December 5, 1997  
This Date's Issues: 1409  • 1410 •1411 

Johnson's Russia List
#1411
5 December 1997
davidjohnson@erols.com

[Note from David Johnson:
1. Interfax: Lebed Calls for Yeltsin's Resignation.
2. Jamestown Foundation Monitor: SWEDES RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT 
YELTSIN'S HEALTH. 
3. Interfax: 25% Of Russians Call Current Electoral System Most 
Democratic.
4. Fred Weir on foreign investment in Russia.
5. John Danzer: Resignation.
6. David Filipov: Gorby.
7. Argumenty i Fakty: Tatyana Netreba, "Players in the President's 
Team -- Who is in Boris Yeltsin's Retinue Today?" 
8. Steve Blank: Yeltsin.
9. Interfax: Duma Figure Conditions For Start II Ratification By 
Start III Understanding. (Rokhlin).
10. Reuters: Duma Approves Budget in Principle.
11. New York Times: Michael Specter, When Yeltsin Talks, Nobody 
Listens (Aides Hope).
12. TRANSITIONS: 'Western Values Are Cliches'
An interview with Zavtra editor in chief Aleksandr Prokhanov

********

#1
Lebed Calls For Yeltsin's Resignation

MOSCOW, Dec 5 (Interfax) - Former Russian security chief Alexander Lebed
on Thursday called for President *Boris Yeltsin's* resignation. 
"That would benefit the country," Lebed told reporters in Moscow. 
He blasted Yeltsin for initiatives to unilaterally cut armed forces in
northwestern Russia by 40% and reduce the country's number of nuclear
warheads by one-third. Yeltsin put forward the initiatives during a visit
to Sweden. 
Lebed said he had cut short a visit to Krasnoyarsk, Siberia, "to look
into Yeltsin's statements." "The president, the supreme commander in chief,
has no right to make" such statements, the ex-security chief said. "It's
not his job to be our tsar, it's to be our president... 
"The statements Yeltsin has made in Stockholm haven't had the approval
of relevant bodies of state authority and contradict the Constitution." 
Lebed said he planned to appeal to the Russian people and "shortly
publish" a document based on analysts' conclusions. 
Russia, he said, still had no budget for next year and the state was
short of money. For this reason dismissing a large number of people from
the military was impossible because under the law they would need
allowances, Lebed said. 
A country like Russia should not have armed forces less than 1.2 million
strong, he said. "Below that level the army can be disbanded because it
won't be combat ready by definition... 
"It would be easier to decide that we don't need an army." 

********

#2
Jamestown Foundation Monitor
5 December 1997

SWEDES RAISE QUESTIONS ABOUT YELTSIN'S HEALTH. Several leading Swedish
newspapers have apparently raised questions about Russian president Boris
Yeltsin's fitness for office in the wake of a 3-day visit filled with
diplomatic blunders and dubious public statements by Yeltsin on key security
issues. The criticism follows Yeltsin's departure from Stockholm yesterday.
One conservative Swedish daily spoke of Yeltsin's "confused nonsense on
international issues" and said that the Russian president "carries himself
in just the same stiff and drug-induced way that we got used to seeing from
Soviet leaders in days long gone." Another newspaper said that Yeltsin, who
arrived in Stockholm on December 2, "was judged by the people he met as a
man who is not well." (Reuter, December 4)

******

#3
25% Of Russians Call Current Electoral System Most Democratic

MOSCOW, Dec 5 (Interfax) - A quarter of Russians regard the current system
of electing government bodies as the most democratic in Russia since 1917,
Interfax was told Friday by the All-Russian Center for Public Opinion
Studies (VTsIOM) quoting the results of a poll of 1,600 adults made at the
end of November. 
The poll was conducted in view of the 60th anniversary of the first
general direct elections to the Supreme Soviet by secret ballot. The
elections were held in December 1937 in keeping with the so-called Stalin
Constitution approved on December 5, 1936. 
During the poll 9% said the Stalin Constitution best expressed the
popular will, while 22% described the constitution passed in 1977 under
Leonid Brezhnev as the most democratic. 
However, 24% believe none of the five constitutions approved since the
1917 Russian revolution can be called truly democratic. 
19% were undecided. 
Many of the supporters of the Stalin and Brezhnev constitutions were
aged over 55, did not complete high school and had lower than average
incomes. Many of them voted for Communist leader *Gennady Zyuganov* or
Liberal Democratic Party leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky in the 1996
presidential elections. 
The current constitution is supported by managers, entrepreneurs,
students and many people between 18 and 40, with a higher education and
high incomes. Most of them voted for Boris Yeltsin in 1996. 
Most likely to reject all of the constitutions were unemployed,
industrial workers, engineers, and people aged between 25 and 40 with a
higher education who voted for Yabloko leader Grigory Yavlinsky. 

*******

#4
From: fweir.ncade@rex.iasnet.ru
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 14:44:53 (MSK)
Subject: Foreign investment 

By Fred Weir
MOSCOW (CP) Russia's marketplace has a reputation
for loose ethics, punitive taxes, official corruption and
legal bedlam.<
Veteran Canadian business people say the reputation is
largely deserved, but if you learn the lay of the land and find
ways to adapt, Russia can also be a goldmine.<
``They do so much to discourage foreign investors in
this country, it's a terrible shame,'' says Doug Steele, a
Halifax native who owns two popular bars in Moscow.<
``And yet this is a great country with immense
potential. There's nowhere else I'd rather be.''<
Relatively few foreigners have taken up the challenge
of Russia's turbulent post-Soviet market, though the pace
is picking up.<
Direct foreign investment is estimated at the
equivalent of $5.5 billion Cdn this year, a big jump over
1996 but disappointing when compared with other emerging
markets. China was expected to received nearly 10 times as
much.<
Canadians have invested a total of $408 million over
the past six years in Russia. <
Steele knows all about the perils and the payoffs of being
in Russia.<
Three years ago he started his first business, a
Canadian-style tavern called the Moosehead, as a 50-50
joint venture with Russian partners. Within a year his
partners muscled him out and returned only a fraction of
his original investment.<
``The trust factor disappears very quickly here once
the money starts rolling in,'' says Steele. ``Criminal
methods of fixing things, like taking a contract out on
your life, are all-too-common.''<
Steele walked away from the experience and invested
his money this time without partners into the Hungry
Duck, a raucous beer-and-vodka joint that has become one
of Moscow's hottest nightspots.<
He has since started up another bar, and plans to open
a restaurant soon.<
``Problems between partners happen everywhere, but
it's more frequent and more dangerous in Russia,'' says
Tatiana Maleva, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment in
Moscow.<
``Russian businessmen often resort to extra-legal
methods to solve problems because, frankly, a lot of the
business in this country is still not effectively covered
by the law.''<
The lack of legal clarity and accepted channels for
resolving disputes has put more than one joint venture on
the rocks.<
Canada's IMP Group has been involved in bitter
wrangling with its Russian partners for two years over
management of the Aerostar Hotel. Despite three rulings in
its favor from the Stockholm International Arbitration
Tribunal, IMP has been unable to enforce the rulings or
collect damages in Russia.<
Prime Minister Jean Chretien raised the Aerostar issue
with President Boris Yeltsin during an October visit to
Moscow, but was rebuffed.<
``The inability to have your judgement enforced in
Russia: this remains a test,'' says Thomas Marr, the
Canadian Embassy's commercial attache in Russia.<
``It would be a very positive development in this
economy when business people can have confidence in the
system of legal redress when there are serious commercial
disputes.''<
But some Canadians insist they have experienced few
legal tangles and are happy with their Russian partners.<
``We set out to become a good Russian business, and
we've never had trouble,'' says Glen Steeves, of Hamilton,
Ont. He is managing director for McDonald's restaurants in
Moscow.<
McDonald's of Canada has invested about $210 million
in Russia and expanded from one outlet to 27 in three
cities since 1990.<
A recent survey by the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development rated Russia as the world's
worst place for corruption among public officials.<
Business people, mostly off the record, admit that
corruption is a pervasive obstacle to normal business in
Russia.<
Steele says ``you see it every day. The fact is you
can't make a move without paying extortion to somebody.
You just write it off as a business expense.''<
Other complaints include high taxes, an ever-changing
legal code and omnipresent bureaucracy.<
``It's definitely not like doing business in Canada,''
says Bill Gilliland, a lawyer who heads the Canadian
Business Association in Russia.<
``But many Canadian businesses do succeed here, and
they do so by getting to know the environment and making
efforts to adapt.''<

********

#5
From: John Danzer <Telos4@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 02:25:35 EST
Subject: Resignation

I would agree with David Johnson's recommendation that it is time for Yeltsin
to resign. I also trust Blank's nose. The smell of alcohol has drifted
undiluted
from Yeltsins breath clear across the Atlantic. Yeltsin's current
"drunk" is his effort to come to grips with his feelings of
failure. Hopefully, he will exit with grace and not try to jump
into an icy river again. 

Watch Lebed. He has good informers. When he steps up his
campaigning it's because he "knows" something. He can't afford to
waste his meager funding and personal political capital on
premature publicity. Zhirinovsky also has good informers. 
Recently, he predicted that there would be no elections in the year
2,000 and that he knew who the likely leader would be. I'm still
betting on Lebed.

My amateur prediction. (Only amateurs can risk predictions)

There will be no presidential election in the year 2,000. The only
person in Russia who could rally any kind of majority in a
conventional election would be the communists. The people with the
money in Russia will do everything possible to avoid that worst
night mare. The next leader of Russia will have to be someone who
can simultaneously get the trust & loyalty of the majority of
people and at the same time be trusted to not seek revenge on the
money holders. To guarantee immunity the money holders will have
to bring their money home. The billions that have fled will have
to be invested in Russia. 

Who can accomplish this? I would predict Lebed will be the man
"drafted" not "elected" to this position. Chernomyrdin would
remain as a Prime Minister to calm the west. Primakov would remain
secretary of state to keep the west on its toes. Lebed will most
likely give greater economic autonomy to the various regions but
strengthen the army as a means of bringing everything together. 
Such a new structure could have the added advantage of attracting
some of the Republics back into the fold. The mafia will buckle
under because they are a convenient scape goat on which to vent the
nations rage. The war on the Mafia will be a distraction that will
occupy the publics consciousness until the money that is brought
back starts percolating through the economy.

The transition to Lebed won't be a pretty sight. The longer it
takes for Yeltsin to get out of the way the uglier the situation
will be. Dangerous instability with a possible "nuclear weapons
accident" (no I didn't get this idea from Peace Keepers) could be
the precipitating factor. Lebed keeps hinting at the possibility
of some nuclear mishap by references to "suit case bombs" and his
description (last summer) of Russia as Albania with nuclear
missiles. He even said at a news conference this past summer that his first
job as leader will be to bring the nuclear weapons under control.

Happy? New Year!

*******

#6
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 1997 14:25:32 +0300
From: David Filipov <dfilipov@glasnet.ru>
Subject: Gorby

WARNING: PLEASE SKIP TO THE NEXT ITEM IF YOU ARE SICK OF GORBY-BASHING.

I greatly respect Gorbachev the historical figure, but I am about to mock
Gorbachev the contemporary politician. 

FINAL WARNING!!

Ok, Gorb-bash-job fans, read on.

Stanley Kober writes:

"On another subject, I am getting a little tired of people continuing to
mock
Gorbachev. I mean, what could be worse than starring in a TV commercial? And
for a food that is high in fat and cholesterol! What fiendish thing will he
think of next?"

There's nothing wrong with Gorbachev doing a TV commercial to save his (very
useful!) foundation from going under. Unless he wants to be taken seriously
as a politician in Russia, that is. The point is not that Pizza Hut is bad
for you. It's that in today's political climate, it's a poor move for a
Russian politician to so blatantly embrace Western consumer products. The
conventional wisdom suggests going the other way (see Nemtsov/inomarki).
Doesn't Gorbachev the politician realize this about his country? No? Then
what kind of a politician is he? A laughably out-of-touch one? One that gets
one percent of the vote? 

By now, appearing out of touch is a cliche' for Gorbachev, which is too bad,
given that he changed the course of history. His major political weakness in
this country -- aside from the undeserved, but undoubtedly popular,
perception that all he did was kick off the ruination of everything that was
good about the old system -- has long been the fact that he appeared too
often in public and rambled too much.

Which brings me to Sinyavsky's list of Gorbachev's achievements, which Mr.
Kober was kind enough to reprint. Sinyavsky, of course, was right. There is
no question that Gorbachev was the man of the 1980s. Unfotunately, and not
at all of his own doing, none of what Gorbachev accomplished is viewed with
any kind of nostalgia in this country today. Here, let's look at Sinyavsky's
list of Gorbachev's achievements from the point of view of, say, a farmer in
Saratov:

1: He withdrew the troops from Afghanistan. - It was a big deal at the
time. But Chechnya made everyone forget about that war, except the people
who lost someone there, or the ones like my farmer's pal Edik who went out a
normal kid and came back an opium addict. And besides, my farmer has spent
the past 18 years cursing the Brezhnev politburo for getting involved in
that war in the first place, not praising Gorbachev for getting out. And
besides, his son was in Vilnius for some of the senseless violence that
Gorbachev condoned there in 1991.

2: He gave us freedom of speech. - "You mean the govorilnya that is the
State Duma?," asks my farmer, ingenuously. "Or those compromised newspapers
and television stations in Moscow?" (And of course, there never really has
been true freedom of speech in many regions. No, since about 1990- 1991,
I've yet to meet to a Russian outside of Moscow or St. Pete who continues to
fully appreciate Gorbachev for the freedom of speech he gave them.)

3: He allowed eastern Europe to regain independence. -- "A my chego ot
etogo poimeli?," scoffs my farmer."And what good did that do US?" 

4: He freed Andrei Sakharov and other political prisoners. -- Regretably,
the political prisoners are forgotten. My guy in Saratov has enough problems
in the here and now, although he's very sorry Sakharov didn't live another
decade.

5: He put an end to the cold war. -- "A my chego ot etogo poimeli?"

All this adds up to one percent. It's tragic, it's wrong, but it's true.
Gorby should stick to ads and get out of Russian politics. 

*******

#7
Russian Paper Views Presidential Administration Structure 

Argumenty i Fakty, No. 49
December 1997
[translation for personal use only]
Article by Tatyana Netreba entitled: "Players in the President's
Team -- Who is in Boris Yeltsin's Retinue Today?" illustrated by a
quasi family tree with Yeltsin at the top, linked by a network of
arrows to his aides for all of whom name and position are given and
for most of whom a photograph is also supplied

Before Anatoliy Chubays arrived in the Kremlin the President had two
parallel structures, as it were: The presidential apparatus, which
included the aides, the President's office, the protocol service, and the
secretariat whose work was coordinated by Viktor Ilyushin, the first aide
to the President, (to whom all the other aides were subordinate); and the
presidential administration, which had its own chief. The administration
included directorates, for example, the directorate for work with the
territories, the control directorate, and so forth.
As head of the presidential administration, Anatoliy Chubays united
both structures in which he played the pivotal role. Under the new
structure, the number of deputies has increased from two to 10.
Until recently, the head of administration had two first deputies. 
After the departure of Aleksandr Kazakov, Viktoriya Mitina who replaced him
lost not only the title of "first" deputy but also some of her powers,
which went to Yuriy Yarov. Some say that Yuriy Yarov, the first deputy
head of administration, was appointed by the President personally, either
because of the much- loved system of creating checks and counterbalances or
because of Yuriy Fedorovich's particularly close relationship not just with
the President but also with his family. (Incidentally, Viktoriya Mitina is
also quite friendly with the President's family.) Valeriy Semenchenko, the
head of the President's office, was appointed deputy head of the
administration. Now not a single edict, not a single decision can pass by
the head of administration.
Mikhail Komissar is in charge of perhaps the most crucial patch of all
-- political matters, relations with other bodies of power and political
groups, as well as public relations.
For the first time, the new structure of the presidential
administration includes a staff officer as a deputy head of administration
(with the title of major general). He is Yevgeniy Savostyanov, the former
head of the Moscow directorate of the Federal Counterintelligence Service.
The post of deputy head of the president's administration for economic
issues was created specially "for" A. Livshits, as a consolation prize
after he returned from the White House [government]. He has been able to
raise his status substantially by organizing the economic directorate.
The President's press secretary, Sergey Yastrzhembskiy, combines this
role with that of deputy head of the administration where he is in charge
of all foreign policy issues.
Clearly, the burden of combining these latter two is colossal and
therefore the post of presidential aide on international issues emerged in
the Kremlin recently. It is occupied by Sergey Prikhodko who is,
incidentally, an old friend of Yastrzhembskiy.
With the arrival of a young team led by Chubays in the Kremlin the
apparatus there began to be divided into the "fathers" and "sons." Or, to
use Kremlin slang, the "romantics" and the "image makers."
The generation of "romantics" includes primarily those who were with
Yeltsin as he became established as president -- aides Yuriy Baturin and
Mikhail Krasnov who is in charge of legal issues; speech writers Lyudmila
Pikhoy and Aleksandr Ilin and presidential administration deputy chairman
Aleksandr Livshits. They themselves have stressed repeatedly that they are
not simply a single team but are also friends. Their academic
qualifications and analytical papers mean that they are also often referred
to as the intellectual team.
Many of the people who arrived in the Kremlin after the presidential
elections are highly talented managers. For example, before joining the
President's administration Yumashev was the successful boss of the magazine
Ogonek. Komissar was head of Interfax, public relations directorate chief
Margelov had a fairly senior position with the Video International
advertising agency. There is no need to tell these people how to find out
what the public wants and how to get it interested.
The position of aides to the President, Yevgeniy Shaposhnikov and
Boris Kuzyk, is rather different. Shaposhnikov deals with air and space
problems -- he was appointed to work in the Kremlin while he was director
general of Aeroflot international airlines. Boris Kuzyk deals with issues
involving the military-industrial complex.
Since a short while ago they have both been subordinate to Aleksey
Ogarev, deputy head of the presidential administration.
Of the people who entered the Kremlin at the same time as the
President in 1992, the only ones left are Anatoliy Korabelshikov, his aide
on regional issues, and the President's head of protocol Vladimir
Shevchenko, a professional of whom it is said that there is no equal
anywhere in the CIS. [The illustration shows Yeltsin at the top of the
family tree; his daughter, Tatyana Dyachenko, Valentin Yumashev, and
Vladimir Shevchenko in the row directly beneath him; the 10 deputy heads of
administration in the row under them; and presidential aides along the
bottom]

********

#8
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 08:18:12 -0500
From: blanks@carlisle-emh2.army.mil (Steve Blank)
Subject: yeltsin

I do not think that to assess Yeltsin and Russia's present state 
that we need to belittle his positive achievements which are very 
substantial. The problem is his negative ones are also in that 
league. While it is true that no transformation of Russia and the 
USSR into democracies could reasonably be expected to be a glorious 
progression, we as analysts, and the Russian people, are entitled to 
criticize Yeltsin for what has been a terrible catastrophe. He did not 
build up a democratic state or a capable governing machine. He stopped 
economic reform midway in 1992 letting the bandits entrench themselves 
in a series of unholy alliances. Thus subsequent privatization and 
other such reforms, undertaken in the absence of a viable state, have 
resulted in the current monstrous economy of banditry and 
rent-seeking. Yeltsin did not organize a government of laws where he 
and his servitors would have the legitimacy that accrues thereby and 
as a result nobody is accountable for anything. He did nothing to 
create a viable system of civil-military relations and instead created 
multiple militaries and then left them on their own, quite 
irresponsibly, except when he needs them for political purposes. Nor 
is it clear that he has any control or comprehension of the strategic 
issues involved in defense policy or of the burden of defense upon 
Russia. In foreign policy, he has overextended Russian forces, 
bogging them down in endless peace operations and making foolish 
threats all over the CIS that only weaken Russia and enlarge its 
neighbors suspicion of her. He still has no viable policy for Europe 
except for Primakov's neo-Brezhnevism. Federal relations have never 
been put on an adequate basis and we see the results in the Far East 
and the North Caucasus. And now we see the economic crisis that his 
rash policies have fostered about to undo even the spurious answer that 
he tamed inflation. How do you tame inflation when the government 
still cannot keep to a budget and monetary surrogates which have many 
of the attributes of money are proliferating around Russia. I've yet 
to find an economist who will tell me that. Sure one can throw people 
out of work or not pay them, but the equivalent of money is still 
sloshing around there. otherwise how could so much capital leave the 
country.

This is by no means a complete list, but it is sufficient a basis 
upon which to provide a reasoned analysis or assessment of his tenure. 
While resignation is both practically unthinkable and politically 
dangerous since he was "elected" (though he stole the election) true 
democracy will not come about soon or painlessly because of his 
mistakes for which he and his cliques must answer.

*******

#9
Duma Figure Conditions For Start II Ratification By Start III Understanding

MOSCOW, Dec 5 (Interfax) - The Duma must ratify the START II treaty only,
if Russia and the United States reach agreement on the main aspects of the
START III treaty and sign a preliminary framework agreement on it, Duma
Defense Committee chairman *Lev Rokhlin* told Interfax stressing that it
was his personal opinion. 
"Russia is one year ahead of schedule in destroying means of nuclear
deterrence," he said. Rokhlin claimed that the ratification of START II
without an understanding on lowering nuclear arms from 3,000- 3,500
missiles to 2,000-2,200 provided for by START III "will cost Russia" $30
billion to $50 billion. "First we will have to destroy our missiles and
then build them again," he said. 
The strengthening of the ground and naval forces as well as the air
force the state of which he described as critical is a key condition of
ratification, Rokhlin said. 
He also said START II is directed at "the manifold weakening" of the
Russian strategic force. "All reforms in the military sphere boil down to
radical cuts in the Armed Forces," he claimed. 
"The combined number of troops confronting us in the West and the East
is almost 4 million, 530 divisions, 42,000 tanks and 1,000 aircraft are
concentrated along Russian borders," Rokhlin said. 
He described as arbitrary the announcement by President Boris Yeltsin of
the reduction of nuclear warheads by one third and naval and ground forces
in the northwest by 40%. 
"As far as I know the president did not coordinate his decisions with
the Defense or Foreign Ministries or the Security Council - everyone there
was shocked," he said. 
"The declarations are not supported by the budget law and in some
aspects contradict the law on defense," Rokhlin said. 
The Duma invited Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev to its closed session
Friday evening. Deputies hope to get explanations about Yeltsin's latest
initiatives. 

********

#10
Duma Approves Budget in Principle 
Reuters
5 December 1997

MOSCOW -- Russia's opposition-dominated lower house of parliament voted on
Friday to approve in principle the 1998 draft budget, subject to a number
of amendments, after an appeal by President Boris Yeltsin. 
The vote in the 450-seat State Duma -- 239 for and 137 against --
followed a dramatic intervention by Yeltsin, who came to the chamber
personally to urge deputies to pass the budget in its first reading. There
were four abstentions. Other deputies were not in the chamber. 
Just minutes earlier, Yeltsin had told the Duma in an unprecedented
appeal: "I ask you not to drag your feet but to vote for the budget at once." 
The reformist government views the budget as a vital tool to craft a
recovery in 1998 after years of economic depression in post-Soviet Russia
and recent world market turmoil. 
"You are all state officials of a big world power which is introducing
democracy, learning to live according to the principles of democracy,"
Yeltsin told the deputies. 
"Not only Russia but the whole world is awaiting the Duma's decision,
because the whole world financial system is in fever...Your work (on the
budget) is not over, you will take part in the second, third and fourth
readings. They are awaiting the budget in every small settlement, village
and town." 
Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov told reporters on Thursday his faction
would reject the draft, which the government sees as a vital tool to
engineer a recovery after years of economic depression. 
His faction had reiterated its position on Friday, but some of
Zyuganov's 138-strong group of deputies had made clear they did not want to
follow the imposed party line. 
Central Bank chairman Sergei Dubinin told the Duma the budget was
crucial for the stability of Russian markets. 
"The adoption or rejection of the budget will have strong influence on
the stability of our markets and the intentions of investors both at home
and abroad," he said. 
A joint Cabinet-parliament commission had previously agreed revisions to
the government's original 1998 draft, raising both spending and revenues by
28 trillion rubles ($4.7 billion). 
The deficit is barely changed at 132 trillion, working out at 4.7
percent of gross domestic product, after the commission agreed to raise the
projection for GDP in 1998. 
$=5,973 rubles 

*******

#11
New York Times
5 December 1997
[for personal use only]
When Yeltsin Talks, Nobody Listens (Aides Hope)
By MICHAEL SPECTER

MOSCOW -- First, he named Japan as one of the world's nuclear superpowers.
The Japanese have no nukes. Then he stunned his aides at a meeting in
Stockholm by announcing -- without a word to any of them -- that Russia
would disarm unilaterally. There are no such plans. 
Then, as his senior generals gasped, President Boris Yeltsin told an
astonished crowd this week that he would cut Russian troop strength in the
Baltic region by 40 percent. That was a few hours after he confused Norway
with Sweden when talking about a major oil deal that Russia is desperate to
conclude. 
His press secretary and defense chief spent the rest of the day issuing
urgent denials of almost everything Yeltsin had said. 
"We don't take what he says all that seriously," a senior American
diplomatic official conceded Thursday, after the latest round of public
gaffes. "We have come to learn that lots of times he just says what's on
his mind at the moment. And his mind changes rather quickly." 
It is normal for people under pressure to make mistakes. But with
Yeltsin there is a growing feeling here that perhaps it has become a little
too normal. 
And Yeltsin is not any old leader: he runs one of the biggest nuclear
powers on Earth. And he runs it like a semi-democratic czar. With no
legislature that can really challenge him, he rules essentially by decree. 
There is no apparent successor to the president, who is 66. Whatever
movement Russia has made toward democracy and a free market -- and that
progress is debated always -- Yeltsin remains enigmatic, inconsistent,
contradictory and overwhelmingly powerful. 
"He is like a little boy," said Dmitri Trenin, a military specialist
based here for the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. "He always
wants to stun the world, attract the most attention. He will say anything
to get attention. And when he speaks like this, people do listen." 
The Swedes certainly did, although perhaps not the way a publicist would
want. The day Yeltsin got to Stockholm, the leading Swedish newspaper,
Aftonbladet, felt compelled to announce the arrival of the Russian
delegation with the headline "Moscow Circus Arrives in Provinces." And not
without reason. 
After all, this is a president who just this year told a captivated
world at a NATO summit meeting that he would remove nuclear warheads from
Russian missiles. No, he didn't mean that. 
In Ukraine this year, Yeltsin made a big gesture of removing sales taxes
between the Slavic states whose people are friendly but whose governments
are often at odds. Yeltsin's Finance Ministry -- already under severe
international pressure to collect more taxes and become more fiscally
responsible -- went absolutely nuts over that one. 
"Something seems to happen to him when he goes overseas," said Pavel
Voshchanov, one of Yeltsin's more critical former press secretaries. "He
loses control there. It has always been the case. When he is here he is
shown just as Mao was with his own people. Doors open, he comes out, says
something that is rehearsed and then he leaves. A czar need do no more. But
in other countries they have other rules. It can't be good for Russia to
see him this way." 
Actually, most people here don't seem to blame Yeltsin for his gaffes.
Perhaps that is because there is so much else to blame him for. A year ago
he was so sick -- many thought near death -- that his recovery had been
seen with great relief in Russia and in the West. For a while. 
But today, the country is buffeted by a growing financial crisis. His
Western-oriented reform leader, Anatoly Chubais, has been tainted as
corrupt and partisan. Foreign investors are pulling their money out of the
market -- mostly in response to fears about emerging markets in Asia that
have nothing to do with Russia -- but it has still crippled the treasury.
An economy that seemed on the verge of a rebound once again seems as if it
might plummet. 
"How long do we need it?" Gen. Alexander Lebed, Yeltsin's former
national security adviser and now an archenemy, asked Thursday. "How long
do we need such a man sending us toward our doom before he finally resigns?" 
It is a question that few others have asked. It is not that Yeltsin is
so popular -- he is deeply unpopular according to every poll taken in the
last year. Yet, few alternatives to the president have emerged during his
six years in power -- in part, of course, because he has done all he could
to defeat opposition voices. 
Yeltsin does not appear to be ill, and his aides say he has greatly cut
back on drinking since his heart bypass operation a year ago. 
Much of what he said this week, in fact, means nothing. A 40 percent
reduction in the army is significant. But earlier this year he called for
such a cut, campaigned for it on radio, and insisted that it begin at once. 
"Don't go trying to figure him out," said Vera Kuznetsova, a political
reporter for Izvestia who covers Yeltsin and has written about him for
years. "Nobody ever has. Even his daughter had no idea what he was talking
about in Sweden." 
Yeltsin's daughter Tatanya Dyachenko is one of his chief aides. 
Early in Yeltsin's second term, his press secretary, Sergei
Yastrzhembsky, expounded grandly on plans for the president to travel to
many parts of the world he had never seen. South America was mentioned;
more trips to the United States and Canada were considered. Africa and the
Middle East were, too. 
Yastrzhembsky was mute this week about Yeltsin's future travel plans.
Looking like a man who just wanted to get his president home while he still
had his feet out of his mouth, Yastrzhembsky could only shake his head and
laugh. 
"The president has opened a new window for journalists on the diplomatic
negotiating process," he said. "Now I have to go." 

********

#12
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 1997 
From: baumgartnerp@omri.cz (Pete Baumgartner) 
Subject: Interview: Zavtra editor in chief

TRANSITIONS
Vol. 4, No. 3
transitions@omri.cz

'Western Values Are Cliches'
An interview with Zavtra editor in chief Aleksandr Prokhanov

With the onslaught of American products and media flowing into
Russia, nationalists fear that Russia's identity will be polluted.
Slamming Michael Jackson and calling Western ideas noxious,
Aleksandr Prokhanov, editor in chief of the extreme-right weekly
Zavtra, predicts a backlash against America in an interview
with Transitions' Anne Nivat

Transitions: Do you think there is a danger from the shift
from a bipolar world of East-West competition to a
monopolar world in which the West, and particularly the
United States, has pre-eminence? Is it dangerous for a great
power to be unchallenged?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: It is dangerous to live in any world. We are
all mortals. States and empires appeared and disappeared in
unipolar worlds. It has never been easy to live in a bipolar world.
As soon as a new geopolitical situation with new political roles
appears, [the world] becomes different. And I would like to
explain the United States' role in this process: to take
responsibility for the world public order requires enormous
strategic efforts; it is a very heavy [burden]. I just fear that
Americans could fail in this role, because they need more
resources, a lot of political networks, and the support of people
and countries that are still hostile toward the States. In short,
having to care for all of humanity, to dominate humanity, trying
to organize a new world order and a new oligarchy is very
dangerous for the States. America could squander all of its
potential and all the sympathy it commands, and collapse along
with those it took under control. That is the main danger in this
monopolar world.

What do you think about the values that are being spread from the
West, particularly Washington, such as the free market, civil society,
democracy, and freedom of expression?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: These "values" are all clichés, not real values.
Let's take freedom or liberal values, for example. I don't really see
where the freedom is when the world is organized around one
administrative center dominated by a single country or national
oligarchy. Freedom is polycentrism; freedom is a game of
different forces. Where is freedom when the world bombs Iraq?
Where is a free market when it is dominated by multinational
corporations? Where is freedom of expression and media when
the Russian national identity is oppressed? All these clichés that
might appeal to the average citizen are in fact oppressing him.
The reality that one might perceive under the rubric of freedom
could actually be horrible. For countries like Libya, Iraq, Russia,
this freedom looks like a gigantic geopolitical concentration
camp. Values and real products spread by the West are nothing
but clichés. This is disgusting and terrible. Wherever the new
geopolitical policy from the United States has been
implemented, there now appear gigantic ruins, a land of ashes
where part of human civilization lies dead.

What is the Western value that you dislike the most, and
why?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: If the Philadelphia Orchestra would come to
Russia and perform Brahms or Gluck, I would gladly receive such
"Western values" and their American interpretation. But instead of
that, what arrived was a small, repulsive, multicolored, and
homosexual monkey: Michael Jackson, of course. Me, a man who has
completely different sympathies and an opposite anthropological
culture, how could anyone ask me to endorse such behavior?
This [attitude] represses my complexes. These are only
substitute, disgusting values intentionally exported by the States
to other countries in order to vitiate all pure values. All these
shabby values, aggressively useless, third-class weeds, arrive in
my country, my Russia. And this, of course, conflicts with and
forces out of my life some of the greatest humanitarian,
Christian, and aesthetic values.

Do you challenge the West in its attempt to dominate the world? What
Russian alternative do you propose?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: This idea of American domination is stillborn.
It is impossible to impose control on an uncontrollable situation. The
world is completely irrational. To control this mysterious and
spontaneous phenomenon which is called humanity, or nature,
or culture, is impossible. Only the desire to control exists. It is
aggressive and utopian, and often results in terrible failure.
Entropy is not possible.

Is there no control at all?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: What control can you have over billions of
Chinese? Over the Japanese? Over the growing Muslim world? The
more rigid and aggressive the American control over the world, the
more subtle and varied the world's rejection will be. Europe today is
far from being a sphere [of influence] for the States. Europe is
rebelling. In Europe, people are appealing for an anti-American
explosion. Take a look at what's happening in Germany and you will
understand. Japan is absolutely outside of the control of the
States, China even more so. And Russia-constantly offended by
others, rejected by the world; Russia, which people thought had
fallen from its pedestal-is in fact potentially dangerous for
America. Because if Russian anti-Americanism were to unite with
Muslim anti-Americanism, it would produce such a whirling
wind that it would destroy all the impetuous and subversive
potential of the United States.

What can Russia offer the West?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: Resources, cheap slaves, beautiful prostitutes.
At least that is what is currently taken from Russia. The West
considers Russia today an immense sack of raw materials, like a
warehouse of minerals, like an enormous reservoir of intellectual
forces accumulated during 70 years of Soviet rule. Entire schools of
mathematicians and scientists have already fled to the West. And
the West, the United States in particular, would like to reorient
Russia against the Islamic world! It wants Russia as a kind of
anti-Islamic barrier. That explains why the West's attitude
toward Russia is disgustingly utilitarian. When relations between
the West and Russia developed normally, as was the case during
the 19th century, even the 20th, then Russia's contributions to
the West were enormous. Everything tied to social modernism
in the 20th century, [Henry] Ford's assembly-line system, the
system of social guarantees, [and the] rationalization of economic
and social life were Russia's gift to the West. It was of course
avidly absorbed by the West and is still being absorbed. For the
future, I simply believe in Russia's star. Russia will keep
producing for the world, and particularly the Western world, the
idea of a subtle irrationalism, of a universal love, of pan-
humanity. All ideas that do not exist in this one-dimensional and
rather primitive America.

Is there anything from the West that Russia could take?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: Russia imports and will keep importing
technology from the West. Russia considers the West an enormous
enterprise producing wonderful intellectual products. Western ideas
on humanity, if taken alone, are terrible, noxious. But blended with
those of the Russian dream, sometimes in a volatile mixture,
sometimes more harmoniously, these Western ideas are
indispensable to world development.

Russia has always been torn between two traditions:
Slavophiles and Westernizers. Where do you fit into that
debate?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: I am a Slavophile, of course. I am among those
who defend a sovereign path for Russia. Today, it is so easy [for
opponents to accuse me] because the very idea of a "Russian path" is linked
with so much violence, with so many aggressive discussions.
Take the war. In 1941, 1942, and 1943, Russia was entirely
Slavophile because the West had sent Hitler's armored divisions
over here. Then, when everything calmed down, when the
wounds finally healed, this discussion between Occidentalists
and Slavophiles started again. Today's Westernizers in Russia are
the liberals and radicals. They are criminals; they are destroying
Russia. Every year, Russia [effectively] loses a million and a half of
its [potential] citizens, one could speak of Russia's population
extinction. I am not speaking about culture, enterprises, the
state of the roads, the health system, or even [the] spiritual state
of the nation. This one and a half million people doesn't even
appear on earth; the birth rate has declined so much. We are a
dying nation. A real genocide is being organized by this
Occidentalist, liberal-democratic, and narrow-minded elite-
namely [Yegor] Chubais and [Boris] Nemtsov.

Have you ever traveled through the West? And where in
particular?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: I've been all through the West, up and down.
Three times in the United States, two times in Germany, in Italy. I
know the West.

Is your weekly publication sufficient to spread your ideas?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: No, certainly not. But a lot of other
newspapers, like Sovetskaya Rossiya and small publications from
every province, support us. And strange as it might be, my ideas are
also endorsed by [Moscow Mayor] Yurii Luzhkov. And Yeltsin
accepted the idea of Russian-Belarusian unification. These ideas don't
belong to me; they just fly in the air, or belong to the "power
ministries" [defense, interior, and state security]. They are forms of
spiritual opposition that is more actively present in my newspaper
than in others.

Is Zavtra on the Internet?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: Yes, some of our articles have been translated
into English by people of goodwill. On the Web, one can find the most
poignant articles.

How do you describe yourself? Would you agree with those who
term you a fascist?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: Only my enemies call me a fascist. I am not
worried if my enemies call me a ewe, a bacterium, or a pederast,
because my friends take care of me with such love, such protection.
They protect me morally and physically. I feel there is an invisible
circle around me protecting me from bullets and verbal attacks.

What do you think about the current political situation in
Moscow, and how do you assess Yeltsin as a politician?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: Yeltsin is a synonym for Russian catastrophe.
It all began under Gorbachev, but Yeltsin gave it its most monstrous
and apocalyptic face. For me, Yeltsin is enemy No. 1.

Who would did you want to win last year's presidential election?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: I supported [Communist Party leader
Gennadii] Zyuganov.

How do you react to the peace agreement signed by Russia and
Chechnya?

Aleksandr Prokhanov: This agreement is tragic because, in reality,
during the Gorbachev period, Russia itself destroyed the Soviet
Union. It has always been a consistent action from the Kremlin,
organized from abroad. The Kremlin and Gorbachev destroyed the
Soviet Union. Then the destroyed fragments of the republics, seeking
desperately to reunite, were again rejected by Yeltsin. Yeltsin
armed the Baltic states; Yeltsin worked against rapprochement
between Russia and Azerbaijan; Yeltsin provoked conflicts with
Georgia, Ukraine, Belarus. Yeltsin destroyed and continues to
destroy Russia. Yeltsin himself distributed sovereignty. The war
in Chechnya was not lost by soldiers, troops, helicopters but by
Yeltsin's entourage who repressed the federal army. This treaty
is an acceptance of separation between Chechnya and Russia.

********

#13
Excerpt
Chubais Says Investors Return to Russian Markets 
Reuters
5 December 1997

MOSCOW -- Foreign investors are returning to Russian markets as the impact
of the world financial crisis fades and confidence in Russia's financial
policy revives, Russia's top economic reformer Anatoly Chubais said on
Friday. 
First Deputy Prime Minister Chubais said in a statement that prices of
Russian Eurobonds and other foreign debt instruments had recovered in the
last few days following the landmark rescheduling of Russia's commercial
bank debt. 
"The rise in the prices of Russia's foreign debt obligations testifies
to the start of the recovery of international financial markets and a
strengthening of foreign investor confidence in both Russian debt
institutions and Russia's financial policy as a whole," Chubais said. 
His statement was issued the day after a sharp recovery in the prices of
domestic Treasury bills and a jump in share prices, as Russia negotiated an
emergency funding package with Western banks. 
Share prices also recovered strongly on Thursday, with the Russian
Trading System (RTS) 21-share index, representing the average of prices
over the previous 24 hours, ending 6.34 percent higher at 361.79. 
Some equities traders said however the price rise, on healthy turnover,
could be a correction to the falls of the past few days, rather than the
start of a change in the trend.... 

********