March 12, 1998  
This Date's Issues:    2105  • 2106  

Johnson's Russia List
#2106
12 March 1998
davidjohnson@erols.com

[Note from David Johnson:
1. Gary Kern: Hands off the eXile!
2. Mark Whitehouse: eXile press review.
3. Matt Roazen: RE Exile Press Review.
4. The Moscow Tribune: John Helmer, CRONY MONETARISM IS OK.
5. Christian Science Monitor editorial: Russia's Tax Revulsion.
6. Financial Times: Bruce Clark, Weapons: Plutonium accord delay 
'raises risks.'
7. New York Times editorial: A Dangerous Plutonium Problem.
8. USA Today: Rising mortality hits Russia's young.
9. USA Today: On-job dangers hit Russian men hard.
10. WP: FINDINGS. Life Expectancy in Russia.
11. Interfax: Russian PM: Yeltsin, Clinton Likely To Meet Mid-1998.
12. Reuters: U.S. Concerns Linger after Chernomyrdin Talks.
13. Interfax: Snowstorm Causes Problems in Moscow Streets, Airports.
14. RIA Novosti: NUMBER OF BANKRUPTCIES OF RUSSIAN COMPANIES IS 
DOUBLING EVERY YEAR, REPORTS GEORGY TAL, CHAIRMAN OF FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY
SERVICE.
15. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Dmitry GORNOSTAYEV, DISCRIMINATION IMPEDES
COOPERATION.
Viktor Chernomyrdin Believes Only the Lazy Can Be Content
With Today's Relations Between Moscow and Washington.]


********

#1
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 
From: Gary Kern <gkern@alumni.Princeton.EDU>
Subject: Hands off the eXile!

In answer to your query, I think the eXile is great. It has carved out
a special niche for itself: the tough guy on the street telling us the
real lowdown about Russia--without respect for authority, with
occasional gutter language, with gut-wrenching realism. It's good to
hear from the tough guy from time to time, because he has street smarts,
a sense of moral outrage (which he would deny) and a no-nonsense
approach. He can't be bought off--or if he can, he'll tell you about
it. Also there is a chance he is keeping some of the more elite
reporters honest. Get rid of him, and maybe there will be more
white-collar smooth-talkers leading us all to slaughter--or mindless
consumption--with buzz words, PC and lies.

I'm not saying that I want every journalist to be a tough guy writing
everything with a personal attitude, nor that everything the tough guy
says is right. But I like these particular tough guys, respect them and
believe that they are mostly on target. Unlike the pampered and
paid-off crowd, they are risking their necks with their paper. That
doesn't happen too often these days, does it? Today our so-called
reporters are a pack of millionaire celebrities, every man jack of them
wearing a trench coat and standing in front of a government building,
reading a cue card. It makes you sick.

Da zdravstvuet eXilsky!

*******

#2
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 
From: whitehouse@imedia.ru (Mark Whitehouse)
Subject: eXile press review

>(DJ: I have received comments positive and negative about the eXile's
>Press Review column. I would like to encourage recipients to pass on to
>me their own views. I'd like to encourage some discussion.)

Commenting on the eXile is like trying to analyze a schizophrenic. But
since the weekly's articles have started regularly appearing on your list,
I'll take a shot at providing some much-needed context.

The eXile's editors, Mark Ames and Matt Taibbi, frequently remind their
readers that the paper shouldn't be taken seriously, which is sound advice
and sets the stage for some great satire. But then, with no obvious warning,
the eXile runs investigative pieces and criticism as if they should be
believed. Some of the serious stuff is good, but a lot of it is just
irresponsible.

Taibbi's most recent Press Review is way out on the irresponsible side. He
levels entirely serious accusations at two Western journalists, Martin
Nesirky of Reuters and Fred Hiatt of the Washington Post, saying that he
thinks they've taken money to write puff pieces about Anatoly Chubais and
Vladimir Potanin.

In doing so, he uses the tried-and-true "accusations denied" trick. If, for
example, a journalist wants to suggest that the Queen of England is a child
abuser, but there is no adequate evidence, it is very easy to call the
Queen's press service, pose the question, then write a big story about how
the Queen denied being a child abuser. Whether or not the accusation is
founded, the person's name gets dragged through the mud.

In the case of Hiatt and Nesirky, Taibbi's only evidence is the articles
themselves. In one, Hiatt gives Vladimir Potanin, head of Uneximbank, some
positive coverage:

"...But for every Russian who still dreams of dominating Latvia or Ukraine,
plenty more still just want to do business there.

"One such person is baby billionaire Vladimir Potanin, who in the space of
a decade has metamorphosed from low-ranking Soviet bureaucrat into one of
the world's most influential businessmen, with interests in banking,oil,
mining, newspapers and more.

"Like many of his generation, Mr. Potanin, 37, is just now coming up for
air from the post-Soviet maelstrom and checking out the world. He is
forming international alliances, including with British Petroleum and the
financier George Soros, and recently came to Washington, seeking to show
that not all "robber barons," as they are commonly known in America, are
the same.

"A new Duma will be elected next year. Mr. Potanin hopes that it will have
a better 'understanding of the modern world, of getting Russia integrated
into the world.' Businessmen like himself will be working toward that goal,
he said."

Taibbi's beef is that Hiatt fails to mention Potanin's Soviet past as a
Komsomol leader and the fact that his bank, like just about every other big
Russian bank, grew fat on cheap budget money and bargain-basement
privatization sales. This is, of course, important background, and its
omission could deserve a mention in a responsible critique, but it's not
proof that an editorial writer for the Washington Post would actually risk
his hard-won job over a bribe.

Nonetheless, Taibbi called Hiatt, who denied his accusation. Taibbi's
conclusion? "I've still got a reasonable doubt." In court, a reasonable
doubt is what gets people acquitted, not what sends them to the electric
chair.

In the second article, Reuters calls Chubais "a brilliant administrator and
much respected in the West," and fudges some background on Chubais' book
advance scandal, failing to explain that Chubais had admitted to taking
money from a publishing house connected to Potanin's Uneximbank, which at
about the same time won an auction for Svyazinvest that Chubais oversaw.
Again, the omission provides ample grounds to question the writer's bias,
but no proof that a Reuters chief correspondent took money for positive
coverage.

Still, Taibbi published his accusations, and even called Nesirky's boss in
London in an attempt "to get him in trouble with his superiors and ruin his
career a little bit." As much as I try to take this as a practical joke, I
get the sense that he's serious.

I can sympathize with Hiatt and Nesirky. The eXile has written similar
stuff about me. The experience taught me an important lesson in
journalistic ethics: If you're going to drag somebody's name into a
scandal, be sure you have your facts straight and your sources are
reliable. Who's going to teach Taibbi?

Mark Whitehouse
Staff Writer
The Moscow Times

******

#3
From: Matt Roazen <Matthew.Roazen@salans-shh.com>
Subject: RE: Exile Press Review
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 12:26:50 +0100

In response to your call for reactions to the Exile Press Reviews you
have been carrying in JRL, I would love to see a full range of reactions
printed in JRL. It's hard to imagine on what basis a reader could find
fault with the substance of these reviews. Perhaps the style is a bit
profane, but the message is clearly and forcefully written -- much of
the reporting by Westerners in Russia is weaker than it should be.

The Exile, in its press reviews, tends to focus on how the Western press
reports on the activities of Anatoly Chubais. This is not an obsessive
fixation or a vendetta. There is a very good reason for focussing on
Chubais's coverage, which I am sure you, and most of JRL's readership,
are already perfectly aware: along with (and in some cases more than)
Yeltsin himself, Chubais is the most important figure in Russia today as
far as the West is concerned. To the decision makers in the U.S. and
the major European powers, Chubais is the figure whose political health
serves as the barometer of Russia's commitment to Westernization.
Chubais's image in the Western press, therefore, is extremely crucial
not just to Chubais, and his ability to channel billions of Western
dollars into his country a year, but to the Western decisionmakers who
channel that money in. If Chubais is shown to have feet of clay, or his
fingerprints all over this or that well-documented piece of corruption,
this mars the illusion that the West is investing its reputation -- not
to say a massive pile of dough -- on a beleaguered but honest bureaucrat
who is trying singlehandedly to drag Russia into the 21st century.
Therefore, Western press coverage -- or non-coverage -- of Chubais is an
appropriate and fertile focus for the Exile.

Oddly, the Russian press is far more balanced on the topic of Chubais,
although this balance works differently than it is expected to in the
West. In the West, an ethical journalist would write an article which
laid out carefully the pros and cons of a particular figure. If a
substantiable scandal came out, the newspaper would run with it. The
decision to include a particular fact would be made based on whether
that fact can be shown to have come from a source outside the particular
journalist's own skull. After all, the theory goes, the paper is
written for the benefit of the reader as opposed to the government, the
paper's advertisers, or the figure in the story himself. Of course,
this theory does not work perfectly in the West, and it does not work at
all in Russia. In Russia, a reader will get his balance of journalism
through reading several papers. If he reads a pro-government paper, the
coverage of Chubais will be favorable. If he reads a paper controlled
by an anti-government political party, the coverage of Chubais will be
unfavorable. If he reads a paper controlled by a businessman with whom
Chubais has recently had a mutually fruitful relationship, Chubais's
coverage will be solidly supportive. If he reads a paper controlled by
a businessman with whom Chubais has had a long feud (Berezovsky, for
instance), Chubais will be pilloried on a daily basis. The reader takes
the average of these coverages and comes to his own conclusion. You can
be sure that Chubais's book advance -- a totally substantiated scandal
similar to the one which toppled Speaker of the House Jim Wright and
nearly did the same to the guy who blew the whistle on him, Speaker Newt
Gingrich, and would therefore be an extremely familiar and accessible
storyline to the American reader -- would have been carried far more
heavily in the American press if it were not for the simple fact that
the United States Government, which makes the lion's share of
investments directly or indirectly into the Russian Federation
Government (and does so primarily through Anatoly Chubais), is not eager
to see Chubais embarrassed. As the saying goes, he may be a son of a
bitch, but he's our son of a bitch. Or, to paraphrase Jake Gittes,
Chubais in Russia is like the leper with the most fingers.

********

#4
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1998 
From: helmer@glas.apc.org (John Helmer)

>From The Moscow Tribune, March 13, 1998
CRONY MONETARISM IS OK
By John Helmer

Never stand between a dog and a tree. That's a piece of advice Russia's
First Deputy Prime Minister Anatoly Chubais must have had in mind the other 
day when he was berating his critics for something he called 
"crony capitalism." It's obvious he thinks Russia's the tree, and his banker 
enemies the dog.

When it comes to the transactions Chubais arranged with George Soros, the
American financier, last year, it's just as obvious that Russia was the 
tree. But what exactly was Soros, who recently admitted lending "several 
hundred million dollars" to the government in June 1997, and possibly other 
sums of money in the months before? And where exactly was the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) standing, while Soros was doing his bit to add to the pool
of liquidity?

The possibility that Chubais and the IMF approve "crony monetarism",
while disapproving "crony capitalism", is a distinction that is difficult
to appreciate, especially if you are standing between the dog and the tree.
Here's why.

According to Vladimir Potanin, the Uneximbank chairman whom Chubais appointed
deputy prime minister in charge of the economy between August 1996 and March 
1997, Soros has been lending to the Russian government for quite a while.
No details were mentioned by Potanin in a public statement reported by 
Reuters on July 31, 1997, except that Soros's money helped finance the 
Russian budget deficit when cash was short between issues of Eurobonds that 
started in November 1996. 

Soros himself admitted one of these loans, according to a wire service
report of remarks he made in Moscow a few days ago. 

The former Chairman of the Russian parliament's Budget Committee, which 
drafts the legal authorizations for treasury borrowings like these, is now 
Finance Minister Mikhail Zadornov, and he isn't saying what he
knew, if anything, about the Soros loans. Zadornov did make clear last
year, though, that he doesn't like, and won't authorize Chubais's 
unusual borrowing technique. That was demonstrated in December when Chubais
invited several western bankers around to his office to ask for 
an emergency one or two-month "bridging loan". One of Zadornov's reasons
is that he doesn't like the security Chubais tried to offer, linking the 
$1.5 billion loan to the selloff of state shares in the valuable Rosneft oil
company. Is it possible that Soros asked for similar security for his loans, 
tying them to the privatization of state telephone company, Svyazinvest, and 
possibly other state assets as well?

The IMF's Moscow representative, Martin Gilman, ought to know what was
happening. It's his job to monitor very carefully each week
what the Russian government's foreign obligations are, before reporting
to Washington on a figure the IMF calls Russia's net international reserves.
These consist of gold plus hard currency, minus foreign loan obligations
to the IMF and other lenders. According to the secret agreement
Gilman worked out last year with the Russian government, the IMF insists
that a target net reserve level is kept every month. If it slips --
because the government has borrowed more, or sold off too much gold
and hard currency -- Gilman is supposed to press a button
on the hotline to managing director, Michel Camdessus.

Last month in Moscow, Camdessus claimed he wants to introduce transparency
in the way Russia manages its finances, and he offered his own version
of transparency by promising to publish one of the documents 
he and the Russian government have agreed to sign. 

That hasn't happened yet, and when it does, it isn't likely to reveal
the net reserve target or other figures Camdessus and Gilman prefer to keep
secret. Making them public would alert ordinary folk like you and me, not
to mention the Russian parliament, to unusual transactions with public
money, faith and credit.

When I read out a list of questions about what Gilman knew
last year about the Soros lending, and invited him to clarify whether
he was in the dark, Gilman refused to say. Others, who knew about the 
Soros lending, claim IMF officials may not have known, or if they did, they
didn't care. When Gilman was asked to go transparent for once, in case
he left the impression he was covering up a crony transaction, he
chose to remain silent. 

It's understandable that Gilman doesn't want to get his hands wet in this 
business. If Chubais used to run to Soros for money every time Camdessus
refused, and froze another loan instalment, then the IMF is bound to know,
and to be jealous, possibly even angry. And when dogs like that start to
show their teeth, it's not safe to stand between them, even if you are a
tree.

********

#5
Christian Science Monitor
12 March 1998
Editorial
Russia's Tax Revulsion

Various parts of the United States have had actual or threatened "tax
revolts" in recent decades. Usually that means citizens band together to
pass initiatives to reduce taxes. And the US Congress is now awash with
ideas for curbing the "tyrannical" powers of the Internal Revenue Service.
But Americans, who love to trace their anti-tax sentiments to the Boston
Tea
Party, rarely stop to think what a relatively benign system of revenue
collection they have. Yes, there are the IRS horror stories. But, on the
whole, Americans pay their taxes willingly and have some confidence they'll
get useful services in return.
Then there's Russia. Nearly half of the taxes due by the April 1 deadline
never materialize. Russians don't just evade around the fringes, they
massively ignore the tax collector. This anti-tax inclination may not have
mattered that much during the Soviet years, when the government officially
owned everything. But in the newly democratizing, privatizing Russia, it's a
major roadblock to getting anything done. And a government that doesn't do
much to improve the lives of people will find taxpayers growing even more
reluctant to pay. A vicious circle.
The Yeltsin government, or its tax collector, is trying a little
psychological offensive this year. It's launching a TV ad campaign, even
including cartoons aimed at the children of tax delinquents. The goal: to
convince Russians that paying taxes is a civic duty that leads to clear
consciences and a happier life - and that nonpayment could have bad
consequences.
It's an approach that the IRS wouldn't dream of. Can you imagine the blasts
of indignation from Congress? But Russians' historical experience may lead
them to be a little more tolerant of relatively good-natured official
bullying. Maybe a few more Russians - particularly the newly rich - will
realize that government by the people requires something of the people.
Let's hope so.

********

#6
Financial Times
March 12, 1998
[for personal use only]
Weapons: Plutonium accord delay 'raises risks'
By Bruce Clark in Washington

The danger of nuclear weapon-making material falling into the wrong 
hands is being worsened by delays in implementing a US-Russian disposal 
plan, US legislators and arms control experts said yesterday.

There is no concrete scheme for the US and Russia to fulfil a pledge 
made in 1994 to neutralise tonnes of plutonium, according to a report by 
the Center for Strategic and International Studies, presented by Senator 
Pete Domenici and Congressman Lindsey Graham.

"Delays in the US programme for disposing of surplus weapons plutonium 
are stalling a similar effort in Russia," the legislators reported. This 
was "increasing the chances that nuclear material could be acquired by 
rogue nations or terrorists".

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US administration has made a 
commitment to deal urgently with the huge stocks of uranium and 
bomb-grade plutonium building up in Russia as nuclear weapons are 
dismantled.

But controversy has dogged a US programme to buy 500 tonnes of Russian 
bomb-grade uranium - equivalent to 25,000 times the amount used to 
destroy Hiroshima - and the issue of plutonium has proved even harder to 
resolve because its use in civil nuclear power is less commercially 
viable.

The US administration in January 1997 announced a policy for dealing 
with its own plutonium, in the hope of spurring Russia to act faster. 
The policy involved a mixture of the two available options: using it to 
make reactor fuel and immobilising it in ceramic form.

But nearly 15 months later the US Energy Department, which is 
responsible for nuclear materials, has made no commitment on how much 
plutonium it is prepared to process by either method, yesterday's report 
noted.

"The US and Russia are moving too slowly in their efforts," its main 
author said. "The problem is becoming particularly acute in Russia, 
where security of nuclear weapons materials is a growing concern."

The row about plutonium disposal follows intense arguments within the 
administration over how to implement the landmark agreement struck in 
1992 under which the US agreed to pay $12bn for reprocessed uranium from 
Russia.

The US Enrichment Corporation, the agency designed to buy the Russian 
uranium and sell it on for commercial nuclear power, is to be privatised 
later this year. Critics have alleged that, as a private entity, USEC 
will have an interest in minimising the amount of uranium it buys from 
Russia and the price it pays, because those purchases compete with its 
uranium business from other sources.

But USEC has rejected this argument, saying it is committed to 
fulfilling the US-Russian agreement and has a stake in proving that it 
remains qualified to act as monopoly buyer.

*******

#7
New York Times
March 12, 1998
Editorial
A Dangerous Plutonium Problem

Russia and the United States have dismantled thousands of nuclear
warheads since the end of the cold war. But all the plutonium from those
warheads is still stored in bomb-ready form. Washington and Moscow must
move quickly to reduce the risks that some of that plutonium could end up
in the wrong hands, for example through diversion to rogue states like Iraq
or Libya. 
Washington and Moscow already cooperate on plutonium management, and
last week's upheaval at Russia's Ministry of Atomic Energy should not
change that. Joint efforts have improved security at Russian plutonium
storage plants, and a new, more secure facility is being built. But
security precautions are not enough. 
Technology exists for making plutonium much harder to use for
bomb-making. Russia has not used that technology yet because of a sterile
international dispute over which of two methods would be more desirable.
One converts the plutonium into ceramic form and embeds it in glass
canisters. The other uses it as fuel in power reactors. That irradiates the
plutonium and mixes it with other elements, making it less useful for
military purposes. 
The Clinton Administration should help break the technology impasse by
encouraging Russia to move ahead with both methods, as America plans to do
with its own bomb plutonium. Russia's preference is to use the plutonium in
reactors. In most other circumstances, using plutonium for power is a bad
idea, because it usually requires converting relatively benign forms of
plutonium into potential bomb ingredients. But the plutonium from
dismantled warheads is already in bomb-ready form. Irradiating it in
reactors makes it less available for military use. 
Plants for converting bomb plutonium into less dangerous reactor fuel
are expensive to build, costing hundreds of millions of dollars each.
Private industry should be involved in constructing these plants, with help
from Western governments. This might be an appropriate use for American
dollars under the Nunn-Lugar program, intended to reduce cold-war nuclear
threats. 
The cold war's end gave Washington and Moscow a historic chance to
reduce the dangers associated with their vast nuclear arsenals. Their
response is dangerously incomplete so long as the plutonium from dismantled
warheads remains in militarily usable form. 

********

#8
USA Today
March 10, 1998
[for personal use only] 
Rising mortality hits Russia's young

Russia's mortality rate rose in the early 1990s at a pace rarely seen
outside war zones. 

Death rates soared nearly 33% between 1990 and 1994, says a study that
blames a depressed economy, cigarette use and rising alcohol consumption.
Men's life expectancy dropped by six years, women's by three. 

Death rates have improved recently but remain high. 

"This is a very, very large change in life expectancy in a very short
period of time," says Francis Notzon of the U.S. National Center for Health
Statistics, an author of the study in today's Journal of the American
Medical Association. 

A JAMA editorial calls it "an unprecedented pace of deterioration in a
country not at war." 

Russian life expectancy fell between 1990 and 1994 from 63.8 to 57.7 years
for men and from 74.4 to 71.2 years for women. At the same time, U.S. life
expectancy rose from 71.8 to 72.4 for men, from 78.8 to 79 for women. 

Russia's falling life expectancy was driven by the deaths of the young.
More than 75% of the drop was caused by the deaths of people 25 to 64. 

"Russian men and women in their prime of life have been affected the most,"
says the editorial, written by London and Moscow health officials. "The
public health situation in Russia today is grave." 

While a crumbling health system and economic and social instability are
partly to blame, the study also found people died younger as alcohol use
soared in the early 1990s. 

Other long-term health issues that lead Russians to die younger than
Americans: poor nutrition, stress, depression and higher use of tobacco. 

Researchers warn that as tobacco businesses are hurt by efforts to curb
smoking in the USA, some companies may look to Russia for business. 

"Russia . . . is a target for the tobacco multinationals," the editorial
says, urging Russian health officials to try to block tobacco advertising.
"Russia needs to heed the lessons learned by Western nations in their
attempts to limit recruitment of new smokers." 

By Robert Davis, USA TODAY

*********

#9
USA Today
March 10, 1998
[for personal use only] 
On-job dangers hit Russian men hard

MOSCOW - Prominently displayed behind Tamara Mikulina's cupboard of
treasured possessions is an out-of- focus, black-and-white photograph of a
bespectacled man smiling timidly. 

"This is our great tragedy," says the elderly Mikulina, pointing sadly to
the picture of son Yuri, who was killed on the job two years ago. 

A mechanical engineer working at a metallurgical plant in the mountainous
Urals region east of Moscow, Yuri was crushed by a piece of heavy
equipment. He was 40; he left behind a wife, two small children and his
grieving mother. 

He was one of 6,000 in Russia who died on the job in 1996 in accidents
resulting from slackened safety rules. As millions of workers fight to
receive monthly wages on time and as factory directors struggle to pay
electricity bills, job safety has taken a back seat to more pressing
problems. 

Since 1990, work-related deaths have risen nearly 20%, according to Russian
trade union figures. This rise has coincided with a steady drop in life
expectancy, for Russian men in particular. 

Researchers compare the drop to that seen in the USA during the
Depression, when a man's life expectancy dropped five years between 1933
and 1936. At its lowest point, in 1936, the life expectancy of a man in the
USA was 56.6 years, about a year younger than that of today's Russian man. 

Circulatory and heart disease may be the No. 1 killer in Russia, but
injuries ranging from homicides to car crashes to on-the-job accidents are
a close second. And these deaths bring major changes in life expectancy
rates, because when many people die young, the average age of death drops
significantly. 

If stress, heavy drinking and poor nutrition strike down men nearing
retirement, accidental death is claiming people in their prime, robbing the
country of years of brain and brawn. 

Mikulina is not familiar with the details surrounding her son's death, nor
does she wish to investigate. But in many cases it's clear that death could
have been avoided if the enterprise paid greater attention to occupational
safety standards. 

"Many miners, for example, choose to ignore the dangerous conditions in
which they work because they need to earn money," says Vladimir Lutoshkin,
who is a lawyer for the Moscow chapter of the AFL-CIO. "They do not have
the same safety features that miners use in the West. Either their
employers don't have enough money to buy the equipment, or they don't want
to pay for it." 

Antiquated equipment is, Lutoshkin says, more often than not the cause of
death on the job, but whether this is because factories are economizing on
safety is a point of debate among experts here. 

Leonid Sharikov, who heads the occupational safety division at Russia's
Ministry of Labor, blames Russia's emerging private enterprises for buoying
profits by neglecting safety rules. 

In an interview this week with the daily Rossisskaya Gazeta, Sharikov
paints a grim industrial scene straight out of a Dickens novel with 12-hour
days and employees too frightened of losing their jobs to complain about
obvious gaps in safety measures. Sharikov says a quarter of all job-related
deaths occur at smaller private enterprises, which account for less than
10% of the work force. 

His words are echoed by Valentin Medvedev, who heads the occupational
safety division for Russia's Federation of Independent Trade Unions, a
massive organization that unites more than 40 million Russian workers. 

"There is a great deal of indifference to safety conditions at private
enterprises," Medvedev says. 

But not all of the accidents can be blamed on the employer. Medvedev blames
a general drop in discipline at the workplace - a euphemism for more people
working under the influence of alcohol - for no small percentage of the
accidents. 

"No one will admit to such a statistic, but there is more drinking going
on," he says. 

According to the Ministry of Health, the use of alcohol has increased
significantly since the collapse of communism. The Russian Association of
Societal Health reports that the use of alcohol among Russians has risen to
13 liters (nearly 12 quarts) per person per year - well above the 8-liter
(7-quart) danger limit established by the World Health Organization. 

Moreover, with only 3,500 federal safety inspectors to verify the standards
of nearly 1 million enterprises, the government is fighting an uphill
battle, Medvedev says. 

"The inspectors cannot check every detail of every enterprise, so a great
deal of the responsibility for the workers' safety falls on the employers,"
he says. "It is our job to convince them that it is in their interests to
provide a safe work environment." 

By Genine Babakian, USA TODAY

*******

#10
Washington Post
March 11, 1998
[for personal use only]
FINDINGS
Compiled from news services
Life Expectancy in Russia

Hits Low, Begins to Lengthen

Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, the life expectancy of Russians 
declined to 40-year lows because of rising rates of disease, accidents, 
alcoholism and other ailments, researchers said yesterday.

But following an alarming shortening of Russians' life spans earlier 
this decade, life expectancy began lengthening again, based on the 
latest data available.

>From 1990 to 1994, the life expectancy of Russian men declined to 57.7 
years from 63.8 years, while Russian women's life spans fell to 71.2 
years from 74.4 years, researcher Francis Notzon wrote in today's issue 
of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

"In 1995 and 1996, life expectancy at birth increased 2.2 years for 
[Russian] men and 1.4 years for women, although these are still the 
lowest [ages] in more than 40 years," said David Leon of the London 
School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and Vladimir Shkolnikov of the 
Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow.

The two wrote an editorial accompanying a study by the National Center 
for Health Statistics in Hyattsville showing that even as Russian life 
spans were shrinking between 1990 and 1994, Americans were surviving 
longer.

Over the period 1990-94, American men's life expectancy rose nearly a 
year to 72.4 years, and women's a few months to 79 years.

In Russia, just over two-thirds of the decline in life spans was 
attributed to rising rates of cardiovascular disease and injuries that 
included work-related accidents, road crashes, suicides and homicides.

Alcohol-related deaths were blamed for 10 percent of the drop, followed 
by infectious diseases and liver diseases, as Russia's health care 
system deteriorated and poverty became more widespread.

"It has been widely recognized that key public health indicators have 
been worsening [in Russia] since the 1960s. . . . However, until 
recently the extent to which conditions had been degrading was not well 
understood because of the lack of published data," Notzon wrote.

"All nations created from the break-up of the Soviet Union have reported 
a decline in life expectancy since 1990, although none has been as large 
as in Russia," he added.

********

#11
Russian PM: Yeltsin, Clinton Likely To Meet Mid-1998 

WASHINGTON, D.C., March 12 (Interfax) - The next meeting between Russian
President *Boris Yeltsin* and his U.S. counterpart Bill Clinton is likely
to be held no later than mid-1998, Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin told
a press conference in Washington on Wednesday. 
Several problems, notably ratification of the START II Treaty by the
Russian parliament, have to be resolved prior to the meeting, Chernomyrdin
said. "The government will direct its efforts in the parliament toward
resolving this issue," he said. 
Chernomyrdin said his Wednesday discussion with Clinton focused on the
upcoming summit. The joint Chernomyrdin-Gore Commission is to do all the
preliminary work on the economy to prepare for the meeting, he said. "In
effect, we'll be discussing strategic issues," he said. 
The upcoming summit will determine the direction of relations between the
two countries in the 21st century, he said. 

*******

#12
U.S. Concerns Linger after Chernomyrdin Talks 
Reuters
11 March 1998

WASHINGTON -- Russia and the United States ended two days of high-level
talks on a range of issues on Wednesday but apparently failed to settle
their differences over Russian deals with Iran.
Both President Bill Clinton and Vice President Al Gore met Russian Prime
Minister Victor Chernomyrdin during the talks, the latest twice-yearly
session held in terms of a five-year-old bilateral commission. 
At a closing news conference, both Gore and Chernomyrdin sidestepped the
issue of Moscow's plans to sell missiles to Tehran. 
"(We) discussed our common concern about the proliferation of weapons of
mass destruction," Gore said. 
He praised Russian President Boris Yeltsin for issuing a decree
tightening export controls on missile technology but added: "Implementation
is key." 
Chernomyrdin said Russia would "absolutely respect the national security
requirements of the United 
States." 
"We are finding ways to absolutely protect our respective national
security and at the same time reap for the benefit of our people the great
new capabilities that high technology can give," he said. 
A U.S. administration official tried to play down the lack of a
breakthrough on the issue of deals with Iran, which the United States
regards as a "terrorist" state. 
"Their position on this is getting firmer and firmer," he said. "They
are reflecting a better understanding that missile cooperation with Iran is
not in Russia's interest." 
On Monday, U.S. officials said Washington had offered Moscow the chance
to expand its lucrative launches of foreign satellites -- a market worth
hundreds of millions of dollars -- if it cracked down on missile technology
exports. 
Washington wants assurances the Yeltsin decree will be rigorously
enforced, saying that if it is not, Congress will seek to impose new
sanctions on Russia. 
On a related issue, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Vladimir Bulgak, who
visited Iran last week, dismissed U.S. and Israeli complaints about
Russia's role in a nuclear plant at Iran's Bushehr port. 
Chernomyrdin, who joins Gore on Thursday for a tour of California's
high-tech Silicon Valley, said during the news conference that Clinton and
Yeltsin were likely to hold a summit this year, possibly as early as in May. 
The commission has handled highly sensitive issues on the post-Cold War
agenda and has been successful on a number of fronts. But differences have
persisted on some fundamental issues -- including NATO enlargement, Iran
and Iraq. 
The meeting this week was used to promote areas of agreement, including
new commercial deals. 
Conoco Inc and Russia's LUKoil signed a multibillion dollar agreement to
develop crude oil and natural gas fields in Russia's Timan-Pechora region. 
The project is expected to have a $25 billion impact on the Russian
economy, said a statement by Conoco and LUKoil. 
Boeing Co confirmed that in a separate deal it would buy $175 million to
$200 million worth of milled titanium products from Russia's Verkhnaya
Salda Metallurgical Production Association. 
Boeing signed the five-year deal at a ceremony attended by Russian
Foreign Trade Minister Mikhail Fradkov and U.S. Commerce Secretary William
Daley. 
A third agreement involved AGCO Corp and the administration of the
Chelyabinsk Oblast -- a $62.5 million deal for AGCO to deliver and assemble
agricultural equipment. 

********

#13
Snowstorm Causes Problems in Moscow Streets, Airports 
Interfax/Reuters
11 March 1998

MOSCOW -- A snowstorm and strong winds have created havoc on Moscow streets
and closed the city's three international airports for spells on Wednesday,
an aviation weather center said. 
Interfax reported Thursday that Moscow's municipal service departments
have been working round-the-clock as heavy snowfalls threaten city traffic. 
Boris Nikolsky, the official responsible for city affairs, said units of
the Moscow military district, the Emergency Situations headquarters and
other special units are assisting the operation. 
Additional efforts are being made to assist traffic regulation on
clogged roads. Downtown traffic is at risk of coming to a complete
standstill. Buses and trolleys can barely move, and have difficulty
approaching stops. 
"Traffic conditions have become aggravated; they are currently on the
verge of an emergency," the Moscow traffic police department said. Traffic
jams have formed throughout the city, particularly in the Leningrad and
Dmitrov avenues. 
The traffic police urged drivers to abstain from using private cars and
to avoid parking close to the sidewalks. Cars will be towed if they
obstruct the way for snow plows. 
It will continue to snow heavily until the end of this week,
meteorologists said. 
The weather has restricted visibility and caused delays in flights,
meaning havoc for travelers, some of whom faced long waits at the airport
on Wednesday. 
"There were extremely bad weather conditions during the night due to a
snowstorm and many flights were delayed," a duty officer at the weather
center said by telephone. 
"According to the forecast, the bad weather conditions may affect the
Moscow airports for the next 12 hours," the officer said. He was speaking
in mid-afternoon. 
Sheremetyevo airport was briefly closed several times overnight to allow
runways to be cleared, an airport official said. "Some flights, including
international ones, were delayed," he added. 
A duty officer at Domodedovo airport said it was closed from midnight to
10 a.m. Moscow time because of winds which made it dangerous for aircraft
to take off and land. "Currently, the airport is working normally, but it
may close temporarily due to expected snow," the officer said. 
Vnukovo airport remained closed midway through Wednesday because of the
bad weather. 
"Vnukovo airport was closed for all flights last night and it is still
not working now because the runways are icy after a snowstorm which lasted
several hours during the night," an airport official said.

********

#14
NUMBER OF BANKRUPTCIES OF RUSSIAN COMPANIES IS 
DOUBLING EVERY YEAR, REPORTS GEORGY TAL, CHAIRMAN 
OF FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY SERVICE
//MOSCOW, MARCH 12,1998 /RIA NOVOSTI/-- 

The number of bankruptcies among Russian companies is 
approximately doubling each year.
This was revealed at a news conference in RIA Novosti
Wednesday by Georgy Tal, chairman of the federal service for
bankruptcies and financial rehabilitation of businesses. 
In 1995, for example, according to the Arbitration Court,
there were 1108 company insolvency cases before the courts. 
In 1996, their number reached 2,600, and in 1997 more than
4,000 cases were heard. 
Explaining the bankruptcy law, which took effect from March
12, Tal pointed to its two basic distinctions from the earlier
legislation. 
Above all, this concerns insolvency criteria. The old law
used the principle that said that a company was considered
insolvent only if its liabilities exceeded its assets. 
The new law espouses a new principle, which is successfully
applied in world practice. If a company within three months
fails to carry out a specific monetary obligation, it is
considered incapable of observing its commitments and special
measures and procedures, stipulated by the bankruptcy law, must
be applied against it. 
The old law, noted Tal, allowed debtors to evade the
bankruptcy procedure and even attract outside capital as
commodity credits and as monetary obligations. 
This filled the economy with a vast number of indebted
firms. 
According to the federal service chairman, the new law
provides for a more flexible combination of the interests of
debtors and creditors.
A consensus of opinion in this area is planned to be
reached by means of a new technique of financial rehabilitation
-- "amicable settlement". 
It represents a form of accord between the debtor and
creditors about the financial rehabilitation of the debtor and
the procedure for debt rescheduling. Specialists expect a great
deal from this mechanism. 
"Hopefully, the new law will reduce the number of insolvent
companies in Russia," Tal emphasised in conclusion. 

********

#15
>From RIA Novosti
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
March 12, 1998 
DISCRIMINATION IMPEDES COOPERATION
Viktor Chernomyrdin Believes Only the Lazy Can Be Content
With Today's Relations Between Moscow and Washington
By Dmitry GORNOSTAYEV

The optimistic statements by Viktor Chernomyrdin and
Albert Gore on the first day of work of the Russian-American
commission for economic and technological cooperation
notwithstanding, the matter of discrimination against Russia in
that very cooperation is probably the main problem in the two
countries' economic dialogue which seems to be free of
political discord. 
Specifically, the US has not yet given Russia the most
favoured nation status in trade which is enjoyed by many a
country much smaller than Russia. The cold-war Jackson-Vanick
amendment is still in force and its extent is limited only by a
decree of President Bill Clinton, which can theoretically be
lifted - and not only in case the Republicans come to power. 
This is the central problem; there are more specific, if
smaller, problems in the two fields which are viewed by the
Chernomyrdin-Gore commission as priorities - space and nuclear
power. 
The two spheres are interconnected - for political, rather
than purely economic, reasons. Although the Alpha international
space orbiter project is on the agenda of the current session,
American specialists and bureaucrats privately say they are
skeptical about Russia's participation in it. 
Be as it may, the matter of providing American financing
for a number of Russian space programmes should be settled in
the course of the session. It is known that Russia's
'insolvency', which the Americans just love to highlight, is
partly explained by the discriminatory measures against Moscow
which are still in force. 
Two years ago, Chernomyrdin and Gore signed an agreement
to limit Russia's capacities to launch commercial satellites
for foreign countries. The situation has changed somewhat to
make amendments to the 1996 agreement a must, and the American
side admits they should be introduced soon.
The fields of nuclear power engineering is not free of
discrimination, either. Washington is trying to make Moscow's
refusal to cooperate with Tehran a condition of American
financing for Russian space programmes. Moreover, Russia is
finding it hard to trade in the enriched plutonium and uranium
obtained from scrapped nuclear weapons. 
First deputy minister for atomic energy Lev Ryabev points
out in this connection that when Russia sells uranium to the US
for use in its nuclear power generators, problems that arise
are rooted in the Americans' deeply ingrained habit to make
discriminatory demands and conditions. 
But Ryabev sees a way to resolve the problem: he told RIA
Novosti that the current session of the Chernomyrdin-Gore
commission would draft an agreement on the use of plutonium for
peaceful purposes. Tentative estimates place the cost of the
programme at over US$ 1 billion. 
The agreement is expected to be signed in the course of
the forthcoming meeting of presidents Boris Yeltsin and Bill
Clinton.
Chernomyrdin's words of an inadequate development of
economic relations between Moscow and Washington can be viewed
as an indirect criticism of Washington's discriminatory
practices. Although the bilateral trade has more than doubled
in the past six years, it is far behind the US' trade with
other countries.
"The five billion dollars' worth of American investments
in Russia's economy do not compare with the tens of billions of
dollars' worth of American investments in China," the Russian
premier pointed out. 
"Only the lazy and those not interested in cooperation can
be satisfied with the parameters of Russian-American economic
relations," he stressed. 
Speaking of the planned Russian-American summit meeting,
Chernomyrdin expressed the hope that it would be held before
the end of the year. The matter may be clarified in the wake of
the meeting between the Russian premier and President Clinton
which was held yesterday when it was late night in Moscow.

********