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-#219-Johnson's Russia List
Released on 2012-10-11 16:00 GMT
Email-ID | 2262777 |
Date | 2011-12-06 17:42:33 |
From | email@example.com |
To | email@example.com |
List-Name | email@example.com |
Johnson's Russia List
6 December 2011
A World Security Institute Project
JRL homepage: www.cdi.org/russia/johnson
Constant Contact JRL archive:
JRL on Facebook: www.facebook.com/russialist
JRL on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JohnsonRussiaLi
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. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Elections Have Different Meaning in Russia, A Eurasian
State, Than in the Wes. (Sergey Smirnov)
2. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Growing Impact of Internet on Russian Politics Analyzed.
3. Interfax: Top Kremlin Strategist Pledges Continued Modernization Of Political
System. (Vladislav Surkov)
3a. RIA Novosti: Kremlin domestic politics chief proposes new liberal party.
4. Wall Street Journal: Kremlin's Ideologist Weighs In on Elections,
5. Interfax: United Russia to get 238 mandates in State Duma - CEC Chairman
6. BBC Monitoring: Medvedev sees 'no tragedy' in One Russia's less than brilliant
election results.
7. Interfax: Medvedev Has to Renovate United Russia - Expert. (Sergei Markov)
8. www.russiatoday.com: Laughing at Duma will make all unhappy Putin.
9. ITAR-TASS: RUSSIAN PRESS REVIEW. Authorities summing up election results.
10. Bloomberg: Putin May Shift Blame to 'Fall Guy' Medvedev for Vote Setback.
11. ITAR-TASS: RUSSIAN PRESS REVIEW. Elections in Russia: the country rapidly
moves to the left.
12. ITAR-TASS: Fair Russia's success is one of parliamentary election sensations.
13. Izvestia: UNITED RUSSIA FAILED ...to repeat its previous success. THE NEXT
14. www.russiatoday.com: Power carve-up in Duma after ruling party's poll slump.
15. Interfax: Russian Pundit Sceptical On Opposition Coalition In State Duma.
(Gleb Pavlovskiy)
16. RBC Daily: ALLIANCE WITH PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION. COALITIONS IN THE DUMA
17. Moscow Times: Observers Question Fairness of Vote.
18. Interfax: Top Kremlin Strategist Plays Down Reports Of Election Fraud.
19. Russia Profile: Spilling Over. Russia's Liberal Opposition Awakens En Masse
for the First Time in Years.
20. Russia Beyond the Headlines: Anna Arutiunova, Still willing to fight for a
new country. Protests show Russians have something they want to protect.
21. Vedomosti editorial: BOTTOM FALLING OUT. IMPORTANCE OF UNITED RUSSIA IS
22. Business New Europe: Putin and Russia are the winners in this election.
23. www.russiatoday.com: Dmitry Polikanov, Russian elections show trend to
24. Moscow Times: Nikolia Petrov, An Exciting End to a Dull Election.
25. Russia Profile: The Internet's Watching. Past Sunday's Duma Elections Were
the First Russian Elections to Come Under So Much Scrutiny in RuNet, Social
Networks and the Russian Blogosphere.
26. Interfax: Gorbachev Says Russia Should Change Political System.
27. RIA Novosti: Russians expect to see 'new edition of Putin' - PM's spokesman.
28. New York Times: Party's Losses Raise Concerns About Putin's Bid.
29. Valdai Discussion Club: The election won't be a cakewalk for Vladimir Putin.
(interview with Vyacheslav Nikonov)
30. RFE/RL: Brian Whitmore and Tom Balmforth, Is The Putin Magic Gone?
31. Washington Post editorial: A clear message of Russian dissatisfaction with
Mr. Putin.
32. AP: As Putin plans to stay, many Russians want out.
33. Moscow Times: Holiday Shoppers Expected to Spend More.
34. Moscow Times: Investors Upbeat About New Duma.
35. Moscow Times editorial: What the Vote Means for Foreign Investors.
36. Wall Street Journal: Russian Oil Frontier: Nowhere Land. Energy Firms, in
Remotest Siberia for Crude, Run Rigs Over Video Link From 700 Miles Away.
37. RIA Novosti: Medvedev shoos foreign powers from domestic affairs.
38. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: ELECTION AS SEEN BY THE WEST. FOREIGN MEDIA OUTLETS
39. ITAR-TASS: Clinton's statement political, opportunistic - view.
40. Moscow News: McCain warns Putin of 'Arab spring'
41. ITAR-TASS: Statement on US missile defence met with rare unanimity among
42. www.russiatoday.com: OSCE to lose its role if not reformed Lavrov.
43. Interfax: Russia Warns Against Secret Contacts With Taliban.
44. Rossiyskaya Gazeta : Flour and machine guns don't count. The West holds
Russia in Afghan "reception area"
Elections Have Different Meaning in Russia, A Eurasian State, Than in the West
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
December 2, 2011
Article by Candidate of Chemical Sciences Sergey Aleksandrovich Smirnov: "We Go
to the Elections. What Next? Thoughts About the Futility of the People's
Expression of Will"
The demand for free elections in Russia bewilders me, because apart from
saccharine sweetness, I can see nothing in it. Elections are empty without their
subject, that is, the voter, being prepared to entrust to the people entered on
the ballot paper the right to decide on his behalf the most important questions
in the life of society.
I will not undertake to judge which words are more accurate -- that there are
different types of civilization or different degrees of its development -- in the
case of West Europe and the United States on the one hand and the countries on
the borders of Europe and Asia -- the former USSR, the Arab East, and Iran -- on
the other. First, peasant labor, which formed the basis of social production for
many centuries, made possible in the countries of the second group, because of
their natural conditions, only survival with forced collectivism. In Russia, out
of this grew the people's communism in a far from Marxist form: "Take everything
and divide it equally, according to fairness." Marx would have turned in his
grave, but the communist autocrats contrived to make collectivism imposable. Now,
by the law of the pendulum, it has been replaced by extreme individualism.
Second, empires headed by supreme leaders having different titles in various
societies (emperor, king, czar, khan, Fuehrer, and so forth) in West Europe early
encountered the resistance of neighbors close to them in strength, and the era of
wars became a thing of the past. Colonial possessions existed until the middle of
the last century. But in Eurasia, empires absorbed their less developed
neighbors, which made them more stable, but did not remove gravitation toward
nation states, which in Soviet times was dubbed a national liberation movement.
In the West, "production societies" were formed, which had a high level of labor
efficiency and a high standard of living for the masses, and in which property
was protected by laws. There they divided the branches of power: the legislative,
executive, and judicial branches, and these branches, as they developed, acquired
an official character and changeability. The handover of power by inheritance was
replaced by elections and a party system. Organization became the main function
of the structures of power, and the number of jobs for the population became the
criterion of their successfulness.
In the Russian language "power" (vlast', which has various other meanings in
Russian: authority, the authorities, the ruling regime etc.) is not from the same
root as the word "force," as it is in English or German, but from the same root
as the word "to possess," and this underlines its primary application to
property. Wealth was acquired through redistribution, the possibility of which
was provided by the possession of power, and it provoked the antipathy of the
masses: Whereas in West Europe, a wealthy neighbor arouses a desire to emulate
him, here he provokes envy and the dream of equality in poverty. Power has turned
into the highest value, without separation, and with rights without obligations;
the latter are determined not according to the requirements of society, but by
the tasks of self-preservation. In the upshot, a "cattle-ization" of the
population occurs, so that people feel themselves to be bond slaves on whom
neither the state's prosperity, nor their own depends: everything is in the gift
of the authorities. This is what television, state-owned or under the control of
the state, is filled with; for the masses there is nothing else.
The antagonism between the population and the authorities gives rise to coercive
methods of rule, and the authorities are not replaceable, but only overthrowable.
And how else do you deal with "eternal" rulers? And is it possible to "choose"
those who will share out wealth in their own interests and who will inevitably
become hated because of this? Such "societies of possession" (obshchesva vlasti )
are built on fear. But what is more terrible for the masses: a supreme leader, or
the absence of one? Subordinates are not allowed to be more intelligent than the
bosses; what we have is "negative natural selection." Competition for power, for
its possessors, is criminal: Look at Belarus or Ukraine. In the USSR, even the
collectivist communist utopia that placed social interests ahead of personal
interests, though the collective and society are the only forms for the existence
of individuals intrinsic to mankind, was no obstacle to the personal character of
the regime. The so-called law enforcement organs are guided not by the law, but
by the wishes of the holders of power. The privatization of this power by the
method of corruption continues the traditions of "feeding" (kormleniye : the
practice by which the public officials of apanage princes received a salary in
kind from the local population), which was supposedly abolished in Russia by the
reform of 1555-1556. And as there can be only one supreme leader, so there can be
only one party (from the English part), which in our country means belonging to
the authorities. Examples are the USSR, China or, at one time, Germany.
In the Soviet Union, before its collapse, many state institutions had ceased to
function. But the special services worked until the last moment: In Eurasian
societies, the authorities' security people absorb the most businesslike people,
who by this time were fed up with the idea of communism. This is why, in August
1991, Alfa (small special-forces commando unit attached to the Federal Security
Service) refused to storm the Russian government building. After the revolution
came the time of state work, and a state security officer (i.e. Putin) was
elevated to the highest post logically, and not by chance. The shadowy director
of this process, Boris Berezovskiy, did not take into account the priority of
state interests for the state security worker, and his attempt to "privatize" it
with the aid of the head of the state machine failed.
Over the period of 70 years Communism had discredited itself to the point of the
impossibility of a repeat of it, restricting the euphoria of the masses to the
model Eurasian supreme leader, Stalin, inseparably connected with it more than
his repressions did. In a society without citizens, the slogan "Russia for the
Russians" in place of the former internationalism guarantees at the freest
elections the victory of those who will promote it -- with all the ensuing
consequences. Thus at one time the most votes were polled by the LDPR (Liberal
Democratic Party of Russia), the generator of ideas for the authorities of
contemporary Russia, a role to which United Russia, the latest clone -- a
hopeless one in view of its total lack of an ideology -- of the party of lovers
of power, does not measure up. For it, the return of the Dear Leader as
supposedly his sublime desert is enough; but civil society spells the end for it.
It recalls the CPSU (Communist Party of the Soviet Union), which enlightened the
population, which as a result perceived communism as a religion, and the latter
fell at the end of the century. The aims of Vladimir Putin and those of the party
on which he has been forced to rely for want of a better one are opposite. In
order to go down in history with a plus sign, he has to change the mentality of
the masses, but United Russia, for the sake of victory in elections, must
safeguard this mentality, without modernizations and innovations. Three years ago
Vladimir Putin did not heed the calls (including, for example, from that
connoisseur of popular opinion, (filmmaker) Nikita Mikhalkov), and did not retain
himself as president for a third term, showing the people an example of observing
the Constitution. So that United Russia will inevitably split into lovers of
power over bond slaves, and those who are concerned by the prospects of society.
Many democrats (whether in inverted commas or without them) with their views --
the ones who are not allowed to take part in elections -- are inclined to blame
this on the current authorities, evidently believing that at elections they would
receive many votes. But however elections were held, they would have far fewer
votes than United Russia has functionaries. It is not "de-Stalinization" that is
topical, but "de-supremo-ization," that is to say, moving away from
totalitarianism: "Provided my native country lives, I have no other cares" (line
from song performed by Soviet singer Aleksandra Pakhmutova, words by Lev
Oshanin). While personalities crush us, instead of the prosperity of people and
of the country, there will be only the fear of the state on the part of its
inhabitants and its neighbors. Right now, the question is, to what degree will
the party of lovers of power cultivate the slogan "Russia for the Russians" in a
multiethnic country, in an empire that has still not completely disintegrated,
and which has nuclear weapons. Because of these distinctions, the German
experiment of changing the mentality of the masses is impossible in Russia. But
without it, what awaits our descendants is a Muscovite Kingdom, a Don Hetmanate,
a Volga Khanate, and a Siberian Voivodship (all these were late medieval
successor states to the Tatar-Mongol Eurasian empire, the Golden Horde, and were
gradually incorporated into Russia in the 16 th century under Ivan III and Ivan
IV), each of them with its own supreme leader: Remember another great Eurasian
power -- the Arab Caliphate.
If the world economic crisis brings down prices on raw materials in a raw
materials adjunct in which the authorities want only to distribute, and know only
how to distribute, how much will it cost Vladimir Putin to be the lawfully
elected czar?
[return to Contents]
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
December 5, 2011
Editorial: "Elections as Internet Access -- For Four Years Russian Politics Have
Played Out in a Parallel World"
Russia's citizens have elected the Sixth Convocation of the State Duma. The life
of its predecessor was largely lackluster and will be remembered by everyone as
only an extension of its and the president's terms.
In content, the current election campaign has also turned out to be perhaps the
most boring in the history of Russian parliamentarianism. No ideological nerve,
confrontation of large ideological projects, nor a struggle between the "right"
and "left" were observed in it. The leftist parties struggled for a
redistribution of seats in the Duma. The right-wing flank sagged. The Ministry of
Justice did not register PARNAS (People's Freedom Party), and Right Cause
abandoned Mikhail Prokhorov and returned to a state of inertia.
For a period of four years, public politics in Russia have lived basically on the
Internet and only rarely broke through on television. By giving the Internet
high-level patronage, President Dmitriy Medvedev made half an effort, albeit not
insignificant. The Internet was not suppressed and was able to become what
television was in the 1990s; that is, a platform for free discussion, where views
and arguments are expressed, collide, are polished, and are assessed by an
At the same time, the political system itself has remained immobile, and the
rules of the game in it -- spoken and unspoken -- are severe. The registration of
independent parties -- that is, participation in a real struggle for real power
-- has become a practically hopeless matter. As before, a minority in Russia use
electronic resources, and in these conditions going to the Internet is not
reformatting nor is it technical or media modernization of public politics, but
the de facto appearance of a parallel political reality, access to which remains
fractional and limited beyond the framework of blogs and social networks.
In 2011, the role of Runet in the election contest is still the role of a
reservoir of ideas, bright slogans, and on occasion, people. Politicians from
registered parties have started to go to the Internet for an audience and for
information. In turn, a way "to the top" is opened up to political figures born
by the Internet itself only if they are ready to compromise, and sometimes
seriously, with their own convictions.
The emergence of an Internet electorate from a parallel milieu in the last four
years is an obvious fact, a reality with which one must deal. The parties have
recognized that their survival will depend on the ability to react adequately to
this new reality. A positive result of the last four years is in this.
The negative side of this process consists of the fact that attracting new people
to the political game has not yet brought any ideological diversification with
it. In agreeing to participate in real elections, the web voter most often votes
against the party of power; that is, against the inert system, which in his eyes
this party personifies. In the struggle against the ruling left, the Internet
forces support of other leftists. The rejuvenation of political life, however
paradoxical, leads to its ideological simplicity and one-sidedness.
As before, the parties function only formally on television. On the Internet,
political forces lead active discussions. The government has come out in words
for political modernization more than once, but in fact opened the door between
these two worlds only a month before the elections. A month is an insignificant
amount of time to raise both the level of political debate and the level of the
audience's consciousness (primarily the television audience). This was a month of
unavoidable populism -- another negative result of the last four years.
Television will not sustain the pressure of the Internet; moreover, it will not
prevail technically or ideologically, thematically. This is already occurring in
the field of entertainment and will also occur in the field of political
information. The government must open the door between the worlds as soon as
possible and no t close it during the between-elections cycle. Otherwise, in five
years elections to the State Duma will have only an indirect relation to life.
[return to Contents]
Top Kremlin Strategist Pledges Continued Modernization Of Political System
Moscow, 5 December: The modernization of the Russian political system will be
continued, as at present it lacks openness and the existence of a popular liberal
party, believes the first deputy head of the Russian Presidential Administration,
Vladislav Surkov.
Answering a question as to what the current political system lacks, in an
interview with a famous blogger and radio presenter, Sergey Minayev, which
Minayev posted on his LiveJournal blog on Monday (5 December) evening, Surkov
said: "Two things. First, a popular liberal party. Or, more precisely, a party of
annoyed city communities".
According to Surkov, these strata of the population have been included into the
political system through the opposition mass media, including those belonging to
structures affiliated with the state, but this is not enough for them. "Apart
from this communication with the state, they should also be given parliamentary
representation," the official said, expressing his conviction.
Apart from that, according to Surkov, the Russian political system lacks people
who realize that there is a need for it to be more open. "In closed systems
disorder increases. The vertical (chain of command) reacts to faults in control
by the desire to become even more vertical, even narrower, simpler, more
primitive. This is a mistaken method. It leads to even greater closedness and, as
a result, greater chaos. Therefore, in order for the system to preserve itself
and develop, it should be opened. New players should be let into it," believes
the first deputy head of the Presidential Administration.
"Interaction is needed, not shutting in. There is more turbulence in an open
system, but, however paradoxical it may be, more stability as well. And we are in
favour of stability, aren't we?", he added.
According to Surkov, the period of sanitization and improvement of the political
system which decomposed in the 1990s has ended, "methods should be changed".
"It is wrong to act in 2011 in the same way as in 2001. This is as if a patient
is treated, treated successfully, he has recovered, but he is still being
treated. It is now enough to treat him. Everyone has been treated. It is high
time to let go. Therefore, the modernization of the political system, which has
been started by Dmitriy Medvedev and Vladimir Putin over the past few years,
should be continued. It will be continued," Surkov concluded.
[return to Contents]
Kremlin domestic politics chief proposes new liberal party
MOSCOW, December 6 (RIA Novosti) Vladislav Surkov, a senior Kremlin official and
one of Russia's chief domestic politics masterminds, has backed the creation of a
"popular liberal party" in Russia.
Asked by a popular radio host Sergei Minayev about Russian political system
lacks, the first deputy head of the Russian presidential administration replied:
"Popular liberal party. Or, rather, a party of disgruntled urban communities."
Minayev posted his interview with Surkov on his LiveJournal blog late evening
Monday, just as police detained 300 people at a 5,000-strong Moscow rally
protesting against alleged vote-rigging in the Sunday parliamentary elections.
The pro-Kremlin United Russia party that gained slightly less than half of the
vote nationwide scored much poorer in big cities. Liberal and opposition-minded
Yabloko party that garnered just above 3 percent nationwide fared on a par with
United Russia in many municipal districts in Moscow and St. Petersburg.
Unlike United Russia that has enjoyed the constitutional majority in the previous
State Duma, Yabloko has failed to pass the 7-percent entry threshold for the
lower chamber in the previous two Duma votes, in 2003 and 2007.
Commenting on the results of the Sunday polls in which all seven registered
Russian parties participated, Surkov admitted that the Russian political system
lacked "new players." Meanwhile, the Justice Ministry has consistently torpedoed
attempts to register new parties over the past several years, allowing only
mergers of existing ones.
Political analysts were divided over whether a new liberal party could gain a
prominence in Russia.
"The election results have clearly shown that liberals are not popular in
Russia," Sergei Mikheyev, head of the Moscow-based Center for Political
Assessments think tank, said. "How can you create a liberal party if people do
not vote for the liberals? And why those who are unhappy with the authorities are
necessarily liberals?"
Sergei Markov, political scientist and United Russia member, disagreed, saying
that there is already a social demand for such a party in the Russian big cities
but it has yet to mature to become a political action.
"Our urban middle class is growing," he said. "These elections have shown that
they have established themselves as a social group, but not yet as a political
Other parties that were represented in the parliament the Communists, the
Liberal Democrats and A Just Russia also scored better in big cities than they
did nationwide in what suggests that the urban vote was rather against United
Russia than for the liberal Yabloko.
Those who want Russia to pursue a European path should be given a "political
choice," Markov said.
Both Mikheyev and Markov agreed that the Yabloko party could become a basis for
liberal-minded Russians to join their forces.
"Yabloko could become the core of such a Europe-oriented party," Markov said,
adding that the party "has the right balance of liberal and social ideas and a
pro-European ideology."
One of the post-Soviet Russia's oldest parties, Yabloko, led by Sergei Mitrokhin
and Grigory Yavlinsky, is much more popular among representatives of the Russian
diaspora in the West, the elections showed. The party led the polls in the United
States and European countries such as Britain, Germany, France, Finland, the
Netherlands and Switzerland.
Within Russia, the party collected more than 8 percent in Moscow and more than 10
percent of in St. Petersburg.
[return to Contents]
Wall Street Journal
December 6, 2011
Kremlin's Ideologist Weighs In on Elections, Thermodynamics
By Gregory L. White
MOSCOW Vladislav Surkov, the man credited with building the tightly controlled
political system in Russia that's come to be known as "managed democracy," rarely
speaks in public. But after Sunday's surprising setback for the Vladimir Putin's
United Russia party in parliamentary elections, he gave an interview to a
pro-Kremlin blogger and television host to say everything is just fine, though
Russian politicians could use some physics lessons and Russian politics some new
""The system is working," Mr. Surkov told Sergei Minayev.
"United Russia has maintained its dominance with much more modest popularity
figures," he noted. "Attempts to shake up the situation and interpret it in a
negative and provocative key are doomed," he said. "Everything is under control."
United Russia's commanding majority in the last parliament which will be
replaced by just over half the seats in the new one was "abnormal," Mr. Surkov
said. United Russia got 49.7% of the vote Sunday, down from 65% in the last
elections in 2007.
"For a party that turned out to be in power during a deep global economic crisis,
this is a good result," he said. "Add to that the painful but necessary reforms
of the (Interior Ministry) and army, plus the forced increase in taxes on
business needed to preserve social benefits, then one can say this is a very good
"And if we don't forget about how much (President Dmitry) Medvedev and United
Russia did to develop democracy and political competition....opportunities for
manipulation were decisively cut off I repeat, this is an outstanding result,"
he said.
Monday, Western election observers condemned the election as not fair or free and
rife with manipulations. Mr. Surkov dismissed allegations as "disrespectful" of
the voters. "Violations happen but they don't have any impact on the results
because there simply aren't many of them."
Mr. Surkov said two things are still missing in the Russian political system.
First, "a mass liberal party, or more precisely, a party for the annoyed urban
communities." He said those voters are already incorporated into the system,
though they may not want to admit it "through opposition media that belong,
strange as it may seem, to the state or structures affiliated with it, the staffs
or audiences of which they are a part."
"That's of course not enough...they should be given parliamentary
representation," he said.
Second, he said, "Among Russian politicians, there aren't enough people who
respect the second law of thermodynamics....In vulgar terms, it says that in
closed systems, disorder grows," he said.
"The (power) vertical responds to breakdowns even more vertically, simply, more
primitively. That's a mistaken method. It leads to a more closed system and thus
to more chaos."
"As a result, for the system to preserve itself and develop, it needs to be
opened up. New players need to be allowed in," he said.
"We can't allow ourselves to wind up in the situation of 'solus rex' the lonely
king," he said.
"The period of cleaning up and nursing the damaged political system of the 90s is
over," he said. "So the modernization of the political system started in recent
years by Medvedev and Putin should be continued."
[return to Contents]
United Russia to get 238 mandates in State Duma - CEC Chairman Churov
GORKI, Moscow region. Dec 6 (Interfax) - With 99.999% of the ballots cast in the
Sunday elections to the State Duma processed, United Russia will apparently have
238 mandates in the 6th State Duma, the Communist Party 92, A Just Russia 64, and
the Liberal Democratic Party 56, Central Elections Commission (CEC) Chairman
Vladimir Churov said.
Meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Tuesday, Churov said nearly all
ballots except several dozens cast abroad have been processed.
This information shows that voter turnout in the Sunday elections was 60.2%,
which is 3% less than in 2007 and 5% more than in 2003, Churov said.
He suggested that voter turnout could have been larger if weather had been better
in the Far East and in the Central European part of Russia. Nevertheless, "the
change in voter turnout is absolute not catastrophic," he added.
Medvedev noted that this is quite a large turnout for any developed country.
As for the number of votes given for the parties that ran in the elections,
32.348 million people (49.3% of all those who came to the polling stations) voted
for United Russia, 12.5 million (19.2%) for the Communist Party, 8.7 million
people (13.25%) for A Just Russia, and 7.66 million (12%) for the Liberal
Democratic Party, Churov said.
Among the parties that did not overcome the 7% election threshold, Yabloko
garnered most of the votes (2.251 million, or 3.43%).
As a party that got more than 3% of the vote, Yabloko is entitled to financing
from the federal budget in an amount of more than 40 million rubles and free
airtime in the next elections, Churov said.
[return to Contents]
BBC Monitoring
Medvedev sees 'no tragedy' in One Russia's less than brilliant election results
Text of report by state-controlled Russian Channel One TV on 5 December
(Presenter) President Dmitriy Medvedev discussed the first results of the
parliamentary election at a meeting with One Russia (United Russia) party
supporters today. The head of state had earlier promised to hold a meeting like
this on the next day after voting. According to Medvedev, the election was open
and honest and One Russia got a decent result.
(Medvedev) One Russia has got exactly what it has, no more and no less. In this
respect, it was an absolutely honest and fair and democratic election. The
results that it has received in the end are what various sociological agencies
forecast, plus or minus, during preliminary opinion polls and exit polls that
were conducted. That is why all the talk of the rampant use of the administrative
resource (changes tack) Where is this resource?
We all know that life is very complex and diverse. I have looked at some of the
clips that people have posted on the Internet. You cannot make out anything in
those clips and yet they are screaming: What a disgrace! Although, of course, it
will be necessary to investigate violations.
In any case, I believed and continue to believe that One Russia has shown a
decent result, as I told the party members at our meeting at the (One Russia)
headquarters yesterday. This is a natural result of how the party has been
developing in recent years, with all its achievements and all shortcomings. This
is a reflection of how the authorities have been working recently. Yes, we do
have problems. Yes, we have very serious tasks that have not yet been resolved.
Naturally, people have their own assessment of those.
So there has been no tragedy. On the contrary, in my view, everything is quite
decent and respectable. I for one am glad that we shall have a merrier parliament
because we do understand that truth can be born only in a debate. No-one has the
monopoly on truth, on developing absolutely correct approaches. When people start
to argue, as a rule, this results in arriving at more balanced decisions, be it
in the economy, in the social sphere or anywhere else.
That is why I think that our country will benefit from a merrier and a more
energetic parliament. I hope that this is what it will be like.
[return to Contents]
Medvedev Has to Renovate United Russia - Expert
MOSCOW. Dec 5 (Interfax) - Institute for Political Research Director Sergei
Markov thinks that Dmitry Medvedev will have to renovate United Russia if he
chooses to lead this party.
It is still a question whether Medvedev will lead the party, Markin said. "There
is no such political certainty so far," he told Interfax on Monday.
"On the one hand, United Russia is a powerful political resource. On the other
hand, Dmitry Medvedev has always been rather critical of this party, especially
during the election campaign. Besides, the party ranking has declined a lot," the
expert said.
If Medvedev decides to lead the party, he will have to modernize it and assume
the modernization responsibilities, he said.
Markov also thinks that Vladimir Putin may win the presidential election in the
first round.
"Traditionally, Putin has enjoyed larger support than United Russia. I think he
may gain 55%-57% of votes. The fall of the United Russia rating may have an
effect on the presidential election, but Putin will only get fewer votes than he
did in the previous election. The main result will be unchanged," he said.
United Russia won despite its lower rating, Markov said. "By any European
standard, this party has a real majority in the State Duma and may adopt laws
within its faction only," he said.
[return to Contents]
December 6, 2011
Laughing at Duma will make all unhappy Putin
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin warns that not taking Russia's parliament seriously
could have a disastrous effect on the political landscape of the country.
At a Tuesday meeting to sum up Sunday's parliamentary election with activists
from the United Russia party, Putin called on Russians to take a serious and
responsible approach.
"The more we laugh at events that take place in the parliament, the sadder we
will be in the end. This will not be noticeable at once, but it will lead to
degradation not only of the political, but also of the legal aspect of state
life," the premier said.
Russia needs a professional parliament, the prime minister stressed, not one
where deputies start fights. Talking about countries that suffer from such
goings-on, Putin mentioned Ukraine's parliament, the Rada.
Putin also acknowledged that United Russia lost some voter support, but said this
was natural. "There are losses and they are inevitable. They are inevitable for
any political force, especially for one that has borne responsibility for the
situation in the country for more than a year. In today's conditions, the result
is good," Putin noted.
Immediately after the election, when preliminary results showed United Russia
taking about 50 percent of the vote, Putin said this result was optimal for the
party, and that it showed the political system in the country was maturing.
Putin called on his supporters from United Russia to react to the people's
demands, and ignore stereotyping this is how the PM sees the growing negative
attitudes to the parliamentary majority. "They say the
ruling party is connected with theft and corruption, but if we recall the Soviet
years who was in power back then? They were all called thieves and corrupt
so-and-sos. And the same thing happened in the nineties," Putin recalled.
The premier also told United Russia about the changes that could take place after
next year's presidential election, dwelling on future changes in the government
and regional authorities, including the body of governors. He also stressed that
Russia would step up the fight against extremism and terrorism.
[return to Contents]
Authorities summing up election results
MOSCOW, December 6 (Itar-Tass) President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister
Vladimir Putin summed up the election results on Monday.
Speaking at a meeting with the committee of his supporters, Medvedev summed up
the election results and, at the same time, answered the traditional Russian
question "Who is to blame?", the Kommersant writes. According to the President,
some governors were at fault. "I think we should pay attention to the regions,
where people showed that they had no confidence in UR," the newspaper quoted him
as saying. "This is not a tragedy, but a signal to the authorities. This means
that the regional authorities are not working the way they should. This is the
reason for drawing practical conclusions, and I am going to do that, using the
powers of president. I have warned governors about such a possibility."
Celebrating the victory of UR, Medvedev, who is on the top of its list of Duma
candidates, told his supporters about the intention to further upgrade the
political system of the country, The Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes. In his opinion,
"we should master new technologies and associate directly with people." The
leaders admit that the main problem facing UR is the loss of majority in the
cities, "where policy is actually shaped." "We are losing the cities, where
policy is actually shaped. We have not found a way to the urban population," said
a source in the Duma. He believes that the orientation of the local
administrations to pensioners and servicemen, and insufficient attention to other
sections of the population was a mistake made by UR.
According to the information of the source, problems with the implementation of
the reforms in the Armed Forces and the police were one of the reasons for the
present-day reduction of the UR rating. He believes, however, the results UR got
were rather good for the situation in which UR and the country in general found
"UR got exactly what it should get, no more and no less, and in this respect the
elections were absolutely honest, just and democratic," The RBK Daily quoted the
words of the President. At the same time, he said that violations at the
elections should be analyzed. The newspaper believes it is a clear signal to the
Central Electoral Commission. Aside from it, Medvedev rebuked those who voted on
Sunday not for UR, but for Communists, although previously those people were
believed to have liberal views. It followed from his explanations that in Russia
this obvious defect is the result of "imperfect political structure of society"
and some "ideological complications." The President was probably hinting at the
bloggers, who called for protest voting.
Summing up the election results, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin pointed to the
contribution made by government officials and to the activity of the population.
He said that UR had been a major part of the foundation of stability over the
past few years, and "its successful performance at the elections was important
for the country in general," The Rossiiskaya Gazeta writes. The results, obtained
by the ruling party, permit it to "work peacefully and rhythmically," Putin
believes. 226 votes are needed in the Duma for the adoption of a law, while UR
will have 238 votes, the newspaper stresses.
[return to Contents]
Putin May Shift Blame to 'Fall Guy' Medvedev for Vote Setback
By Henry Meyer
Dec. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Russian Premier Vladimir Putin may shift the blame to
President Dmitry Medvedev to insulate himself from his first election setback,
said political scientists and economists from Moscow to London.
Medvedev, 46, led the campaign of Putin's United Russia party and is set to
switch jobs with him next year. The party won 49.5 percent of the Dec. 4 vote for
the State Duma, the lower house of parliament, preliminary results show. That
compares with 64.3 percent four years ago and is the first time the party's
support declined from one nationwide vote to the next since it was set up a
decade ago.
Medvedev, 46, may inherit the day-to-day running of a government that expects the
budget to open up a deficit of 1.5 percent of gross domestic product next year
after ending 2011 in a surplus of about 0.5 percent. He will also have to contend
with a more fractured parliament than during his presidency.
"It won't mean anything for Putin, all power will remain in his hands," Mikhail
Kasyanov, a former prime minister under Putin who now opposes the government,
said in a telephone interview. "The fact that United Russia under Medvedev got
far fewer votes than it did four years ago when it was led by Putin may end up
being quite convenient."
The Micex Index added 0.8 percent to 1,517.89 at yesterday's close in Moscow
after falling as much as 0.4 percent earlier. Steelmakers OAO Severstal and OAO
Novolipetsk Steel both climbed more than 2.5 percent. The dollar-measured RTS
index rose 0.9 percent to 1,559.28. The ruble strengthened 0.1 percent to 30.9046
per dollar.
Appeal to Voters
Medvedev was promised the job of premier after he agreed in September to make way
for Putin's return to the Kremlin. While Russia needs to tighten its finances to
limit the fallout from the euro zone debt crisis, Putin, 59, who is focused on
securing election as president in March, may pump more money toward appealing to
voters, according to Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and Aberdeen Asset
Putin would get 31 percent of the vote in a presidential election, compared with
7 percent for Medvedev and 8 percent for Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov,
according to a Levada Center poll last month. A third said they were undecided.
The Nov. 18- 21 poll interviewed 1,591 people and had a margin of error of 3.4
percentage points.
'Fall Guy'
Medvedev may become the "fall guy" for United Russia's election setback, allowing
Putin to appoint former finance minister Alexei Kudrin as prime minister in his
place, Tim Ash, head of emerging-markets research at RBS in London, said in an
e-mailed research note yesterday.
The president sacked Kudrin in October after the finance minister, who is
well-respected by investors, criticized him for increasing military expenditure,
warning that spending was approaching a critical level if global economic
conditions sour.
Medvedev lost political stature after surrendering his chance of a second term to
Putin and paid the price in credibility, Lilit Gevorgyan, a London-based analyst
at IHS Global Insight, said by e-mail yesterday.
"Putin is likely to hold his end of the deal and appoint Medvedev as his prime
minister once he finalizes his return to the Kremlin," she said. "But Medvedev's
term in the prime minister's office is unlikely to be long,"
After balancing this year's budget, Russia will probably run a 2012 deficit of
1.5 percent of gross domestic product, Putin said Nov. 16. The country, which
posted budget surpluses between 2000 and 2008, faces deficits of as much as 3
percent through 2014 as oil prices fall, presidential aide Arkady Dvorkovich said
in June.
'Tough Task'
"The government is going to have a tough task in Russia, as maintaining good debt
ratios would require cuts in social spending and pensions over the medium-term,
which is politically difficult," Charles Robertson, global chief economist at
Renaissance Capital in London, said in an e-mail yesterday. "Any prime minister
is going to need support from the president to push through the necessary
The cost of insuring Russian government debt against default over five years with
credit default swaps has risen 85 basis points, or 0.85 percentage point, since
June 30 to 227, according to data provider CMA, which is owned by CME Group Inc.
and compiles prices quoted by dealers in the privately negotiated market. That
compared with an increase of 46 basis points to 156 for Brazil so far this half,
the data show.
The ruble has dropped 9.7 percent against the dollar since the end of June,
heading for the worst half-year since the six months through December 2008.
'Post-Election Hangover'
A surge in spending on state salaries and social benefits "could well create a
large post-election hangover" by increasing the oil price required to balance the
budget, said Ash at RBS.
Russia may need an average oil price of $126 a barrel to balance its budget next
year, compared with an earlier forecast for $118, after a bigger-than-estimated
increase in military salaries, Alfa Bank said last month. The price of Russia's
main export, Urals crude oil, traded at about $110 a barrel yesterday.
The budget deficit will widen unless the country continues to benefit from "high
oil and gas prices," European Bank for Reconstruction and Development President
Thomas Mirow said in a Nov. 30 interview. The world's largest energy exporter
relies on oil and gas revenue to fund 40 percent of its budget.
While Putin rewarded Medvedev's loyalty during his four- year term as president,
the Russian leader would benefit from replacing him as prime minister with a
"strong figure who could manage the government," Masha Lipman, an analyst at the
Moscow Carnegie Center, said in a telephone interview yesterday.
"I can imagine him being pushed aside," Lipman said, listing possible replacement
candidates as Sergei Naryshkin, head of the presidential administration, and
First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov.
[return to Contents]
Elections in Russia: the country rapidly moves to the left
MOSCOW, December 6 (Itar-Tass) After the parliamentary elections of 2011 the
political map of Russia turned out to be painted in different colours. New
priorities and preferences of Russian nationals, which they expressed at the
polling stations, are far more important. They happened to have been changed
radically in many respects during the past four years.
The authority of the ruling party, which dominated the main legislative body of
the country, using its constitutional majority, was suddenly reduced, The Novye
Izvestia writes. Its dramatic slide from the previous position (65 per cent of
the votes) to the present level of "less than half of the votes" is certainly the
main sensation of the Duma elections. The reduction of the number of votes by 15
per cent looks somewhat abstract. In real terms the figure means that the number
of supporters of the United Russia Party (UR) was reduced by 15 million. If we
wish to establish the absolute level of the support for the policy pursued by UR,
we shall see that out of 110 million Russians who have the right of vote, only
some 25 per cent trust UR.
While the electors of Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia, the Karachay-Cherkessia
Republic and Mordovia still vote unanimously for UR, like in the Soviet times,
the results of the voting in Karelia, the Murmansk, Arkhangelsk, Sverdlovsk and
Yaroslavl Regions were catastrophic for the ruling party: the number of its
supporters there was reduced by half and amounted to 29 to 32 per cent. At the
same time, the opposition parties got more votes at the expense of the votes lost
by UR, and now one could say that the "red belt" was extended to the Asian part
of Russia. The Communist Party got some 25 per cent of the votes in Siberia and
the Far East. In the competition between the Liberal Democratic Party and the
Just Russia Party (JR), JR, led by Sergey Mironov, sensationally outdid its
rival. So, it is obvious that the electorate has moved to the left.
Rostislav Turovsky, vice president of the Centre of Political Technologies, whose
words are quoted by The Nezavisimaya Gazeta, believes that the format of Russia's
party system may be changed, because "UR in its present form is not fulfilling
the tasks, set before it." He is sure that the present slump is not an accidental
episode and that "the recession has been going on for several years." Since UR
cannot get back the constitutional majority, Turovsky believes it might merge
with JR.
The electoral campaign of JR was most effective, The Moskovskaya Pravda writes.
The results of the public opinion polls, conducted last summer, showed that they
would not qualify for the Duma, while a week before the elections public opinion
polls predicted that they would get from nine to twelve per cent of the votes, or
even 19 to 20 in big cities.
JR confirmed its image of a party of professionals, the newspaper believes. Its
programme was concrete, and participants in debates sounded convincing. This
helped JR to attract to its side a major part of the middle class and
intellectuals. JR used its chance to the full. It not only mobilized the
disillusioned pensioners, but also managed to gain the support of a large part of
the liberally-minded electorate. The result of JR in big cities was the same as
the right-wing parties showed in their best times.
[return to Contents]
Fair Russia's success is one of parliamentary election sensations
By Itar-Tass World Service writer Lyudmila Alexandrova
MOSCOW, December 6 (Itar-Tass) The main outcome of last Sunday's parliamentary
elections in Russia, namely, the ruling party's loss of monopoly, has not
obscured other election sensations. One of the main of these was the unexpected
success of the party Fair Russia, headed by ex-speaker of the Federation Council,
Sergei Mironov. Just three months before the election most social scientists
predicted that Fair Russia, which with Mironov's resignation lost the
administrative resource, would not enter into the State Duma at all. However, the
party not only cleared the 7- percent barrier, but even outplayed the Liberal
Democratic Party of Vladimir Zhirinovsky.
Experts say that Fair Russia, which positions itself as a Social Democratic party
and is affiliated with the Socialist International, owes its success not only to
an effective election campaign, but also to a great share of protest votes,
including those of people with liberal views, who would not vote either for
United Russia, or for the Communists. Now the future of Fair Russia will largely
depend on whether it will be able to properly put to use the gained political
The success of Fair Russia can be called a breakthrough: the party managed to
outdo the Liberal Democratic Party and become the third largest faction in the
State Duma. The Fair Russia party almost doubled its parameters - from 7.74% in
2007 to 13.22% this year. It collected the votes of 8,474,168 men and women (in
contrast to 5,383,639 votes four years ago).
Fair Russia, says the daily Moskovskaya Pravda, not only mobilized the retirees,
disaffected with the authorities, but managed to earn support from a large part
of the liberal-minded electorate - in big cities Fair Russia showed results
similar to that once achieved by right-wing parties in their prime.
Nobody could predict such an outcome just recently. According to all sociological
polls the FR either balanced on the edge of the 7% barrier, or at best was to
gain no more than 10% of the vote. The question of the party's elementary
political survival was on the agenda.
Fair Russia, a collection of disparate fragments of other political parties,
cannot boast a firm "electoral core", in contrast to the Communist Party. In
fact, the party has no clear ideology, and over the four years it has been in the
State Duma there occurred no growth of confidence in it. Particularly harmful for
the reputation of Fair Russia was the loss of State Duma's deputy speaker,
Alexander Babakov, who, after the dismissal of Mironov, joined Vladimir Putin's
All-Russia Popular Front - in fact, defected to United Russia. Some other fellow
party members followed suit. When people unprepared for political shocks began to
leave the party, experts interpreted this as a new birth of Fair Russia as an
oppositional force.
Fair Russia will not enter into formal coalition agreements in the sixth State
Duma, but will decide whether to throw its weight behind specific bills, Sergei
Mironov said on Monday, when asked whether his party intended to enter into a
coalition with other parties who had negotiated the qualification hurdle.
"There will be no formal agreements with anyone else," he said. "We will be
guided by a pragmatic approach and team up with those who support our bills. In
particular, such initiatives as land tax exemption for the owners of small plots
and the freeze on the housing and utilities tariffs. If someone is prepared to
support these bills of ours, we shall be ready to unite."
Political analysts, meanwhile, have been looking for answers to the question what
exactly explains the unexpected success of Fair Russia and their prospects.
"Probably the biggest surprise is Fair Russia's third place - in my opinion,
well-deserved," said the general director of the International Institute of
Political Analysis Yevgeny Minchenko in an interview to Finam FM.
"They have held qualitative re-branding - from a stand-by ruling party they have
transformed themselves into an oppositional party. It should be noted that, of
course, the United Russia party, too helped them a lot with its tough criticism,
which demonstrated that it was an oppositional party, indeed."
The success of Fair Russia should be associated with protest voting, political
analyst Mikhail Remizov is quoted by the online periodical Mnenie.ru as saying.
"That party was chosen by the electorate that wanted to vote against United
Russia, but did not see itself as a supporter of the ideological parties - the
Communist Party or the Liberal Democratic Party. It is an ideologically neutral
protest electorate." Fair Russia positioned itself as a party opposed to all.
This is precisely the capacity in which it acted. Another success factor, he
added, was its popular leaders in several regions.
"Mironov's party was rescued by his old friend Putin, who in doing so hardly
thought of Mironov," says the president of the Effective Politics Foundation,
Gleb Pavlovsky. "The reshuffle at the end of September ruined United Russia's
position before the election and thereby created a window of opportunity for Fair
Russia, which eagerly used its chance. What happens further remains to be seen.
It all depends on what the party's leadership and Mironov himself really want."
Pavlovsky is skeptical about the future of Fair Russia. "For some time they will
be marking time in indecision, and then somehow they will find a chance to sell
themselves in bulk," he believes.
In fact, Fair Russia is not a Social-Democratic Party, and it is unlikely it will
ever be one, says political scientist Boris Makarenko. "The trouble is that the
political space is devoid of the right-wing segment after the authorities ditched
the Right Cause project," he told Itar-Tass. "If Fair Russia reads the voters'
message right, then it will move closer towards the center."
Fair Russia, he said, was in trouble lately, because the elite figures lost
confidence in it. Now, when it becomes clear that the party is alive and kicking
and it will be really hard to crush it, some elite-level figures may start
joining it businessmen and liberal professionals. If Fair Russia moves towards a
social-liberal program, it can be very promising, concluded Makarenko.
[return to Contents]
December 6, 2011
UNITED RUSSIA FAILED ...to repeat its previous success
Author: Anastasia Novikova
The sixth Duma was elected in Russia last week-end. Twenty-
seven regions elected their local parliaments as well. The Central
Electoral Commission announced when 26% bulletins had been
processed that four political parties were making it to the lower
house of the parliament - United Russia (47.3%), CPRF (20.25%),
LDPR (13.4%), and Fair Russia (13.36%). The turnout by 6 p.m.
Moscow time amounted to 50.4%, approximately equalling the turnout
four years ago.
Experts and observers wondered before the election how much
United Russia would poll, whether Fair Russia would make it, and
if Yabloko would return to the Duma at long last.
Answers to these questions will only be known when all
bulletins have been counted. Interim results show at this point
that the opposition will deprive United Russia of the
constitutional majority in the next Duma.
Fair Russia almost doubled the results shown in the course of
the previous election. As for Yabloko whose return to the Duma was
cautiously anticipated, it is hovering at the level of about 2.6%
for the time being. Dmitry Orlov of the Agency of Political and
Economic Communications said that Yabloko just might poll upwards
of 5% and suggested that it would be prudent to wait for until
after procession of all bulletins in Moscow and St.Petersburg.
Political Information Center Director General Aleksei Mukhin
said, "All things considered, there will be two cores or nuclei in
the next Duma. It will be United Russia on the one hand and an
alliance of the CPRF and Fair Russia on the other... It depends on
the Communists, of course, on whether or not they decide to go for
an alliance such as this. It is clear, however, that this alliance
will add to their political clout."
Orlov disagreed and said that he did not expect consolidation
of the parliamentary opposition because of the animosity between
leaders of different political parties.
Political Techniques Center Director General Igor Bunin in
his turn commented that United Russia was doing worse than it did
four years ago when it finished the parliamentary race with 64%.
He said, "And yet, United Russia will retain control over the
lower house of the parliament all the same."
"As for Fair Russia and the surprising number of the Russians
casting their votes for it... I reckon that this is a result of
this party's low anti-rating. The people who do not want to vote
for United Russia or the CPRF cast their votes for Fair Russia.
One might say that this party obtained its electorate."
Mukhin said that the loss of about 15% ought to teach United
Russia a lesson. "Let's hope that it will teach the ruling party
the necessity to evolve and to stop dismissing the electorate as
such. This loss of votes is an aftermath of the castling within
the ruling tandem."
Political scientist Leonid Radzikhovsky said that the
arrangement of forces in the next Duma depended on whether or not
United Russia polled 50%. "If it does, then nothing at all will
change and no other factions will be able to do anything about
United Russia's domination. If it fails, then the ruling party
will have to cope with the CPRF faction... In fact, this latter
turn of events will show that United Russia is vulnerable..."
Orlov in his turn that United Russia would certainly poll
more than 52%.
Atmosphere in Russia on the polling day was quite nervous. A
scandal with the Association Vote preceded the election. DDoS
attacks on the web sites critical of the regime on the polling day
ended the moment polling stations closed. Experts listed them
among the worst violations.
Sergei Danilenko of the Central Electoral Commission said
that the parliamentary election marked a throwback to some old and
nearly forgotten problems. "Matter of fact, we all but forgot
about how members of local electoral commissions or observers are
elbowed out of polling stations. Things like that were not
practice during the last two elections. This time, however, they
were practiced en masse."
"Once again, it all comes down to flaws of the electoral
legislation... and lack of professionalism on the part of local
electoral commissions," said Valery Kryuchkov of the Central
Electoral Commission.
[return to Contents]
December 6, 2011
Power carve-up in Duma after ruling party's poll slump
The dominant force in Russian politics, United Russia, will for the first time
have to learn the art of compromise following the erosion of its parliamentary
majority in State Duma elections at the weekend.
With the vote count all but completed, the overall picture of a brand new board
of lawmakers is now emerging. With just under 50% of vote, the party of the
president and prime minister has lost significant clout, its parliamentary muscle
a shadow of the two-thirds majority it boasted for years.
Among the parties United Russia will have to court or combat in the new
parliament are the Communists, who came in second, and Fair Russia and the
Liberal Democrats, who also secured Duma mandates.
The four other parties which took part in the elections failed to pass the 7 per
cent vote barrier required to ensure seats in the new lower house.
In contrast to the 2007 election, when United Russia got 64 per cent of the vote,
in 2011, the party failed to gain a constitutional majority the much-coveted two
thirds in the Russian State Duma.
However, since the votes polled by parties which failed to reach the threshold
will be distributed among the winners, the United Russia Party is set to end up
with more than 50 per cent of the seats, which means they will be able to pass
all bills proposed by the cabinet. It means they will not need to form a
coalition with any other party.
However, United Russia's top brass have made public their intention to form
alliances within the Duma.
Meanwhile, as RT's Ekaterina Gracheva reports, early results have left some
voters angry. On Monday in the center of Moscow, several thousand protesters
gathered to express their discontent with the result of the parliamentary vote.
Around 5,000 people came to a rallysanctioned by the Moscow authorities.
Protesters chanted "Russia needs new elections," "Russia without Putin,"
"Revolution," and "Shame." Police did not intervene in the rally until several
hundreds protestors took to neighboring streets. After the crowd attempted to
attract attention by disrupting traffic, they faced a police cordons and up to
300 were arrested.
A similar situation unfolded on Monday in Saint Petersburg, where several
thousand protesters rallied in favor of different opposition parties and against
the way the election had been conducted.
Also on Monday, a pro-United Russia rally which took place in central Moscow
passed off peacefully.
No tanks were sighted in Moscow on Tuesday despite rumors in the Russian
blogosphere, reports RT's Peter Oliver. However, it has been confirmed that riot
police have drafted in more staff to maintain order on the streets.
Meanwhile, some international observers have spoken of fraud and widespread
violations of election rules, while others have insisted any irregularities were
insignificant, declared accusations unjustified, and maintained that the vote
should be considered legitimate.
President Dmitry Medvedev has promised that any accusations of electoral fraud
will be investigated and anyone found guilty of infringements prosecuted.
[return to Contents]
Russian Pundit Sceptical On Opposition Coalition In State Duma
Moscow, 5 December: The opposition parties that have won seats in the State Duma
will not be able to form a coalition, head of the Russian Institute Gleb
Pavlovskiy believes.
"I do not believe in the reality of opposition parties' forming a bloc. We are
going to see public statements of their willingness to do so, while in reality
they will only intimidate and try to sell their votes with maximum profit," the
political scientist told Interfax on Monday (5 December).
In his view, One Russia (United Russia), for its part, "will conduct
behind-the-scenes negotiations with each of the opposition parties and reach
agreements with each of them separately".
"In the short term, One Russia's only concern will be to prove the legitimacy of
its election in individual constituencies and regions. We are going to see their
legitimacy seriously jeopardized in certain places," Pavlovskiy said.
He also believes that the possible nomination of Boris Gryzlov to the post of
State Duma speaker (chairman) shows the peculiar nature of the party's internal
structure. "Such a form as nomination, shouting a certain name out loud, shows
that the non-faction structure has been retained in One Russia, even though
everyone knows perfectly well that there are various branches, groups and
groupings within the party: conservatives, liberals(, etc.)," the political
scientist said.
[return to Contents]
RBC Daily
December 6, 2011
Author: Svetlana Makunina
[Political coalitions in the next Duma will be short-lived and not particularly
robust in the first place.]
Now that the ruling party will have to do without the
constitutional majority in the Duma, experts anticipate
establishment of coalitions there but warn that they will be
unstable. Political scientists reckon that the powers-that-be
might decide to meet the parliamentary opposition halfway - but
only in order to smooth out Vladimir Putin's presidential
President Dmitry Medvedev, the leader of United Russia's
federal ticket, was the first to speak of coalitions in the Duma.
He said that the Duma ought to be workable and urged the future
faction of the ruling party to maintain working contacts with
representatives of other political parties. "We will have to make
coalitionist agreements with other factions," admitted Medvedev.
Fair Russia leader Sergei Mironov responded by saying that
there could be no long-term agreements in writing between
factions. Mironov reckoned that coalitions would be spontaneous.
Fair Russia Chairman Nikolai Levichev allowed for the possibility
of coalitions with the CPRF and United Russia on certain issues.
Igor Lebedev, the head of the LDPR faction, denied any
negotiations over coalitions under way. "Still, the LDPR is open
for a dialogue. The only condition is that we are prepared for
cooperation on equal footing," said Lebedev.
The Communists said that alliances with United Russia were
out of the question unless it altered its views first.
Experts dismissed Medvedev's words on alliances between
United Russia and other political parties. "All other parties
present themselves as the opposition. It will be strange indeed
for them to ally with United Russia. It will look like suicide,"
said political scientist Aleksei Mukhin.
"Coalitions within the Duma may only be virtual... but that
is not what the opposition craves," said Igor Bunin, Director
General of the Political Techniques Center. "United Russia will
have to court the opposition now. It entered a phase where it has
to share responsibility with other political parties... or it will
poll 39% and not 49% next time."
Spokesmen for political parties in the meantime expect a
dialogue with the Presidential Administration.
"The bargaining is under way already... over support for or
resistance to Putin's forthcoming presidential campaign," said
political scientist Mikhail Vinogradov. "This campaign might
follow two scenarios. The first one stipulates genuine election
following a fierce political competition. The second suggests
involvement of purely technical rivals who nobody expects to win,
like in 2004. The powers-that-be are still choosing their
Fair Russia already said that it would nominate a candidate.
It will probably be Mironov, founder of the party and leader of
its faction, nominated at the convention on December 10. Some
experts suspect that Mironov already talked it over with Putin. In
2004, Mironov was a technical candidate running for president to
make the election legitimate. He failed to poll even 1% then.
Mironov said a couple of days ago that it would be different this
time because he had a strong and capable team now.
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
December 6, 2011
Observers Question Fairness of Vote
By Nikolaus von Twickel and Alexey Eremenko
President Dmitry Medvedev on Monday dismissed claims of massive vote-rigging in
Sunday's elections by declaring that the State Duma elections were democratic.
"United Russia got as many votes as it had not more and not less and in that
sense the elections were absolutely fair and just," Medvedev told supporters in a
meeting at his Gorky residence, according to a Kremlin transcript.
But national and international observers pointed to multiple indications of
voting fraud, many of which were recorded on video.
One of them, posted on YouTube, showed young men at a Moscow polling station
engaging in so-called carousel tactics and voting multiple times. In one video,
an activist of the Solidarity opposition movement uncovers a stash of ballots
already cast for United Russia in the station's toilet.
Medvedev, however, flatly dismissed such footage as unconvincing on Monday.
"I watched some of the videos. ... There is nothing to be seen. They just cry
foul and disgrace," he said. The president said that although violations should
be investigated, his party could not be blamed.
"I believe that United Russia gave a decent performance" he said.
The ruling party, whose list Medvedev headed without being a member, got 49.54
percent 14 percentage points less than at the 2007 elections, according to
preliminary results published Monday.
The Communists came in second with 19.16 percent, followed by A Just Russia with
13.22 percent and the Liberal Democrats, the party of nationalist Vladimir
Zhirinovsky, with 11.66 percent, the Central Elections Commission said on its web
Opposition leaders also branded the vote as illegitimate, even though United
Russia managed to lose to the Communists in the polling station where Prime
Minister Vladimir Putin voted.
The Communist Party garnered 26.35 percent at the poll in Moscow's Gagarin
district almost four points more than United Russia, which got 23.7 percent,
Interfax reported Monday.
Other signs of possible falsification were the Soviet-style 99 percent result in
Chechnya backing United Russia and a screenshot from state-run Rossia-24 news
channel that quickly went viral on the Internet showing results in
Rostov-on-Don totaling a whopping 146 percent.
Western elections observers said Monday that the vote was unfair but stopped
short of saying that it failed to meet international standards. They also said
they themselves found indications but no direct proof of rigging.
The vote count was marred "by frequent procedural violations and instances of
apparent manipulation, including several serious indications of ballot
box-stuffing," said a joint report by the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe, or OSCE, and the Council of Europe.
Heidi Tagliavini, head of the OSCE mission, said the main deficiency was a
blurring of lines between the state and "the governing party," without naming
United Russia.
Her words echoed the main complaint by opposition parties about the central and
regional governments' unashamed use of "administrative resources," as well as the
fact that major parties were not allowed to participate in the elections at all.
Tiny Kox, a Dutch lawmaker who led the mission of the Council of Europe's
Parliamentary Assembly, said he discovered a clear instance of ballot
box-stuffing at a Moscow polling station.
"There was a stash of folded ballots inside the box after it was opened for
counting, and the station's head frantically tried to hide it from me," Kox told
reporters. He refused to name the polling station, citing the mission's rules.
The Dutchman also caused some amusement when he recalled that another Moscow
polling station entertained voters and observers with a six-member folk music
troupe dressed in bright costumes.
"This is strictly a violation, but a minor one," he said.
Kox also complained that Central Elections Commission Chairman Vladimir Churov
had refused to sit down with observers, canceling a meeting at two hours' notice
last Thursday. "This sets a precedent to other states," he said.
The commission had no immediate comment on the complaint.
Medvedev criticized OSCE observers earlier this year for unfairly meddling in
internal affairs, and Churov has often said their numbers are too high. However,
the OSCE and the Council of Europe succeeded in bringing more than 300 observers
to the country, including 60 long-term observers.
The observers' report also mentioned a crackdown on Golos, the country's only
independent observer organization, and Tagliavini said this negatively affected
the election's image.
Golos, which was smacked with a $1,000 fine for violating election law and whose
director was temporarily detained, said in a statement Monday that the election
day was characterized by "significant and massive violations of many key voting
Among the most common infringements encountered was multiple-voting, when
individuals cast votes more than once, as well as manipulated absentee ballots
and limitations placed on election monitors' work.
The statement was published on a LiveJournal blog because the organization's web
site, Golos.org, was still inaccessible due to denial of service attacks.
However, the organization's monitoring site set up for the elections at
Kartanarusheniy.ru was up and running on Tuesday and contained reports of 6,053
violations nationwide.
Similar hacker attacks had brought down many liberal media outlets' web sites
Sunday, but several sites became available again once polling stations had closed
on Sunday night. On Monday evening, the Bolshoi Gorod weekly was still offline,
and the Dozhd online TV channel temporarily succumbed to an attack.
None of the half-dozen election monitors throughout the country and even abroad
who were contacted by The Moscow Times on Monday reported exposing any outright
vote-rigging on their watch. But most spoke about violations or suspected
Konstantin Karpov, a vote monitor with the Communist Party in Moscow's
northwestern Mitino district, said he and his Yabloko colleague prevented
officials at the polling station from handing ballots to voters from outside the
district who had no absentee ballots.
The vote was not rigged at the ballot count because the ballot box was a digital
one, which allowed the Communists to trump United Russia, he said in e-mailed
Five neighboring polling stations showed similar results, but United Russia got
twice the average amount at the sixth one a statistical discrepancy that may
imply ballot-stuffing, Karpov said.
In southern Moscow, an elections commission representative with Yabloko was
accused of "harassing" a voter by waiting for her in the toilet.
The commission member, who asked not to be identified, said she actually met the
voter near the ladies' room when the voter was whispering with the commission's
head, whom other commission members suspected of sympathizing with United Russia.
United Russia won the vote at the district but was closely trailed by the
The commission member said she and her colleagues with A Just Russia and the
Liberal Democrats suspected that the harassment allegation was a diversion from
"But it would have been worse if we didn't raise a fuss," she said.
Moscow-based voter Ksenia Kononova reported on her Facebook page on Monday that
her vote was stolen, the ballot handed out to a different person who provided a
different passport. Polling station officials refused to accept her complaint,
she said.
Vote results for Polling Station No. 1701 in southern Moscow reported on the web
site of the Central Elections Commission was vastly different from the official
protocol, monitor Dmitry Surnin said, also on Facebook. The discrepancy was in
United Russia's favor.
Both Kononova and Surnin provided photographs of what they said was rigged voting
Vyacheslav Mysin, an independent observer in St. Petersburg, said the city was
chock full of United Russia's billboards over the election weekend, a time when
no campaign materials were allowed.
"There were no major violations at a polling station where I worked," Mysin said.
"But at other stations, observers saw at least two stacked packs of ballots for
United Russia in the ballot boxes."
A Moscow Times reporter spotted no violations during the vote count in the
Bashkortostan town of Oktyabrsky, despite the fact that most independent
observers were earlier banned from the polling station in question.
The most exciting part of the vote count in Oktyabrsky was a 15-minute discussion
on how to spell "zero" in Russian in the protocol. Still, United Russia swept the
ballot in the town.
Repeated attempts to contact opposition activists in regional capital Ufa fell
through because cell phones had no reception on Monday. No such problems happened
on election day. Local activists told The Moscow Times earlier that they expected
their phones to be tapped or disconnected from the grid because of the elections.
Voters in the Russian Embassy in Stockholm, meanwhile, were peaceful, with
Yabloko, a preferred pick of the middle class, easily beating United Russia.
"Everything was done sharp in accordance with the rules," an observer from the
polling station, Andrey Zayakin, said in e-mailed comments.
The only issues were with voters, he said, citing one who demanded that the
monitor should have been a Swede because "there are no independent Russians."
[return to Contents]
Top Kremlin Strategist Plays Down Reports Of Election Fraud
Moscow, 6 December (as published): Vladislav Surkov, first deputy chief-of-staff
in the Russian presidential administration, believes that reports of mass
violations in the course of the (parliamentary) election are exaggerated and is
characterizing Russia's political system "as transparent and appropriate".
"There were violations, of course, but certainly not on an 'industrial' scale.
But people are wailing as if this is a widespread phenomenon. This shows legal
nihilism or illiteracy," Surkov said in a conversation with the well-known
blogger and radio presenter Sergey Minayev. Minayev posted the conversation on
his LiveJournal blog on Monday evening (5 December).
Addressing those who have been reporting mass violations, Surkov enquired why, in
that case, at virtually every State Duma election, the forecasts of sociologists
and the exit polls have been so similar to the results of the election.
By way of example, he cited the figures from 2007, when VTsIOM (All-Russia Centre
for the Study of Public Opinion) forecast One Russia (United Russia) would take
63 per cent of the vote, while FOM (Public Opinion Foundation) predicted 62.3 per
cent. The actual result was very similar, at 64.3 per cent.
"Virtually complete overlap. So then where's the scope for all this ballot
stuffing which people have been wailing about so much? Violations happen, but
they don't have an effect on the results of the voting, simply because there
aren't that many of them. And the guilty parties are punished, on occasion by
means of criminal prosecutions," Surkov is convinced.
According to Surkov, a similar situation also arose in the course of this
election: sociologists' forecasts for One Russia fluctuated within a range
between 46 and 53 per cent, while the exit polls put the figure at 48.5 per cent.
The result was around 50 per cent.
"It all adds up! Our political system is transparent and appropriate. So to all
those people who are wailing, I reply: enough wailing. I'm fed up of you," Surkov
[return to Contents]
Russia Profile
December 5, 2011
Spilling Over
Russia's Liberal Opposition Awakens En Masse for the First Time in Years
By Andrew Roth
Russian oppositionists spilled onto the streets of the Chistiye Prudi park in
Moscow last night by the thousands to protest the results of Sunday's State Duma
Elections amid allegations of massive voter fraud. The liberal demonstration,
organized by the banned Solidarnost movement, was the largest that Russia has
seen in years. After several hours of peaceful protesting, an attempt to march on
the headquarters of the Russian Security Services at Lubyanka devolved into
violence, as police detained hundreds of protestors, including de facto
opposition leader and corruption whistleblower Alexei Navalny.
By seven in the evening, the time marked for the beginning of the protest,
Chistiye Prudi was mobbed and police had slowed the stream of protestors into the
park to a trickle. Hundreds more lined up along streets adjoining the park in
freezing December rain to whistle and jeer Russia's leading party, United Russia,
as well as its leaders Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry
Medvedev. On a stage emblazoned with the logo "Return Power to the People"
Russia's best known opposition figures, from cultural leaders like Navalny and
opposition music critic Artemy Troitsky to opposition politicians Boris Nemtsov,
Vladimir Ryzhkov and Solidarnost youth leader Ilya Yashin, addressed the hyped-up
"To all of those who voted on Saturday, I want you to raise your hands," Navalny
asked the crowd and thousands raised their hands in the air. "Thank you, thank
you. What we told them on Sunday is this: 'we exist.'" The crowd returned to
booing and blowing orange plastic whistles, which had been distributed before the
event as a symbolic nod to Putin's booing at a recent mixed martial arts match in
Moscow, seen as a watershed moment in the prime minister's growing unpopularity.
"They'll hear that voice and fear us," shouted Navalny.
"Russia without Putin," was the emphatic response from the audience, a refrain
that repeated itself throughout the night. Alex, a 19-year-old student at Moscow
State University, said that he had come down to Chistiye Prudi to protest the
elections and "another 12 years of Putin," referring to the possibility of Putin
serving another two terms as president after his protege, Medvedev, said he would
not run for a second term. "I almost didn't go to vote yesterday but there were
so many people who told me that I should," he said. "We made a point in the
elections, even though they were falsified. And if everyone stays involved and it
doesn't go back to how it was, maybe we can make a bigger one in the March
[presidential] elections."
Several hours into the demonstration, after leading opposition figures had
already spoken and the rally seemed to be winding down, Solidarnost youth leader
Ilya Yashin told protestors "we're marching on the Lubyanka," more than a mile
away through central Moscow. Protestors began streaming out of the park but were
met by Russia's riot police, the OMON, on Mysnitskaya Street, where hundreds were
detained. Drivers in Moscow, used to sitting in mile-long traffic jams, but not
used to hearing shouts of "Down with United Russia" on Russia's dark boulevards,
honked horns in support. As protestors approached Lubyanka, they ran into a wall
of OMON riot police local press reported that several hundred protestors were
At once, it seems, the elections seem to have both revived Moscow's long dormant
liberal opposition with United Russia's considerable drop in popularity and have
served as a rallying point around widely reported election tampering. Moscow has
served as one of the key points for public reaction: whereas exit polls by the
Fund for Public Opinion showed United Russia support at 27.5 percent, the city
officially gave United Russia close to 47 percent of its ballots. "I don't know
one person who voted for them," said Mikhail, an unemployed 26-year-old, "and
neither do any of my friends. There is no way they won that much of the vote
OSCE elections observers yesterday gave a mixed review to the elections, saying
that despite a lack of a level playing field, "voters took advantage of [their]
right to express choice." "The OSCE's response was based on the intimidation
voters encountered during the campaign, the lack of independence of the federal
Elections Commissions, and then in several occasions, voters being bused in to
turn in large batches of ballots," OSCE Parliamentary Assembly Spokesman and
voting monitor Neil Simon told Russia Profile. "At our own polling station in
Central Moscow, the Elections Committee tried to wait until we left the building
in order to count the votes, but in the end, we waited them out."
Throughout the day, social networks were jammed with both denial of service
attacks against liberal Web sites and videos of supposed voter fraud taking
place. YouTube clips like this one show "carousels" of voters submitting ballots
at more than ten different polling stations, vote counters opening up a ballot
box that has been stuffed with votes for United Russia, and pens with erasable
ink being used at a Moscow polling station.
Russia's only independent elections watchdog Golos, which has been embroiled in
conflict with the state Elections Commission and was also knocked offline by
cyber attacks yesterday, released a report on the elections which both noted
serious violations and growing "public control" over the elections process.
Nonetheless, Golos went one step further than the OSCE, writing: "[E]lection
committees allowed meaningful violations of law, which put the results of the
elections into question."
For the first time in the recent history of small, ephemeral liberal protests,
OMON riot police were staring down crowds far larger than they were used to
handling, who chanted "shame" as police threw protestors into buses, and "down
with the police state." Even during the violence, at moments the protests
maintained the same giddy attitude of a liberal movement that had finally found
its footing: as one protestor was hauled off toward a waiting police bus already
packed with those detained, he called out: "Wait for me!" before he was pushed
aboard and the bus took off for the police station.
[return to Contents]
Russia Beyond the Headlines
December 6, 2011
Still willing to fight for a new country
Protests show Russians have something they want to protect.
By Anna Arutiunova
Anna Arutiunova is the executive editor of Russia Profile.
I got home in a stellar mood last night. I was soaked to the bone, knee-deep in
mud, with the handles torn off my purse and a few bruises on my ribs. But I've
never been better.
I went to the protest held at Chistiye Prudy in Moscow last night, not as a
journalist, but as a citizen. I decided that no matter what trouble I'd get into,
my press card would stay put this was about my voice, not my profession.
Russia's climate seems to be set against democracy in the country, as cold rain
poured all night over the crowds that gathered on the boulevard, tuning the once
tidy lawns into thick pools of slush. But pressed up hard against each other and
squeezing tighter yet to make room for the newcomers, few at the rally seemed to
care about appearances.
Various estimates place the number of people anywhere between 2,000 and 10,000. I
would say I saw at least 5,000 to 6,000 pairs of sparkling eyes. This was the
first demonstration in Moscow I've witnessed of this magnitude. But the most
important was the atmosphere: People took to the streets en masse not because
they hoped to somehow rectify the fraud and vote rigging that plagued Sunday's
parliamentary elections (they've already given up on that), but as an emotional
show of solidarity, to look each other in the eye, to confirm that no matter what
the regime says or does, they will stand united in their opposition.
The sense of unity permeated the air; calls for change, for fair presidential
elections, for a future without Putin and without United Russia from the stage
reverberated through the crowd that seemed to breathe in unison. "Obviously,
there is no need to calm down. As for the calls for new elections, we have new
elections coming up in March, where we can show these gentlemen exactly what we
think of them. I want to say, with all responsibility, that unfortunately in the
1990s, we failed to make proper use of freedom. It came down from above. But over
the past few years, a real civil society has been formed in Russia, and it won't
disappear. I can see it before me. Never before in Moscow was there such a
feeling of unity and determination," writer Dmitry Bykov, the mastermind behind
the satirical Citizen Poet series, told the cheering crowd.
Whether any of these efforts to rally the opposition troops will ever come to
fruition is debatable. Some are saying that nothing will change, while others see
last night as the beginning of a revolution. I think the truth is somewhere in
between we won't wake up in a new country tomorrow, but we may do so in a year.
"I am congratulating everyone with the results of these elections," said Dmitry
Kataev, a former Moscow City Duma deputy and a member of Solidarnost, one of the
rally's organizers. "The real results of the vote show that we already have
something to protect from falsification. That's a victory."
It seems that the biggest point of the protest was to scare the authorities a
little. But judging by the number of soldiers brought into Moscow today, the
current regime is scared indeed.
[return to Contents]
December 6, 2011
[The parliamentary election: analysis of the outcome.]
Activeness of voters is what the 2011 parliamentary election
will be remembered for. Pessimists keep saying that nothing has
really changed. Technically, they are correct. Nothing has, by and
large. According to interim estimates, the ruling party lost 15%
or so. It polled 64.3% in 2007 and only 49.54% last week-end. Even
so, however, it retained a majority in the Duma (238 seats). One
may safely assume that whenever there is a major issue on the
floor, United Russia will ally with the LDPR and Fair Russia. As
for the CPRF, it will probably remain the ruling party's bitter
The construction remained intact but not its legitimacy.
Legitimacy of the construction becomes increasingly more
questionable. The system is sliding into an absolute loss of
adequacy and importance. It happened to the CPSU just over two
decades ago. It is happening to United Russia these days, as
testified to by countless violations in the course of the
election. Reports made by activists of the Citizen-Obsever group
from the 36 polling stations in Moscow where they were present and
where no massive violations were observed are quite telling.
According to them, the ruling party averaged 23.4% there.
Throughout Moscow, however, it averaged 46.62%. In other words,
what United Russia actually polled (or so one might safely assume)
more or less matched the forecasts pollsters had made prior to the
Optimists will say that the loss of 15% by the ruling party
is a relatively important result of protest voting. This triumph
is first and foremost symbolic. As it turned out, the Russians who
care can consolidate for political purposes. Even more
importantly, they can do so for the purposes that are wholly
legitimate. Namely for voting.
What counts is that those who care turned out to be capable
of scoring even despite the massive violations on the part of the
state that itself never hesitates to break the rules of the game
it set. Observers were out in force at polling stations this time,
and the violations they reported are a legion. Some of these
violations were thwarted, some others are to be considered by
The so called parliamentary opposition (the same old CPRF,
LDPR, and Fair Russia) made it to the Duma again. Even they,
however, cannot deny the fact that they owe it to a considerable
extent to protest voting. Should the active part of society that
elevated them into the Duma remain agile, it will certainly find
ways and means to make sure that these parties of the opposition
take society's interests into account. In fact, this is going to
be one of the priorities of civil society in the new electoral
cycle. One-time mobilization for the polling day is way easier
than exertion of control over the powers-that-be, day in and day
The situation as it is poses questions for the authorities as
well. Sure, they worked their will on society again but not to the
extent they could have. It does not mean, however, that they will
show the same lenience during the presidential election in March.
Society is learning, and learning fast. No society can change the
system overnight but attempts to change it will continue without
stopping now.
Sky-high "Teflon" ratings of presidents and ruling parties
usually indicate an authoritarian regime. Their slide down is an
indication that the regime in question is in trouble. A lot will
depend on how the regime takes it now - as a signal to initiate a
dialogue with society or an excuse to start fighting a defensive
[return to Contents]
Business New Europe
December 6, 2011
Putin and Russia are the winners in this election
The surprise result in the Russian parliamentary elections was that everyone was
awarded pretty much the votes they actually got.
There were few surprises in the actual results. United Russia walked the ballot
to take 49% of the vote with most of the votes counted. Then the Communist Party
of the Russian Federation took another 20%, Vladimir Zhirinovskys nationalist
LDPR won 12% and centre-left Just Russia another 12%. The remaining parties on
the list failed to clear the 7% threshold needed to get any seats.
But what is so surprising about these results is that they were more-or-less the
same as what the polls had been predicting, meaning the Kremlin accepted the
results in what should be called the first truly free and fair elections since
Putin came to power in 2000.
A few caveats here: the state still has a monopoly over the media and the
opposition was seriously hindered in its efforts to campaign by dirty tricks and
official obfuscation. Still, the danger was that the Kremlin would attempt to
stuff ballots and ensure that United Russia won 62% of the vote and so gain a
constitutional majority. What has actually happened is managed democracy in
action: the state let the people have a real vote, but has ensured that the
winners of the vote remain inside the political ring-fence set up by the Kremlin
around the political process.
If you compare this result to votes in the West, then clearly it is
disappointing. But compared to most of the countries in Eastern Europe and
Central Asia, it was truly representative.
Still at the helm
Nevertheless, the bottom line is the Kremlin remains firmly in charge. United
Russias votes together with the loyal LDPR means it will still have a
constitutional majority. What has changed here is Zhirinovsky has been promoted
to a major force in Russia politics. However, completely loyal, totally cynical
and eminently corruptible, Zhirinovsky is more than an acceptable candidate for
this new role, as the LDPR has always toed the Kremlin line and won't change now
that it has real power.
The biggest surprise was the strong showing by the Communist Party. The strong
support has nothing to do with Gennady Zyuganov's campaigning; clearly the strong
support was a protest vote, as the Communists were the only true opposition on
the ballot, ineffective and unappealing as they are.
Ironically, this is what happened in Central Europe in the aftermath of the
collapse of the Soviet bloc: the communist parties remade themselves and won
power in the first few years of independence. They were not very effective and
were mostly voted out again, but their stint in office served to focus the
liberal parties on the need to address the concerns of the people and come up
with credible policies. No-one seriously expects Russias Communist Party to go so
far as to actually win office, but by allowing it to do so well the Kremlin will
have to up its game and think more about what the people want or else face even
worse results in the next election.
And the elections have set a precedent: by allowing a more-or-less free vote this
time round, the Kremlin will find it harder to blatantly fix any elections in the
future. The Kremlin probably had the Orange Revolution in Ukraine, the revolution
in Kyrgyzstan and most recently the riots in Belarus a year ago in mind when it
decided to accept a real vote after all, the Kremlin remains in power even if its
grip has been weakened.
[return to Contents]
December 6, 2011
Russian elections show trend to democratization
By Dmitry Polikanov
Dr. Dmitry Polikanov began his career as a political analyst with a number of
Russian think tanks and international organizations. Being Vice President of the
PIR Center (The Russian Center for Policy Studies), he frequently comments on
major developments in Russian foreign policy. For almost ten years he has been a
guest speaker at the NATO School in Oberammergau (Germany), where he was the
first Russian lecturer.
Since 2007, Dr. Polikanov has been working with the ruling United Russia party.
He now holds the position of Deputy Head of the Central Executive Committee and
is deeply involved in various party activities, including the development of its
strategy and ideology. Dmitry Polikanov was also one of the authors of the Human
Resource Reserve project within the party.
The elections are over and the result has yielded the best possible outcome for
the political system per se. An intense campaign, high voter turnout, a pretty
good performance by the opposition parties all this indicates that the trend
towards the democratization of political life and the gradual reform of the
system initiated by President Medvedev was right.
The campaign had some clear innovations in comparison with 2003 or 2007. One of
them is the increasing role of the Internet in politics. Web technologies make
the system more transparent and, at the same time, provide a platform for heated,
emotional debate (albeit marred by the opportunity to use obscene language and
anonymity). Another novelty was the greater engagement of civil society in the
process, from primaries and the Popular Front set forth by United Russia, to
significant numbers of volunteers who worked as observers at the polling
And there is more to be expected next year with President Medvedev emphasizing a
potential change in political culture. Russia will have to learn to build
coalitions. This is particularly true with respect to regional parliaments, in
some of which the ruling party has only a slim majority. This will create
additional checks and balances and will force the governors to be more flexible
and to win their authority.
Another lesson learned is the need for "open government". The success of the
elite will depend on its ability to involve different social strata in
decision-making and, hence, to deliver a more effective and legitimate public
service. Besides, "large government" will help to bring new faces to Russian
politics and overcome the generation gap in the Russian elite a task proclaimed
in 2008 but which has yet to be accomplished.
Finally, it is clear that the opposition parties benefited from a kind of
"advance payment" at the elections. Many people were not so much voting for them,
as against United Russia. Therefore, the Communists'19% vote share is more a
tribute to their historical role as a classical opposition than of genuine
support for their platform. Even worse is the situation with the small parties.
Their failure was certainly predictable (and the Duma now represents the opinions
of 95% of voters in comparison to 90% four years ago). But they now have time
recruit new people and formulate fresh ideas ahead of the 2016 elections, and to
make maximum use of the call for modernization being made by more pro-active
United Russia will also continue to reform itself. Some observers believe that
the outcome is sad for the ruling party, but this is hardly true. To draw a
soccer analogy: in 2007 we defeated our opponents 5:0; in 2011, it was 3:1. But
after the vote transfer process, the party will secure nearly 53% of seats in the
Duma a big enough majority to pursue the policies it promised its electors.
Moreover, at the federal level, United Russia will not be forced to form
coalitions there are no amendments to the Constitution foreseen in the near
future and all other laws can be passed by the UR faction. The majority party's
goodwill and good intentions are what will determine the further development of
the Russian political system, of which United Russia have for years been the core
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
December 6, 2011
An Exciting End to a Dull Election
By Nikolai Petrov
Nikolai Petrov is a scholar in residence at the Carnegie Moscow Center.
The State Duma elections this time around were actually quite interesting,
despite a sluggish start in which campaigning from all parties lacked vigor and
went largely unnoticed by the public. Interest in the elections began rising
sharply by the end of the campaign after the Kremlin suddenly became visibly
nervous about United Russia's falling ratings.
The authorities were even more concerned about the possibility that popular
protests might break out after the elections. That would explain why the
authorities cracked down on the Golos election-monitoring group and detained Left
Front leader Sergei Udaltsov and activists from The Other Russia. It would also
explain their decision to mobilize 30,000 members of the pro-Kremlin Nashi youth
group, if necessary, to cordon off the central squares in Moscow.
For all its vapidity, the campaign served as a type of primary for United Russia.
It also served as a venue for bargaining between the federal and regional
political elites and for debates that, despite the lack of participation by top
United Russia officials, provided a forum for increased and varied criticism of
the ruling authorities.
The campaigns for 27 regional parliaments held simultaneously with the federal
drive also added some intrigue to the Dec. 4 elections. Having successfully
replaced all of the heavyweight governors, the Kremlin was left without any big
names to run on the United Russia ticket in the regions. That is why deputy prime
ministers and other Cabinet ministers headed one-third of all party lists in
place of governors.
Indeed, the regional factor played a greater role in these elections than ever
before. United Russia fared fairly poorly in a number of regions, and although
that will not change the overall picture, it will surely add to the ruling
party's troubles and humiliation.
The fact that the authorities did not obstruct independent elections observers
from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe could be indirect
evidence that they had no concrete plan for widespread election falsifications,
as many had expected to boost United Russia to the much-desired 60 percent level.
At the same time, however, the Kremlin clearly overreacted with its heavy, crude
attack against Golos.
Another positive aspect of these elections is that this is probably the last
hoorah for a whole group of United Russia apparatchiks who need to be replaced
with more energetic and innovative politicians. More important, this could also
mark the end of the primitive and ineffective political system that Putin built
back in the pre-
crisis days when the Kremlin had so much money and power that it all but dictated
conditions in the Duma. But it is clear that the current political system will
now have to give way to a more pluralistic one in which the Kremlin and United
Russia will have to compromise and build coalitions with the three other parties
in the Duma.
More important than the mere redistribution of Duma seats orchestrated by a
dominant United Russia is the palpable shift in mood. Increasing numbers of
people are venting their frustration with the ruling regime through protest votes
that are reminiscent of the elections of 1989-90. Today, we have woken up to a
fundamentally new political configuration.
[return to Contents]
Russia Profile
December 5, 2011
The Internet's Watching
Past Sunday's Duma Elections Were the First Russian Elections to Come Under So
Much Scrutiny in RuNet, Social Networks and the Russian Blogosphere
By Andrei Zolotov Jr. and Andrew Roth
There is at least one area in which last Sunday's parliamentary elections proved
to be a breaking point, a milestone in the development of the Russian society. It
was the role that the Internet in general and social media in particular played
in informing the public about the course of the polling, the fraud and the
results of the vote.
At about 3:30 p.m. on Sunday, Anna Kachkaeva, a prominent Russian media expert
and the dean of the Communications Department at the Higher School of Economics,
wrote on her Facebook page: "Well, one can state that these elections are for the
first time taking place in the real situation of parallel information flows the
official one and the one of mass civic networks."
In fact, the day began very poorly for opposition-minded Internet media. The Web
sites of a large number of media and groups monitoring the elections, including
Echo of Moscow radio, Kommersant.ru, which publishes stories not only from the
Kommersant newspaper, but also from other publications of the publishing house,
Bolshoi Gorod magazine, OpenSpace.ru and the Golos association one of the most
prominent monitoring groups were knocked out by DDoS attacks.
But the move by unidentified "killer hackers" triggered a massive reaction in the
Russian blogging community, and served as an additional mobilization call. One
blogger after another, from such popular figures as anti-corruption crusader
Alexei Navalny to rank-and-file civic journalists, offered their blogs as
vehicles for publishing reports of violations.
Twitter played a key role in the dissemination of exit polls from individual
regions and even individual polling stations across Russia. Given many Twitter
users' anti-United Russia bias, the majority of these were meant to show that
support for United Russia was weak in the regions. Here is one of the dispatches,
roughly translated: "Polling station #671 (Ivanov Region) UR 22.63%, Just Russ
18.17%, Communists 35.77%, LDPR 12.69%.," tweeted by a local amateur monitor
and then re-tweeted through clearinghouses like Alexei Navalny's blog, which has
many more readers.
That move and there were many of those reporting exit polls early in the day
has raised the issue of the legality of such activity. According to the Russian
election law, it is forbidden to publish any new polls, and especially exit
polls, during the last week before elections, and especially on the day before
elections. It is only after the polling stations in the country's westernmost
region of Kaliningrad close at 9 p.m. Moscow time that the traditional media
begin reporting the exit polls. But what about the blogs, which are not
registered as media outlets? Nashi activists demanded that Navalny be arrested
for breaking the "silent period," and the Central Election Commission issued a
statement saying it would investigate the case.
Social networks also served as a conduit for disseminating evidence on alleged
vote rigging. YouTube clips like this one show "carousels" of voters submitting
ballots at more than ten different polling stations, vote counters opening up a
ballot box that has been stuffed with votes for United Russia, and pens with
erasable ink being used at a Moscow polling station. On Facebook, user Dmitry
Surnin, who was monitoring the elections yesterday in Moscow, posted this count
of the voting tallies, which he says are considerably different from what was
posted on the Central Election Commission's Web site today.
The clip by user Singinau on YouTube, depicting a chairman of a local Electoral
Commission as he seems to be filling in voting bulletins a move that constitutes
a crime was reposted on many Facebook and Twitter accounts and garnered more
than 500,000 views in just one day.
Another form of activity was informing one's friends on social networks of
whether people had voted and if they did, which party they had voted for. Special
userpics began appearing on Facebook depicting the party the user had voted for.
Political figures from the unregistered Parnas party, who advocated ruining the
ballots as an expression of protest, posted pictures with the ballots crossed
Toward the evening, as the exit polls and the first results started to appear,
voter reactions swept over the blogosphere. Late in the evening two twitter
tags, the first # and the second an unprintable insult, began linking to
@MedvedevRussia, after the president tweeted "Thank you for supporting United
Russia!" Many of the responses were unprintable, but here is what user anzgri
wrote: "You are a liar... you serve Putin and not United Russia. Retweet this."
When Golos' map of violations was knocked offline during the day, it moved all of
its data over to this GoogleDoc, where it tallied over 1,300 violations. At three
in the morning, Golos finally signed off on twitter: "The elections are
illegitimate. Good Night."
"Civil journalism had opened a completely new era last Sunday, with hundreds if
not thousands of Facebook users, Vkontakte [Russian social network] users,
Tweeterers and LiveJournal bloggers monitoring the elections, serving as a
comprehensive public watchdog," said Vassily Gatov, the vice chairman of the
Russian Publisher's Guild and the head of RIA Novosti's MediaLab a think tank
tracking trends in new media. "That was a truly amazing feeling of the tech-savvy
crowd taking the role every media outlet should care about: are our votes counted
properly? Is the system cheating in order to get some predefined results that
would favor a particular (of course, ruling) party? People of different social
backgrounds and of various political affiliations were reporting from all over
the country leaking the suspicious manipulations at poll stations, taking videos
of fake bulletins in the boxes, detecting voting violations with tweets. The
network of networks had said just its first word."
Kachkaeva, of the Higher School of Economics, said that the size of the audience
of the traditional media first and foremost television is still incomparable to
that of the Internet. But interaction between the two has also started taking
place. Blogs were publishing television videos and some local television channels
began picking stories from the Internet. Even on the state-run Rossiya 1
television channel, where the election night coverage demonstrated a variety of
opinions unheard of on national television in the past decade, the subject of
fraud publicized in social media and the very new phenomenon of Internet-era
election watching became a notable subject of discussion. "It was a breaking
point, something completely new," said Kachkaeva.
[return to Contents]
Gorbachev Says Russia Should Change Political System
MOSCOW. Dec 5 (Interfax) - Former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev said on
Monday that Russia should change its political system to "help our people
participate in decision making."
"People should know what they would make sacrifices for," Gorbachev told the Ekho
Moskvy (Moscow Echo) radio.
He also argued that Russia is in for hard times and said this should come home to
Russian leaders. "They've decided to swap jobs, and sustain their tandem. This
coincides with upcoming six years on which we pin great expectations. If we miss
them (those six years), we'll have a hard time, we will be in a very difficult
situation," he said.
In a comment on Sunday's State Duma elections, Gorbachev said: "I wouldn't say
they were the most honest of elections. The most honest election was in 1989
(elections for the Soviet parliament) and in 1990 (parliamentary elections in the
then Soviet republic of Russia)."
[return to Contents]
Russians expect to see 'new edition of Putin' - PM's spokesman
MOSCOW, December 6 (RIA Novosti)-Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as a
presidential candidate will deliver new ideas and proposals because Russians
expect to see "a new edition of Putin," the premier's spokesman Dmitry Peskov
told the BBC on Tuesday.
In an interview with the BBC, Peskov said that despite the drop in support for
the United Russia party in Sunday's parliamentary elections, "its leader,
Vladimir Putin has no grounds to worry about his presidential prospects."
"Russians expects Putin in his new edition. It is obvious that the party will
need to be renewed, and Putin as a candidate for the new presidential term in
this country will have to deliver new ideas, proposals, form new unions," Peskov
The United Russia party has nominated Putin as its candidate for the presidential
polls, due to be held on March 4.
"Putin has never been directly connected with the United Russia party since he is
regarded as an independent politician," he said.
His comments came as Putin holds a meeting with United Russia members at the
party's headquarters.
Sunday's parliamentary elections in Russia were marred by widespread allegations
of vote fraud in favor of United Russia, with dozens of video clips showing
alleged election violations posted on the Internet.
[return to Contents]
New York Times
December 6, 2011
Party's Losses Raise Concerns About Putin's Bid
By ELLEN BARRY
MOSCOW Vladimir V. Putin was not the subject of Sunday's bruising vote in
Russia, but you would not have known it from watching him when the early results
came in. He looked like someone who has just received very bad news, and stumbled
his way through a speech to his supporters, barely forcing a smile before
stepping off the podium.
United Russia's loss of 77 parliamentary seats has confirmed, for anyone who
doubted it, that some Russian voters are cooling toward Mr. Putin's government.
It comes as Mr. Putin begins his own three-month campaign to return to the
presidency a decision he revealed in September, with the expectation that voters
would be reassured, easing the path to re-election for both United Russia and
That expectation was wrong, and on the heels of United Russia's poor showing,
some analysts were entertaining a question that would have sounded bizarre two
years ago: Will Mr. Putin win in the first round, or be forced into a runoff?
"I think that yesterday, there was a line drawn between the Putin of the past,
with his great successes, and the Putin in the future," said Nikolai Petrov, a
political analyst at the Carnegie Moscow Center. "No longer is Putin capable of
winning in the presidential election just by saying general words about justice
and reminding people of his achievements when he was president. He should explain
why exactly he is coming back to office and what his plans are."
On Monday night, several thousand people gathered in a light rain on a Moscow
boulevard, chanting "Russia Without Putin" and brandishing signs that read,
"These elections are a farce!" In interviews, many participants said it was the
first time they had taken part in a protest. Tatyana Sergina, 27, a bank employee
who was wrapped in a down jacket, said her goal was to keep Mr. Putin from
winning in the March election, forcing him into a runoff with "a strong
The presidential campaign may be easier than the parliamentary one was. Voters
have come to identify United Russia with unresponsive, corrupt apparatchiks they
encounter in their daily lives but they tend not to blame Mr. Putin for the
failures of other officials.
Mr. Putin's approval ratings have been declining, but they remain high by
international standards, at above 60 percent, according to the independent Levada
Center. He has a particularly ardent following among female voters over 40, said
Gleb O. Pavlovsky, a political consultant who, until recently, worked closely
with the Kremlin.
Mr. Putin is also not likely to face a significant challenge, since candidates
cannot be registered without the assent of Kremlin gatekeepers. His opponents may
be familiar foils from his previous races in 2000 and 2004 the ultranationalist
Vladimir V. Zhirinovsky, the Communist Gennadi A. Zyuganov and Sergei M. Mironov,
who openly endorsed Mr. Putin when the two men last ran against each other.
Independent candidates can enter the race, but only if the Central Election
Commission certifies the signatures of two million voters.
Mr. Putin's supporters say he will be able to disassociate himself from the
damage United Russia has suffered.
"Putin is a consolidating figure, and I know many people who don't like United
Russia and like Putin," said Robert Shlegel, a United Russia deputy. "He is a
significant figure in Russia, and above politics. Russia is united around its
leader. This is a tradition."
Still, Sunday's gains had left opposition leaders emboldened to criticize Mr.
Putin. Late on Sunday night, during an ebullient appearance on a federal
television channel, Mr. Zyuganov complained that "our people have been ruled for
10 years by the same cooperative, the one from St. Petersburg," the prime
minister's hometown. At a news conference on Monday, another Communist continued
in the same vein.
"Citizens have lost confidence in the social and economic course conducted in
this country," said Ivan I. Melnikov, first deputy secretary of the party's
central committee. "Mr. Putin is one of the men who guided us on this path. For
this reason alone, he will have colossal problems in the coming election
Mr. Putin can insulate himself from the damage in various ways. He could dissolve
or rebrand United Russia. He could announce that President Dmitri A. Medvedev was
to blame for the party's losses, since his name appeared at the top of the party
list, and renege on the promise to make Mr. Medvedev prime minister. He could
play on populist themes, like the allegation that the United States is trying to
interfere in the elections, or nationalist anger over the influx of migrant
workers from Central Asia. Finally, he could commit to new waves of spending.
Mr. Petrov, from the Carnegie Moscow Center, said Mr. Putin's best option might
be to embrace the message voters sent on Sunday, and introduce a greater degree
of pluralism into the political system.
In any case, Mr. Putin will be working under constraints that are unfamiliar.
"The time when he could do anything he wanted, it has already ended," said
Aleksei V. Makarkin, an analyst with Moscow's Center for Political Technologies.
When Mr. Putin revealed his plans to return to the presidency in September, "the
interesting thing is that the elite took the announcement calmly, because they
had accepted it already. But the middle class felt offended," Mr. Makarkin added.
It is that group, he said, that has evidently abandoned United Russia.
Mr. Pavlovsky said Mr. Putin has not regained his footing since then. "The main
thing is what didn't happen the thing he expected, cries of delight across the
country when it became clear that he was returning," Mr. Pavlovsky said. "He now
has his first uncertainty."
There have already been signs of waning support, like the crowd that booed when
Mr. Putin climbed into the ring at a November mixed martial arts event.
Nevertheless, Mr. Pavlovsky said, he was certain that Mr. Putin "thought this was
being organized by small groups of his enemies."
But Sunday's results provided incontrovertible proof that some voters are turning
against the government. Among the party's worst results 33.77 percent came from
Leningrad Region, which is home to Mr. Putin and his closest circle of
associates. The party also fared badly in ethnic Russian industrial and agrarian
centers that were traditionally "very Putinist," Mr. Pavlovsky said.
"It is a challenge, and I don't know how he will deal with it," he said. "There
are different approaches. Some people become better, some people become worse.
It's hard to say. We'll see."
Michael Schwirtz and Andrew E. Kramer contributed reporting.
[return to Contents]
Valdai Discussion Club
December 6, 2011
The election won't be a cakewalk for Vladimir Putin
Valdaiclub.com interview with Vyacheslav Nikonov, President of the Politika
Foundation and Executive Director of the Board of the Russkiy Mir Foundation
Preliminary election results show that United Russia has lost many votes compared
to the last election. Is this the result you expected?
Regarding forecasts, all sociological services predicted that United Russia (UR)
would receive four to five percent more votes, that is, 53%-54%. But in reality
it got 50%. Did I expect it to get 4% fewer votes? This difference is within the
statistical margin of error. It was common knowledge that United Russia would
receive fewer votes than in 2007.
Why has United Russia lost the confidence of some of its voters?
This is typical for any ruling party that is in power during an economic crisis.
Relatively speaking, it got off easy: most ruling parties that stood for election
in Europe lost power.
The Communists and A Just Russia have gained where United Russia has lost. What
could you say about their political potential in the Duma?
Needless to say, their potential has increased relative to the number of seats
they have gained.
Will these parties have greater influence over decision-making in parliament, or
will they support United Russia?
They have never supported it. United Russia easily managed without them, but this
is a different matter. Judging by the preliminary election results, United Russia
will have a majority for passing routine bills but won't have the constitutional
majority required for adopting constitutional laws. As such, it will be necessary
to form coalitions.
What do you think about the impact of the election results on the presidential
campaign and future elections?
Most likely there will be serious competition during the presidential campaign.
The election won't be a cakewalk for Vladimir Putin.
[return to Contents]
December 5, 2011
Is The Putin Magic Gone?
By Brian Whitmore, Tom Balmforth
PRAGUE/MOSCOW -- Prime Minister (and national leader) Vladimir Putin has fallen
to Earth. President Dmitry Medvedev looks weaker than ever. And State Duma
speaker Boris Gryzlov may be out of a job.
The December 4 legislative elections, in which the ruling United Russia party
struggled to hang onto its parliamentary majority and decisively lost the
two-thirds supermajority it has enjoyed since 2007, was a watershed and a wake-up
call for the ruling elite -- which for the first time since Putin came to power
more than a decade ago is finding itself on the defensive.
The first casualty may be Gryzlov, a leading figure in United Russia who has
served as speaker of the State Duma since 2003. Russian media cited unidentified
party sources as saying that in the wake of the elections, Gryzlov would likely
be removed.
But analysts say the regime's problems appear to run deeper and cannot be fixed
by cosmetic changes such as replacing a secondary figure like Gryzlov.
The election result pierced the air of omnipotence that Putin has carefully
cultivated over his decade in power and could potentially move the country into
uncharted territory.
"Putin has ceased to be a magician wielding a magic wand," Moscow-based political
analyst Dmitry Oreshkin explains. "His popularity is declining and this creates
an unusual and potentially dangerous situation. We have never seen Putin deal
with political adversity. We've seen him when his popularity was rising. We've
seen him when his rating was at its peak. But we've never seen him when his
rating was falling."
More Difficult To Rule
Putin is still all but assured victory in the March presidential election, when
he will seek to return to the Kremlin after a four-year break. Despite his
falling poll numbers, he remains the most popular politician in the country.
But in his second stint as president Putin will be faced with an elite that is
more divided, a civil society that is more assertive, and an economic situation
fraught with uncertainty. All of this will make it much more difficult for Putin
to rule in the authoritarian, top-down fashion he is comfortable with.
Oreshkin says the new reality leaves Putin's vaunted "power vertical" severely
weakened and leaves him with a stark choice: Negotiate a more pluralistic system
or rely on force and oppression to maintain the old one.
"It is the beginning of the end, but he will fight to preserve the system,"
Oreshkin says. "And it is unlikely that he will try to negotiate and find a
compromise with other political forces. He is more likely to try to tighten the
If the election results left Putin weakened, they have all but emasculated
Medvedev, who just months ago was being touted by supporters as a reformist
leader poised to preside over an economic and political modernization of the
Nothing But A Placeholder
All that talk ended, of course, after the September 24 United Russia congress,
when Medvedev announced that he would not stand for a second term as president.
The carefully orchestrated move confirmed what many suspected all along: that
Medvedev's presidency was nothing but a placeholder designed to enable Putin's
return to the Kremlin.
It also left his supporters, both in the elite and in society, deeply
"Medvedev damaged his reputation after he willingly showed himself to be a
second-rate politician," Oreshkin says.
Medvedev was given consolation prizes for stepping aside. He occupied the top
spot on the United Russia party list for the election and he was assured that
once he leaves the presidency he would have Putin's support to serve as prime
The job switch with Putin, which looked like a cynical ploy to many, only
deepened the disappointment in Medvedev. And the top spot on the party list meant
that, to a degree, he can be blamed for United Russia's weak showing.
"When Medvedev was chosen to head the list, many hoped this would get United
Russia more votes. But this did not happen," says Sergei Mikheyev, the general
director of the Center for Political Assessments.
'But For How Long?'
The disappointing election results only heightened impressions of Medvedev's
political impotence, which does not bode well for his prospects to serve as a
strong -- or even effective -- prime minister.
"Medvedev will be prime minister, but the question is for how long," Mikheyev
says. "This issue will be debated, and it will depend on the economy and how he
approaches the job."
If Putin, Medvedev, and Gryzlov have all been weakened by the election results,
many observers are pointing to former Federation Council speaker Sergei Mironov
as the vote's surprising winner.
Mironov's center-left A Just Russia party was originally established as a
pro-Kremlin group. But the party became more of a true opposition force after
Mironov fell out with United Russia and was removed as speaker of the upper
After losing Kremlin support, it looked like the party's political fate was
sealed and Mironov was destined for the political wilderness. But instead, as the
party reinvented itself as an opposition force, its prospects rose markedly. In
the end, the party won 64 seats in the 450-seat Duma, nearly double the 38 it won
as a pro-Kremlin party in the 2007 elections.
The biggest thing the authorities lost in the December 4 elections, Moscow-based
political analyst Kirill Rogov told RFE/RL's Russian Service, is their legitimacy
in the eyes of the public.
"There is formal legitimacy that comes from the Electoral Commission saying what
percent you won, but there is also real legitimacy, which is in people's
consciousness," Rogov says. "It is people's trust in what the authorities tell
them. It is impossible to ignore this. It influences the public. It influences
the elite. It influences the bureaucracy. The legitimacy of the authorities is
falling step by step."
RFE/RL's Russian Service contributed to this report
[return to Contents]
Washington Post
December 6, 2011
A clear message of Russian dissatisfaction with Mr. Putin
RUSSIA'S VOTERS have just demonstrated that even a rigged election can send a
message. Despite the lack of a meaningful choice in Sunday's parliamentary
elections, and despite what international observers said were "serious
indications of ballot box stuffing," the voters made clear their dissatisfaction
with Vladimir Putin's regime. His United Russia party was reported to have
received 49.5 percent of the vote, compared to 64 percent in the last election
four years ago. The Communist Party got the biggest share of a massive protest
vote, while two other Kremlin-tolerated "opposition" parties substantially
increased their number of parliamentary seats.
Mr. Putin is in no danger, for the moment: United Russia will still control a
parliamentary majority, and he is a heavy favorite in the presidential election
scheduled for March. But Russians have made a contribution to what has been a
global outpouring in 2011 of popular dissatisfaction with rulers particularly in
authoritarian countries.
No less than Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, Mr. Putin invited the backlash by choosing to
retrench rather than reform his regime. His decision to shove aside sidekick
Dmitry Medvedev and return to the presidency next year, for a second run of at
least six years, dashed the fading hopes of Russians that the country might be
inching toward a more open political system. The restoration signals a
perpetuation of the criminality that has infected every corner of the Russian
government and the economic stagnation that has kept it dependent on exports of
oil, gas and other raw materials.
Mr. Putin further provoked voters by manipulating the election system to
eliminate alternatives. After a billionaire businessman attempted to rejuvenate a
liberal opposition party called Right Cause, the Kremlin organized a clumsy
internal coup to remove him. Other liberal pro-Western parties were denied
registration, while the sole Russian independent election monitoring group,
Golos, was subjected to a campaign of intimidation.
There's no telling how far the ruling party would have fallen in a free vote. In
central St. Petersburg, Mr. Putin's political home base, only 27 percent was
recorded for his party. Such results were balanced by massive rigging elsewhere:
In Chechnya, which was devastated by a war launched by Mr. Putin, 99 percent
voter participation was reported and 99.5 percent of the votes were tallied for
United Russia.
Mr. Putin will now face the question of how to respond to the rebuff. One likely
answer is bribery: Economic analysts expect government spending to soar before
the March presidential vote. Meaningful steps to combat corruption might also
appease many Russians. But Mr. Putin's history suggests he will move in a more
dangerous direction, stoking Russian nationalism and looking for enemies at home
and abroad. The regime was already shifting in that direction before the
parliamentary vote, with threats to target U.S. missile defense installations
with nuclear weapons, or to withdraw from the START nuclear treaty negotiated by
President Obama.
The Obama administration should be prepared to deflect such attacks and to defend
other likely Putin targets, such as the democratic government of Georgia. In the
meantime, the democratic world can hope that Sunday was the beginning, and not
the end, of a Russian awakening.
[return to Contents]
As Putin plans to stay, many Russians want out
December 3, 2011
By MARIA DANILOVA
Natalia Lepleiskaya is just the sort of person today's Russia needs - a
successful young IT manager who does charity work in her free time.
But frustrated by what she describes as the corruption and stagnation around her,
she and her husband are packing their bags to start a new life in Canada.
"I don't see how I can change things ... and I don't want to waste my youth on
it," said the 29-year-old, who moved to Moscow from a provincial city several
years ago and rose to a senior position at a top technological company.
As Vladimir Putin's party prepares to dominate weekend parliamentary elections in
a prelude to his planned return to the presidency in spring, an increasing number
of Russians are contemplating leaving their homeland in search of a brighter
future abroad. A March presidential election victory for Putin - all but taken
for granted - raises the prospect of his being in the top job for 12 years.
Disenchantment with life in Russia was growing even before Prime Minister Putin
and President Dmitry Medvedev agreed in September to swap jobs,
In a May poll by the respected Levada Center, 22 percent of respondents said they
wanted to move abroad for good, compared to 13 percent in April 2009. The poll
among 1,600 Russian adults across the country had a margin of error of 3.4
percentage points.
Emigration statistics are hard to come by because few of those who leave for
lengthy periods renounce Russian citizenship, while getting foreign residency may
take years.
But demographer Mikhail Denisenko at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow
estimates that at least a half million Russians moved abroad in 2002-2009 and
more are on the way in what he describes as the fifth wave of emigration since
the beginning of the 20th century.
"The level of frustration is higher ... it's a feeling of discomfort, an aversion
to life in Russia," said Lev Gudkov, the head of the Levada Center.
"The prospect of another 12 years of stagnation or even a worsening of the
situation is frightening them and they are beginning to think about moving to a
different country or at least providing a future for their children" abroad.
Numerous recent websites and blogs offer advice on how to emigrate. One of them,
"Time to Shove Off," offers commentaries and videos exposing alleged crime and
corruption among top Russian officials. "Yet another governor buys himself yet
another Mercedes for 7 million rubles ($233,000 or euro175,000)," reads one
posting. "Corruption as a lifestyle," a headline says.
"The news that Putin is staying has spoiled people's mood and this talk (of
emigration) started resonating more," said Anton Nossik, a popular blogger and
Internet expert, who holds seminars on emigration.
The democratic reforms ushered in by the 1991 Soviet collapse generated hope that
Russia could finally become a free and progressive nation. But Putin's 11 years
in power, first as president and now as prime minister, have left many people
disillusioned and gloomy about the future.
While an expanding economy has boosted living standards for many, corruption has
become systemic and political competition has virtually disappeared. On a more
day-to-day level, many Russians complain that education and health care continue
to lag far behind. The draft-based army is plagued by vicious hazing, leaving
many parents fearful for their sons. Few have faith that they can count on either
the police or the courts to protect them or their property.
Russian emigration is by no means a new phenomenon. The 20th century alone
witnessed waves of emigration, beginning with those who fled after the 1917
Bolshevik Revolution and during World War II. Over 290,000 Jews emigrated from
the Soviet Union 1971 to 1988, and up to 1.6 million people left Russia in
1989-2002 as the Soviet Union disintegrated, according to demographers.
Today's departures are not nearly as traumatic as during the Soviet era, when
would-be emigres spent years fighting to be allowed to leave, often losing jobs
and friends in the process - then bade farewell to their families forever,
certain they would never return.
But the decision to leave Russia is still often painful. Many emigres leave
behind elderly parents, a familiar culture and the ability to communicate in
their native tongue.
Fifteen years ago, a teenage Lepleiskaya branded her cousin a traitor for moving
to the United States rather than staying and working to change life in Russia for
the better. As an adult, along with building a successful career, she volunteered
at an orphanage and collected money and clothes for those in need.
In the early 2000s, she voted for Putin and his party, but as the years went by
she became increasingly angered by what is happening in the country. Social
inequality has worsened, corruption runs amok, opposition protests are violently
dispersed and the television news often resembles Soviet propaganda.
"There came a moment when I stopped caring ... nothing will change
substantially," Lepleiskaya said.
She said the final straw was when a singer she knew spent 10 days in jail in a
southern Russian city after performing a song critical of the police. She came to
the conclusion that citizens have no power to hold the government accountable or
push for change, either through competitive elections or street protests.
"Have you seen what those protests look like? It's 50 people and 150 riot police
and these young men and women are dragged into those detention trucks,"
Lepleiskaya said.
She realizes that Russia's emerging market provides opportunities for high
profits and quick career advancement in some spheres, but she doesn't trust the
government to protect her savings against inflation and economic turmoil. Her
father, a college instructor for 40 years, recently retired and receives a
pension equivalent to $270 (euro200) per month.
"I don't want to sit on top of a tinderbox. I would rather build my career
slowly, step by step, work and know that eventually when I am 60 the government
will not let me down," she said.
She and her husband, Alexander, a 27-year-old IT specialist are set to receive
their Canadian entry visas in the coming days and plan to fly to Montreal in the
spring. Lepleiskaya now has to vaccinate her cat, who has the French name Xavier,
sell off their belongings and begin saying goodbye to loved ones.
They have never even visited Canada and know it will take a while to find jobs as
interesting and well-paid as those they are leaving behind in Moscow, but they
are looking to the future with hope for a better life for themselves and their
Denisenko, the demographer, said the departure of enterprising, educated Russians
bodes ill for the country.
"Compensating for them will be hard," he said. "Russia would be better off if
they stayed."
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
December 6, 2011
Holiday Shoppers Expected to Spend More
By Irina Filatova
The global economic downturn hasn't hit Russians' purchasing power significantly,
with this year's spending on gifts and entertainment during the New Year's
holidays expected to grow 11 percent from 2010, while most Europeans plan to cut
their holiday expenditures, a survey said Monday.
Russian consumers plan to set aside about 428 euros ($575) for holiday costs, or
11 percent more than last year. More than half of that sum is to be spent on
gifts and the remainder on food and entertainment, according to the survey by
The consulting company polled 1,104 people aged between 18 and 65 in six cities
with a population of more than 1 million Moscow, St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk,
Nizhny Novgorod, Rostov-on-Don and Yekaterinburg.
European consumers' average holiday spending is likely to decrease 0.8 percent
this year to reach 587 euros, the survey said.
The gap in spending between Russian and European consumers is not very
significant given that Russia's inflation expected to reach about 7 percent this
year is higher than in Europe, said Vladimir Biryukov, a partner at Deloitte's
consumer business group.
On the other hand, most respondents in Russia have seen their incomes increase
and expect them to continue growing in the future, he said by telephone.
According to the survey, most Russians are optimistic about their personal
finances, with 67 percent of them saying their purchasing power had increased
compared with last year and 40 percent expecting further growth in 2012.
But half of the respondents think that the country's economy is still in
recession, with only 15 percent and 22 percent, respectively, saying the economy
is growing or stable, the survey said.
"For Russian consumers, it seems that the crisis is something that has affected
their heads more than their pockets at the moment," Deloitte said in a statement.
This perception largely results in changing consumer behavior, with most survey
participants being more cautious about choosing New Year's gifts this year,
Biryukov said.
Russians have become more rational in their holiday spending. The number of
people buying presents without looking at the price decreased from 41 percent in
2010 to 34 percent this year, the survey said.
The number of consumers buying gifts on sale and items considered "useful' has
also increased, bringing consumer behavior in Russia closer to that in Europe,
Biryukov said.
Of consumers surveyed, 87 percent said they are planning to buy useful gifts this
year, compared with 79 percent in 2010, while about 67 percent will choose
discounted or generically labeled products, which are cheaper than branded goods,
Deloitte said.
Cash, travel and laptops have remained the most-sought after gifts in Russia over
the last couple of years, while the most popular gift purchases are actually
cosmetics and perfumes, the survey revealed.
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
December 6, 2011
Investors Upbeat About New Duma
By Anatoly Medetsky
United Russia won enough seats to usher government-sponsored bills through the
State Duma, but the decline in popular support for the ruling party as revealed
by Sunday's elections will likely have consequences that reach beyond law making.
Led by President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, the party
will occupy 238 seats in the new Duma, while a bill requires at least 226 votes
to pass.
The loosening of the tight grip that United Russia had on the previous Duma,
where it counted 315 deputies, could trigger earnest liberal reforms and a few
showcases in the tepid fight on corruption. This could allow the government to
win over voters who are not placated by the state's increased social spending.
"Its good news because it will hopefully give the message to the leadership that
it will have to change to continue to be successful," said Jochen Wermuth, chief
investment officer at Wermuth Asset Management.
Some of the changes would have to appeal to the 47 million-strong Internet-using
middle class who hardly have any representation in the new Duma, he said.
"To not lose these people who want to modernize the country, the Russian
authorities will have to start implementing reforms that will make them happy
independent judges, rule of law, fighting corruption," Wermuth said. "There could
be a war on corruption not with words but actions for example, putting in
prison high-level people who have taken or given bribes at the high level. That
would be a chance to impress people."
Some investment banks and asset managers predicted that the swollen ranks of the
leftist forces in the Duma could prompt the government to undermine their support
by expanding social spending. The Duma election results could "induce extra
populist steps on the part of the country's leadership to move the needle of
public opinion" ahead of the presidential election March 4 where Putin will run,
VTB Capital said in a note to investors Monday.
Tim Ash, head of emerging markets research at Royal Bank of Scotland in London,
said: "The natural instinct for Putin will be to pump more money into the
economy," Bloomberg reported.
Viktor Szabo, who helps manage about $7 billion in emerging market debt,
including Russia's ruble eurobond, at Aberdeen Asset Management in London, also
agreed about the prospect of increased spending, saying it could stoke inflation.
But the most plausible interpretation of the success at the polls for the
Communist Party and A Just Russia is venting frustration with United Russia, both
Alfa Bank and Wermuth said.
"We do not see this necessarily as nostalgia for Soviet times, but rather as an
indication of protest voting," Alfa Bank chief economist Natalia Orlova and
analyst Dmitry Dolgin wrote in a note to investors Monday. "Supporting the
Communists as a prominent second party was the most obvious way to vote against
United Russia in the absence of a legal means to express this view."
Therefore, the government should think twice before dipping into the budget to
spend more in response, an option that would strain state finances further,
Wermuth said.
"I have some faith that the Russian government is professional enough to
understand that they have already overcommitted themselves in the 2012 budget and
there's no room for more social expenditures," he said.
In terms of Duma operations, United Russia's majority will provide enough support
for Putin as the likely next president and Medvedev as the likely next prime
"It will allow us to work calmly and rhythmically," Putin said at a Presidium
meeting Monday.
United Russia's faction will still be able on its own to confirm prime ministers,
express votes of no confidence to the Cabinet, appoint and remove Central Bank
chairpeople and pass any legislation though it doesn't have enough seats to
unilaterally change the Constitution.
"They still have a chance to pass through the parliament all the required
reforms," Wermuth said. "United Russia can still rubber-stamp anything. It's
positive in a sense because if they are serious about reforms they can make a
[return to Contents]
Moscow Times
December 5, 2011
What the Vote Means for Foreign Investors
United Russia garnered less than 50 percent of the vote in State Duma elections
for the first time in its decade-long history. What does that mean for foreign
In terms of passing Kremlin-backed legislation, it should make little difference.
The Liberal Democratic Party has faithfully backed the Kremlin line in its 20
years, and there is no reason that it should stop now. While A Just Russia, which
was created by the Kremlin ahead of 2007 elections to drain votes from the
Communists, criticized the authorities in the months before Sunday's elections,
it is all but certain to side with the Kremlin on key legislation going forward.
That leaves no need for the Communists, whose support will not be necessary for
the Kremlin to obtain a Constitution-busting majority in the Duma.
More significantly, the results of Sunday's vote open the door for Prime Minister
Vladimir Putin to call off his job swap with President Dmitry Medvedev. Putin,
who is expected to easily reclaim the presidency for a third term in March, has
linked the future appointment of Medvedev as prime minister to United Russia's
performance in the Duma elections.
Should Putin decide to reconsider his options for prime minister, here are five
possible candidates for foreign investors to keep an eye on:
Former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin. Our favorite pick by far, Kudrin has
proved to be a results-oriented, principled technocrat who is not afraid to speak
his mind even when his opinions are unpopular, as illustrated when he jealously
guarded his multibillion-dollar stabilization fund from spendthrift populists in
the 2000s. He won widespread praise for his farsightedness when his prudence
bailed out the government during the financial crisis of 2008-09.
Kudrin's outspokenness also caused his downfall when he openly criticized
Medvedev in September. But with the possibility of Medvedev's departure from the
executive branch of government, let bygones be bygones. Kudrin is a prime
minister whom foreign investors can count on, and he would work for the economy's
well-being. The only caveat: Putin would need to heed his advice.
First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov. A poster boy of free-market economics
with foreign investors, Shuvalov is actually next in line for the prime
minister's seat as the second top minister in the Cabinet after Putin. He fills
in as prime minister in Putin's absence and knows all the intricacies of
government, having served as a minister since joining Mikhail Kasyanov's Cabinet
in 2000.
Kremlin chief of staff Sergei Naryshkin. Believed to have first met Putin while
they both served in the KGB, Naryshkin worked with investors both in Putin's
hometown of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad region before moving to Moscow in
2004 to, among other things, help Putin cement state control over Channel One
television. A promotion could be due for his efforts to keep an eye on the
Medvedev administration. As prime minister, he would likely be a yes-man, much
like Mikhail Fradkov and Viktor Zubkov during Putin's previous presidential
Kremlin first deputy chief of staff Vladislav Surkov. If anyone deserves a
merit-based promotion from Putin, it is Surkov, who as political ideologist
masterminded the creation of the Rodina, Just Russia and Right Cause parties, as
well as the Nashi youth group. Surkov also was instrumental to the development of
"the power vertical" and "sovereign democracy," and to the rolling back of
democratic norms over the past decade. In the best case scenario, Surkov would
also be a yes-man as prime minister. But with his track record, he would probably
be much more assertive.
Anti-corruption blogger Alexei Navalny. A long-shot candidate, Navalny should not
be written off by Putin or anyone else too quickly. Perhaps Navalny has committed
the unpardonable sin by exposing corruption at state institutions like Transneft
and VTB and, even worse, by labeling Putin's United Russia as "the party of
crooks and thieves," now a popular catchword for the party among disillusioned
But the perceived negatives could actually work to Putin's benefit. There is no
better person to install as prime minister after elections that exposed
disenchantment with United Russia than the one who first dared take the party to
task in a high-profile manner. Moreover, Putin's main weak point as he returns to
the Kremlin is his poor record on corruption. While there is little sign that
Putin wants to improve in this area, the recruitment of a corruption-fighting
campaigner could go far toward burnishing his credentials as a leader determined
to improve the investment climate. One more thing: Navalny is a patriot whose
actions follow his words, and this puts him squarely in the same camp as Putin,
whose has his own deep sense of patriotism. While pro-investment in his rhetoric,
Navalny has no experience in politics, and as prime minister he could turn out to
be a wild card for investors.
So where does that leave Medvedev?
We would like to see Medvedev get a shot at pushing ahead with the modernization
and anti-corruption drives that were supposed to be the hallmarks of his
presidency. But at the same time, we recognize that he has made precious little
progress in those areas and the executive branch needs new blood. If the prime
minister's post, indeed, is no longer in the cards for Medvedev, let him take up
the speaker's post in the new State Duma. He was, after all, United Russia's sole
candidate on the ballot in Sunday's Duma elections.
[return to Contents]
Wall Street Journal
December 6, 2011
Russian Oil Frontier: Nowhere Land
Energy Firms, in Remotest Siberia for Crude, Run Rigs Over Video Link From 700
Miles Away
By GUY CHAZAN
EASTERN SIBERIA, Russia-There's the middle of nowhere, and then there's here.
The place is Verkhnechonsk, an oil field in eastern Russia operated by TNK-BP
Ltd. that is one of the remotest spots on the planet. To get there you have to
fly to Siberia, take an aging turboprop plane deep into the taiga, or subarctic
forest. Then hop on a helicopter heading north. From Moscow, the journey takes a
day, including layovers-longer if there are snowstorms.
It is so far from anywhere that TNK-BP, a joint venture of BP PLC and a group of
Soviet-born billionaires, runs operations via video link from an office in
Irkutsk, some 600 miles away. "It's like living on an island," says Albert
Gilfanov, the oil field's deputy manager.
Russia is an energy superpower, with 13% of the planet's oil resources and a
quarter of its natural gas. Having declined steeply after the collapse of the
Soviet Union, oil production has come back strongly, hitting a new post-Soviet
high of 10.3 million barrels a day in October.
Yet the mainstay of Russia's hydrocarbon wealth-the big Soviet-era oil fields of
Western Siberia-is in decline. To keep production stable, Russia has no choice
but to expand into new areas like Eastern Siberia-where oil reserves are less
plentiful, production costs higher and the logistical challenges mind-boggling.
Some companies are already there. TNK-BP has been pumping crude from
Verkhnechonsk, one of the biggest oil fields in Eastern Siberia, since 2008.
But the difficulties it faces are enormous. The cold is staggering, even for
Siberia: winter temperatures can fall to minus 70 degrees Fahrenheit, at which
point all outside work is banned. The nearest human settlement is 250 miles away,
and the forests are full of bears, wolves and elks. The oil is stuck under layers
of hard rock and salt deposits that make drilling difficult.
And perhaps worst of all, the size of the prize is far from inspiring. All of
Eastern Siberia contains five billion barrels of proven oil reserves, according
to the International Energy Agency, compared with Western Siberia's 48 billion
Russia's other prospective areas are even more remote and even more expensive to
develop: according to one estimate, $500 billion will be needed to open up vast
oil and gas fields in the offshore Arctic. The costs of producing oil in Eastern
Siberia and other far-flung areas are high-between $6 and $10 a barrel, compared
with $4-$8 a barrel in Russia's older oil provinces, according to the IEA.
Although crude from Eastern Siberia sells for over $100 a barrel, capital and
transport costs take a big chunk out of profits.
And under Russia's current tax system there is little incentive to invest. For
example, the Russian government's take from one of its new fields in the
Arctic-the total effect of the country's fiscal system on cash flow from the
fields-is 72%, compared with 53% for one of Brazil's massive offshore oil fields,
according to Morgan Stanley. "For these projects to be successful...there needs
to be some significant changes to the fiscal regime," Glen Waller, head of Russia
for Exxon Mobil Corp., told a recent conference in Moscow.
Yet Russia's rulers are so heavily dependent on the money they get from the oil
companies that they are loath to reduce taxes. Revenues from oil and gas make up
almost half of Russia's budget income.
The IEA projects that Russian oil output will stabilize for the next few years
and then go into a slight decline, as output from new fields fails to compensate
for declines in the older ones.
But the key to keeping Russian oil production more-or-less stable, according to
the IEA, is to maintain or even increase output from Russia's core region of
Western Siberia, which still contains billions of barrels of oil. That could be
done by restructuring the tax system so as to encourage investment in its new
fields and through enhanced recovery techniques at old ones. If that investment
isn't forthcoming, total Russian oil production could go into "a rapid decline,"
the IEA says.
Verkhnechonsk was first discovered in 1978 by Soviet geologists. But it was
considered too far away from the U.S.S.R.'s export markets to be worth
That changed in 2006 when Moscow started building the East Siberia-Pacific Ocean
pipeline, known as ESPO-a multibillion-dollar project designed to bring Siberian
oil to Asia. Suddenly, marooned oil fields like Verkhnechonsk had an outlet to
the fast-growing energy markets of the East.
The Russian government also helped by making crude from Eastern Siberia exempt
from mineral-extraction tax, at least initially, and oil-export duties. Armed
with the tax breaks, TNK-BP set to work.
Mr. Gilfanov, the oil field's deputy manager, was one of the first men to be
deployed to Verkhnechonsk. He was sent here in 2007 from Samotlor, an oil field
in Western Siberia that is one of the largest in the world and where he worked
for 30 years.
Mr. Gilfanov says Verkhnechonsk has the same feel Samotlor had when he arrived
there in 1979 as an idealistic young communist. "There was nothing here when I
came, just taiga," he said, referring to the swampy coniferous forest that covers
the area. "I was a pioneer again."
Conditions were tough. Workers shivered in winter and in summer were tormented by
midges so vicious they have been known to kill cows. With no roads, the oil men
had to be flown in by helicopter from Ust Kut, a desolate Siberian way station
that Bolshevik leader Leon Trotsky was exiled to in Czarist times.
The oil field itself, with its complex geology and even more complex chemistry,
didn't make things easier. TNK-BP engineers soon discovered that the oil in the
reservoir was incredibly cold. That increases the risk of wax building up in the
wellbore-the hole created by the drill bit-blocking the well and slowing the
oil's flow rate. It also means the oil has to be heated up when it comes out of
the ground so water and salts can be removed-a process that requires huge amounts
of energy.
"Verkhnechonsk has some of the lowest temperatures among any of the world's oil
fields," says Igor Rustamov, head of the Verkhnechonsk production subsidiary.
Also, the oil has an unusually high salt content. Cleaning that requires a lot of
fresh water, which is in short supply in the ice-bound taiga. Meanwhile,
hard-to-remove salt deposits can build up in pipes, pumps and valves.
Finally, the part of Verkhnechonsk's reservoir that actually contains producible
oil-the pay zone, as it is called-is unusually thin. So TNK-BP had to drill
horizontal rather than vertical wells, using advanced technologies to guide the
drill bit toward the reservoir's sweet spot-"like an optical sight on a sniper's
rifle," says Mr. Rustamov.
There have been other problems. The Russian government, noting the steep rise in
oil prices, canceled the zero oil-export duty in July 2010, half a year earlier
than planned. "Of course it was a blow," says Jonathan Kollek, the company's head
of supply, trading and logistics. "The industry needs predictability to plan
investments efficiently."
TNK-BP finally delivered Verkhnechonsk's first oil into the ESPO pipeline in
October 2008, a landmark event. Production is expected to increase to a peak of
160,000 barrels a day by 2014, from roughly 100,000 barrels a day now.
But that pales in significance compared with the monster fields of Western
Siberia. Samotlor reached peak production of more than three million barrels a
day in 1980. Even now, 46 years after it opened, it is producing five times more
than Verkhnechonsk.
"East Siberia just doesn't have the same reserves," said Mr. Rustamov. "In that
respect, West Siberia is irreplaceable."
[return to Contents]
Medvedev shoos foreign powers from domestic affairs
MOSCOW, December 6 (RIA Novosti)-President Dmitry Medvedev said Tuesday that
Russia's political system is Russia's own affair and not that of its foreign
"If they observe elections, violations, it is one thing, but the issue of
Russia's political system is not their business," Medvedev said at the meeting
with the head of the Central Election Commission, Vladimir Churov. "Soon they
will tell us how we should write our Constitution."
The president's remarks came on the heels of the harsh criticism of Russia's
Sunday legislative elections voiced by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
Clinton said on Tuesday that Russia's vote was "neither free nor fair" and called
for investigating complaints about election violations.
Russians voted Sunday to elect the State Duma, the lower chamber of the
parliament. The ruling United Russia party, led by the Prime Minister Vladimir
Putin, collected 49.3 percent of the vote with 99.99 percent of ballots counted
as of late Tuesday afternoon.
International and domestic vote observers claim to have collected an extensive
record of vote fraud.
Medvedev's statement echoes the so-called "sovereign democracy" rhetoric that was
popular during the presidency of his predecessor Putin, which sought to bar
foreign influence from domestic policies, including civil rights issues.
Medvedev, who topped the United Russia ticket in these elections, has spoken
against the "sovereign democracy" notion in the past.
[return to Contents]
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
December 6, 2011
Author: Giovanni Bensi
Foreign media outlets have been commenting on the parliamentary
election in Russia ever since the first announcement of the
interim results by the Central Electoral Commission. Most of them
went to great lengths commenting on the defeat inflicted on United
Russia and on the increase of protest moods in Russian society.
Neither were the circumstances that accompanied the election
forgotten in comments, particularly illegitimate demonstrations
and mass arrests of their participants. Electronic media outlets
with web sites of their own and TV channels were the first to
react. Newspapers had to wait until the following morning, of
course. Corriere della Sera featured a piece titled "Russia.
Downfall of Putin's Party". Its author pointed out that United
Russia, the political force that had monopolized power in Moscow
in 2003 and retained the monopoly ever since, failed to get the
constitutional majority i.e. two thirds of the parliament. It
could not amend the Constitution anymore and thus found its hands
tied. The piece also commented on the increasing number of the
votes cast for the Communists and for Fair Russia which it called
Reppublica, another Italian newspaper, focused attention on
protests and repressions from law enforcement agencies on the
polling day. The newspaper even featured a brief interview with
Andrea Rigoni, Italian lawmaker who observed the election in
Moscow on behalf of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe. Rigoni encountered trouble at a polling station. "It
happened not far from the Red Square and Lubyanka," said Rigoni.
"I displayed by badge and the guards at the entrance waved me
through but told my interpreter to wait outside. In this manner
they all but made my presence there pointless because I do not
speak Russian and I could ask no questions."
The French Le Monde pointed out that the election last Sunday
failed to change the Duma in any significant manner. The same four
political parties made it to the lower house of the parliament.
The new correlation of forces in the Duma will nevertheless compel
the ruling party to seek compromises with other political parties.
Munich-based Seuddeutsche Zeitung emphasized that the Russian
opposition was calling the 2011 parliamentary election "the
dirtiest" in the post-Soviet history of Russia. "Domination of the
ruling party is history... foundations of Putin's regime are shaky
Frankfurter Algemeine sneered that the so called castling
within the Russian ruling tandem had some assets as well. "This
rotation a la russe is a perfect example of the division of
powers. It is surely better than endless rows typical of weak
European and American democracies." The author, however, stated
that this seeming harmony could do democracy in.
The Spanish Mundo stated that "... the parliamentary election
in Russia regressed into a a referendum aiming to gauge the
popularity of Putin who has been the national leader since 1999
and intends to become the president again, three months from now."
Author of the piece in Mundo reckoned that the defeat inflicted on
United Russia in December was a bad omen for the presidential
election come March.
The Washington Post wrote that "Putin expected his party to
succeed and demonstrate public support for his comeback" and that
the outcome of the parliamentary election killed this dream.
"Putin methodically removed all potential rivals. Most Russians
fail to see an alternative to Putin even though they become
increasingly more discontent with his authoritarian style,
corruption, and the gap between the people and the moves and
[return to Contents]
Clinton's statement political, opportunistic - view
MOSCOW, December 6 (Itar-Tass) Chairman of the Russian Public Institute of
Election Law Igor Borisov called the statement by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton "opportunistic and purely political." "Such opinions coming from the
politician who did not take part in monitoring the election "are driving a wedge
between our peoples and countries," he said.
Borisov, who supervised the international sector as a member of the previous
Central Election Commission, and is an acknowledge experts in international
monitoring, confirmed that the reports by the OSCE Office for Democratic
Institutions and Human Rights - which observed Russia's parliamentary elections -
do not contain this kind of evaluations voiced by Mrs Clinton. It seems they see
it better from the States," he noted.
The expert said he fully agreed with the advice for the U.S. secretary of state
given by senior officials at the Russian Election Commission. "Mrs Clinton should
pay attention to U.S. elections which take place amidst numerous violations," he
During her speech in Vilnius at a meeting of the OSCE foreign ministers on
Tuesday, Clinton severely criticized the election to Russia's 6th State Duma:
"Russian voters deserve a full investigation of electoral fraud and manipulation.
The Russian people, like people everywhere, deserve the right to have their
voices heard and their votes counted. And that means they deserve free, fair,
transparent elections and leaders who are accountable to them."
Head of the committee for international affairs under the 5th State Duma
Konstantin Kosachev (United Russia faction) warned about Moscow's tough response
in case the USA takes actions following Clinton's statement on the Russian
"This statement is not helpful in improving the atmosphere of our relations,"
said Kosachev, who was elected to the 6th State Duma," I'm hoping the U.S.
authorities will not draw any practical conclusions from the present odd
statement by Mrs Clinton; it would be an impossible development."
"So we take note (of it); it is far from being the brightest page, it's even one
of the darkest pages in the history of Russian-U.S. relations of the recent
years; in our joint work in the "resetting" mode. But if this statement remains
just a statement; hopefully, we'll avoid negative consequences.
"If there are initiatives on the part of the U.S. side, say with direct support
of those who Clinton says belong to the Democrats, our response will be tough and
consistent. Our after-election situation is our situation, and only we, the
Russian citizens, can determine the parameters of holding election and
eventually, give opinions about them," Kosachev said.
[return to Contents]
Moscow News
December 6, 2011
McCain warns Putin of 'Arab spring'
By Tom Washington
Tweets of warning are in the air as US Senator John McCain, former presidential
candidate and Russia skeptic, told Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to watch out for
an "Arab Spring."
"Dear Vlad, the Arab Spring is coming to a neighborhood near you," McCain wrote
after United Russia, which backs Putin for president in upcoming elections,
suffered an unexpectedly low return in the polls after Sunday's State Duma
elections. Putin will stand for president in March next year.
Mass demos around Moscow since the election have protested alleged electoral
fraud, even with the low numbers for United Russia. The party won just over 50
percent of seats, less than 2007's return of just over two thirds and a
constitutional majority.
Putin critic
McCain has never pulled his punches for Putin and called the Prime Minister a
"dictator" in an interview with the BBC in October, despite Putin's theoretical
position as No. 2. He is still touted as the senior policy maker in the ruling
tandem of himself and President Dmitry Medvedev.
Depending on the presidential elections in March, which Putin is expected to win,
he is to swap places with the current president and return to power, potentially
until 2024.
"I think dictators all over the world, including Russia... Maybe even Mr.
Putin... are maybe a little bit more nervous," McCain told the BBC after former
Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was killed by Libyan opposition and NATO forces and
as Russia's Duma race began to hot up.
Russian spring?
He said, "I think it's the spring not just the Arab Spring," as the wave of
unrest, that spread across much of the Middle East and ousted governments, was
"I cannot predict an armed uprising or anything like that but I can certainly see
significant protest in a lot of countries," he added.
Despite the low turnout for the ruling party on Sunday significant protests have
taken place in Moscow and other Russian cities, prompting firm action from riot
police and promises of counter protests from pro-Kremlin supporters. Pro-Kremlin
youth group Nashi promises a 15,000 strong rally on Manezh Square on Tuesday
[return to Contents]
Statement on US missile defence met with rare unanimity among Russians
GORKI, December 5 (Itar-Tass) President Dmitry Medvedev's statement on the U.S.
missile defence system in Europe was met by Russians with rare unanimity, the
head of state said, adding that it was not motivated by elections.
"I do not know how all this will be eventually interpreted, but I can say one
simple thing that should set us all thinking: it has been a long time since I saw
such unanimity on the position of the president of the country," Medvedev said at
a meeting with his supporters on Monday, December 5.
"Everyone, left and right, young and old, support tough measures. There demand
for that," he added.
"After I made the statement I heard all the time that this was done in order to
strengthen the position of United Russia before the elections and my own position
during transformation of power, that this was done for situational reasons. Now
that the elections are over, I would like to say to all our people that this was
an absolutely well considered statement, I had been thinking about for a long
time, I did not want to make it but I had to," the president said.
Russia has opposes the deployment of U.S. missile defence elements in Europe as a
threat to its own strategic nuclear forces.
Moscow insists on legally binding guarantees that the missile defence system
being created by the United States and NATO in Europe won't be aimed against it.
This issue was raised at a meeting between Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov
and U.S. Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Ellen
Tauscher in St. Petersburg in the middle of August.
"The Russian side stressed the importance of ensuring legally binding guarantees
that the missile defence system being created by the United States and NATO won't
be aimed against Russia's strategic nuclear forces," the Foreign Ministry said.
Tauscher had earlier recalled that two years ago in Prague U.S. President Barack
Obama had declared America's commitment to "to seek the peace and security of a
world without nuclear weapons."
The United States hopes for further cooperation with Russia on missile defence,
Mark Toner, Deputy Department of State Spokesman, said earlier this month.
"We've been clear all along, for many years now, that this system is not directed
against Russia. In multiple channels, we've explained to Russian officials that
the missile defence systems being deployed in Europe do not and cannot threaten
Russia's strategic deterrent," he said.
Commenting on President Dmitry Medvedev's statement that Russia may pull out of
the START if the U.S. develops missile defence in Europe, and may place Iskander
missiles in the Kaliningrad region, Toner said, "The New START Treaty benefits
the security and stability of both our countries, and its implementation is going
well, and we see no basis for threats to withdraw from it."
He stressed, "We don't see any reason for Russia to take any military
countermeasures to missile defences that won't affect the strategic balance
between the U.S. and Russia."
"We're going to continue to try to engage with them constructively on missile
defence. We want that kind of cooperation because we believe it's in both our
interests, Europe's interests, and Russia's interests," Toner said, adding, "...
our focus and commitment remains on how to work productively and constructively
with Russia on a cooperation on missile defence."
Toner said the U.S. missile defence reflects a growing threat to our allies from
Iran that we're committed to deterring. "Our focus is on cooperation, is on
making clear to Russian authorities that this is in no way a system that's
directed at Russia. It's directed, as I said, from a threat to our allies in
Europe, and in Russia, in fact, from Iran," he said.
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Russia and NATO need tactical
cooperation instead.
NATO and Russian Defence Ministers met in late June to discuss the next steps in
our missile defence cooperation. "We all understand that the foundation for our
cooperation must be confidence and trust," Rasmussen said.
"The threats to Russia come from elsewhere. And our invitation to cooperate on
missile defence is proof of that," he said, adding that NATO posed no threat to
Russia and was not considering it as a threat.
Russian Defence Minister Anatoly Serdyukov confirmed after that meeting that
there is trust between Russia and NATO on missile defence, but there are no
"NATO has so far not listened to Russia's proposals on missile defence. NATO
insists on building two independent systems," he said.
According to Serdyukov, this may lead to a situation where "a missile defence
system that may be created in Europe by 2020 will neutralise Russia's strategic
In this case, Russia will have to "look for ways to overcome this system, which
will lead to a new arms race".
The minister believes that this is "the position of the U.S. in the first place".
At the same time, he stressed that the dialogue will continue. "We have no other
choice. Otherwise a return to an arms race will be inevitable," Serdyukov said.
Chief of the Russian Army General Staff, General of the Army Nikolai Makarov said
"unilateral steps being taken by the alliance do not add security and stability
in the region".
[return to Contents]
December 6, 2011
OSCE to lose its role if not reformed Lavrov
Without serious reforms, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe
(OSCE) could become irrelevant, the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has
"It is obvious that without profound OSCE reforms, without the organization's
transition on a solid legal basis, it will keep losing its high role," Lavrov
said at a meeting of foreign ministers from OSCE member states in Vilnius, as
cited by Itar-Tass.
According to Russia's top diplomat, the preparations for the gathering once again
showed that the OSCE's "existing instruments malfunction while the path of
extensively increasing the number of documents and obligations has exhausted
itself, especially when previous obligations such as guaranteeing freedom of
movement are being 'forgotten'."
Lavrov pointed out that Moscow has its own vision of how the organization should
be reformed and has already put forward its ideas.
"The projects of respective draft decisions submitted by Russia and our partners
concerning different aspects of the reform are worth being seriously considered,"
he said. "It is important not to forget about the main OSCE mission as a
collective instrument to ensure security and co-operation."
Speaking at the meeting, Lavrov also called on the security organization to
address the growth of nationalism in Europe.
"We believe it is crucially important to respond to an address submitted to the
OSCE by the non-governmental association, 'Lithuania without Nazism,' with an
appeal to consider the growing nationalistic and neo-Nazi manifestations in the
European space," the minister said.
Lavrov also touched upon the situation in Kosovo and accused international forces
in the region the NATO-led KFOR and the EU mission EULEX of failing to observe
"The OSCE must stay focused on the situation in Kosovo, which has aggravated
again following deviations from the UN Security Council Resolution 1244 and the
failure to observe neutral status by the international [forces]," he said.
The head of Russian diplomacy also noted that the OSCE could make its
contribution to the settlement of the situation in North Africa and the Middle
"The developments of the 'Arab spring' and the difficult progress of the Afghan
settlement call for greater attention to the relations between the OSCE and its
partners by co-operation," he stressed.
Moscow would like Arab nations to decide on their future developments without
outside interference, Lavrov underlined.
"The OSCE could make a contribution, within the limits of its potentialities, to
the international support for those processes, with the UN playing the key role,
and proceeding from the resources it has and in response to the appeals of the
partner countries themselves," he added.
Russia has repeatedly voiced its criticism over the way UN resolutions such as
the one adopted on Libya are implemented. During the Vilnius meeting, Lavrov
stated that Security Council resolutions are often used for illegal ends.
"The deliberate use of resolutions of the UN Security Council for illegal
purposes, the attempts to interfere in domestic conflicts in support of one of
the conflicting parties, including with the use of force, under the pretext of
'responsibility for protection,' evoke serious concern," Lavrov said.
According to the official, double standards are used in approaches to different
crisis situations and this may lead to grave consequences. Lavrov stressed that
deviation from the principle of the supremacy of law will "undermine global and
regional security and will destroy the foundation, on which the whole system of
international relations is built."
[return to Contents]
Russia Warns Against Secret Contacts With Taliban
MOSCOW. Dec 5 (Interfax) - Russia warns all countries involved in the settlement
efforts in Afghanistan from secret contacts with the Taliban.
"According to information we have, both the Afghan authorities and a number of
their international partners had sporadic contacts with members of the Taliban
movement. Moreover, Kabul was not always notified of these meetings," Russian
presidential representative for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov said in an interview
with Interfax.
"Such behind-the-scenes contacts between representatives of foreign states and
organizations with the Taliban are fraught with wrong signals of the
international community's true intentions in the context of the settlement
efforts on Afghanistan," he said.
Russia is convinced that dialogue with the armed opposition could have a positive
effect for normalizing the situation in Afghanistan only if militants lay down
their arms, recognize the constitution and break away from al-Qaida and other
extremist organizations, he said.
On the other hand, Russia has repeatedly supported proposals on removing Taliban
officials from the UN Security Council sanction list, Kabulov said.
"In addition, we have also supported the proposal on separating the sanction
regime imposed by UN Security Council resolution 1267 into two independent
mechanisms, with the establishment of new Security Council committees separately
on al-Qaida and on the Taliban," he said.
"At the same time we suppose that reciprocal reconciliatory steps on the Taliban
part should be a precondition for further actions on relieving the sanctions for
the Taliban members on the list," he said.
[return to Contents]
Rossiyskaya Gazeta
December 6, 2011
Flour and machine guns don't count
The West holds Russia in Afghan "reception area"
By Evgeny Shestakov (Bonn)
During the International Conference on Afghanistan in Bonn, Russia's foreign
minister Sergey Lavrov reminded participants about the support Moscow has
provided to international military forces since the beginning of the Operation
Enduring Freedom.
In the last 10 years, our country has written off $11 billion of Afghanistan's
We have supplied 40,000 tons of wheat flour and about $50 million dollars' worth
of non-military equipment to Afghanistan as part of humanitarian aid. Russia has
donated a significant amount of small arms and ammunition (20,000 machine guns
and 2.5 million rounds of ammunition), and has been providing free training to
the Afghan army. Recently, Moscow donated 3,000 tons of wheat flour and 40 trucks
to Kabul. It would seem that such an impressive amount of "logistical support"
would guarantee that Russia's voice would be heard in the discussion of regional
problems by the Western coalition in Afghanistan. But prior to the Bonn
conference, Zamir Kabulov, a special envoy to Afghanistan grimly stated: "Russian
proposals usually leave our partners indifferent."
Most of Moscow's initiatives address the practical steps necessary to restore the
Afghan economy. "We have declared our readiness to allocate funds to the amount
of $500 million for the implementation of the transnational energy project
'CASA-1000'. We expect our participating partners, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan,
Afghanistan and Pakistan, to issue a joint address with an invitation to
participate in its implementation," explained Kabulov.
The West remains wary of all Russian declarations of willingness to cooperate in
the construction of a hydro-electric power station and other infrastructure in
Afghanistan. Coalition participants, mainly the United States, look at
Afghanistan as their personal playground, to which access of "strangers" ought to
be closed.
Moscow's proposals of involving regional international organizations where Russia
has a fairly strong presence in the Afghan settlement have been continuously
rejected. In the West, we are regarded as merely a transit state, a supplier of
humanitarian aid. In his speech in Bonn, Sergey Lavrov once again urged
conference participants to reconsider their attitudes toward the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization. "In future, this structure could become a high-priority
platform for the coordination of international efforts in Afghanistan." It's
possible that, this time, the Russian foreign minister has been heard.
On the eve of the conference, Germany's special representative for Afghanistan
and Pakistan, Michael Steiner, said that at the Bonn conference "the
international community will ensure in a credible way that it will not repeat the
mistakes of the past [following 2014]". What mistakes did the German diplomat
have in mind?
In a New York Times article, published before the conference, its authors
influential American experts argued: "Instead of relying heavily on Pakistan as
a supply corridor, the United States should expand its cooperation with Russia,
which has been playing an increasingly important role in military transit to and
from Afghanistan." It's too early to say that "the ice has been broken," but the
initial signs of progress are evident. Collective Security Treaty Organization
Secretary General Nikolay Bordyuzha has taken part in the International
Conference on Afghanistan for the first time. An invitation to Bonn was also
extended to the SCO Secretary General M. Imanaliev.
Afghanistan's problems call for the inclusion of qualitatively different players
with untainted reputations who enjoy a certain amount of influence in the region.
But convincing Washington of the need to replace the players won't be easy.
Before the conference, US officials had made statements regarding the possible
continuation of the US military base presence in Afghanistan after the withdrawal
of international forces in 2014. Russia considers such actions unjustified.
Moscow is urging a complete withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan
and the restoration of the country's neutral status.
At the conference in Bonn, the majority of participants urged the Afghan
government to engage in a dialogue with political opponents, resolve the problem
of drug trafficking, and fight corruption. It was noticeable that Afghan
President Hamid Karzai, who sat in his traditional green robe on a podium in the
center of the hall, was rather tense when hearing these proposals. "There is a
growing understanding of the special role of Afghanistan's neighbors," said
Lavrov, addressing Karzai in his speech.
But based on the final outcomes of the conference in Bonn, the settlement process
was not smooth, which is typical of such annual meetings. President Hamid Karzai
and his ministers were, once again, given a "pass grade" for their work. Russia's
initiatives on the inclusion of the SCO and the CSTO in the Afghan settlement did
not make it into the final documents of the Bonn conference.
[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