 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
CDI Library > Johnson's
Russia List |
|
|
May 4, 2000
Johnson's Russia List #4284 4 May 2000 davidjohnson@erols.com
[Note from David Johnson:
*******
Russia seen headed for "authoritarian reform" By Paul Taylor, Diplomatic Editor
LONDON, May 4 (Reuters) - Russia seems headed for a period of "authoritarian reform" under President Vladimir Putin, but its economic and military weakness make it unlikely to be a threat to the West, a leading think-tank said on Thursday.
The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) said the former KGB officer could well use his extensive presidential powers to establish a more authoritarian regime, strengthening the role of the security services. "While the prospects for Russian democracy and relations with the West under Putin are worrying, and those for the economy are uncertain, Russia has too strong a state tradition to slide remorselessly down to third-world status, as was occurring under Boris Yeltsin," the annual "Strategic Survey" said.
The IISS said Western worries about Putin's intentions would be tempered by his pragmatism and Russia's obvious economic and military weakness.
"An army that had such enormous difficulty capturing Grozny is unlikely to be used to threaten Warsaw or Kiev," it said.
Early hints of Putin's outlook towards democracy and the media suggested Russia may evolve a form of "guided democracy" seen in other former Soviet republics, the institute said.
"In an international democratic league, Russia may come to lie somewhere on a spectrum between Turkey (at best) and Egypt (at worst)" with severe limits on how far opposition politicians or the media could go in challenging the system, it said.
STRONG BACKLASH SEEN
The London-based institute said Putin might be seeking better ties with NATO in hopes of averting two Western moves -- U.S. deployment of an anti-missile shield and a further eastward enlargement of NATO -- which would be against Russian interests.
But there was strong potential on both sides to make stable relations very difficult, it said.
Bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress for a National Missile Defence system made a decision in its favour almost inevitable, whatever the Russian position.
Russia would react with particular hostility to any move to expand NATO to the former Soviet Baltic states, a prospect that European NATO allies also viewed with foreboding.
"Although direct Russian retaliation against the Balts would be unlikely given their stability and Russia's military weakness, a NATO move to the Baltic would probably increase Russian attempts to damage U.S. interests elsewhere," it said.
Putin's government was likely to make stronger efforts to assert Russian influence in the southern Caucasus and the war in Chechnya could yet spread into U.S.-backed Georgia if Russian forces pursued Chechen rebels across the poorly-guarded border.
The Chechens were likely to resort to terrorism if they could no longer fight Russian troops openly, and "the corrupt and shambolic Russian security services would find it very hard to deal with a really determined terrorism movement," the IISS said.
*******
Business foes accuse Putin of preparing Russian police state
MOSCOW, May 4 (AFP) - A political row erupted Thursday only days ahead of Vladimir Putin's inauguration when a newspaper claimed to have evidence that the president-elect had plans to widely expand the role of Russia's secret police.
An editor of the business daily Kommersant told AFP that he had in his possession documents produced by the Kremlin administration which plotted to extend the authority of the internal security services beyond their constitutional limits.
Extracts from the alleged text published in the newspaper said Russia's Federal Security Service -- the main successor to the Soviet-era KGB which Putin once headed -- will be ordered to trace the activity of all possible opponents to the Kremlin as well as opposition newspapers.
"The new president, if he really wants to ensure order and stability, does not need a self-regulating political system," Kommersant quotes the alleged Kremlin text as saying.
"He needs a political structure in his administration which can not only forecast the political situation in Russia, but also clearly control the political and social processes in the Russian Federation."
A Kremlin press officer refused to answer any questions about the publication. Putin is currently on vacation in the Black Sea resort town of Sochi.
Political analysts said the reports meant that an internal struggle for ministerial appointments in Putin's future government had broken out into the open.
The Kommersant daily is under control of the controversial business tycoon Boris Berezovsky.
He was seen to have great influence in Boris Yeltsin's Kremlin and Putin is reportedly trying to limit Berezovsky's influence beyond Sunday's inauguration.
The publication, which is being syndicated by Kommersant over the course of the week, the most serious attack on Putin since his first-round March 26 election victory.
"The text is one of the working versions that has been prepared by the Kremlin administration and handed to us on loose sheets of paper,"
Kommersant's deputy editor Kirill Kharatyan said.
"I trust my journalists. I have no doubts that it is real.
"People who say that we published this as a trial balloon should bite their tongues. The Kremlin administration is irate with us right now." Kommersant has previously leaked a series of government documents, and many suggest that it had done so through Berezovsky's Kremlin connections.
Moscow's influential political analyst Andrei Piontkovsky said he had few doubts that the document was real. But he added that its publication was being used against Putin as a threat.
"Berezovsky seems to be blackmailing Putin ahead of the government appointments. Berezovsky once again has picked a devilish tactic," Piontkovsky said.
"This is a clear element of an under-the-carpet war, where Berezovsky is showing his muscle to make sure that his people get into the government.
"This also tells us nothing new about Putin -- relying on the KGB is very much his style," Piontkovsky said.
Moscow media has accused Putin of curbing press freedoms in the course of the raging Chechen war and during his election campaign. Western economists for their part suggested that a critical stage had been reached in Russian politics, with the role of the so-called oligarchs once close to the Kremlin being decided right now.
"The charge undertaken by Mr. Berezovsky ... may be considered a threatening signal for Mr. Putin ahead of his May 7 inauguration, with increased political activity of the oligarchs set to intensify, given that in the month of May their political fate is at stake," the Renaissance Capital investment bank said.
*******
Russia to enter new era with Putin inauguration By Patrick Lannin
MOSCOW, May 4 (Reuters) - Vladimir Putin is to be inaugurated on Sunday as Russia's second post-Soviet president, carrying the hopes of millions of people for a better life after 10 years of flawed reforms.
In a ceremony in the one of the Kremlin's great halls, the 47-year-old former KGB spy will place his hand on a leather-bound copy of the constitution of the nuclear-armed country and swear to serve his people for the next four years.
But it is far from clear how he plans to carry out the huge task of modernising a nation racked by economic crises, rampant corruption and crime, and some observers fear he will revive some of the authoritarian methods of Russia's past.
They cite his career as an agent of the KGB, the feared Soviet security police, and his record as the architect of the war in Chechnya, where thousands of civilians have been killed or made homeless, as evidence of this possibility.
Putin himself has spoken of the need to rebuild Russia and increase welfare after the economic changes under former President Boris Yeltsin left many on the edge of poverty.
He describes the Chechnya war as a fight against ``terrorists'' for the unity of Russia and rejects Western criticism of alleged rights abuses and an excessive use of force.
One of the great unknown areas is his economic intentions. He has spoken the language of market reform and of openness but has remained tight-lipped on
his exact plans. He has appointed a team of economists to work on a 10-year plan for the country.
Putin, elected on March 26, has already shown his mastery of parliament, with which Yeltsin had bad relations, getting the State Duma lower house to pass key arms control treaties.
ESCHEWS POMP True to his reputation as a business-like leader, he has said he wants less pomp than Yeltsin's inauguration so that it does not overshadow May 9 celebrations to mark the end of World War Two, one of Russia's most venerated anniversaries.
Yeltsin, officially known as the First President of Russia, will attend the ceremony, handing over a special presidential medal in a transfer meant to symbolise political continuity.
Putin is expected to complete the naming of his new government by the end of May, with technocrat First Deputy Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov favourite to become prime minister.
The centrepiece of the inauguration, due to be broadcast live, will be a 26-word presidential oath which Putin will read with his hand on a copy of the constitution. Orthodox Church leader, Patriarch Alexiy II, will bless the new president, a reflection of the strong ties fostered between church and state in modern Russia after 70 years of officially atheist communist power.
Putin's rule is expected to be smoother given his authority in parliament, where right-leaning parties can for the first time in Russia's post-Soviet history outvote the Kremlin's traditional opponents, the Communists.
AUTHORITARIAN STREAK?
Some analysts have cited the war in Chechnya and his KGB past as evidence of an authoritarian streak, reinforced by the fact that the Kremlin has not shrunk from using state-controlled television stations to smear opponents.
This was seen ahead of recent elections and the biased media coverage won a rebuke from rights and security group, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).
``Some feel that it is more and more probable that Putin's announced 'dictatorship of law' in Russia will in effect be simply a dictatorship, a secret police state in which the whim of Putin or his administration will be the law,'' wrote analyst Pavel Felgenhauer in the English-language Moscow Times daily.
The West has reacted to Putin, a young and vigorous leader, with cautious optimism after the drift and uncertainty of the last few years when Yeltsin's health problems loomed large.
The criticism over Chechnya has resulted in little concrete action to penalise Moscow and Putin has already met British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Japanese premier Yoshiro Mori.
U.S. President Bill Clinton is due to visit Moscow to meet Putin in June. Ties with Cold War foe NATO have also improved and Russia has ratified the START-2 nuclear arms cut treaty with the United States as well as the global nuclear test ban treaty.
*******
Moscow Times May 4, 2000 Inaugurating an Era of Hope and Denial By Boris Kagarlitsky
Until recently, U.S. experts sparred about "who lost Russia." But with a new team in the Kremlin, the mood has changed. The U.S. mainstream press has
managed not to notice the role of "administrative resources" in the recent presidential elections. It has ignored opposition protests and talk of vote falsifications. USA Today published a tiny notice referring to the Communists' contention on vote-rigging. But Americans don't especially trust the Communists, and no one noticed the protests by the liberal opposition and myriad facts printed in independent publications.
Yet in other circumstances, the U.S. press was very vocal about vote falsification. After Russians cast their ballots, Peru held its own presidential elections. President Alberto Fujimori wanted to win in the first round. But the U.S. State Department insisted that the votes be recounted. Now Fujimori will have to run in a second round; he missed winning a majority of votes in the first round by a few percentage points. Sound familiar?
The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal continually report about the wonderful new Russian leader: He is young, dynamic, concerned about national interests, surrounded by a dream team of reformers. In the U.S. press, there are always good guys and bad guys. When things in Russia are bad, the reader is told about corrupt officials, bureaucrats, authoritarian politicians and irresponsible oligarchs. When things seem to be shaping up, they are told about young reformers, politicians of a new breed, effective administrators, dynamic businessmen. As the political climate changes, the good guys of one story become the bad guys of another.
Granted, the U.S. administration and U.S. press refer to "violations of human rights in Chechnya." But these statements are amorphous; the facts are barely laid out. The situation was different when the United States was preparing to attack Yugoslavia. Then stories about the viciousness of Serbs filled the papers, and The New York Times devoted issue after issue to the evils of Slobodan Milosevic.
So Milosevic can't, but Putin can?
A comparison of information from Chechnya and Kosovo confirms that all of the West's concerns about minority peoples and human rights is hypocrisy, masking cynical political calculations. Milosevic's problem isn't that he gave his police forces a signal to deal with the Albanian separatists without regard to civilian losses, but that, in contrast with his Russian colleagues, he didn't first cut a deal, didn't accept the conditions of the International Monetary Fund, didn't massage U.S. corporate interests. Franklin Roosevelt once reportedly said of Anastasio Somoza: "He may be a son of a bitch, but at least he's our son of a bitch." Milosevic didn't play the game, wasn't "our" son of a bitch.
But with Russia, the U.S. is ready to demonstrate unexpected patience. The Soviet Union was stronger and more dangerous; nevertheless, the West criticized it sharply. Now the West shows reserve in commenting on democracy and human rights because the rest of Putin's policy suits it. Take nuclear weapons: Putin did what Yeltsin couldn't in pushing through START II ratification. This coincides with the plans of the U.S. administration, which also needs this agreement.
So everybody's happy. Russian patriots have been promised "derzhavnost," and Americans are sure they will get what they demand. Transnational corporations active in Russia are satisfied and opt not to rock the boat. Only the Europeans are spoiling the party. The Council of Europe's complaints have truly offended the Moscow leadership, which sees this as Western ingratitude, even a betrayal. After all, Moscow's policy is formed in close contact with the West: The IMF examines the government's plans; the World Bank agrees on certain programs. The war was needed to raise the authorities' rating in light of economic reforms approved by the world community. The Kremlin is convinced that, if the West approves our economic policy, it should support a war made necessary to screen that policy.
The politicians simply don't understand that their Western European friends are in a far more complicated situation then the Americans. The average American barely understands where Chechnya is. Western Europe is another matter; there, the events in Chechnya elicit protests that governments have to deal with. But the Europeans led the Kremlin to understand that it shouldn't take the snub too seriously. Tony Blair invited Putin to London, and the German and British intelligence services openly came to the aid of their Russian colleagues fighting "international terrorism" in the North Caucasus.
In general, we will solidify the unity of the "Christian world" in the face of the "Moslem threat." And, meanwhile, Western transnational corporations will solidify their positions on the Russian market and squeeze out Russian exporters from markets in Moslem countries.
Boris Kagarlitsky is a researcher at the Academy of Sciences Institute of Comparative Politics. He contributed this comment to The Moscow Times.
*******
The Russia Journal May 1-7, 2000 Editorial Cold heat
While the airwaves are still warm from the crackle of the recent scuffle between RAO UES chief Anatoly Chubais and Gazprom boss Rem Vyakhirev, Russia's northern cities and Far East regions are beginning to lose both heating and hot water.
Tuesday, residents of Primskoye Krai in the Far East, who had already lost their heating, found their hot water was also cut off. With most electricity producers living on day-to-day rations of "black" oil, coal and gas, such news will become increasingly regular.
President-elect Vladimir Putin may have brokered a cease-fire between the warring energy chiefs, but neither he nor his energy minister, nor even the Soviet-style Vyakhirev, appears to have any ideas on a long-term solution to this critical issue.
The solution to the problems surrounding the energy complex and the struggle for control of these monopolies will be a litmus test of Putin's economic reform credentials and authority over the Russian oligarchs. Russia's energy complex ¡ with its over-borrowing and overspending, huge subsidies, inefficient production and distribution methods ¡ represents one of the most intractable problems in the Russian economy.
Even the U.S.S.R. State Planning Commission, understanding the precarious nature of the Soviet economy due to its reliance on exporting raw materials, rationed fuel to the population to minimize losses. The astronomical increase in domestic consumption of motor fuel over the years, at prices that still are a fraction of international oil prices, has only added to problems. Then there is the nonpayments issue in the fuel and energy complex, a problem that also dogs the broader Russian economy. Payments for energy consumption are rarely made, and there seems little chance that state institutions ¡ including government-subsidized housing and various defense and civil organizations ¡ will ever clear their debts.
Under tremendous pressure from the government to cough up more tax money and supply cheap (or free) energy to the public sector, while at the same time trying to invest to keep the business going and maintain the export flow, Russian energy companies now face critical choices.
Sooner or later, with any major correction in world oil and gas prices, the taps will be turned off, triggering a domino effect across the country, leading to a full-blown economic crisis. Meanwhile, the political conflict only compounds the problem. It is no secret the Kremlin would like to jettison Vyakhirev, who has run the gas giant unchallenged while using it to finance the KremlinÆs nemesis, Media-MOST, which owns the private NTV television channel. It has also been rumored that Kremlin Chief of Staff Alexander Voloshin would like to become Gazprom chief, though Vyakhirev is unlikely to yield without a good fight.
Chubais, for his part, would like to see not Voloshin, a known Boris Berezovsky confidante, but his own man in charge of the gas giant. The Chubais clan has suffered a number of setbacks in the last six months, beginning with the loss of the Transneft oil pipeline monopoly; and a friendly man in Gazprom will be crucial to his own survival.
At the same time, Chubais appears to be the only person with any idea of how to resolve the looming energy crisis. In an interview with London's Financial Times newspaper, Chubais again proved himself to be one of the few people in Russian business, both public and private, prepared to confront and make the tough decisions ¡ arguing the need for the government to drastically reduce its holding in the energy generation sector.
But despite verbal commitments to do so by Putin, a radical divestment by the government is unlikely to happen anytime soon.
At the same time, Russia will need billions of dollars in new investment to establish power plants to replace the aging and ineffective oil, gas, coal and dangerous nuclear plants it currently relies on.
In the meantime, heating and hot water will continue to be cut-off across Russia sporadically, with more hardship for the elderly, the sick and the poor. It is likely that Chubais will be the scapegoat if a disaster unfolds. That is what NTV is trying to project by putting all blame on UES for electricity and heating shortages. But the government would do better to heed Chubais'
advice, rather than taking the easy option of using him as a whipping boy for the population's outrage.
Whatever happens, the recent scuffle between the energy titans has pushed the energy issue to the forefront of Putin's economic reform program. Unfortunately, land ownership and tax reform, it seems, will have to wait their turn. ******
Date: Wed, 03 May 2000 From: abe brumberg <ABrumberg@compuserve.com> Subject: In Memoriam
Dear David: The thumb nail sketches of some of the contributors to PROBLEMS OF COMMUNISM who are no longer with us will appear as an addendum to a paper I will deliver at St. Antony's 50th birthday celebration, at Oxford, this coming July. I think they may be of some interest to the readers of your File. Abe Brumberg
IN MEMORIAM
Richard Lowenthal
I first met Richard Lowenthal in l956, and fell instantaneously under the spell of his powerful intelligence, his ability to get to the heart of any problem, and also, his occasional choleric outbursts notwithstanding, his warmth and humanity. His experience in the German socialist movement, and as a journalist in both German and English (he was with the London Observer when we met) made him a marvelous source of information and reflection, on which I could draw again and again. Lowenthal was my principal mentor during my entire editorial tenure and beyond. He was also a very good friend. His death in l998 left a void in my life to this day..
.Alec Nove
Like lowenthal, I met Nove soon after I began working for Problems of Communism, and admired him for his open-mindedness, his enthusiasm, readiness to rush in where others feared to tread, his inexhaustible energy, imagination and grasp of reality. A scion of a Menshevik family, his commitments to Marxist values unencrusted by doctrinaire "hangups" was utterly refreshing. Her became one of the regular *contributors to the magazine.
Bertram D. Wolfe
Bertram D. Wolfe's magnificent biography of Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin, Three Who Made a Revolution, which takes the reader through l9l6, was one of the most beguiling books I read in my youth. After obtaining my MA at Yale, I I worked as a researcher for Wolfe in what later became the US Information Agency. Wolfe as a thinker and as a person played a formative part in my development as a student of Soviet affairs. He was a vain man, a splendid writer, and demanding teacher. His vanity, however, never intruded upon his respect for others. He contributed many articles during the first years of Problems of Communism, though he had become very alarmed when I was appointed editor, writing a letter to the Director of USIA asking whether it was wise to appoint a man "so young and inexperienced to such a powerful post." A one time Bolshevik, founder of the Mexican CP and leader of the American Communist Party in the l920s, he was wont to endow the position of an editor with almost supernatural power (wasn't Lenin an editor of Iskra? And how those Russian Social Democrats battled for a voice on the clandestine journal!). Two years later, however, he wrote me, quite unexpectedly, retracting his earlier reservations, and
congratulating me on the fine job I was doing on the magazine. I was very touched.
Merle Fainsod
Though I came to disagree with Fainsod on some matters, I always admired his ability to organize his thoughts, observations, and data into a coherent whole, which together with his flawlessly lucid style made the job of editing him such an absolute delight. An aloof man, he was at the same time unfailingly courteous. I remember in l972, when I helped to arrange what was probably the first round table of German and American Sovietologists, which took place in Dusseldorf, Fainsod raised a toast "to his good friend Karl Kernig," our German host. Kernig, a bubbly man whose English was the despair of his American colleagues, ran over to me and exclaimed, his face flushed and beaming, "He called me Karl!" To be called by a distinguished American colleague by his first name was, to Kernig, the ultimate honor
Peter Wiles
Peter Wiles combined an astute mind, a passion for irreverent wit, and surprising warmth. His rambunctious sense of humor occasionally caused him some trouble, but of course he would never acknowledge it and never let it affect his feelings for those he genuinely respected. I have never understood the mysteries of economics, and always felt grateful to Wiles for his charitable attitude, all the more since I knew him not to suffer fools gladly.
Leon Lipson
>From the first time we met I was captivated by Lipson's grasp of Soviet law and our collaboration over the years only strengthened my first impressions. Lipson also had an ear for languages, and his Russian was splendid, as was his knowledge of Russian literature. With a touch of the precious about him, some people thought him rather ponderous, but I found him in fact something of a "softie," and his sense of humor congenial to mine. Who but Leon Lipson would have collaborated with me in l962 in reprinting a brief report from a Soviet newspaper about a citizen whose brawny appearance suggested he was "a person yielding large quantities of production yet who turned out to be a "parasite" and sentenced to four years with "compulsory labor", and then asking our readers to explain the real reason for his punishment, for which they would be awarded with a copy of Stalin's's Problems of Leninism? About 40 readers from various countries responded, several received copies of the Stalin volume (by that time a commodity difficult to come by) , and the whole exercise was carefully analyzed by Lipson, who examined the historical and ideological ramification of the law on "social parasites" adopted in l961, and certain of its similarities (noted by several readers) with "anti-vagrancy" statutes in Western countries. .
Max Hayward
Hayward had this in common with his St. Antony's colleague Harry Willets (still happily amongst us): both were brilliant experts on Soviet literature, on the politics of Soviet literature, and indeed on Soviet society in toto. The major difference between the two was that while Hayward was a reluctant contributor who nevertheless would produce a promised piece of writing, Willets would go to inordinate lengths to elude his commitment. (He will still tell you today of how he tried to avoid me by boarding a boat in New York for England, only to receive a telegram--I was proud of tracking him down--reminding him of a promised essay. He finally forced himself to remember.) Hayward was also a marvelous lecturer and raconteur: I still remember with a shudder of pleasure his talk--lasting almost two hours--given at LSE more than three decades ago on the language of the Soviet underworld. He was also another of these Englishmen whose cool demeanor (when not inebriated) concealed a generous spirit and a deliciously wicked sense of humor.
Adam Ulam
Adam Ulam came from the pleiad of Soviet and Chinese experts at Harvard University who in the first years of Problems of Communism constituted the largest and most gratifying pool of potential contributors. I recall making my way to Cambridge at least twice a year in search of useful contacts and good conversation, and a cup of tea with Ulam would inevitable be one of the highlights of my visit. Ulam soon became a regular contributor, whom I cherished for his wide-ranging erudition and sense of irony. Ulam's detestation of Communism--its ideological pretensions, inhumanity, and hypocrisies--was as fervent as that of many Americans who had experienced Soviet and/or communist reality on their own skins, but he often managed to filter it through the lens of dry humor, which rendered his observations all the more lethal. A good example was Ulam's "The æEssential Love' of Simone de Beaver," (2/62) a penetrating portrait of the romance of an intellectually commanding woman with a "philosophy-in-being' capable of blandly justifying mass murder in the name of "the logic of history." (I note with interest Ulam's use of the phrase "holocaust" years before the word entered our vocabulary in relation to mass murder.) Known as something of a catwalk, Ulam once invited me for lunch to his house, assuring me that though his wife was away, he was perfectly capable of concocting a soup with plenty of sherry. We were dining outside in the patio, and every few minutes Ulam would enter the kitchen, taste the soup, and announce that it still did not contain a sufficient amount of sherry. At the end of the meal, we both staggered into the living room to take a snooze in on one of the comfortable armchairs. This incident came to my mind several years later, when I attended a one-man show of Arkadi Raykin (pMre) in Moscow, where among other roles the magnificent actor played the part of an agitpropchik describing the evils of samogon to his audience, in the process imbibing more and more of the fiery substance until he fell flat on his face. I wonder whether there are still such colorful experts on Russia around any more whose personal deportment can so deftly illustrate "real existing socialism"? Jane Degras
I first met Jane Degras in l956, during my first visit to Great Britain, when I established contact with many people who were later to play a formidable role as contributors to the magazine and also as personal friends. I was fascinated by this rather tiny woman, whose homely face,
not to put too fine a point on it, would turn beautiful as soon as it broke into a smile-- and whose prominent East London accent also affected the little Yiddish she knew. But the little lady was nobody's fool. In turn genial and tough, she boasted a first class mind as well as a stupendous memory. Her major expertise lay in the history of the Comintern. She was utterly delightful to work with.
Benjamin Schwartz
For a man blessed with a powerful mind and plenty of reasons to be proud of himself, Benjamin Schwartz was probably the most unassuming person I ever met. Principally an authority on China, his knowledge of Marxism and ideological matters in general was no less impressive. Though I was never much of a student of China, I always found it enjoyable to step into his small office at the old Russian Research Center on Dunster Street in Cambridge to have a pleasant talk and get some information about topics and potential contributors to the magazine. I think he had once been a yeshiva student, for his interest in ideology had a Talmudic ring to it. A diffident and lovely man. Hugh Seton-Watson
Like Benjamin Schwartz, Hugh Seton-Watson was also a very private person, and it is a moot whether his interest in bird watching did not take precedence over following developments in Russia and particularly Eastern Europe. He was a man with an encyclopedic knowledge about all the countries in the area, and also an astonishing memory, for his pieces, always written by hand, carried numerous source references that seemed at his finger tips, with all the necessary details, when he sat down to put pen to paper. We were lucky, my editors and I, that he was such a superb writer, and that his calligraphy was so exquisite, for I cannot imagine what it would have been like to edit a manuscript poorly written in longhand. He was also, I recall, an extremely fast writer, for occasionally hardly any time passed between sending a letter inviting him to write something, and the arrival of the finished product ********
The Times (UK) 4 May 2000 [for personal use only] 42 unarmed men guard Chechen frontier FROM GILES WHITTELL IN THE PANKISI GORGE, GEORGIA
THE jovial figure wearing corduroy trousers and carrying a kagoule who clambered out of a helicopter in the spectacular Pankisi Gorge yesterday could have been mistaken for a privileged tourist. But Bernd Lubenick is an Austrian general about to lead 42 unarmed men on one of the riskier missions attempted in the Caucasus mountains.
With winter snows receding from the high passes of the Georgian-Chechen frontier, the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) is to quadruple its border monitoring unit. Thirty alpine reconnaissance experts, including a British Army climber, will be added to the ranks. Their job, General Lubenick said, will be to help to avoid "any spillover of the Chechen conflict into Georgia".
It is a formidable task. North of the border, Moscow has stationed hundreds of armed guards and flown thousands of bombing runs in a remorseless attempt to wipe out the rebels. To the south, unknown numbers of Chechen men who
escaped the onslaught are living as refugees and biding their time before returning to the war. In between, Europe's highest peaks form its most dangerous frontier.
Along the Pankisi Valley to the east, between 5,000 and 6,000 Chechens have found a remote but beautiful alternative to Ingushetia's refugee camps, living in houses lent by the Georgian Government. Many are fighting-age men but fiercely deny any role in the war.
"No one living here is planning to go back and fight," said Lyecha Dubayev, 37, who like most men in the gorge claimed that he arrived from Grozny last autumn before the city came under serious siege. "We don't hate the Russian people, just their government," he said. But Russia believes that up to 600 rebels are regrouping in the Pankisi Gorge, and one of Moscow's generals has called it "a boil that needs to be lanced". Georgian officials, who long ago gave up policing the area, privately concede that many of its refugees are fighters.
The most telling evidence is the Chechens' intense suspicion of visitors. After one interview I was taken to the valley's only English speaker to have my notes examined to prove that I was not a spy for a Russian offensive in the gorge.
Satisfied, my escorts relaxed and all but gave themselves away. "They can take the clothes off our backs but they will never crush the Chechen spirit," one said. Another declared: "Yes, I am young; yes, I am male; and yes, if this war goes on I will go to help my brothers."
The road up the gorge is more pothole than tarmac and turns to mud before the border. By June it will be passable for four-wheel drives, as the road to Chatili village already is. They are the only vehicular routes into Chechnya across an international border, lifelines for the potential war effort.
Between these roads, dozens of high cross-border footpaths will open up over the summer, and General Lubenick plans to patrol them. From rented houses in Chatili and Omalo in the Pankisi Gorge, and tent camps in between, the OSCE intends to mount continuous 24-hour foot patrols.
"So far we've been unable to do any monitoring," said the general. Stationed in Georgia since February, he has been frustrated by weather and a tiny staff. Now, with the snow melting fast, and 42 men instead of 12, his work starts in earnest.
In two weeks the OSCE team - from Azberbajian, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, the United States, Russia, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Turkey - will be joined by a Swede and two British soldiers. They will be equipped with satellite phones, personal radios, night-vision goggles, climbing equipment and food for several days - but not a single firearm. Vladimir Putin, the Russian President, says he has no intention of violating Georgian territory or airspace in his pursuit of Chechen rebels. But at least 30 Russian incursions into Georgian airspace have been reported since the start of the war. Igor Sergeyev, the Russian Defence Minister, has called the Chechen war a disguised struggle with the West for control of the Caucasus.
If so, Europe's latest unarmed peacekeeping effort may soon look brave but woefully inadequate.
*******
Trud May 4, 2000 [translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only] HOPES AND RATINGS: PUTIN AND KASYANOV ARE THE MOST POPULAR STATESMEN TODAY Vitaly GOLOVACHEV, Trud political analyst
On April 14-17, the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Centre (VTsIOM) held a regular poll among the adult population. Among the themes touched upon was Russians' attitude to the activities of Vladimir Putin, Mikhail Kasyanov and the State Duma.
(1) Do you approve, or disapprove, of Vladimir Putin's activities at the post of prime minister/acting president of Russia? ----------------------------------------------------------- Jan.28-31 Feb.25-28 March 10-13 Apr.14-17 ----------------------------------------------------------- I approve of them. 79% 76% 68% 77% I disapprove of them. 14% 14% 23% 15% I don't know. 7% 10% 9% 8% --------------------------------------------------------- - As we see it, the rating of the present head of state is still at a very high level, as it has been since the memorable day when Boris Yeltsin handed in the reins of government to him. Both before the presidential elections and after March 26 (the election day), the majority of citizens (75-79 percent) approve of Vladimir Putin's activities. His rating dropped a bit in March, but too insignificantly to affect the general tendency. What is the reason for such nationwide support? The main reason is people's trust in Putin. The people have got tired of idle promises of the former rulers. A man of action who makes no meaningful theatrical pauses when talking, Putin stands in stark contrast to his predecessor. This is why people have got confidence in him. This confidence is of special nature and is especially strong in Russia. Though it has been given to him in advance, such support is extremely important for a statesman, and even more so for the president. However, there are some pragmatic explanations for the fact that Putin's rating has risen by 9 percent since March. Pensions today are not only paid regularly, they have been increased. Wage arrears to public sector workers have decreased. Signs of economic recovery are in evidence. The majority of citizens support the tough line towards Chechen rebels. They favour Putin's national-patriotic stance; in fact, he has deprived the communists of their banner while remaining a proponent of a democratic, market-oriented way of development. He is not trying to curry favour with the West, which is also to his advantage. The new host of the Kremlin's chief office is unpretentious and easy to understand. The impression is that he knows what he wants, and he will work to achieve this. This image serves to enhance people's trust in him still more. Now Putin is to show by his concrete deeds that Russians have made the right choice.
(2) Do you approve, or disapprove, of Mikhail Kasyanov's activities at the post of first vice-premier of the Russian government?
------------------------------------------------------------ Jan.28-31 March 10-13 April 14-17 ----------------------------------------------------------- I approve of them. 32% 39% 50% I disapprove of them. 30% 25% 24% I don't know. 38% 36% 26% --------------------------------------------------------- In my opinion, Mikhail Kasyanov's growing popularity (from 32 to 50 percent) is largely explained by the fact that Vladimir Putin supports his first vice-premier. This is understandable: if you trust the president, you approve of his personnel decisions. Whatever the case, Kasyanov is the second most popular statesman in Russia today.
(3) Do you approve, or disapprove, of the first actions of the new State Duma? ----------------------------------------------------------- Jan. 28-31 Feb. 25-28 April 14-17 ----------------------------------------------------------- I approve of them. 18% 24% 27% I disapprove of them. 65% 56% 58% I don't know. 17% 20% 15% ----------------------------------------------------------- Russians' attitude to the State Duma is changing for the better now, albeit slowly. There is a simple explanation for this: the first signs have appeared that the Duma is becoming a working structure, rather than a politicised, destructive force which has blocked the adoption of many major decisions only recently. A shadow of the former confrontation is still hanging over the new parliament (at least, in people's minds), and it is not yet working to the best of its abilities (lots of time was spent on squabbles). Maybe, this is the reason why 58 percent of the respondents spoke negatively of the Duma's activities. However, the number of positive appraisals has increased by 1.5 times.
********
Russia Rejects US Missile Proposals May 4, 2000
MOSCOW (AP) - Russia opposes U.S. proposals for amending an anti-missile treaty because the defense system Washington wants to build could be the basis for a shield covering all of the United States, a Defense Ministry official said today.
Col. Gen Leonid Ivashov, head of the ministry's international cooperation department, said Russia doesn't see any reason to revise the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which blocks Russia and the United States from building national missile defense systems. The United States wants to amend the treaty to build a limited defense system against possible attacks by ``rogue states'' such as North Korea. The U.S. government says the system wouldn't be able to protect against the widespread attack Russia is capable of launching.
A first stage of the proposed U.S. system would install rockets and a radar to knock down missile attacks from Asia. The second phase, focused on
defending against threats from the Middle East, wouldn't be built before 2010.
But Ivashov said the defenses could easily be expanded.
``One may get the impression at first glance that the U.S. plans to deploy 'a limited missile defense system' in one region,'' he said. ``What is actually meant here is a system with such control and target-acquisition means ... which can be easily expanded to national dimensions.''
Russia fears the U.S. system could provide a defense against any nuclear attack, making Moscow's nuclear weapons useless and leaving it defenseless. Russia, with its economy in shambles, cannot afford a missile defense system.
The United States insists its plan is not a threat to Russia and would not lead to a new arms race. The ABM treaty rests on the concept that banning anti-nuclear defenses would make both sides vulnerable to nuclear destruction and thereby ensure that they never use atomic weapons.
Moscow calls the ABM treaty a cornerstone of strategic stability. President Vladimir Putin has threatened to pull out of other arms control agreements if the Americans break the treaty.
*******
Russia's Kasyanov on Program to Sell State Assets: Comment
Moscow, May 4 (Bloomberg) -- The following are comments by Russian First Deputy Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov on implementation of the program to sell state assets.
The comments were carried on Interfax news agency. ``The Russian government hopes the market situation will be favorable in the second quarter of the year and that implementation of the privatization program will be continued.
``Despite problems of state asset sales over the past few years, its results have laid a market foundation for the development of the Russian economy.
``These results must be analyzed and a plan for the current year must be developed. The curtailment of the privatization program last year was due to an unfavorable situation on the market.
``In 2000 the situation has improved, and in the second half of the year we will be able to privatize a number of properties.
``In line with the economic development strategy, properties that must remain under government ownership must be determined.''
*******
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 From: fweir@online.ru (Fred Weir) Subject: Holidays
MOSCOW
The streets of Moscow are empty, as they always are in the first week of May. This is the onset of northern Spring, and it's unlikely that any Russian Czar, commissar or president could ever have prevented folks from making for their country gardens to put down the tomatoes, cucumbers and beets. But beneath the silence all the signs are that epochs are clashing mightily over the soul of this traditional Spring holiday. Millions of Russians marched Sunday with crosses, icons and candles in the ancient Kryostni Khod (Way of the Cross) processions around local Churches to mark the beginning of Easter, which occurs here 13 days later than in the West. Confined to a few showplace churches during Soviet years, the celebration seems to be rapidly reconquering Russia's popular consciousness. Easter masses in the beautiful Orthodox cathedrals of Moscow and St.
Petersburg were crammed this year. Great and powerful people, like President-elect Vladimir Putin, made sure they were prominent among the crowds. During this entire week one believer meeting another offers the salutation "Khristos Voskres" (Christ has Risen). "Vo Istina" (Truly), comes the response. On the other hand, tens of thousands of other Russians still took up hammer and sickle emblems, red flags and portraits of the Soviet Union's founder Vladimir Lenin to march in May Day parades in cities across the country. Once a key holiday on the Soviet calendar, the international workers' day of solidarity is still an official day off, and remains important to many people who resent the wrenching changes of the past decade. "We fought, we worked, we built a great country," said Svetlana Kortunova, pensioner in her 70's, marching in a Communist-led Moscow parade. "They may have destroyed the Soviet Union, but they will never take away the peoples' holiday of May Day". Russia's official calendar is a crazy quilt of Soviet-era political commemorations, ancient religious festivals and holidays grafted-on by former President Boris Yeltsin. The only real tension occurs at moments when the Church and the Communists are both vying for attention, like early May. No one seems to remember, or even know the significance of the holidays invented by Mr. Yeltsin in a futile bid to create a post-Soviet political tradition, such as Independence Day on June 12. "Independence from whom?" Russians always ask in astonishment. A survey conducted last week by the independent VtSIOM agency last week suggests pre-revolutionary tradition may be decisively winning the battle for possession of early May. About 84 per cent of respondents in the poll said they planned to take part in the week-long celebration of Orthodox Easter. Just 45 per cent said they would mark May Day. That's sharply down from 67 per cent last year. Of course, that still means there must be millions who honor both the religious festival, drenched in the Russian church's medieval colour, and the secular, militant workers' holiday. Politicians trying to straddle the fence should beware. Arriving at a workers' rally, a tired-looking Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov was greeted by followers who eagerly congratulated him with May Day. "Vo Istina," Mr. Zyuganov responded. Oops. Optimists say that perhaps the contradictions that seem so tense, barely a decade after the Soviet Union's demise, will go away by themselves in time. "Already young people have stopped regarding these Communist marches as some kind of threat," says Olga Zaretskaya, a specialist in Russian cultural studies. "They see it more like an outdoor exhibition of Soviet folklore, a colorful recreation of a time they only dimly remember. "Maybe the day will even come when our government will pay the Communists to stage a May Day parade, as a tourist attraction". At least the one Russian holiday that has never been the least bit controversial is rapidly approaching. All Russians mark May 9, the day of
the Soviet Union's victory over Nazi Germany, with a single-minded solemnity that makes it seem like the war was only yesterday. The Spring holidays traditionally extend from May Day to the close of Victory Day celebrations, which are always marked with a huge fireworks display in the Kremlin. In post-Soviet years, the shared commemoration of Victory Day has always seemed to restore social peace and unity after the loud Communist flag-waving and polemics of May Day. But this year Russia's freshly-elected leader has decided to schedule another political event for that very weekend. Mr. Putin is to be inaugurated Sunday, May 7, in a glittering Kremlin ceremony that supporters say will usher Russia into a bright new era. Maybe it will also become the first of a whole new wave of holidays.
*******
Web page for CDI Russia Weekly:
http://www.cdi.org/russia
|
|