Center for Defense Information
Research Topics
Television
CDI Library
Press
What's New
Search
CDI Library > Johnson's Russia List

Johnson's Russia List
 

 

October 15, 1997 
This Date's Issues: 1284 1285 1286


Johnson's Russia List
#1285
15 October 1997
davidjohnson@erols.com

[Note from David Johnson:
1. AP: Yeltsin, Lawmakers in Showdown Vote.
2. RIA Novosti: ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE COUNTRY WILL TURN 
INTO 'POLITICAL DEMISE' FOR SOME FORCES; THAT IS WHY
THEY ARE TRYING TO DESTABILIZE THE SITUATION, SAYS 
ANATOLY CHUBAIS.

3. G.F. Bain: Re Matt Taibbi's How the World Bank plundered 
Russia.

4. Matt Taibbi: Response to GFBain letter.
5. Journal of Commerce: John Helmer, Russia enemy No. 1: America.
6. Reuters: Nuclear time bomb ticks in Arctic--environmentalists.
7. David Wheeler: Orthodox Church Actions.
8. Chicago Tribune: Colin McMahon, RUSSIAN-AMERICAN'S VISA SNAG 
IS TELLING.

9. AP: Archeologists unearth settlement.
10. WP: DW, The Loneliness Of the Outdated Soviet Dissident.
11. Interfax: Chubais: Privatization Remains Key Trend Of 
Cabinet's Policy.

12. RIA Novosti: STATE STATISTICS COMMITTEE: RUSSIA OVERCOMES 
ECONOMIC RECESSION.

13. Segodnya: VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE MAY DRAW FULL HOUSE.
After the Vote It's Up to the President.

14. Reuters: Government Tries to Stop No-Confidence Vote.] 

********

#1
Yeltsin, Lawmakers in Showdown Vote 
By Greg Myre 
October 15, 1997

MOSCOW (AP) -- Legislators weighed the risks today of bringing a
no-confidence vote against the government, possibly provoking a political
crisis that could lead to fresh elections. 
The showdown has been building for weeks as the Communist Party and
other opposition groups in the State Duma expressed bitter resistance to
President Boris Yeltsin's economic policies, including an austere 1998
budget proposal. 
The debate began early in the afternoon and a vote was expected later
today. Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin said Tuesday he may submit his
resignation if the motion is approved. 
Usually a no-confidence vote is a painless way for lawmakers to register
disapproval of the government -- the measure has no legal effect under
Russian law unless followed by a second ballot within 90 days. 
There are no signs that Yeltsin wants to get rid of Chernomyrdin. 
But the prime minister's resignation could set off a political chain
reaction that would eventually allow the president to dismiss the Duma,
parliament's lower house. 
With Russia awash with problems, neither side relishes the prospect of
risking its jobs and putting its popularity to the test in fresh elections. 
``We in the government don't need extreme scenarios,'' First Deputy
Prime Minister Anatoly Chubais said today. ``But if our opponents create
one, we know how to work in those circumstances. We've been through worse
situations.'' 
Chubais said the outcome of the no-confidence vote was ``absolutely
uncertain.'' 
``The chances of either outcome are 50-50.'' 
Chubais, one of the main architects of Russian economic policy, said a
no-confidence vote would be ``a powerful financial blow to the country.'' 
After six years of decline, the economy appears to be stabilizing and
there are prospects for modest growth next year. Chubais said that's
actually bad news for government opponents, led by the communists. 
``The coming growth would mean the political end for some forces in the
country,'' Chubais said. ``In order to prevent that, they are ready to rock
the boat.'' 
At least 226 of the 450 Duma deputies must vote no confidence for the
measure to pass, and most analysts were predicting a close vote. 
By law, Yeltsin is not required to do anything following the first
no-confidence vote. But if a second no-confidence vote passes the Duma
within three months, Yeltsin must replace the prime minister or call new
parliamentary elections. 
Ultranationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, a constant critic of Yeltsin and
head of the Duma's third-largest faction, said he would not vote against
the government because he opposes new elections. 
``We are not going to take part in a farce. What's happening is dictated
purely by (Communist) party interests,'' Zhirinovsky said. 
Yeltsin has never had good relations with the current parliament, which
is dominated by communists, nationalists and other hard-liners. 
The constitution gives the president the upper hand on most matters.
However, the president does need parliament's consent on some key issues,
such as the annual budget. 
Communists and others oppose Yeltsin's plan to reduce the military and
end subsidies to money-losing state enterprises. A reconciliation
commission formed last week has made no visible progress toward a compromise. 

********

#2
ECONOMIC GROWTH IN THE COUNTRY WILL TURN INTO
'POLITICAL DEMISE' FOR SOME FORCES; THAT IS WHY
THEY ARE TRYING TO DESTABILIZE THE SITUATION,
SAYS ANATOLY CHUBAIS
MOSCOW, OCTOBER 15 - RIA NOVOSTI CORRESPONDENT MARINA
URYVAYEVA. Economic growth in the country will turn into 
"political demise" for some forces. That is why they are trying
to destabilize the situation. This opinion was expressed today
by Anatoly Chubais, Vice-Premier of the Russian Government. He
was speaking at an enlarged meeting of the Ministry of State
Property and the Russian Federal Property Fund. 
Chubais said that the situation connected with the State
Duma's decision to push ahead with the no-confidence vote in the
government, "is absolutely uncertain." "We shall not let our
opponents act out their scenario or, in other words, to leave
the government hanging in a state of limbo," he said. The First
Vice-Premier did not rule out the version when the Duma "will
have to give up the decision it had adopted or get ready for the
next elections."
Anatoly Chubais believes that in the event no-confidence in
the government is expressed, the country as a whole will be
dealt a powerful blow, in particular, against Russia's
international rating in the context of the country's joining the
Paris and London Clubs. Evaluating the economic situation as a
whole, Chubais pointed out that for the first time in six years
positive tendencies have begun to appear, when there is no
economic recession in Russia and it is literally half a step
away from entering the real economic market

*******

#3
From: Gfbain@aol.com (G.F. Bain)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 21:52:43 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: How the World Bank plundered Russia

I worked many years as a senior project manager at the World Bank and can
only characterize "Matt Taibbi"'s diatribe as tabloid journalism of the most
sophomoric kind. It is also a surprise that JRL accepts the "F" word - what's
next? the "N" word?
The angry, inexact and distorted picture of the Bank's activities as
presented by Taibbi is the sort of communist, old-line nonsense which served
to dupe the Russian public for so many years. He may get a response from the
Bank if he would only tell them who and what he is, and whether he is worth
the trouble.
The piece came to my printer as 12 double-spaced pages of distortion - a
lot
to waste on the matter -eg: (1)the Bank lends only to governments or with
government guarantees for purposes agreed to by each government because that
is its charter (2) the Bank does not dictate any budget matters but only says
in essence "If you want this project, get your budget in proper shape or
start such a process - show us that you will do the right things"(3) the Bank
offers only to finance the foreign exchange component of a project unless
special circumstances exist, and that loan is set up as a credit in the
Bank's books with payments made directly to the foreign supplier supplier on
evidence that the material is enroute (its use will be supervised) in order
that no funny business can occur(3) Summers no longer works for the Bank and
dragging him into this piece is irrelevant.
Perhaps Taibbi should visit the USA and Europe - let's take up a collection
-to get his thoughts straightened out and give him the opportunity to tell us
what is the best system for organizing a country's productive system, other
than communism or the current criminalistic system, that is.

********

#4
From: "Matt Taibbi" <exile.taibbi@matrix.ru>
Subject: response to GFBain letter
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 23:37:57 -0700

Dear GFBain,

Got your letter. In response to your criticism I have the following to say:

1) That the Bank lends to governments for purposes agreed to by each
government is not a guarantee that the loans are used in ways that benefit
the majority of the borrower country population. It is not even a guarantee
that the borrower country population understands or approves of the loan.
Russia is a good example. 

2) To say that the Bank does not dictate budget matters is asinine. How
dumb do you think we are? I have in my hands a letter from Sergei Vasiliyev
to Vladimir Potanin, dated June of last year: it lists 11 pages worth of
instructions on how to reform Russia's economy, based on "recommendations"
made by the World Bank (the letter openly states this). Russia had just
received a crucial loan before the election whch was used to pay off coal
workers who were threatening to strike, which may have caused a major
problem for Yeltsin going into the vote. It was a straight one-to-one
trade. Furthermore, what does, "what does 'in proper shape' and 'do the
right things' mean?" Did you read my piece? Voting on what to spend money
on and what not to spend money on is very nearly the exclusive province of
elected officials in every democratic country. The budget IS politics.
There is no absolute right and wrong when it comes to the budget. That's
what we have democratic debate for. It's not for the World Bank to decide
what is right and what is wrong for a nation. In the best case, it's for
its people to decide.

3) Of course Lawrence Summers is still relevant to the World Bank. His
policies
exactly coincide with World Bank policies; he has been asking for the same
things that the World Bank has. He is the former chief economist of the
World Bank. If Leon Trotsky quit the communist party and two years later
ran for congess in your district, you'd sure find his past relevant,
particularly if he were still calling for a transfer of the means of
production to the proletariat, etc. And also, his arrogance in dictating
policy changes to Chubais is characteristic of the "structural
adjustment" strategy which, you might recall, he helped usher in.

4) I am not a communist. In fact, as the editor and part owner of my
newspaper, I am a businessman who believes in the market, and believes in
competition. The whole point of my article was that the World Bank has been
making massive profits without being exposed to market risk. It is an
anathema to its own stated ideology. The World Bank is anti-capitalist, not
me. I would be interested to hear your answer to that.

Sure, I do use the "F-" world. It's something I learned from people like
Tom Wolfe, Hunter Thompson, P.J. O'Rourke-- the best journalists of our
generation, in short. These were guys who hit upon a tremendous revelation:
that you can write using the same language that people actually use. And I
and most of the people I know use that word pretty regularly. Incidentally,
GF, it is a verb that is used to describe an action that you might have
seen on video once or twice in your life.

While we're on the subject of semantics: yes, it's true, the word "fuck" is
sophomoric and impolite. I admit it. I'll use it again. However, I won't be
labelling anyone a communist in the near future. Calling people
"communists" over the years has been infinitely more destructive than using
the word "fuck" has ever been. "Communist" has been used to get people
fired, blackballed, even jailed. It's been used to incite mobs. It's been
used, incidentally, in ways very similar to the way your "N-" word has been
used-- to stifle debate and incite hatred instead of thought. What has
"fuck" done? Think about it.

I don't need to visit Europe or the USA. I'm an American. I love my
country. And the reason I do is because it's a place where everyone can
contribute to setting the rules of state and commerce. Americans never let
any foreign power come in and tell them "what's right." We've been smarter
and tougher than that. 

I hope that your letter has been posted on the Johnson's list. If you
really were a World Bank project manager, it will help illustrate to all
the JRL readers what kind of person makes the Bank tick. 

Sincerely,
Matt Taibbi

********

#5
Journal of Commerce
October 15, 1997
[for personal use only]
Guest Opinion
Russia enemy No. 1: America
BY JOHN HELMER
JOURNAL OF COMMERCE SPECIAL

MOSCOW -- In Russian villages there is an old peasant saying about dogs. 
"Once in the pack," they say, "you may not have to bark. But at least 
you've got to wag your tail."
These days, Russia's military strategists are doing their best to do the 
latter, acknowledging that the collapse of the Soviet economy and 
massive cuts in Russia's defense spending make it impossible to do both. 
But at the defense ministry and inside the Kremlin's Security Council, 
judging what or who poses the most dangerous military threats to Russia 
is far from decided.
The bad news for Washington, as well as for the U.S. business community 
in Russia, is that the debate over expansion of the North Atlantic 
Treaty Organization is driving ordinary Russians, and opinion leaders in 
Moscow, to become more suspicious of the United States.
The U.S. Information Agency regularly tracks shifts in Russian opinion. 
According to its latest poll, reported in May, seven in 10 Russians 
believe the United States "is using Russia's current weakness to reduce 
it to a second-rate power." Sixty percent say they have little or no 
confidence in NATO and 40% now say they lack confidence in the 
International Monetary Fund, double levels in 1993.
When Vice President Al Gore complained last month that the Russian 
government needs to do more to assure U.S. investors on security, he was 
promised a new investment protection committee headed by Prime Minister 
Victor Chernomyrdin. 
The practical reality, however, is that the general public and Russian 
elites both believe American political and business interests are making 
Russians insecure, not the other way round.
According to a March USIA report, "the U.S. is named far more often (by 
29%) than any other country as 'the greatest threat to Russia today.' "
Germany, which invaded Russia twice this century, spends a great deal of 
attention gauging how the Russian military, as well as the Russian 
public, feel about a German military threat.
A nationwide poll by the Russian Public Opinion Fund in August found 
just 6% of Russians thought Germany was a country that "can start a war 
against Russia." A parallel poll by another organization, the All-Russia 
Foundation for Public Opinion Research, asked in the same month whether 
Russians think world powers like the United States, Germany, Great 
Britain and Japan are Russia's partners or adversaries. Fifty-one 
percent said adversaries; only 28% said partners.
But concern about Germany is on the rise, fueled, Moscow observers 
believe, by Germany's role alongside the United States in expanding 
NATO.
The United States was well ahead of Germany on the Russian enemies' list 
in 1996, as well as this year. The May 1997 USIA poll of Russian opinion 
makers found that 10% named Germany, another 10% named Turkey, and 12% 
named China as threats.
The August 1997 Public Opinion Fund poll found 32% of ordinary Russians 
see the United States as a threat.
That said, 16% of ordinary Russians in August 1996 found Chechnya, the 
secessionist Russian republic and subject of a bloody two-year war with 
Russia, to be enemies. 
Even now, according to recent polls, 11% of Russians still believe 
Chechnya is capable of starting a war with Russia. Fighting in Chechnya 
is a lightening rod for current Russian military strategy.
The consensus among Russian diplomats and defense experts is that the 
nation's principal threat comes from the south. They draw a line from 
Chechnya through the Caucasus, including Georgia, Azerbaijan and Turkey. 
A top objective of the Russian defense ministry is to negotiate with 
Washington and NATO to drop the limitations imposed, almost a decade 
ago, on arms deployments Moscow can make on its southern flank. 
These, known as the flank limits, were drawn up in the treaty on 
conventional weapons in Europe and accepted by Moscow two years before 
the Soviet Union broke up. Turkey is the only NATO member adamantly 
opposed to dropping the flank limits.
Because of the importance the Clinton administration places on securing 
U.S. investment in the flow of oil from the Caspian Sea, Russians are 
bound to suspect an alliance between the United States, oil-producing 
Caucasian states like Azerbaijan and Turkey.
Russia's foreign ministry and the Foreign Intelligence Service publicly 
criticize Turkey for aiding the Chechen secession. This accusation was 
given additional force last week when the Turkish press reported that 
two leaders of a Chechen terrorist group that hijacked a Russian ferry 
in the Black Sea last year have "escaped" from prison. 
John Helmer writes for The Journal of Commerce from Moscow. 

********

#6
Nuclear time bomb ticks in Arctic--environmentalists
By Abigail Schmelz 

OSLO, Oct 14 (Reuters) - Norwegian environmentalists said on Tuesday a
radioactive time bomb was ticking in an Arctic Russian region while they
concentrated their efforts on fighting a legal battle over one of their
activists. 
Alexander Nikitin, a retired Russian navy nuclear safety inspector, has
been
charged with treason by Russia after writing of the environmental hazards
posed by the ageing nuclear submarines of Russia's Northern Fleet in a report
published by Norway's Bellona environmental organisation. 
``What we should have used the last two years for is finding solutions for
the problems in the report,'' Thomas Nilsen, a researcher for Bellona, told
Reuters. 
The activists, who have not been granted visas to Russia because of their
involvement in the Nikitin case, said they had been concentrating on bringing
what they saw as the human rights injustices of the case to international
attention. 
Bellona, which is researching the risks of the ageing fleet on Norway's
doorstep, published the controversial report last year and says it has since
been used as a standard for technical information on the region. 
``It is so desperately hopeless to sit here in Norway when an accident
could
happen any day without being allowed to do anything,'' Nilsen said. 
The report, which contained photographs of waste spilling out of
containers,
said there was great concern over the leakage of radiation into Arctic waters
and called for international co-operation to improve the situation. 
Russia's FSB, or Federal Security Service has charged Nikitin on three
counts
-- treason, revealing state secrets and forgery. A date has yet to be set for
his trial. 
Bellona accused Russia of using scare tactics to stop people talking about
the environmental problems of the Kola Peninsula and the Nikitin case, which
it says is key to its future work. 
``If all the information is considered state secrets it would be extremely
difficult for international organisations to do work in Russia with military
nuclear waste,'' Nilsen said. 
``But when we win the Nikitin case then all the doors are completely
open.'' 
Nilsen said the report had been banned in Russia, but his group had
smuggled
copies in Russian to the Murmansk region, where he said they were in demand.
Many Russians have accessed it via the Internet, he said. 
The FSB -- the successor to the notorious Soviet-era KGB secret police --
raided Bellona's offices in Murmansk in 1995, confiscating computers, data
discs and other material. 
FSB sources said Nikitin continued to use his military identification
card to
gain access to top secret documents on Bellona's behalf after he retired from
active service. 
Bellona maintains it used only voluntary and authorised sources in its
report, which it says contains no state secrets. 
Norway has repeatedly called on Russian President Boris Yeltsin for fair
treatment of Nikitin, who has been confined to his home city of St Petersburg
since his release in December after 10 months' detention in jail. 

********

#7
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 1997 22:49:51 -0400
From: David Wheeler <dwheeler@intrstar.net>
Subject: Orthodox Church Actions

Dear David:

I am struggling a little to understand, and I hope there might be a
correspondent of this list who can help me. I guess what I -- and I am sure
many others in western religious circles -- am feeling is primarily a sense
of betrayal at the attitude taken by the Russian Orthodox Church toward
other religions.

I realize that to some people this problem is at best a matter of politics,
at worst much ado about nothing, but to a western-minded man of faith it
flies in the face of every tenet of Christianity for one sect to oppress
another. And the action taken by the Russian government at the urging of
the Orthodox Church DOES amount to oppression.

Where the sense of betrayal comes in is that for all my adult life, first as
a layperson and then as a pastor, I have prayed for Christians in Russia,
whether they were Orthodox or underground Baptist or whatever. I cheered
and gave thanks for every advance they made, no matter how slight. I have
in my library a book, "The Gospel's Triumph Over Communism," that I have
read several times -- celebrating the endurance of the Orthodox Church in
the face of systematic, organized persecution by the state. I offered many
thanks when the church rose triumphant at the fall of the FSU. Although
there have no doubt been some abuses, primarily all we in western churches
want to do now is to help the people of Russia discover their faith --
whether the name over the door be Orthodox, or something else. But now for
reasons I am still hard-pressed to understand, they want to shut us out of
the liberty for which we have prayed and worked for so long.

I can't see why they regard us as disruptive, deceptive, or competitive; we
are all working for the same goal: the salvation of the souls of the
Russian people. I admit that I am largely ignorant about many things; maybe
I just don't get it. Can anyone enlighten me? Incidentally, I am REALLY
struggling with a religious body being involved in the import of vodka and
cigarettes, when alcoholism and poor health are two of the most prevalent
problems in post-soviet Russia! Again, help! How can this be? I would
love to hear something from someone who really understands -- maybe even
from an Orthodox person.

******

#8
Chicago Tribune
October 14, 1997 
[for personal use only]
RUSSIAN-AMERICAN'S VISA SNAG IS TELLING
BORIS JORDAN STORY GIVES GLIMPSE OF FEUD BEHIND THE SCENES 
By Colin McMahon
Moscow

Aiming to attract investment and turn around their battered economy,
Russian officials say they are willing to roll out the red carpet for
foreigners with capital. Yet on Monday, one of Russia's strongest financial
backers lashed out after the rug was pulled out from under him.
Boris Jordan, the 31-year-old Russian-American who as president of
Renaissance Capital Group has helped draw billions of dollars into Russia,
said Monday that a decision to revoke his residency visa will hurt
investment. Never mind that the decision appears to be temporary.
"When someone . . . has his visa removed for competitive reasons, it still
shows that Russia's playing field has not matured to that of the rest of the
world," Jordan said at a packed news conference in Moscow.
Jordan's multiple-entry visa was canceled earlier this month when he left
Russia on a business trip. He had to cool his heels in London until a
one-week pass was arranged. Though Jordan's visa has since been extended, the
matter remains unsettled.
The controversy opens a window on the often behind-the-scenes feud raging
among leading bankers and their political allies within the Kremlin. Last
month President Boris Yeltsin called members of the business elite into the
Kremlin and urged them to end their wrangling, but the Jordan affair shows it
won't be so easy.
Jordan is allied with Uneximbank, the big winner in recent privatization
efforts that included the summer sale of a 25 percent stake in the state
telephone monopoly, Svyazinvest.
For the Svyazinvest deal, Renaissance cobbled together a consortium that
included financier George Soros and Deutsche Morgan Grenfell. The sale
brought Russia $1.8 billion, and foreign observers generally thought it fair
and competitive.
Critics thought otherwise, pointing to Uneximbank's friendly relations
with Anatoly Chubais, one of Yeltsin's first prime ministers.
Among Chubais' foes these days are Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gusinsky,
two of Russia's richest men whose holdings run from newspapers to banks to
industry. After their separate bids for Svyazinvest lost, they charged that
the auction was rigged and demanded another shot. The government refused.
Berezovsky, who also is a senior member of Yeltsin's national security
staff, said officials justifiably revoked Jordan's visa because the American
had gained access to state secrets.
At the news conference Monday, Jordan said he didn't know what Berezovsky
was talking about.
"The actions against me are based only on emotions . . . on the emotions
of my rivals, and not on law," said Jordan, who has spent most of this decade
in Russia and went through a similar visa battle last year.
Before co-founding Renaissance in 1995, Jordan helped make a fortune for
Credit Suisse First Boston by investing in Russia's stock and bond markets
when few others saw them even as possibilities. In July, Renaissance
announced a merger with International Co. for Finance and Investment, the
investment-banking arm of a sprawling group led by Uneximbank; last month,
Jordan was named chief executive officer of ICFI.
Because Jordan is so adept at drawing foreign capital, some analysts in
Moscow believe he may be an especially inviting target for Uneximbank's
competitors. Without the foreign partners that Jordan courts, the reasoning
goes, Uneximbank would be hampered in bidding on the lucrative state assets
still to be put on the block.
Apparently, Jordan sees it the same way. "I think the annulment of my visa
was (the result of) the competitive groups within Russian business that today
have access to various corrupt midlevel politicians or bureaucrats in the
various ministries," he said.
Despite Berezovsky's comments and other evidence to the contrary, Russian
Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin seemed to imply Monday that the Jordan
affair may have been merely a mixup.
"Perhaps something happened there, perhaps it was an oversight on
somebody's part," Chernomyrdin told a news conference held to discuss foreign
investment. "That matter is being looked into."
He also rejected the notion that the investment climate has been soured.
"One should not be afraid," the prime minister said.

********

#9
Archeologists unearth settlement 
October 14, 1997

MOSCOW (AP) - Archeologists have unearthed a 22,000-year-old settlement near
Moscow that once was inhabited by early Stone Age hunters of woolly mammoths.
The excavated dwellings provide the oldest evidence of humans in the Moscow
region, The Moscow Times newspaper reported Tuesday. 
It previously had been thought that the region - in an ice age at the
time -
had been too cold to support human life, Hizri Amirkhanov of the Institute of
Archeology and leader of the dig, told the paper. 
The site in Zaraisk, 125 miles southeast of the capital, has yielded the
remains of 15 mammoths killed by the hunters, tools and jewelry. The only
human remains found so far is an arm bone. 
After three years of excavation, the breakthrough came this summer when
archeologists discovered two round dwellings with roofs made from mammoth
bone. 
``They were the same size as a modern Soviet kitchen,'' Amirkhanov was
quoted
as saying. Archeologists expect to find several more dwellings at the site,
he said. 
The settlement was first revealed when rains washed away earth at the site
near the local fortress. 
The evidence indicates that the hunters arrived in the region while
pursuing
mammoths. They came and went periodically before leaving for good about
17,000 years ago. 
Settlements dating back 25,000 years have been excavated in the Vladimir
region northeast of Moscow, but the culture of the inhabitants was different,
Amirkhanov said. 

*******

#10
Washington Post
15 October 1997
[destroy after reading]
The Loneliness Of the Outdated Soviet Dissident
By Daniel Williams

MOSCOW, Oct. 14—Alexander Podrabinek, a dissident who risked life and
livelihood in Soviet times fighting the Communist regime, has found a niche
in the new Russia -- campaigning for civil rights. Still, his eyes brighten
when he talks about a sideline that is a throwback to his previous
clandestine career.
"I try to advise dissidents in places that are still under Communist
rule. In China, in Central Asia, in Cuba," he said cheerily. "It's really
where experience comes in handy. I know a lot about the workings of the
secret police."
His dual vocation -- civil rights work at home and aiding dissidents
abroad -- is Podrabinek's way of overcoming a kind of political hangover.
Soviet-era dissidents like himself are trying to come to terms with a
harsh reality: They play a marginal role in current Russian life. In a
country preoccupied with money, survival, corruption, crime and political
intrigue, the voice of the old-time dissident is barely heard, and when
heard, rarely heeded. Worse, in the view of some dissidents, the Russia
that has grown from the ashes of communism is not the Russia of their dreams.
Their waning influence has raised the question of whether the end is
near for one of Russia's most durable institutions -- the intelligentsia,
Russia's class of activist thinkers.
In Soviet times, the dissidents were the bold and persecuted branch of
the intelligentsia. But after 160 years of battling for social justice and
suffering exile, torment and death at the hands of czarist and Communist
authorities, is the intelligentsia finished and the dissident obsolete?
"The changes in Russia are uncomfortable for the intelligentsia," said
Alexander Gelman, a playwright and social commentator. "Everything seems
done in the wrong way. No one knows which side to take. It's not the
intelligentsia or their friends who have come to power, and the rulers are
not calling on them."
"Yes, we were expecting to be called," said Vladimir Voinovich, a
dissident satirist who was exiled to Germany by the Soviets. "But nobody
needs us. Time passes, we get old. Our influence is zero. Even our moral
role is not so remarkable, although society needs it as never before."
The agony of the dissidents has been the subject of many newspaper
articles over the past year. The problem, some commentators write, is that
dissidents are simply out of touch. "It is amazing how irrelevant they
are," said Masha Lipmann, an editor at Itogi magazine.
Others contend that the dissidents are unsure how to assault a
government they helped bring to power. Association with the reformist
economic policies of the government of President Boris Yeltsin makes it
hard to criticize the outcomes -- leaving the role of opposition to the
old-line Communists and extreme nationalists.
The dissidents "do not tire of persuading everybody that . . . tens of
millions who find themselves on the verge of complete poverty are to be
sacrificed on the altar of the liberal revolution," wrote the Moscow News.
"Many of the `masters of thought' today do not bother even to try to
understand those who disagree with their hierarchy of values."
Roy Medvedev, a dissident writer, has urged Soviet-era dissidents to
drop their preference for preaching and begin to vie for power. "The new
opposition, like opposition movements of democratic countries, should
openly participate in the social and political life of the country and make
claims for influence or even power," he wrote in the Moscow Times.
Such collective action seems unlikely. Dissidents are highly
individualistic. What seemed to Westerners a single-minded David fighting
the Soviet Goliath was rather a small army made up mostly of generals whose
ideas varied widely. Some were democrats, some monarchists, some religious,
some atheistic, some xenophobic, some Western-oriented.
A sampling of a few prominent dissidents shows the variety of attitudes
and paths they follow today. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, among Westerners the
best-known living dissident, is widely regarded as a prime example of the
shrinking fortunes of the dissidents. For a year after his return from
exile in 1994, he ran a weekly television show on which he offered an
unrelentingly gloomy picture of Russian prospects. The program was abruptly
canceled; critics characterized him as a doom-sayer.
He nonetheless continues to warn of the decline of education,
spirituality and culture in Russia. Last month, in a speech to the Academy
of Sciences, he attacked Western culture and, in particular, the "fruitless
noise and grimaces" of television. "The people's existence will depend on
those who throughout these dark ages help save from ruin . . . our inner
mental and spiritual life," he said.
Several dissidents are engaged in human rights campaigning. For them,
Russian brutality during the war in Chechnya was the gauge of their
ineffectiveness.
"We could really not make a difference," said Sergei Kovalyov, then head
of Yeltsin's human rights commission. He resigned in 1996 after the Russian
army demolished a town in which 100 hostages were held captive by Chechen
guerrillas.
"I was called an enemy of the people, an enemy of Russia," he recalled.
"I realized that the regime was not going to listen."
Kovalyov, a biologist by profession, spent 10 years in a Soviet prison
for publishing information on human rights abuses. Some Russians consider
him the successor to the late Andrei Sakharov as the patron saint of
dissidents.
He is at once pessimistic, yet willing to carry on. "Dissidents of the
'70s and '80s in no way influence the events in today's Moscow," he said
flatly the other day during an interview in his office. "Still, we must
keep working away; the moles of history dig imperceptibly."
He sees the creation of public interest groups that address specific
issues -- the environment, consumer rights, human rights, for instance --
as the future of dissent. "We can create a society that feels itself a
source of power," he said. "A country of people willing to stand up to the
central power: Mr. Smith goes to the Russian Federation."
Kovalyov has concluded that the Yeltsin government is dominated by the
Communist-era nomenklatura, the party elite, which has adapted to new
freedoms while maintaining old attitudes. "They are cleverer than before.
They are not afraid of what people like me say. Brezhnev -- the fool! -- he
was afraid," Kovalyov remarked.
Larisa Bogoraz, another dissident hero, organizes seminars on legal
issues for visiting groups from all over Russia. She is not surprised that
both the public and the government turn their backs on dissidents. "The
life of a nonconformist is difficult," she said at her Moscow apartment.
"You are unlikely to affect life in a drastic way. Any nonconformist is an
irritation."
Bogoraz was sent to jail and Siberian exile the first time for taking
part in a demonstration in Red Square to protest the 1968 Soviet invasion
of Czechoslovakia. She acknowledges that many of her political generation
feel resentment. But, like Kovalyov, she preaches patience. "There is
bitterness." she said. "One can't expect fast results; a long time may
pass. We need to learn, too, about Russian society; it is a long way from
our ideals."
Alexander Podrabinek publishes a civil rights newsletter and seems
content with a circulation of 12,000 readers. The paper deals with issues
of prison conditions, religious persecution, the death penalty and the
military draft. The weekly is titled Express Chronicle, the same name of an
underground paper he published a decade ago.
"I'm not frustrated," he said. "Dissidents have to understand that the
'70s and '80s are over."
He adheres to the dissident tradition of keeping politics at arm's
length. "We don't appeal to the government, we appeal to society," he said
during a chat in his cramped Moscow office. "Dissidents are bitter because
no one from power calls on them. I myself see no reason to cooperate with
the authorities. The authorities are not clean enough to cooperate with."
Valeria Novodvorskaya, a self-described libertarian, makes no bones
about her bitterness. She blames the audience rather than the government:
"In this country, most of the dissidents hold little appeal for the people."
"Only the West defended the dissidents, and only thanks to that we
survived. We owe nothing to the people; they are slaves who put up with
everything to get a few perks," she declared heatedly.
The final insult for dissidents is that their struggles are being
forgotten, the newspaper Izvestia said this week. If so, it is a sadly
ironic turn of events, since many dissidents campaigned hard so that the
victims of Stalinism should not be erased from memory. This week, on the
eve of a memorial meeting to honor the late military dissident, Gen. Pyotr
Grigorenko, Izvestia lamented that "victims of the [distant] past are
remembered, but recent fighters and victims are forgotten."

*********

#11
Chubais: Privatization Remains Key Trend Of Cabinet's Policy

MOSCOW, Oct 15 (Interfax) - Russian First Deputy Prime Minister *Anatoly
Chubais* Wednesday told the leaders of territorial privatization agencies
at the Ministry for State Property that privatization remains the nucleus
of the government-pursued policy. At the current stage, he said,
privatization is being filled with new content. 
He also said that the tasks of accomplishing massive privatization and
creating private ownership have been "irrepressibly" accomplished. The
privatization agencies are faced with the following key problems:
privatization as such and control over state property. 
He said in comment on the problem of revenues gained from privatization
that the privatization targets set in the budget have already been attained
and will be topped by 50%. However, federal sales by the Ministry for State
Property account for 95% of this sum. The sale of state property in the
regions have added just 300 billion rubles to the budget, which means that
privatization in the regions proceeds slowly. 
Investments in enterprises is as important as budget revenues gained
from privatization. However, as long as the government remains a debtor,
privatization will be mostly aimed at enlarging the budget, Chubais said. 

*******

#12
STATE STATISTICS COMMITTEE: RUSSIA OVERCOMES ECONOMIC RECESSION
MOSCOW, OCTOBER 15 (RIA NOVOSTI CORRESPONDENT). By using a
method of statistical analysis which takes into consideration
seasonal factors and which was developed by the International
Monetary Fund for many countries, one can assert that economic
recession in Russia has been surmounted, Secretary of State of
Russia`s State Statistics Committee Vladimir Sokolin said at a
meeting with journalists today. He pointed out that the domestic
statistics did not take into account the above mentioned factors
and experts have overlooked the transfer from economic recession
to economic stabilization.
The methods of data`s computation are being improved. For
example, a new statistics of price rates was created beginning
with 1992, "we possess the whole spectrum of prices in Russia,"
Sokolin said. In line with the conclusion of the International
Monetary Fund, its experts maintain a close cooperation with the
State Statistics Committee, the statistics in our country
corresponds to international standards and is even "one of the
best in the world" as far as drive and scale of data are
concerned.
According to Sokolin, Russia takes the first place among
CIS states and Baltic countries in re-structuring of its
statistical work in the sphere of statistics. There is no such
completeness of economic information in these countries as in
Russia. As Sokolin reported, organizers of an international
conference on statistics of consumer prices to be opened on
November 24 in Geneva want to see Russian experts among
participants of this conference. 

********

#13
>From RIA Novosti
Segodnya
15 October 1997 

VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE MAY DRAW FULL HOUSE
After the Vote It's Up to the President
By Yevgeny YURIEV

The Duma does not even want to hear about compromise any
more. It seems to be ready to sacrifice the premier for the
sake of playing a mean trick on the hated 'young reformers'. 
Duma speaker Gennady Seleznev explained, sadness thick in
his voice: what the Duma really wants is a vote of no
confidence to Anatoly Chubais and Boris Nemtsov, but since the
vote can only be addressed to the premier in line with the
Constitution, Viktor Chernomyrdin is in the line of fire and
his two first deputies can stand aside and look on. 
The premier, meanwhile, seems to have grown tired of being
kicked for somebody else's sins. On the eve of his yesterday's
visit to the lower house he had had a tough talk with Seleznev
to promise that he would resign if the Duma passed a
no-confidence vote. 
But the initiators were unmoved by the threat. Gennady
Zyuganov said that the premier's intention to resign if the
Duma passed a vote of no confidence to the Cabinet was
Chernomyrdin's "personal choice." 
The Communist faction's Numero Uno promised that stance
was not subject to change: on the eve of a forthcoming plenary
meeting of the Communist Party's central committee Zyuganov et
al. have to uphold their partisan image, demonstrate
irreconcilability and fight off accusations of corroboration
with the authorities - Chernomyrdin be damned. 
This newspaper has data to indicate that the Communists
are hell bent on getting the needed 226 votes and going out of
their way to convince their allies - the Agrarian faction and
Narodovlastie - to put up a solidarity vote.
The Communist faction had angrily rejected the proposal of
a secret ballot in which the no-confidence vote would likely
fall short of the target, and insisted on a show of hands. 
The Communists would thus expose turncoats in their ranks
and deal with them accordingly. Seleznev, a member of the
Communist faction, is the only one allowed to abstain. The
feeble hearted run the risk of eviction and being crossed out
from the party list for the next elections. 
To ward off a potentially large number of sick leaves and
extraordinary summons to the electorate, those members who
intend to miss the vote 'for a reason' have been advised to
authorise their colleagues to use their electronic voting
cards. 
If the Yabloko faction does not amend its stance at the
last moment, the vote of no confidence is assured. 
Possible outcome? Scenarios are several.
The Hard Scenario was described by Vladimir Ryzhkov, first
deputy to the Duma speaker from the movement Our Home Is
Russia, Chernomyrdin's backers, yesterday: the premier
announces his resignation "then and there," i.e. in the Duma
right after the vote. The president accepts his resignation
without waiting for a repeat no-confidence vote three months
later as per the Constitution. The very next day the President
presents a new candidature, one absolutely unacceptable to the
Duma. If the lower house fails to approve the new premier, the
President dissolves it without batting a lid. Ryzhkov gives the
MPs less than a month to pack: the Duma may be dissolved as
early as 10 November, in his opinion. 
The Soft Scenario: the President accepts the premier's
resignation only to propose him for premiership soon after. The
premier agrees on the condition he has the right to pick his
own team which may well include the 'young reformers'.The Duma
plays along - naturally. 
The Unnerving Scenario: the President does not accept the
premier's resignation and thus provokes a trench war to last
the next three months. Both the Duma and the cabinet are in
limbo and the President is above the fight.
But in the final count, everything depends on the
President: he both writes the plot and directs the political
drama to go on stage today.

********

#14
Gov't Tries to Stop No-Confidence Vote 
Reuters
15 October 1997
MOSCOW -- First Deputy Prime Minister Anatoly Chubais made a last-ditch
attempt to avert a no-confidence vote on Wednesday, warning parliament it
would hurt the economy and place itself firmly on the road to dissolution. 
"The deputies in several weeks will have either to drop their decision or
get ready for a fresh election," Chubais said in a speech. 
The State Duma (lower house) was due to start debating the no-confidence
motion, proposed by the opposition Communists over the government's
"disastrous" economic policy, at noon GMT. 
The outcome of the vote was still in the balance just hours before the
debate, with the government talking tough in public but trying to reach a
compromise behind the scenes. 
Prime Minister Victor Chernomyrdin has made clear he will resign after
nearly five years in office if he loses the vote. 
President Boris Yeltsin, who backs his stolid and loyal prime minister,
has also taken a tough line. He cannot dissolve the Duma if it passes just
one no-confidence vote, but can do so if it passes another one in the next
three months. 
"We, in the government, do not need extreme scenarios," Chubais, who is
also finance minister and one of the masterminds of the government's
economic reforms, told officials at the Privatization Ministry. 
"But if extreme opposition forces us to accept such a scenario...we will
still achieve our goals in a most impressive manner." 
He said the economy would suffer if parliament brought down the
government, which has stepped up reforms since Chernomyrdin and Yeltsin
instigated a gradual reshuffle last February which promoted more radical
reformers such as Chubais. 
"Our experts have calculated that we would immediately lose between $300
and $400 million," he said. "Russian debt prices would fall and
preparations for a new (debt) rating would be significantly slowed." 
The government says Russia is finally poised for economic growth, nearly
six years after the Soviet Union collapsed, and that reforms are starting
to bear fruit. 
The Communists, who have about 140 deputies in the Duma, said they were
confident of mustering enough support among opposition forces to get the
226 votes needed for the no-confidence motion to pass in the 450-seat
chamber. 
But the outcome was still unclear, partly because the Communists regard
Chernomyrdin as more ready to do business with them than the radical
reformers led by Chubais and fellow First Deputy Prime Minister Boris
Nemtsov. 
The no-confidence motion, drafted by the Communists, avoids blaming
Chernomyrdin. It holds the two first deputy premiers responsible for
reforms which the opposition says are leading to chaos. 
"The government on the whole has become a hostage of its radical wing
which is unable and unwilling to heed the voice of people and opponents,
let alone to start a dialogue with them," the motion said. 
The Communists say the government exceeded its powers by unilaterally
cutting budget spending this year. The government, with tax revenues
falling well below target, sought approval for its cuts but the Duma
refused to back the unpopular move. 
By ousting Chernomyrdin, the Duma would risk Yeltsin nominating Chubais
or Nemtsov to become prime minister. If the Duma rejected the new candidate
three times, Yeltsin would then have the power to dissolve it. 
One ray of hope for the government was that the liberal Yabloko bloc,
expected to vote against the government, expressed reservations about the
wording of the no-confidence motion. It did not say how it would vote if
the motion was not amended. 
The no-confidence vote and the debate, due to include speeches by
leaders of parliamentary groups and a reply from Chernomyrdin, were
expected to last about 90 minutes. 
The communists, the largest group in the State Duma, the lower house,
with 140 seats, say they have 215 of the 226 votes needed for their
no-confidence motion to pass. 
Yeltsin, who has huge powers under Russia's post-communist constitution,
has made it clear he is happy with the Cabinet and unhappy with the Duma's
resistance to its reforms. 
Chernomyrdin, who appeared confident in Yeltsin's backing, made it clear
Tuesday he did not want to corner the Duma. 
"The country which is on the verge of economic growth does not need
votes or rows, it needs a policy of responsible dialogue between the
executive and legislative powers," he said. 
Chernomyrdin said his government was ready to cooperate with parliament
in passing the draft 1998 budget rejected by the lower chamber in the first
hearing last Thursday. 
"It's time to work hard to let Russia enter 1998 with a new law
(budget)," he said after crisis talks with the Duma speaker Gennady
Seleznyov and the head of the Federation Council, the upper house, Yegor
Stroyev. 
Despite the no-confidence row, Communist Seleznyov also appeared upbeat
on prospects of a compromise on the budget draft between government and
parliament. 
"You might have noticed that parliamentary leaders were absent from
today's meeting and sent qualified experts instead," he told reporters.
"Experts find common language much faster." 

*******


Return to CDI's Home Page  I  Return to CDI's Library