia Rises in Bribery Score, Still Last
By Khristina Narizhnaya
Russian businessmen are most likely to give bribes in commercial deals abroad,
compared with businessmen from other large economies, according to the
Transparency International bribe payers index, released Wednesday.
Russia scored 6.1 points, the lowest score of 28 countries measured, ranking
below the average index score of 7.8. China and Mexico got the second- and
third-lowest scores of 6.5 and 7. The scale stretched from zero to 10, with zero
indicating a businessman who gives bribes and engages in other unethical tactics
all the time and 10 for someone who never uses bribes or other questionable
No country got a perfect score. The Netherlands and Switzerland ranked highest
with 8.8 points, with Belgium, Germany and Japan close behind with scores of 8.7
and 8.6.
The index, last published in 2008, surveyed about 100 businessmen from large and
medium-sized companies from each country. Six new countries were added to the 22
countries surveyed last time, and the average score of all countries combined
decreased a tenth of a point.
"Bribe" is one of the first words uttered in a business deal when Russians are
involved, Transparency International Russia director Yelena Panfilova said,
citing acquaintances in international business.
"We export technology, oil, wood. And we also export this," Panfilova said.
The most corrupt sectors are government-funded projects, whereas the agricultural
and manufacturing sectors are less likely to involve bribes.
Over the last decade, the nature of bribing inside Russia moved from voluntary to
involuntary, Panfilova said. Officials now demand that businesses pay bribes for
services that should be free or in some cases simply to let businesses operate.
"Business does not want to get involved [in corruption], but they [officials]
come and show a price list," Panfilova said.
A number of foreign companies will not come to Russia because of the rampant
corruption in the business sphere, Transparency International Russia deputy
director Ivan Ninenko said. Several international companies, including Siemens
and Daimler, were involved in corruption scandals last year.
Officially, anti-corruption compliance seems to be improving companies have
implemented ethics codes, the strict U.K. Bribery Act took effect earlier this
year, and President Dmitry Medvedev made it a cornerstone of his policy to fight
corruption. But, in practice, compliance is still a problem.
About 70 percent of Russian executives don't understand what compliance is, while
more than 70 percent don't take compliance seriously, other than paying taxes,
said Oleg Danilin, head of global financial services advisory at Ernst & Young
Many of the 30 or so percent of executives who take compliance seriously have
been fined in the past or faced some other problems related to corruption,
Danilin said.
Most companies make an effort to make themselves look good on paper, or "apply
window-dressing," but they do not actually enforce anti-bribery and other ethical
guidelines, Danilin said. Typically, problems arise after some time.
Anti-corruption compliance is "like your brushing teeth every day. It's not
required, but if you don't brush your teeth for five years, they will rot,"
Danilin said.
One solution could be to hire specialized compliance officers and pay them high
salaries to motivate them to do their jobs, Danilin said. Another is to provide
adequate protection for those who report corruption.
Russia's bribery index score advanced a twentieth of a point from 5.9 in 2008,
but Panfilova said she believes that progress should be much greater.
"I am ashamed every time these indexes come out," Panfilova said. "I don't want
to sit with a red face yet again. Let the Chinese or the Mexicans take the
honor," Panfilova said.
Hours after the rating came out, state-run news service RIA-Novosti ran an
update, citing unidentified experts who linked the Transparency International
rating to an attempt to pressure Gazprom and diminish its presence on the
European market.
The experts admitted that Russian business behaves aggressively abroad and that
the problem of "export corruption" exists, however, it is not a high-priority
problem for the country, RIA-Novosti reported.
Although Russia faces the prospect of unchanged leadership for the next 12 years,
even if Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is elected president, the country is
changing, Panfilova said. The middle class is growing and demanding
Laws are just pieces of paper without proper enforcement, Panfilova said.
"The law has to get into the right hands. When those hands appear, the law will
appear," Panfilova said.
[return to Contents]
November 3, 2011
International experts: Russia is a major exporter of corruption
Author: Maxim Tovkailo, Galina Kamneva, Yulia Taratuta, Aleksei Nikolsky
According to Transparency International, Russia is a major
exporter of raw materials and corruption since it is Russian
companies that are prone to bribing state functionaries in the
foreign countries where they operate.
Russia rated the lowest on the list of suborners made by
Transparency International. Its experts approached the heads of
3,016 holdings from 28 world's largest economies and evaluated how
frequently businesses bribed functionaries abroad. Zero points
meant that the company always bribed foreign functionaries. Ten
points meant that it never bribed anyone.
Russia polled 6.1 points, 0.2 more than three years ago when
the previous report was drawn. Russia became the last on the list,
right after China. According to the WTO, Russia and China
accounted for 13% of global export in 2010.
Experts point out that the "corruption export" index is
correlated with the level of corruption at home. Where corruption
in the state sector is concerned, Russia rated the 154th on the
list of 178 countries in 2010. Yelena Panfilova of Transparency
International said, "Russian businesses developed the erroneous
feeling of impunity. They think that since they get away with
bribes at home, they will almost certainly get away with them
Said a businessman, "I remember when Putin was meeting with
representatives of major businesses in the early 2000s, he asked
what problems worried them the worst. I was present at the
meeting, you know. Putin was told that Russian businesses had two
major headaches - courts and the police... Putin said that he
would tell the judiciary and the police to leave businesses alone
but he wanted businesses in their turn to stop bribing the
judiciary and the police... An awkward pause followed. Putin
frowned and said, "I see that we haven't reached an agreement. All
right, let's go on to the next item on the agenda."
A source said, "Bribe is optimization of costs. Whenever a
company does not want to spend money on marketing or being friends
with state officials, it has a way out... It can buy a couple of
state functionaries. It's a myth that there is no corruption at
all in the West. It's just in Russia lots of bribes go to petty
representatives of the state - like precinct police officers,
communal services, and so on." Transparency International experts
bore out this statement. Not a single country on the list they
made was recognized as corruption-free.
Experts say that if governments mean to stop national
businesses from bribing foreigners, they ought to begin with
installation of effective anti-corruption mechanisms at home.
Panfilova said that anti-corruption laws in Russia were fairly
sophisticated but even that did not help since these laws were
universally ignored. "President Dmitry Medvedev said that up to 1
trillion rubles were stolen every year within the framework of the
public purchasing system. And yet, only one functionary was tried
for corruption and actually imprisoned to three years
imprisonment. Are we supposed to think that this Voronin alone
pocketed a trillion rubles every year?" said Panfilova. [Andrei
Voronin of the Control Directorate of the Presidential
Administration was sentenced to three years in prison for
machinations with procurement of medical equipment- Vedomosti.]
[return to Contents]
Russia's Poor Corruption Record Linked To Pressure On Gazprom - Experts
Moscow, 2 November: Experts believe that Transparency International's latest
report (Bribe Payers Index), in which Russia ranked last as a country whose
companies pay bribes most often when working abroad, is linked with attempts to
put pressure on Gazprom and reduce its presence on the European market. At the
same time experts admit that Russian business abroad behaves aggressively, and
the problem of "export of corruption" does exist, - however, it is not the
country's top priority. (passage omitted)
Export of corruption is different
Head of the Strategiya 2020 (Strategy 2020) foundation Mikhail Remizov stressed
that Transparency International's report "concerns export of corruption, i.e.
corruption practices of Russian companies abroad, rather than corruption per se".
"This is a big difference really between corruption inside the country and export
of corruption. Russia's neighbour on this list of corruption indicators is China,
that is, a country that carries out a very consistent, intelligent and shrewd
expansion of its business abroad. Corruption is one of the tools of this global
expansion," he told RIA Novosti.
According to the expert, at different times governments have different attitudes
to the export of corruption.
"At one time the USA turned a blind eye to corruption mechanisms used to promote
US business abroad, then they started fighting with it," Remizov said.
Corruption was a way to enter closed markets, but with the expansion of the WTO
network the markets opened, and in the context of the interests of Western
capital's global expansion views on corruption have changed," he said.
Pressure on Gazprom?
Remizov compared Transparency International's report with "the current pressure
on Gazprom in Europe, quite coordinated and going on in different countries and
in different directions, in relation to its position on the European market".
"In this regard, arguments that Russia is a global exporter of corruption can be
used to continue and develop the campaign to reduce the presence of Gazprom on
the European market and limit its abilities," the expert said.
Political analyst Sergey Markov agreed with his colleague.
"This is an attempt to put pressure on Gazprom, but I think it is unlikely that
representatives of the political elite phoned Transparency International and told
them to write that everything was bad. No. There is simply a general trend of
putting pressure on Russian companies. But it is true that the Russian business
community, especially in the 90s, behaved very aggressively and shamelessly," he
told RIA Novosti.
Markov thought that China was at the bottom of the list also because of its
aggressive export policy. "The government (of China) does not allow companies to
be corrupt in the country, but encourages corruption outside the country," the
analyst said.
Is this a problem?
According to Remizov, the problem of export companies' corrupt practices is not
paramount to the interests of Russia.
"Our country today, I think, is not in a state for us to believe that the export
of corruption is a major, predominant problem. The predominant problem is still
internal corruption, in government structures and major companies," the analyst
He described the problem of internal corruption as "solvable".
"The idea that this is an absolutely incurable ailment is wrong. Of course, some
corruption always exists, but this pathological level of corruption that we are
facing now can be dealt with," he said.
To achieve this, in his opinion, it is necessary to take "measures most of which
we have not even come close to, starting from punishment for officials' illegal
enrichment and ending with anti-offshore laws with regard to big companies.
First Deputy Head of the Duma Security Committee Mikhail Grishankov also warned
against confusing Transparency International's report and the Corruption
Perception Index (corruption in government agencies). However, he noted that the
report's figures are "very alarming", and they speak about the level of
corruption in the country as well.
"Of course, it was difficult to expect that measures taken by the government will
work quickly," the MP said, adding that companies will always be willing to
resolve their issues through such "agreements".
Grishankov believes that corruption cannot be destroyed only by legislators and
law-enforcement agencies. Society as a whole must take part in the process, he
said. He stressed that Russia must put an end to this evil in three to five years
latest, otherwise many of the programmes associated with the development of key
industries will be impossible to implement in full.
How to put an end to export of corruption?
Markov believes that, in theory, Russia could one day be first in Transparency
International's report, "but a lot of revolutionary changes must happen first".
"The Soviet companies were the least corrupt. Of course, large-scale corruption
appeared with the collapse of the Soviet Union, system of social relations, and
work ethic, and transition to rabid individualism," he said.
[return to Contents]
Expert Confident Russia Will Reduce Corruption In Coming Years
November 2, 2011
Experts from Transparency International Russia are convinced that over the next
decade corruption in Russia will fall regardless of the outcome of the upcoming
parliamentary and presidential elections, Russian Interfax news agency reported
on 2 November.
"Will something change in 12 years? I'm sure there will be changes. I am
absolutely optimistic here and it does not matter who is coming for how many
years (to power - Interfax)," director of Transparency International Russia
Yelena Panfilova said at a news conference at the Interfax central office in
Moscow on 2 November.
"Anybody can come to power for any number of years - for a billion years if you
wish. We are changing, and the country is changing. The country is not so much
the prime minister, the president or the ruling party as the people," she said.
According to her, "on the one hand, it is difficult not find someone in the room
who has never encountered corruption, but on the other hand, the civic-minded
middle class is growing in the country".
"Ii is impossible to stop this, unless probably only by mass repressions or a new
Gulag but I'm sure that this will not happen in the 21st century," Panfilova
She said that the number of people who cared about the country was rapidly
"It does not matter at all what the names of people at the top are if this
process is already under way," the director of Transparency International Russia
According to Transparency International Russia experts, small and medium
businesses are most vulnerable to corruption in Russia.
"Small and medium businesses fall victim to corruption most often. Medium
business is the cornerstone, the very fabric of the economic process," Panfilova
According to her, it's easier for large companies to remain honest and less
susceptible to corruption.
"In our environment, only large companies can afford to be honest. They have
armies of lawyers and their international trade allows them to cover costs when
it takes them a year to collect the necessary documents," Panfilova said.
She said that corruption in Russia, even the sector which was formerly
"voluntary", i.e. in which tacit consent of both parties was present, is looking
more and more like extortion.
According to Transparency International's latest Bribe Payers Index, Russian
companies are the worst in the list of 28 countries.
"The place of Russian business in the 2011 report was not a surprise for us,
because Russia is still trying to find ways to fight corruption in the system. It
would be strange to expect businessmen to behave better when officials continue
taking bribes. There is hope that strict compliance with new state
anti-corruption laws and international obligations will help change the situation
in the coming years," Panfilova said, as quoted by Russian news agency RIA
She said that some foreign companies refuse to work on the Russian market due to
high corruption risk.
The most corrupt sectors of business in Russia are government orders and the
construction industry. The least susceptible to corruption, according to the
report, are agriculture and light industry.
Deputy director of the Transparency International Russia centre Ivan Ninenko said
at the news conference that the centre had prepared recommendations that could
improve the situation.
[return to Contents]
Russia Profile
November 2, 2011
What Triggers Capital Flight
New Figures From Russia's Central Bank Show That Foreign and Domestic Investors
Are Pulling Their Money Out of Russia
By Tai Adelaja
Tuesday's announcement by Russia's Central Bank that capital flight will double
to $70 billion this year is a stark reality check for the Kremlin, which has been
making frantic efforts in recent months to improve the country's investment
climate. The regulator said it arrived at the new figures after it firmed up a
new draft of the country's monetary lending policy for 2012 through 2014. The
original draft, which was prepared in early October, predicted an increase in
capital outflows of just $36 billion.
The ever-increasing capital outflows, the regulator said, indicate a change in
foreign investor sentiment "in favor of buying less vulnerable foreign assets"
amid increased volatility in global financial markets. Many experts interviewed
by Russia Profile on Wednesday confirmed that the newly firmed-up figures are
"realistic." They added that foreign investors indeed prefer to transfer their
funds to less risky assets in the United States, despite the fact that the
country' credit rating was downgraded in August. The Central Bank's document
noted, however, that Russians are not investing money in their country either,
scared off like their foreign colleagues by the country's "unfavorable
investment climate."
Between January and September this year, Russia's net private capital outflow hit
an estimated $49.3 billion, Sergei Ignatyev, the chairman of the Central Bank,
said early last month. Capital flight surged in the third quarter, especially in
September, when $13 billion or 70 percent of the third-quarter outflow left the
country, Bloomberg reported Ignatyev as saying. The 2011 total has now exceeded
that of 2010, when $35.3 billion left the country, but still less than the $133.7
billion that left at the height of the financial crisis in 2008.
Researchers from the Higher School of Economics' Center for Development warned in
a report released last week that capital flight cannot be reversed without
fundamental changes in the Russian economy. "Capital is fleeing Russia not
because things are better elsewhere, but because things are bad here and are
probably going to get worse," according to the researchers as cited by the
Associated Press. "Things that need to be done are not new: fostering
competition, establishing the rule of law, fighting corruption and state racket,"
the report said.
Despite the resolution of the Kremlin's succession problem in September,
political uncertainty continues to plague Russia's investment environment,
various experts claim. Russian companies have continued to move money abroad,
while Russian exporters are refusing to repatriate their overseas profits to
Russia, analysts said. The sudden dismissal of former Finance Minister Alexei
Kudrin, whom many investors associate with fiscal prudence, has not helped
matters either. Emerging Portfolio Fund Research said some $443 million had been
pulled out of funds that were invested in Russia a week after Kudrin's shock
resignation, compared to just $164 million that left the week before his exit.
"One should not underestimate the political situation in the country, as well as
the expectations of a fairly negative election campaign," said Anton Safonov, an
analyst at the Investkafe agency. Safonov, who correctly predicted back in
October that capital outflow could reach $70 billion this year, said "the
political situation is almost always associated with large capital outflows from
Kudrin has attributed capital flight to "the high oil price and the impossibility
of investing this revenue on the domestic market." In a speech at a financial
conference last month, he told business people that capital outflows from Russia
could continue if the budget isn't brought under control. He said Russia's
dependence on an ever-higher oil price to balance the budget was primarily due to
the country's military spending, his main point of contention with the Kremlin.
Since all speculative movements in the Russian market are correlated with oil
prices, the widely expected dip in global oil prices will adversely affect the
Russian economy and trigger even more capital outflows, according to Yevgeny
Pischulin, a trader at the REGION Broker Company. Russia is particularly
vulnerable to the ongoing global financial turmoil as investors try to avoid the
so-called emerging markets in favor of safe havens in Europe and the United
States, he said. "European banks with assets abroad, including in Russia, are
repatriating capital for re-investment in their home countries as well as in
treasury bonds of sturdy countries like the United States or Germany," Pischulin
said. "The speculative demand for foreign currencies by public and private
companies is only aggravating the tendency and spurring even bigger capital
The Central Bank, meanwhile, has also lowered its outlook for the country's
international reserves, slashing it to $495 billion from the $515 billion
projected earlier. Russia's reserves, the world's third largest, stood at $469.4
billion last year, but rose to $493.6 as of October 1, 2011, on the back of
higher energy prices. Despite the fact that oil prices remain at a consistently
high level, the regulator predicted that foreign reserves will stagnate. Capital
flight partly prompted the Central Bank to sell more than $14 billion of reserves
in September and October to curb depreciation in the ruble.
[return to Contents]
Valdai Discussion Club
November 3, 2011
No visible results of "economic modernization on the Medvedev track"
The VIII summit of the Valdai International Discussion Club "Elections 2011-12
and the Future of Russia: Development scenarios for the next 5-8 years" is to be
held in the Kaluga Region and Moscow in November 7-11, 2011.
Valdai Club.com interview with Sergey Aleksashenko, Macroeconomic Research
Director of the National Research University Higher School of Economics.
Can we expect an economic breakthrough if Vladimir Putin wins the 2012 election?
I don't. I think Prime Minister Putin has clearly formulated his economic views,
which are limited to strengthening the role of the state in the economy,
suppressing competition and refusing to undertake consistent efforts to improve
the investment climate in the country, and he has been implementing this approach
systematically. Of course, I would like to hope that the phrase "Never say never"
will apply to my answer, but I don't see any reason to hope.
Russia has been trying to ease its oil dependence for decades. Will it succeed in
the next decade, or will this disease continue under a new president?
I don't agree that Russia has been trying to ease its oil dependence. In my view,
this dependence has become even stronger in the last five years. It will take
25-30 years and strong political will for modernization that is, to turn Russia
into a 21st century nation to ease this dependence, but I don't see any such
will among our leadership.
Dmitry Medvedev focused on economic modernization during his presidency. Are
there any practical results to account for these efforts? Will this policy be
continued under Putin?
There are no visible results of "economic modernization on the Medvedev track."
In principle, it is a mistaken premise to expect modernization to be initiated
from the top. Furthermore, a modern economy cannot develop in Russia without
reforming its political institutions, such as the elections, the courts and the
law enforcement agencies.
During his terms as president and prime minister, Vladimir Putin has highlighted
economic cooperation with the CIS states. Will he continue to pursue this foreign
economic policy?
Yes, I think he will. No, I suspect that economic integration with our closest
neighbors will not ensure any economic benefits for Russia. We need foreign
investment, technology, management and skills, which the CIS countries cannot
provide. The CIS countries will eventually feel these advantages because their
enterprises will have free access to the Russian market, but Russia pursues this
policy for its political image.
Could Putin change the direction of the Russian economy toward the Asia Pacific
Yes, but not considerably. Russia supplies raw materials to the rest of the
world. In principle, it can sell most of them to Europe or Asia the difference
for the economy is insignificant.
Do you think the Jackson-Vanik amendment will be abolished in 2012? Will this
influence Russia's accession to the WTO?
Yes, the amendment will be abolished immediately upon Russia's entry into the
WTO. The accession agreement will be signed on December 15 this year, and all
accession procedures should be completed by mid-2012.
[return to Contents]
Medvedev tells G20 debtor states to cut spending
CANNES, November 3 (RIA Novosti)-Russia's President Dmitry Medvedev advised
debt-laden countries on Thursday to cut their spending immediately and called on
stronger states to support demand in the eurozone, in Russia's first official
statement on the European crisis.
"States whose debt burden is excessive must launch fiscal consolidation
immediately," Medvedev told the Group of 20 summit in Cannes. "It would be
reasonable if EU states seen by markets as safe harbors, support demand and thus
ease the situation for their weaker partners."
He said that the fundamental reason for markets' distrust of financial rescue
plans within the eurozone was their uncertainty about how to cut the debt burden,
exceeding 80 percent of gross domestic product in most states, while economic
growth only amounted to 1-2 percent.
"Proof of the fact that these states will take all steps necessary to secure
sovereign borrowers' mid-term solvency is enough to reassure markets," Medvedev
Greece stands on the brink of a national default, after a hard-won 130 billion
rescue program from the EU was endangered by Greek Prime Minister George
Papandreou's plans this week to hold a referendum on the deal. Greeks, hostile to
additional austerity measures tied to the bailout package, are almost certain to
reject the plan, which, in turn, would trigger the country's falling out of the
euro zone.
A Greek default may also trigger defaults in Spain and Italy, which also have a
huge debt burden.
Medvedev said he opposed the Greek referendum, as do French President Nicolas
Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who told Papandreou on Wednesday
night that Athens would not receive a cent more until it decides to meet its
commitments to the eurozone.
"My feeling is that the actions of our partners aimed at instilling order should
be more dynamic and decisive. Neither the referendum, nor any delays in making
decisions will do any good," Medvedev said.
Russia is ready to support troubled EU states, he said. Earlier on Thursday he
called on the BRICS states, which include Brazil, Russia, India, China and South
Africa, to work out a joint position on the euro crisis.
[return to Contents]
Russia to weather worst of EU turbulence
MOSCOW, November 3 (RIA Novosti, Agata Sheremet)-The worsening economic
turbulence in Europe threatens to exacerbate Russia's high levels of capital
outflow, but is unlikely to cause a full-blown economic crisis, analysts said on
That's as long as prices for oil, Russia's core export, are stable.
Europe's economic problems returned with a vengeance this week after Greek Prime
Minister George Papandreou said he would hold a referendum on whether to accept a
130 billion euro bailout and debt write-off from the EU conditional on more
budget cuts. The fate of the plan is the center of discussion at the Group of 20
summit taking place in Cannes, France on November 3-4.
Greeks may well vote the rescue program down, which would almost certainly result
in the country leaving the eurozone and possibly triggering a wave of banking
"If worst comes to the worst, and Greece leaves the eurozone, market panic and
economic decline will affect Russia too, which will tell not so much on the trade
balance ... but on capital outflow from Russia, which will increase," Investcafe
analyst Anna Bodrova said.
Investors panicked by the European crisis will lose appetite for risk, which
Russian assets represent, and will also try to solve their liquidity problems
with the help of their Russian subsidiaries, adding to capital flight and further
weakening the ruble.
The central bank nearly doubled its 2011 private capital outflow forecast this
week to $70 billion from $36 billion previously.
Analysts say poor economic performance, an unfriendly investment climate and
political risks ahead of forthcoming elections are key drivers behind the capital
flight, but the eurozone crisis will add to the problem.
Capital flight will increase amid the panic on world markets unless the
government takes drastic measures to stop it, said Sergei Sheremet, a senior
analyst Radar consulting firm.
"Otherwise, the impact of the European crisis will be significant, perhaps even
leading to a complete share trade ban for the largest public companies. They may
decide to impose an embargo and tighten foreign exchange controls," Sheremet
As an emerging nation's currency, the ruble is strongly dependent on external
factors, Bodrova said, especially since the central bank had reduced intervention
The official rate of Russian ruble for tomorrow fell 16 kopecks against the
dollar to 30.84 and 7 kopecks against the euro to 42.21 on Thursday.
Bodrova said she expected the ruble to be volatile within the 30.60-31.50 per
dollar range, heavily affected by European turbulence.
Economic problems would be limited to financial markets only as long as the price
for energy, which accounts for almost half of Russian budget revenues, does not
"The crisis will affect Russia to the extent that ordinary people would feel it,
only if the oil price falls. What we have seen so far, is that despite all the
troubles in the eurozone, oil is stable," TKB Capital analyst Sergei Karykhalin
Brent oil is currently trading just below $110 per barrel which is above the
level on which Russia's budget is planned, and it is not expected to fall in the
near future, according to analysts.
"You should start worrying when oil drops below $100 per barrel. As long as it is
above $100, no one will fear for the Russian economy and the ruble exchange
rate," Karykhalin said.
[return to Contents]
Moscow News
November 2, 2011
Coupling in Cannes
By Tim Wall, editor
As President Dmitry Medvedev joined other world leaders for emergency talks at
the G20 summit in Cannes the playground of the rich it would be hard to think
of a more symbolic venue for Russia to re-couple with the global crisis.
The talks there a last-ditch attempt to avoid a Greek default and a likely crash
for the Greek economy looked unlikely to provide any lasting answers for the
European Union. Growing larger by the day is the probability of a Europe-wide
debt contagion, with the possible break-up of the 17-nation eurozone.
Russia has generally avoided the worst of the crisis so far, but a default in
Greece would make it impossible for Moscow to stay decoupled, as economists here
have hoped.
Russia has so far managed to avoid serious austerity measures by a combination of
high oil prices and pre-election, Keynesianstyle spending. But the budget deficit
is set to grow massively if oil drops much below $100 a barrel.
It's true that the oil price can be kept artificially high for an extended
period, particularly by instability in the Middle East. But even the most elastic
rubber band eventually reaches its limits and snaps.
Deeper austerity measures in Europe could (possibly) avoid defaults spreading
quickly from Greece to Italy, Spain, Portugal and elsewhere. But austerity comes
with its own problems, as consumers lack the money to spend the economy back to
Russia is in a better position to weather the storm due to its $500 billion
reserves. But in 2008, when trillion-dollar bailouts saved Wall Street but failed
to stop the global economy spinning into recession, Russia's reserves fell by
one-third. Presumably, the same could happen again.
The key answers this time are probably to be found not with the U.S. or Europe,
but with China. If China can come up with a rescue package in Cannes, there may
be hope for EU leaders to kick the ball a little bit farther down the road.
But even China's boom can end, particularly if the U.S. and Europe stop buying
its goods. And then the idea of Russia de-coupling would be about as likely as,
well, film director Nikita Mikhalkov winning in Cannes.
[return to Contents]
Russia Us Differences Over ABM Boil Down To Politics - Experts
Moscow, 2 November: Differences between Russia and the US over European missile
defence are political and can only be overcome through joint work, Russian and
American experts said during today's Moscow-Washington video link-up titled
"European missile defence: is there a chance for an agreement?" (passage omitted:
background information on the positions of the sides)
According to senior researcher of the International Economy and International
Relations Institute (IMEMO) of the Russian Academy of Science retired Maj-Gen
Vladimir Dvorkin, all current differences between Moscow and Washington over
European missile defence "are exclusively political". "All the problems are about
distrust which has persisted in both the US and Russia," Dvorkin said. He also
said: "The point is that, according to our estimates, wherever European missile
defence areas may be based in Europe, be they sea-based systems or adapted ground
systems of the SM-3 standard, given their characteristics, their speed
(approximately 5.5-6km), they are in no way capable of attaining the warheads of
Russian missiles. They are not fast enough, even taking into account the effect
of IT systems."
He added that there would be no threat "even taking into account the fact that
they (Russian missiles) will be launched in Russia's most western regions in the
western direction". According to Dvorkin, "the only threat which could emerge -
signs of a military threat - would emerge if ships equipped with the Aegis system
(a US multipurpose combat information and control system) were deployed in the
northern seas". "There they could intercept Russian maritime missiles within an
active section. American experts are saying that they (the Aegis systems) are not
intended for destroying missiles but transforming them would not be a problem at
all," he said.
Head of a department in the IMEMO of the Russian Academy of Science, director of
the Institute of Strategic Assessments, professor of the Moscow State
International Relations Institute (MGIMO) of the Russian Foreign Ministry Sergey
Oznobishchev said when commenting on current Russian-US relations that "this is a
deep-rooted phobia" which could be uprooted but "cooperation is all important
"As regards joint missile defence, this is a completely new objective - to work
together for countering future threats," he said. At present, "our political
phobia stops us doing this", Oznobishchev said. "If we create at least one joint
centre (for exchanging information on potential threats), this will already
constitute a step forward," he added. (passage omitted: US experts are quoted)
[return to Contents]
Center for the National Interest
Task Force Prescribes Steps to Advance U.S. Interests in Russia
Underlines Why Americans Still Need to Care about Russia
How will Vladimir Putin's return to the Kremlin impact American national
Can the U.S. work with Russia to reduce risks that the rise of China disrupts the
global order?
Should the U.S. allow Georgia to block Russia's entry into the World Trade
How can the U.S. engage Russia to reach further cuts in nuclear arsenals and
reduce the global threat of nuclear terrorism?
These are just some of the thorny policy questions tackled in a new report by the
Task Force on Russia and U.S. National Interests, released in Washington and
Cambridge, Massachusetts, on Oct. 31, 2011, by a group of business leaders and
former military officers, senior government officials and diplomats.
The task force report assesses Russia from the perspective of American national
interests and offers prescriptions for coherent, realistic management of the
U.S.-Russia relationship as the two nations approach the 20th anniversary of the
collapse of the Soviet Union on Dec. 25, 1991.
The study also makes the case that Russia remains on of the handful of countries
in the world that can deeply affect American economic and security interests,
demanding constant U.S. attention. The report argues that Vladimir Putin's
decision to return to the Kremlin as Russia's president next year will make
maintaining focus, care and determination even more challenging for American
While recognizing that the Obama Administration's reset policy has led to
significant improvements in U.S.-Russia relations, the task force report warns
that relations remain fragile -- and that an undertow of mutual distrust is more
at fault than specific disputes.
"This suspicion of one another's motives may in fact be a greater obstacle to
cooperation than sometimes divergent national interests and values," the
executive summary says.
It concludes that a sustainable cooperative relationship that protects U.S.
interests will require American policymakers to move forward "without illusions
regarding either Moscow's sometimes neo-imperial ambitions, or the pace of
democratic change in Russia."
The task force was co-chaired by Graham Allison, director of Harvard Kennedy
School's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, and Robert D.
Blackwill, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and former U.S.
ambassador to India. The project director was Dimitri K. Simes, president of the
Center for the National Interest. The Center's executive director, Paul J.
Saunders, served as editor of the report.
The report offers dozens of specific policy prescriptions on key issues that
shape the relationship: Nuclear weapons and proliferation; arms control; energy
security; fighting terrorism; trade and investment; and democratic values.
These include:
The U.S. should engage Russia to develop a joint roadmap for security of nuclear
weapons, weapons-grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium everywhere in the
The U.S. also should engage Russia to get the world to agree to halt all new HEU
enrichment and plutonium reprocessing.
The U.S. and Russia should rapidly agree on Russia's WTO accession.
The U.S. should accept that Russian democracy will evolve in its own forms and
will occur gradually.
The U.S. should press for human rights conditions clearly and firmly, without a
patronizing tone.
The Belfer Center and the Center for the National Interest co-sponsored the Task
Force and the report is available for downloading here:
[return to Contents]
Russia Beyond the Headlines
November 2, 2011
The ambassador of better will
McFaul's appointment as the next American ambassador in Moscow indicates a shift
in the U.S. policy toward Russia.
By Eugene Ivanov
Eugene Ivanov is a Massachusetts-based political analyst who blogs at The Ivanov
On Oct. 11, a day before the Foreign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate was
to begin hearings on the nomination of Michael McFaul, President Barack Obama's
top Russia adviser, as the next U.S. ambassador to Russia, the "Washington Post"
published an op-ed by David Kramer, president of Freedom House, and Robert Kagan,
of the Brookings Institution. In their piece, Kramer and Kagan called on the
Senate to confirm McFaul.
Uh-oh! When two sworn enemies of the Obama administration's policy of the
"reset" voice their support for a man widely considered as one of its architects,
something must be going on.
The intense media coverage of McFaul's nomination, first announced by the White
House in May, is somewhat unusual: After all, no one in Washington, DC was
bubbling with excitement when John Beyrle, the current U.S. Ambassador to Russia,
was sent to Moscow in 2008. And, honestly, how many American journalists know
the name of the Russian Ambassador to the United States? For the record, it's
Sergei Kislyak.
But then, the reasons for replacing Beyrle, a career diplomat, with diplomatic
novice McFaul have never been clearly articulated, although it's true that during
his tenure, Beyrle committed a couple of faux pas. In August 2008, shortly after
the beginning of military activities in South Ossetia, Beyrle irritated his
superiors at the State Department by claiming that Russia's response to the
attack by the Georgian military on Russian peacekeepers was justified; he later
backtracked from this statement. This "error of judgment," however, didn't cost
Beyrle, a George W. Bush appointee, his job. Impressed with Beyrle's credentials,
the newly elected President Obama asked him to stay in Moscow. In December 2010,
though Beyrle was in hot waters again: Classified diplomatic cables posted by
WikiLeaks revealed some unflattering opinions he had about the Medvedev-Putin
tandem. Obviously offended, Moscow nevertheless made it clear that it was ready
to leave the WikiLeaks story behind. Neither incident, however, prevented Beyrle
from taking part in all important bilateral meetings over the past four years,
including presidential summits.
Some Russian analysts, pointing to McFaul's experience in security issues, took
his nomination as a sign that Washington was planning to pay more attention to
U.S.-Russia relations just at a time when these relations are particularly
troubled by seemingly irreconcilable differences over European missile defense.
Others are not so sure: They argue that if Obama needed McFaul for help in
defining Russia policy, he would have kept McFaul in the White House in
Washington rather than in Spaso House in Moscow where McFaul will be inevitably
overwhelmed with numerous administrative chores.
The second point of view does seem to hit a nerve: should the Obama
Administration pursue the policy of the "reset" in its current form, why would
there be any need to replace Beyrle with McFaul or anyone else, for that
matter? Instead, it appears that by dispatching McFaul to Moscow, the White
House is sending a message that its policy toward Russia is about to change.
The shift in U.S. policy toward Russia seems to grow from purely domestic roots.
Preparing for a tough re-election campaign next year and weathering a tsunami of
criticism for his economic policies President Obama has chosen the path many of
his predecessors have traveled: he has begun promoting his national security and
foreign policy successes. The policy of the "reset" with Russia is one of the
administration's most obvious achievements in the international arena: Obama can
point to a new arms control agreement and also to increased cooperation with
Russia on Afghanistan and Iran. Yet, critics of the "reset," such as Kramer and
Kagan, keep arguing that its benefits came at a price: willful ignorance of what
they call "Russia's deteriorating human rights situation." To deflect this
criticism, the Obama Administration has apparently decided to shift the focus of
its Russia policy on human rights issues.
Here McFaul's credentials as an academic with a strong track record of "democracy
promotion" come in handy. So does his scathing criticism of then-President
Vladimir Putin's policies in 2000-2008. And the title of McFaul's latest book
"Advancing democracy abroad: why we should and how we can" must have had the
same effect on Kramer and Kagan as the sound of a horn does on a hunting horse.
Evidently, the White House decided not to wait until McFaul's confirmation by the
Senate to introduce the new "twist" in its policy vis-`a-vis Moscow. A couple of
weeks ago, Michael Posner, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, went to Russia on a six-day trip. While
traveling in Moscow, Nizhny Novgorod and Kazan and meeting with Russia's civil
activists, Posner played the role of a Goodwill Ambassador of sorts, delivering a
preachy message that "the United States would 'redouble' its efforts to make sure
Russia heeded international norms on human rights." If Posner's "goodwill"
mission is an example of what the White House expects of the next U.S. ambassador
to Russia, then there is no doubt that McFaul who, unlike Posner, lived in
Russia and speaks fluent Russian will be an even better Goodwill Ambassador than
Posner. What will happen to the "reset" McFaul reportedly helped to architect,
remains to be seen.
[return to Contents]
US jury finds Russian 'merchant of death' guilty
By Sebastian Smith (AFP)
November 2, 2011
NEW YORK A New York jury found a Russian arms dealer, dubbed "the merchant of
death," guilty of conspiring to sell a huge arsenal to US-designated terrorists,
in a case that has angered Moscow.
Viktor Bout, 44, who was extradited from Thailand to the United States in 2010,
was found guilty on all four counts including conspiring to kill US service
personnel and to sell anti-aircraft weapons.
Federal Judge Shira Scheindlin set sentencing for February 8. Bout faces a
minimum of 25 years and possibly up to life in prison.
"Today, one of the world's most prolific arms dealers is being held accountable
for his sordid past," US Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.
The lead federal prosecutor for Manhattan, US Attorney Preet Bharara, said that
"with today's swift verdict, justice has been done and a very dangerous man will
be behind bars."
Bout's lawyer, Albert Dayan, immediately promised an appeal.
"It's definitely not the end of the process. We will appeal," Dayan told
reporters. "We believe this is not the end. We have a chance."
Bout, dressed in a grey suit with a white shirt, looked despondent as he listened
to the jury forewoman read out the verdict reached after fewer than eight hours
of deliberations over two days.
He briefly hugged Dayan after the verdict and was led back to a detention center.
His wife Alla and their teenaged daughter -- present through most of the trial --
were absent from the 15th-floor courtroom, which was packed with journalists and
law enforcement agents.
Later, a distraught Alla Bout told AFP that her husband was the victim of
political machinations.
"I don't think this was about justice. I would call this American nationalism,"
she said, fighting back tears.
But rights groups celebrated the downfall of a man alleged to have poured weapons
into some of the world's bloodiest conflicts.
"It is a good day when the world?s most notorious arms trafficker is put out of
business and off the market for good," said Oistein Thorsen, a campaigner with
Oxfam International.
"However, it is tragic that because we have no global treaty regulating the
activities of arms dealers, many other unscrupulous dealers and brokers will
continue to operate."
The trial was the culmination of a sophisticated US sting operation to corner
Bout, a veteran of a shady international air freight business that specialized in
African conflict zones.
US informants posing as high-ranking members of Colombia's FARC guerrilla group,
an underground leftist force that Washington considers a terrorist organization,
told Bout at a 2008 meeting in Bangkok that they wanted to buy weapons.
Among the weapons requested were hundreds of Russian anti-aircraft missiles that
the fake FARC representatives said would be used to shoot down US pilots aiding
the Colombian military.
In the secretly taped conversations in Thailand, Bout told the fake FARC members
that he could supply the weapons.
His lawyer had tried to argue in court that the Russian had in reality quit the
arms trade and was merely playing a charade to further his real goal, which was
to sell two unwanted cargo planes.
Bout was arrested at the 2008 meeting with the US agents, then extradited from
Thailand to the United States after a bitter legal battle.
The mustachioed former Soviet military officer is alleged to have been the
biggest private black market arms dealer in the post-Cold War period. He always
denied this, saying he worked exclusively as a private air transporter -- though
sometimes carrying legal shipments of arms -- and lived openly in Moscow.
Bout's more extended resume allegedly includes pouring weapons into wars in
Afghanistan, Angola, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Liberia, Rwanda,
Sierra Leone and Sudan.
The movie "Lord of War," starring Hollywood actor Nicholas Cage, was inspired by
Bout's life.
The chief US Drug Enforcement Administration agent who organized the Thailand
sting branded Bout "one of the most dangerous men on the face of the Earth."
Arms expert and longtime Bout critic Kathi Lynn Austin said the verdict "closes
the book on one of the most prolific enablers of war, mass atrocities and
terrorism in the post-Cold War era."
"We should all be grateful that the world is safer now that the man who armed the
hot spots of the globe is behind bars," she said in a statement.
Russians were outraged by Bout's arrest and extradition. There is also concern in
Russia over the health of Bout, who has lost considerable weight since his arrest
in Thailand.
Alla Bout said she thought her husband's only chance of ever leaving US prison
would be through intervention "at a state level -- a government level."
Alexander Otchaynov, vice consul for Russia in New York, would not comment on the
verdict. "Commentaries on such things will come later," he told reporters.
[return to Contents]
November 3, 2011
A Bout face: Moscow lobbies for Bout's return
Moscow has harshly criticized a US court's guilty verdict in the Viktor Bout case
and vowed to secure the former Soviet military officer's return to Russia.
On Wednesday, a New York Federal jury found Bout, 44, guilty of attempting to
sell heavy weapons to a Colombian terrorist group. He will be sentenced on
February 8, 2012, and may get from 25 years to life behind bars.
Commenting on the decision, the Russian Foreign Ministry said that it will
continue taking "all measures needed to ensure the legal rights and interests of
Viktor Bout as a Russian citizen."
"Our goal is to secure his return to his home country," the ministry's
spokesperson Aleksandr Lukashevich said in a commentary published on the body's
official webpage.
Moscow once again pointed out that Bout a Russian citizen was illegally
extradited from Thailand "under unprecedented political pressure from American
What was "absolutely unacceptable," Lukashevich stressed, is that "unlawful
methods of physical and psychological influence" which run contrary to the
international law and US international obligations were used during the
"operation" involving American special services officers, and again during the
The Russian side expressed its indignation over the negative atmosphere around
the Bout case which, was deliberately stirred up "at the direct instigation of
the US executive power" and impeded an impartial investigation into the facts.
"One cannot consider it normal that a Russian citizen was kept in custody in
unjustifiably harsh conditions, obviously aimed at making him agree to a plea
bargain," the spokesman said.
These factors call into question "the very grounds on which the prosecution was
based and, correspondingly, the justice of the court verdict."
The Russian lower house believes that the New York court decision could be
politically motivated.
The verdict was delivered in a style of "typical American propaganda," said First
Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Foreign Affairs Committee Leonid Slutsky, as
cited by Itar-Tass. Bout was turned into a kind of "an evil genius", a "baddie"
from Russia. The official is confident that Moscow should continue fighting for
its citizen and added that "neither the state nor the family will leave him."
Another representative of the committee, Andrey Klimov stated that both the Bout
case and the verdict are pieces of the same "political put-up job." What the
former military officer is convicted of "is utter rubbish". Following the logic
of the American justice bodies, Klimov observed, one cannot even hypothetically
discuss whispering "with his wife in the kitchen" anything that can pose a threat
to US interests. "That is exactly what they want to imprison Bout for," the MP
The deputy believes that Moscow should use both political and diplomatic methods
in order to prevent such violations of the rights of Russian citizens from
happening in the future.
[return to Contents]
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
November 3, 2011
For the US the Russian mafia is worse than the yakuza
US is expected to tighten visa requirements for Russian citizens
By Artur Blinov
In the TOC report, compiled by the US State Department, the Russian mafia has
surpassed the well-known Sicilian mafia and other criminal groups from outside
the US, including the Japanese, Mexican and other criminal organizations.
Previously, in early July, US President Barack Obama signed a decree on the
imposition of sanctions against the largest TOC groups.
It mentions the Russian mafia alongside the Japanese yakuza, Italian camorra and
Mexican Los Zetas. However, at that time, there was still some confusion in
terminology, and the document included a series of criminal groups from the
post-Soviet space the "Brothers' Circle" (apparently, "Bratki"), the "Family of
Eleven", and "The Twenty".
Some confusion is also observed when it comes to identifying the criminals'
citizenship and their gangs often all suspects from the former Soviet Union, are
referred to as "the Russian mafia". For example, the White House document, titled
"Strategy to Combat Transnational Organized Crime", cites Russian citizen Semen
Mogilevich (Schneider) and Ukrainian hacker Sergey Yastremsky as threats to the
US security from Russia. Another document, compiled by the US National
Intelligence Council, makes mention of Viktor Bout, who was extradited to the US
by Thai authorities and is currently on trial in New York (a court verdict was
expected yesterday evening), as well as Armenian and Uzbek criminal groups.
Measures currently being taken by the US administration are based on assessments
contained in a report by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS). In this document, drafted under the leadership of
former editor-in-chief of the Washington Times, Arnaud de Borchgrave, it was
reported that Russian criminal organizations are active in 50 countries, and
their size doubles every nine months.
The report was made based on the results of a two-year-old study, conducted by
the CSIS using data from US intelligence and law enforcement agencies. It reads
that 200 of Russia's largest criminal organizations have turned into
multinational corporations.
In the explanations made regarding the current measures against the "Russian
mafia", the US Treasury says it is mainly based in the former Soviet states, but
is spreading its influence to the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.
The current actions taken against it, in essence, represent an attempt by US law
enforcement agencies and financial services to stimulate action in this area.
According to the US Treasury's under-secretary for Terrorism and Financial
Intelligence, David Cohen, from now on US authorities will be applying the same
financial sanctions toward translational criminal organization as those that
proved effective in the fight against Al-Qaeda and other radical movements. These
sanctions include freezing of any assets held in US banks, and introducing a ban
on entry to the United States and business deals with US organizations.
According to experts, based on the list of threats from TOC compiled by the US
State Department, US visa requirements for Russian citizens will be tightened.
Moreover, we could expect to see more arrests of Russian citizens in third
countries, including some based on charges fabricated with the assistance of US
intelligence services. This applies both to the Viktor Bout case, as well as the
Konstantin Yaroshenko case the latter is currently held in pre-trial detention
in the US.
[return to Contents]
Russian Oil Companies Resuming Operations in Libya - Kremlin Envoy For N. Africa
ST. PETERSBURG. Nov 2 (Interfax) - Russian oil companies are resuming their
operations in Libya, said Russian presidential envoy for North Africa Mikhail
"As for our oil companies, Gazpromneft along with concern ENI have already
resumed their operations, and more of our players on the Libyan oil market, such
as Tatneft, Lukoil and others, are about to do the same," Margelov told
journalists in St. Petersburg.
The new Libyan prime minister reaffirmed on Tuesday that "the new Libyan
government will respect all contracts with the Russian Federation," Margelov
"The resumption of operations under infrastructural contracts is very important
to us. This concerns above all the contract with Russian Railways," Margelov
He added that he could not see any "political reasons for the new Libyan
government to revise contracts with Russian companies."
The Russian companies Tatneft, Stroytransgaz, and Zarubezhstroytechnology
operated in Libya before the civil war that ended up in a change of power.
Gazprom (RTS: GAZP) signed a contract with Italy's ENI on joining the Libyan
project Elephant in mid-September.
The ouster of Muammar Gaddafi and the National Transitional Council's coming to
power recently gave rise to doubts that the new authorities would be willing to
continue joint projects with Russian companies.
[return to Contents]
Russian Pundit Examines Usefulness of CSTO Despite Its Apparent 'Helplessness'
November 2, 2011
Article by Carnegie Moscow Center expert Aleksey Malashenko: "Bottom Line"
Repeated attempts have been made to increase the regional and world influence of
the military-political association of Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan,
Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, which will be 20 years old next year.
Suffice it to say that the Collective Security Treaty itself was signed in 1992 -
soon after the breakup of the USSR - and 10 years later, at Russia's initiative,
it was renamed an organization, in which form the Collective Security Treaty
Organization (CSTO) exists to this day.
During their regular meetings the leaders of the CSTO member countries invariably
adopt important resolutions and declare their desire to keep control of the
situation in the post-Soviet area. The purport of these statements boils down to
appeals to use the institutions and mechanisms created within the CSTO framework
to maintain security and stability and not to admit the NATO bloc to the former
Soviet republics' sphere of strategic interests: They say that Brussels must know
that our borders are reliably bolted and there is no point in strangers poking
their nose in here.
However, during the two decades of its existence the CSTO has essentially never
once tested itself in a really big matter connected with maintaining security in
the expanses of the CIS. The events of the second "tulip revolution" in
Kyrgyzstan in the spring and summer of last year can serve as the most obvious
example of its helplessness. Blood was being shed in a member country of the
organization, but the CSTO was quite unable to react to the situation in
Kyrgyzstan and extinguish the conflict, to all intents and purposes acknowledging
its impotence. Although, if it had intervened, maybe things would have been still
worse: Just imagine order being instilled in Kyrgyzstan by Uzbekistani subunits,
let's assume!
Nevertheless, paradoxical though this may be, the CSTO is not a useless
organization either for Russia or for the other member countries. However, its
value lies not in the aims proclaimed by the CSTO. For Moscow the CSTO
represents, first, the opportunity to maintain the semblance of increasing its
military-political influence in the post-Soviet area - which is meant to
compensate for having yielded its economic positions in the former republics.
Second, it provides cover for Russian military installations in the post-Soviet
area. In addition, for Moscow the CSTO also means one more card in grand
bargaining with the West.
As for the other CSTO members, for them membership of the organization means the
opportunity to obtain Russian weapons at domestic Russian prices. And, of course,
they are still warmed by the glimmering hope that the CSTO will emerge into a
qualitatively new stage of its development and formulate a "crisis response"
strategy, which will enable it to prevent a repeat of the "Arab spring" close to
Russia's borders.
[return to Contents]
Forward email
This email was sent to firstname.lastname@example.com by email@example.com |
Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe(TM) | Privacy Policy.
Johnson's Russia List | 6368 Circle Drive | Chincoteague | VA | 23336