May 25, 1999    
This Date's Issues: 3303 • 3304   • 

Johnson's Russia List
#3304
25 May 1999
davidjohnson@erols.com

[Note from David Johnson:
1. Reuters: Zadornov surprise choice as economic supremo.
2. Reuters: Russia to have deputy pm for defence-Stepashin.
3. Itar-Tass: Alexy II Calls for Reburials from Red Square.
4. Interfax: Presidential Candidates Said Equal Without Yeltsin. 
5. Reuters: Zadornov sees Russia 99 output better than feared.
6. Financial Times (UK): Charles Clover, Russian Orthodox Patriarch 
ignites feud.
7. RFE/RL: Paul Goble, A Threat To The Growth Of Civil Society.
(Re NGOs).
8. Moscow Times: Brian Whitmore, Regional Leaders Discuss Altering 
Duma Elections.
9. New York Times: Celestine Bohlen, Kremlinology 101: The More Things 
Change...
10. Boston Globe: David Filipov, Russia's 'Good Morning' couple.
11. Andrew Miller: Kids Say the Darndest Things. (Views of Russian
business students).]

********

#1
Zadornov surprise choice as economic supremo
By Ivan Rodin

MOSCOW, May 25 (Reuters) - Finance Minister Mikhail Zadornov was named on
Tuesday as Russia's new economic supremo, a surprise appointment that will
see him become first deputy prime minister while keeping his previous post. 

The appointment by President Boris Yeltsin means moderate reformer
Alexander Zhukov, widely tipped for the first deputy's post, will stay in
the State Duma lower house of parliament, where he heads the influential
budget committee. 

Economists said the difference in economic competence and outlook between
Zadornov and Zhukov was not great but that Zhukov might have found it
easier to steer laws aimed at winning $4.5 billion more of International
Monetary Fund money through the house. 

``The first deputy, who will oversee macroeconomic issues, financial
issues...has been appointed by presidential decree as Mikhail Mikhailovich
Zadornov,'' Prime Minister Sergei Stepashin told Russian television. 

Stepashin had just ended several hours of talks with Yeltsin, who is
vacationing in the Black Sea resort of Sochi. 

The naming of Zadornov was seen as a partial victory for Stepashin in his
battle for some degree of independence from Yeltsin, who has the final say
in cabinet appointments. 

Yeltsin had already named one first deputy as Nikolai Aksyonenko, a little
known former railways minister with little economic experience and
Stepashin had insisted on having another number two, who was expected to be
Zhukov. 

NTV commercial television had even said on Thursday morning that a
presidential decree had been signed naming Zhukov to the post, so Zadornov
emerged as a late surprise compromise. 

Some economists still felt Zhukov might have been better fitted for the post. 

``The Duma is a very complicated institution and Zhukov knows it very well,
from the inside,'' said Pavel Teplukhin, president of Moscow's Troika
Dialog asset management. 

But other analysts pointed out that Zadornov had also headed the
parliamentary budget committee until 1997 when he became finance minister. 

Zadornov has survived in government despite being in charge of finance
during the August 1998 financial crash, from which Russia is still
recovering. 

As well as winning more IMF money, Zadornov will have to hold difficult
talks on winning relief from a crushing $140 billion of foreign debt. 

Stepashin aid his cabinet was now 80 percent complete. 

He said Valentina Matvienko had been re-appointed deputy prime minister in
charge of welfare while deputy premier in charge of agricultural issues
would be Vladimir Shcherbak, previously deputy agriculture minister. 

Stepashin said Yeltsin had agreed to a proposal for a deputy prime minister
with a special role overseeing defence issues. The appointment would be
announced in two or three days. 

Yeltsin last week re-appointed Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov and Defence
Minister Igor Sergeyev and has named Vladimir Rushailo as interior
minister, the post Stepashin held in the last cabinet. 

Stepashin has made clear his priority is to form a team capable of steering
Russia out of a deep economic crisis. 

Yeltsin, 68, went to Sochi on holiday last Friday after a gruelling 10 days
in which he sacked Stepahin's predecessor Yevgeny Primakov, survived a bid
by the Duma to launch impeachment proceedings and persuaded the chamber to
approve Stepashin. 

Aides say his health is ``okay,'' but he missed a meeting with Spain's
prime minister last week. 

********

#2
Russia to have deputy pm for defence-Stepashin

MOSCOW, May 25 (Reuters) - Prime Minister Sergei Stepashin, a former
interior minister, underscored his commitment to Russia's cash-starved
security sector on Tuesday by announcing that he would appoint a deputy
premier for defence. 

Russia's armed forces and the defence industry are in poor shape compared
with the mighty Soviet military machine. Troops are demoralised and
underpaid, more youngsters dodge the draft than answer it and arms exports
are no longer what they were. 

``The president has approved my proposal that one of the deputy premiers
will be a special deputy who will be in charge of problems of the defence
sector,'' Stepashin told reporters. 

Speaking after talks with President Boris Yeltsin at the Black Sea resort
of Sochi, Stepashin said he had left a list of potential candidates for the
job with the Kremlin chief and expected a decision soon. 

Yeltsin appointed Stepashin acting premier three weeks ago after sacking
Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov. Last Wednesday, parliament approved
Stepashin in office and since then he has been building his cabinet team. 

Under Yeltsin, the so-called ``power'' branches -- the defence, interior,
and foreign ministries and the intelligence services -- report to the
president. It was not immediately clear to whom the new deputy premier
would report. 

Defence Minister Igor Sergeyev is widely regarded as being a Yeltsin
loyalist, as is Stepashin. A move to appoint a deputy prime minister over
Sergeyev could be perceived as criticism but also as an attempt to help
ensure the sector secures sufficient funds and support. 

Stepashin has said he wants to make sure the defence sector receives the
budget funds it was promised for the year -- a brave undertaking in a
country with at best shaky finances. 

********

#3
Alexy II Calls for Reburials from Red Square 

MOSCOW, May 24 (Itar-Tass) - Alexy II Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia has 
called for reburial of Soviet statesmen and prominent figures from Moscow's 
Red Square in another place. 

Alexy officiated a liturgy at the Kremlin's Assumption Cathedral on Monday in 
memory of Saints Cyril and Methodius, the creators of the Slav alphabet. 

He told reporters after a holy procession came from the Assumption Cathedral 
to Slavyanskaya Square that it was "immoral that here, in the very heart of 
Russia, various performances and concerts take place, and burial places are 
nearby". 

"I hope that time will come when a new pantheon or some other burial place 
will be created, and these people will find there their last refuge," Alexy 
said. 

He said "the main square of the country cannot be a cemetery". In the 
foreground of Red Square is the Lenin mausoleum facing the GUM department 
store, with a separate necropolis of Joseph Stalin, Felix Dzerzhinsky, Yakov 
Sverdlov and other Soviet leaders just behind the mausoleum. Behind the group 
of the necropolis' busts is the Kremlin wall with ashes of many Soviet-era 
top functionaries and people of prominent deeds buried in its lower part. 

The patriarch stressed that he was speaking of a prospect. "Everything should 
be done in order our society is not divided on this issue," he said. 

The round-the-clock sleek guard of honour at the Lenin mausoleum, which was 
known as Russia's "post number one" has been removed and calls for the burial 
of the Soviet state's founder Vladimir Lenin in the grave have been sounded, 
but a proportion of Russians bristle at the idea. The stock argument of 
Communists and left-leaning proponents of the downtown cemetery is that it is 
"our history". 

********

#4
Presidential Candidates Said Equal Without Yeltsin 

ST.PETERSBURG, May 21 (Interfax) - Yabloko leader 
Grigory Yavlinsky, answering a question posed by Interfax, suggested that 
the absence from the 2000 presidential race of Boris Yeltsin, "the 
undisputed leader" at the 1996 polls, would place the candidates for 
president "under maximally equal conditions." Asked if the current prime 
minister could be nominated for the presidency, Yavlinsky said that so 
far it is too early to determine Sergei Stepashin's chances of winning. 
The Yabloko leader said that the prime minister's rating will play "a 
certain role" in the election campaign. However, "everything changes so 
quickly that guessing a year ahead makes no sense," Yavlinsky said. 

********

#5
Zadornov sees Russia 99 output better than feared

MOSCOW, May 25 (Reuters) - Acting Russian Finance Minister Mikhail Zadornov
on Tuesday forecast the economy would shrink no more than one percent this
year and prices would rise 2.5 percent or less in May. 

"I'll be blunt -- the situation is turning out somewhat better than we
expected in the autumn," Zadornov said in an address to an accounting
standards conference. 

Russia's NTV television said President Boris Yeltsin confirmed Zadornov as
finance minister on Tuesday but officials were not immediately available
for comment. 

Zadornov said gross domestic product (GDP) shrank no more than one percent
in year-on-year terms in the first four months of the year. 

"The result for 1999 will be a fall of the same magnitude, if not zero." 

The economy was looking up last year but stumbled after August's rouble
devaluation and a 12 percent increase in the monetary base, to 232.1
billion roubles, in the six weeks to May 17, has been seen fanning inflation. 

Zadornov said the central bank has been buying large amounts of hard
currency, which would account for the rise in the monetary base. 

Prices rose 3.0 percent in April, after 2.8 percent in March. 

********

#6
Financial Times (UK)
25 May 1999
[for personal use only]
Russian Orthodox Patriarch ignites feud
Alexei II's religious rival is firmly opposed to his visit to Ukraine, timed 
to occur during poll campaigning, writes Charles Clover

Next month, Alexei II, Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox church, will board a 
hydrofoil in the Russian city of Tver and begin a five-month pilgrimage down 
the waterways of Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, to bring the cross to his 
dominions on the eve of the millennium. And Filaret, Patriarch of the 
Ukrainian Orthodox church, has vowed to stop him.

As soon as they touch Ukrainian soil, Alexei and his followers will ignite a 
long simmering feud between the Moscow and Kiev Orthodox patriarchates, which 
parted company in 1992 and have clashed violently many times over church 
properties in western and central Ukraine.

The visit is also expected to raise the highly divisive question of Ukraine's 
ties to Russia during an especially sensitive time. Ukraine will hold 
presidential elections in October, which may well turn into a referendum on 
whether or not to re-join a confederation with Russia after seven years of 
independence. Nerves are already frayed by the poor economy and the Yugoslav 
crisis.

In a taste of what might come, on April 30 Filaret and his supporters were 
attacked by Moscow patriarchate clergy during a journey to the eastern 
Ukrainian city of Mariupol - the heartland of the Moscow patriarchate in 
Ukraine - to consecrate a cathedral. Filaret was struck on the head during 
the mêlée, and his secretary is in hospital with a concussion after being hit 
with an iron bar.

"If Alexei comes here, we will stop him. He will face us at every turn," 
threatened Filaret.

Frank Sysyn, an expert on Ukrainian religious affairs at the Canadian 
Institute of Ukrainian studies, warned: "The recent assault on Filaret has 
brought tensions to a boiling point. In this context, the trip of the Moscow 
patriarchate may be the spark that lights a conflagration."

Moscow patriarchate clergy are violently opposed to Filaret because of what 
they see as the usurpation of their property by the Ukrainian church since 
its split from the Russian Orthodox church following Ukraine's independence 
in 1991. Filaret was excommunicated by the Russian Orthodox church after the 
split.

"Filaret is the thief of the Orthodox church," said Pavel, a bishop of the 
Moscow patriarchate in Kiev, his voice trembling with anger. "He has the mind 
of Satan because he is his son."

Since the split, there have been sporadic clashes between supporters of both 
churches over the Ukrainian government's attempts to re-allocate property 
between the two patriarchates. The Moscow patriarchate, which used to control 
all the Orthodox properties in Ukraine, sees this re-allocation as theft. 
Indeed, Filaret's success in establishing the Kiev patriarchate is the 
indirect cause of the violence in Mariupol. The eastern Donetsk area, where 
Mariupol is located, is a bastion of support for the Moscow patriarchate, 
which controls 200 parishes there. But Filaret has set up 50 Kiev 
patriarchate parishes there in the last few years, causing tensions that 
boiled over when he visited Mariupol.

Alexei's plans, while ostensibly designed with the beginning of the 
millennium in mind, could not come at a worse time for Ukraine's government. 
His visit will take place at the height of Ukraine's presidential election 
campaigns, and may give a boost, unintended or otherwise, to leftwing 
candidates campaigning on a platform of reunification with Russia.

Dr Sysyn explained: "The trip of the Moscow patriarch is intended to hinder 
the growth of the independent Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The major question 
is whether it will also be aimed against the independence of the Ukrainian 
state."

His trip will take him through central and eastern Ukraine, where support for 
the Moscow patriarchate is strong. These regions are the most populous in 
Ukraine, and will be decisive in electing the next president in October.

Filaret accuses the Moscow patriarchate of entering into an alliance with the 
left, in an attempt to destroy Ukraine's sovereignty - and he has promised a 
confrontation. He says that he will not be the first to use violence but that 
this time "we will defend ourselves". Despite the potential for violence, 
Ukraine's government would not dare object to the visit, thereby alienating 
the key eastern regions. "What can happen during the visit is difficult to 
predict," said Viktor Bondarenko, head of the Ukrainian government's 
committee for religious issues. "The inter-Orthodox conflict is still not 
settled and could at any moment turn from an intellectual to a physical 
conflict." 

*******

#7
Russia: Analysis From Washington -- A Threat To The Growth Of Civil Society
By Paul Goble

Washington, 24 May 1999 (RFE/RL) -- A Russian government program to
re-register the country's non-governmental organizations appears likely to
deprive many of them of the legal standing they need to continue to operate
and to weaken one of the main institutional supports for the development of
civil society there. 

In an interview carried by the Moscow newspaper "Nezavisimaya gazeta" on
Friday, Russian Federation Justice Minister Pavel Krasheninnikov said that
his country now has approximately 100,000 NGOs. But he noted that only 25
percent of them had re-registered with the authorities and that only 25
percent more were likely to do so by the July 1 deadline. 

Without such registration, these groups will not be able to participate in
elections. They will not be able to own property or maintain a bank
account. And they will not be able to act as legal persons for purposes of
contracts or in court cases. In the justice minister's own words, those
that do not register will simply "fall out" of the civil and legal order. 

Krasheninnikov attempted to portray this in the best possible light. He
said that a higher percentage of the 3500 such groups which operate on a
country-wide basis would in fact re-register. He suggested that many of the
100,000 are currently more or less inactive and that their names might be
misused by others. And he claimed that the re-registration process would
give Moscow greater control over those with extremist agendas. 

Even if all of Krashenninikov's arguments are correct, both this process
and the outcomes he suggests inevitably cast a chilling shadow over the
development of this key element of civil society, of a space between
individuals and the state that serves to maximize the power of individuals
and to limit the power of governments in modern democracies. 

For many democratic and human rights activists, the emergence of NGOs in
the Russian Federation and other post-communist countries was a major
reason to expect that these countries to be able to escape their
authoritarian pasts. 

Until the Gorbachev era, public organizations were invariably controlled by
the Communist Party and the Soviet state and were often dismissed by both
Soviet-era activists and Western organizations as oxymoronic GONGOs -- that
is, Government-Organized Non-Governmental Organizations. And even under
Gorbachev, only a few groups successfully escaped state tutelage and control. 

After 1991, the number of genuinely non-governmental organizations grew
rapidly. Some of them flourished; some did not. Some advocated democratic
positions; others, anti-democratic ones. But virtually all of them provided
an opportunity for Russians and others to act without constant supervision
from the authorities. And that in turn contributed to the kind of
individual self-confidence on which democracy depends. 

But over the last several years, the pendulum has begun to swing in a very
different direction, with the state insisting on having an ever larger say
over the activities of these and other groups and thus reducing their
effectiveness as schools of democracy. 

Like Krasheninnikov, Russian officials often insist that they are doing
nothing more than regularizing the situation and that a requirement for
registering in order to rent property or have a checking account is neither
onerous not dangerous. 

But there are three reasons to be skeptical about such arguments. 
* First, recent experience suggests, Russian officials carrying out this
program are unlikely to register all those who apply, thus opening the door
to blatant favoritism for those the officials approve as well as
discrimination against those they dislike. And that in turn opens the way
for various kinds of corruption. 
* Second, the re-registration process is almost certain to create two
classes of NGOs: those who continue to operate with the government's
blessing and those who continue without it or who are forced to go out of
business as a result. Not only does that undermine the purposes of such
groups, it may lead to the radicalization of those who believe they have
been excluded. 
* And third, this process suggests that at least some Russian officials are
anything but committed to the principles of democracy that are proclaimed
even by the December 1993 Russian constitution. And consequently, democrats
-- Russian and otherwise -- are likely to see this re-registration process
as portending even more restrictions against public activism in the future. 

Such people will certainly not be reassured by the title "Nezavisimaya
Gazeta" gave to its interview with Krasheninnikov: "The Justice Ministry is
Involved in a Cleansing of the Political Field." 

********

#8
Moscow Times
May 25, 1999 
Regional Leaders Discuss Altering Duma Elections 
By Brian Whitmore
Staff Writer

ST. PETERSBURG -- A potentially powerful new regional political movement met 
in St. Petersburg over the weekend and called for a change in the way 
parliamentary deputies are chosen. 

Nearly 600 delegates from 83 of Russia's regions attended the founding 
congress of the All Russia group. The movement's leadership includes some of 
Russia's most powerful local leaders: St. Petersburg Governor Vladimir 
Yakovlev; Mintimer Shaimiyev, the president of Tatarstan; Murtaza Rakhimonov, 
the president of Bashkortostan; and Ingushetia President Ruslan Aushev. 

The regional leaders are political powerhouses who could help deliver a 
national election to a presidential hopeful. Earlier, members and outside 
observers said that candidate would be Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov. 

But officials attending the conference did not play up Luzhkov's candidacy, 
and Luzhkov himself did not attend. 

Instead, they talked about ways to enhance the power of the regions - by 
changing the way the State Duma, or lower house, is elected. 

All Russia seeks to change the current system, in which half of the Duma's 
450 federal lawmakers are directly elected in constituencies, while the other 
seats are allocated proportionally according to the percentage of the 
national vote received by political parties. 

All Russia proposes having the Duma elected solely from 450 electoral 
districts. Such a move would strengthen the governors, who have enormous 
influence over elections in their territories, and weaken Russia's national 
political parties. 

"The governors would clearly like to turn the Duma into the junior branch of 
the Federation Council," said Andrei Ryabov, a political analyst at the 
Moscow Carnegie Center. The Federation Council, the upper chamber of the 
Russian parliament, is comprised of regional leaders. 

Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov, whose party dominates the Duma, slammed 
the proposal, saying that criminal groups - also influential in the provinces 
- would dominate the chamber. 

"The Duma will be elected from Mafia districts," Zyuganov was quoted as 
saying by Interfax. Likewise, Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the liberal 
Yabloko party, has called All Russia a "dangerous movement." 

Luzhkov is not likely to agree with the change, either. His well-funded 
Otechestvo, or Fatherland, movement is expected to do well in party list 
voting and become a major force in parliament. 

"Luzhkov is already playing in the same league with Zyuganov and Yavlinsky as 
a national party leader," said Andrei Piontkovsky, director of the Center for 
Strategic Studies. "He is not interested in scrapping the party list system." 

*******

#9
New York Times
May 24, 1999
[for personal use only]
Kremlinology 101: The More Things Change...
By CELESTINE BOHLEN

MOSCOW -- Having fired a Government, squelched an impeachment drive and
installed a colorless but loyal police commander as Prime Minister and
potential successor, President Boris N. Yeltsin headed south on Friday for
what his aides described as a well-deserved vacation. 

As for ordinary Russians, they were left -- once again -- out in the
cold and in the dark. If the extraordinary events of the last 11 days
proved anything, it was that Russia's fledgling democracy is as secretive
and arcane as the Communist regime it replaced seven years ago. 

"The opinion of the silent majority -- that is, at least 77 percent of
the population, which does not want to see upheavals -- is ignored," said
Vyacheslav Nikonov, head of the Politika Foundation, a political research
group. "The authorities and public opinion have in the past week been
acting totally at cross purposes." 

In the name of stopping a purported Communist comeback led by the former
Prime Minister, Yevgeny M. Primakov, the Kremlin has reverted to form.
Now it is back to the days of "cadres" (an old Soviet term for personnel)
and clans, of backroom deals and hidden agendas, of rumors and oblique
hints. 

Russian politics have never been free of intrigue, but the eight-month
tenure of Primakov, whose coalition Cabinet included Communist ministers
and was backed by Yeltsin's Communist opposition, did mark the first
attempt by the Yeltsin administration to rule not by confrontation, but by
consensus. 

It didn't last. "The consensus model of government suited an overwhelming
majority of the population, and an overwhelming majority of the elite,"
said Nikonov. "But it sidelined the President's administration and
reduced its ability to play the decisive role in deciding who would be
Yeltsin's successor." 

In the Kremlin's view, Primakov's coalition had overshot its role as a
guarantor of stability and was rapidly becoming a launching pad for the
Communist party's long-term ambitions -- first as a source of financial
support for parliamentarian elections in December and for Primakov's
expected presidential candidacy in June 2000. 

In the weeks leading up to the dismissal of Primakov, Yeltsin's
advisers took pains to depict the power struggle in bleak terms of good
and evil. One top Kremlin official described the Prime Minister as
"strategically dangerous," a man who demonstrated some characteristics of
Stalin. 

Now, with Primakov out of power, some Kremlin advisers are talking
about grooming his successor, Sergei V. Stepashin, a 47-year-old veteran of
the security services, as Yeltsin's latest heir, an alternative not only
to the Communists but also to Mayor Yuri M. Luzhkov of Moscow, a leading
presidential aspirant. A month ago Luzhkov was in good favor with
Yeltsin. Now, after failing a number of loyalty tests, he is again
feeling a cold wind from the Kremlin. 

Stepashin's success hinges on his ability to survive until the eve of
the presidential elections. In that time he must negotiate the passage of
tough fiscal legislation to avoid defaults on foreign loans, and navigate
the parliamentary elections. 

Above all, he must survive the whims of an emotional and jealous
President who could at any moment overturn the best of strategies. Among
the wild cards said to be under consideration is a referendum to unite
Russia with Belarus, its western Slavic neighbor. Such a union would
throw Russia's political calendar wide open because it would create a new
entity in need of a new -- or old -- President. 

"If Stepashin manages to stay and be the last premier before the
elections," said Aleksandr N. Shokhin, a former minister and centrist
deputy in the lower house, "he has a very good chance to become a
presidential candidate, supported not only by the Kremlin -- which is
important, but not that important -- and the regional elite, which is
more important, and key political forces. So far he has a chance, provided
he is not fired in September." 

Stepashin's credentials for his new role are still obscure. His record
as head of the domestic intelligence service was blotted by a disastrous
performance in the early days of the conflict with the breakaway Chechnya
republic. His views on economics are pretty much a blank. 

But his loyalty to Yeltsin is absolute. 

As one recent poll indicated, many Russians are ready for a law-and-order
candidate, and Stepashin holds the rank of colonel general in the
interior forces. Others look to Stepashin, son of a naval officer from
St. Petersburg, as an example of a new generation of more mild-mannered,
urbane politicians. 

"Why are we voting for Sergei Stepashin?" asked Vladimir Zhironovsky,
Russia's most virulently anti-Communist nationalist, during the debate
that ended last Wednesday with Stepashin's overwhelming confirmation on
the first vote. "Simply because we are sick and tired of people from the
sticks. For the first time in the past 100 years, someone from St.
Petersburg will head the Government." 

As Stepashin learns the ropes, who is running the country? The most
obvious answer is Yeltsin himself. After a winter of hibernation, the
68-year-old President roared back to center stage in the spring, despite
an apparent -- but officially unconfirmed -- physical relapse. In recent
appearances his step has been unsteady, his speech labored, his comments
confused. 

Behind him stands a tiny group of Kremlin insiders who include top
members of his administration and his daughter Tatyana Dyachenko. This
group, known simply as the Family, has become the conduit for a
remarkable comeback by two of Russia's most politically unpopular
figures: Anatoly Chubais, a liberal reformer and former privatization
czar, and (if press reports are to be believed) Boris A. Berezovsky, a
multibillionaire financier with irrepressible political ambitions. 

Chubais has all but openly admitted his role in the decision to fire
Primakov and replace him with Stepashin. Interviewed by Newsweek
magazine, Chubais, who is now head of the national electric utility,
called the appointment of Stepashin "a strategic and reasonable step by
Yeltsin." 

But Kremlin strategies are not always smoothly executed, as became
embarrassingly apparent on May 12, the day Primakov's dismissal was
announced. 

First, Gennadi Seleznyov, the Communist speaker of the lower house, told
deputies he had had a call from the President informing him that the next
Prime Minister would Nikolai Aksyonenko, a little-known Railways Minister
(who has since been promoted to become Stepashin's First Deputy Prime
Minister). 

An hour later Seleznyov again interrupted the proceedings with the news
that a letter from the Kremlin had arrived nominating Stepashin as Prime
Minister. Seleznyov smiled and shrugged. "I came to work today with clean
ears, and my telephone is working," he said, as the deputies roared with
laughter. "The President told me Aksyonenko, which is what I told you." 

Many Russians are convinced that the President's confusion was not
accidental. As the haggling over Stepashin's Cabinet appointments moves
into full swing, the newspapers have been full of reports of a struggle
between Chubais and Berezovsky, who reportedly backed the Aksyonenko
nomination. 

How much real influence is wielded by Berezovsky is difficult to gauge
because his Kremlin access reportedly goes directly through Mrs.
Dyachenko, the younger of the President's two daughters and his political
counselor since 1996. Valentin Yumashev and Aleksandr Voloshin,
respectively the Kremlin's former and current chief of staff, also have
ties to Berezovsky. 

A master of intrigue who is said to have taken care of the Yeltsin family
finances, Berezovsky is also a master of illusion, and of the
well-planted leak intended to suggest -- without proof -- that his
political comeback is complete. 

Berezovsky is the most notorious of the oligarchs who made fortunes in
the early days of Russia's chaotic privatization. As long as Primakov
was in power, Berezovsky was on the defensive, the target of
well-publicized corruption inquiries that threatened to creep into the
Kremlin itself. 

When Primakov was fired, Berezovsky, who was in France, leaped back
into the limelight with a statement that portrayed the decision as a
triumph of good over evil. 

"Primakov's dismissal is not just a replacement of one person as Prime
Minister by another," Berezovsky said in an interview with the Interfax
news agency, it is "an abortion of an attempt for a Communist and K.G.B.
revenge in Russia." 

As for Stepashin, the financier's praise was lukewarm. "Stepashin
doubtless shares the President's ideology and will doubtless follow the
course of reforms," he said. 

*******

#10
Boston Globe
25 May 1999
[for personal use only] 
Russia's 'Good Morning' couple 
By David Filipov

MOSCOW - Like all loving spouses, Yekaterina and Alexander Strizhenov have
their share of spats. Unlike most couples, the Strizhenovs air their
differences each Wednesday in front of a nationwide audience that has just
dragged itself out of bed.

Not only that, the Strizhenovs somehow manage to have little disagreements
without botching the assignment at hand: making sure millions of Russians
start their day on an upbeat note, no easy task in this perennially
crisis-stricken land.

And what may seem really strange - all this works as good TV.

Wednesday is the day the Strizhenovs host the popular ''Good Morning'' show
on Russian Public Television, the network that reaches most of Russia's 147
million viewers and a sizable chunk of the rest of the former Soviet Union.

Both accomplished stage and film actors, the Strizhenovs add a little
''Family Ties'' to a format that is equal parts ''The Today Show'' and
''Regis and Kathy Lee.'' Judging from their fan mail, it is a successful mix.

But Wednesday is only one day in the life of the Strizhenovs, perhaps the
hardest-working couple in Russian show business. 

Yekaterina, 30, has the kind of face you are sure you have seen before.
And, if you live in Moscow, you probably have: as Mama Nina in the Russian
version of ''Sesame Street,'' in 30 feature films, numerous plays, and in
ads for shampoo and ketchup. Soon, she'll be seen in a television series
she is currently shooting in Odessa, Ukraine.

Alexander, also 30, has the pedigree. He was born into a family of famous
actors and, in the recent words of the Russian edition of Cosmopolitan
magazine, ''poured from the same mold as Leonardo DiCaprio.'' He studied at
Juilliard. Like Yekaterina, Alexander has starred in a number of films -
four with his wife, including a screen version of Hamlet in which she
played Ophelia and he played her brother, Laertes. He just finished a
six-year run as Christian in a popular Moscow stage production of ''Cyrano
de Bergerac,'' all while finding time to set up and run an advertising agency.

So why does this busy acting couple need to host a TV show?

''Money,'' the Strizhenovs answered unanimously in a recent interview in
the cafeteria at the Moscow House of Cinematography, where Russia's rich
and famous dine in, well, relative squalor. 

''`Good Morning' pays the bills,'' Yekaterina said, before Alexander, as he
tends to do on the air, cut her off.

''It pays the bills,'' he interjected. ''The film industry is not what it
used to be.''

Since the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union (and the end of 100-percent
state funding for movies), the storied Russian film industry has fallen on
hard times. While Russia still puts out a few quality films a year, most of
the work available is in cheap, violent crime flicks. These are tough times
for actors, even if you are one of Russia's most recognizable couples.

''Let's put it this way,'' Alexander said, lighting up his umpteenth
Marlboro Light of the conversation. ''By American standards, we should
probably drive around in a limousine. When I explained to some American
friends who my father is [Oleg Strizhenov, one of Russia's most famous
actors], they were like, `Wow, you must have a villa on your own private
island in the Pacific, like Marlon Brando.'''

There are no limousines or private islands in the Strizhenovs' life. They
won't say what they earn, citing a ''commercial secret'' clause the
television station forces its personalities to sign, although they clearly
live more comfortably than the average Russian.

''But stardom is much, much different here,'' said Yurate Gurauskaite,
culture editor at the Russian edition of Vogue magazine. For one thing,
most Russian actors, even those successful on TV and in films, still
consider stage acting the most important measure of prestige, a function of
Moscow's world-famous theater scene. In today's Russia, there is no such
thing as a ''box-office hit.'' 

And there are those bills to pay. The Strizhenovs, especially Yekaterina,
have been adept at adapting to market realities.

This is where ''Good Morning'' came in. 

''Someone had the idea of taking a couple who turns the show into their own
little guest room,'' Alexander said. 

''We're there to give people something optimistic to start the day,'' added
Yekaterina. 

You get an idea of how hard that is when you visit Ostankino, the cheerless
studio headquarters of Russian Public Television. Stern police toting Uzis
guard the entrance. Unlit hallways weave like a complicated Kremlin plot
past spartan and decrepit offices.

But the studio of ''Good Morning'' is all day-glo yellow chairs, yellow
walls, faux windows with bright city scenes painted on them. 

The atmosphere on the air is similarly bright and surprisingly laid-back.
The Strizhenovs' show is full of lifestyle features and practical
information, like what to cook for breakfast and when to plant your
cucumbers, as well as an ecletic collection of music videos and movie
reviews. 

This past Wednesday, an unusually blustery May morning that found Moscow
deep in a government crisis, was also the anniversary of the founding of
the Young Pioneers, the Soviet version of the Boy and Girl Scouts. That was
the theme the Strizhenovs went with. 

Lots of Russians look back fondly on their Pioneer days, even though other
Russians believe the Pioneers were one of the ways the Soviet regime
prepared children to be good communists.

Yekaterina wore pony tails and the red tie of the Young Pioneers. Alexander
Strizhenov wore a dubious expression.

''I remember that what irritated me about the Pioneers is no one cared
about what you thought, they were interested in what you were able to
parrot,'' he started.

''Oh, I don't know about that, Sasha,'' interjected Yekaterina, using her
nickname for her husband. ''Maybe you had a bad Pioneer organization in
your school.''

''I went to a good school,'' harumphed Alexander.

''Well, I had a happy childhood as a Pioneer,'' Yekaterina said, turning to
a feature on the history of the pioneers as the studio guest waited
patiently to get a word in edgewise.

Viewers across Russia eat this stuff up.

''We get letters all the time from people who ask, `How do you make it
work?''' Yekaterina said. 

It is a good question, especially given the high divorce rate in the world
among actors. The Strizhenovs have been together since they met at age 14
on the set of one of their early films, a drama called ''The Leader.''

''We are not an ideal pair,'' Yekaterina said. ''Sometimes, Sasha doesn't
let me get a word in. But he is a great partner.''

At times the Strizhenovs wonder if there is not a better life elsewhere.
Alexander recently flirted with Hollywood when he nearly landed the part of
a Russian living in Alaska in a film version of ''Grizzly Adams.'' But the
project folded and he came home. It was probably for the better, Yekaterina
said.

''Better to be stars in Russia,'' she said, ''than workers at a carwash in
New York.''

*******

#11
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999
From: Andrew Miller <lingua@fem.ru> 
Subject: Kids Say the Darndest Things

Kids Say the Darndest Things
By Andrew Miller in St. Petersburg

READERS ADVISORY: by no means does the author of this text intend any
personal comment upon the young men and women expressing their views
herein, whose lives are hard enough and whom, in the context of Russia
and their young ages, he respects and of whom, in any context, he is
personally fond. The author takes a certain pride in having introduced
a certain diversity of opinion among these students, and takes shame
at not having introduced enough. This text is offered solely for the
purpose of cross-cultural awareness and insight by readers who may not
often view such materials. Any inferences or conclusions are the
reader's own affair.

Recently, a group of about two dozen freshman majoring in Management
at the business school of one of the leading insitutions of higher
learning in Russia (where an examination in English skills is
requisite to matriculation), at the close of their first year of
study, took an examination from an American professor in their
Business English class (having studied with that professor for three
months). The topic was the currency unification in Europe. During the
semester, students had read several business texts about the topic and
listened to lectures supplementing them. They then sat for a 75-minute
written exam. The final question on the test was a ten-minute free
essay (intended purely to gauge linguistic skills) on a topic not
touched upon at all in class, as follows:

"If Russia is offered euro membership, should it accept? You must take
a position, yes or no, and then explain and defend it."

Here are the answers, verbatim and in their entireties (elipses in
text are students' own).

1. [#1 overall exam result] My position is that Russia will accept
this offer. Russian politicians will be very happy with that fact that
Russia is invited to the Club. They will do everything they can to get
the opportunity to make foreign products cheaper and travel in Volvos,
Mercedezes and so on. But for ordinary people it won't be the best
choice. Russia won't be able to sell its own goods and domestic
manufacturers will die very soon. Russia sooner or later will be
thrown out of the Club with a completely destroyed economy.

2. Yes, Russia should accept it, because it will get all pros that
have EU members who accept euro. It would be good for russian aconomy
because now it has a lot of difficulties. Being a EU member, Russia
can get help (support) at other countries, but the only trouble for
Russia is not to becom and exporter of treasures of the soil, wood . .
. and forget about development & industry. Never the less I consider
it to be good for Russia, because it get much.

3. Yes. It can defend russian rubles from dollar. I think that it will
help to the econimics of Russia. It could stabilize the rate of rubles
now, and increase export to the Euroland. All together our countries
can organise very strong finance and stable economical system.

4. I don't know what design take out government, but I think we should
do it. Let's look, what happend.

5. Yes. It can defend russian rubles from dollars. In my opinion it
will affect well Russian economy. It could stabilize the rate of
rubles now and increase the export to Euroland.

6 I can't give you a definite answer. Euroship, probably, could help
to rise Russian economics but at the same time that might do harm (or
just undermine) to European econmics.

7. I don't agree with our Russian government in many points, and I
don't know how to answer, but I think may be - yes.

8. I think - yes. The suggestion to be a member of euro club will
means that Euro wants to have relations with us. I think it will be
very useful for Russia. Our government could think, that European
country will give money to us.

9. I think that even very clever people can't answer to this question.
Russia is extraordinary country. Nobody can say what will be through 3
weeks, but my point of view is that it will be good.

10. No. It is impossible for Russia to accept the euro. If we do this
our imports will become cheaper. Russia is an industrial country, it
has to develop our production. The quality of Russian products are
much worse then in the foreign countries, so our sales will fall down.

11. [Author's note: in responding to all other questions, this student
cheated brazenly and unimaginatively from student 10]. No. Russia is
industrial country, it should develop production. It'll not be
possible if we accept the euro, because import will be cheap. There
will not be opportunity to sells R. products because their quality is
worse then foreign products.

12. [#2 overall exam result] I think, if Russia is offered euro
membership it should graspt the opportunity and accept it. The economy
of all euro members is much stronger than in Russia. And I think we
can't improve the situation ourselves. What Russia really needs now is
a strong economy.

13. [#3] If Russia is offered euro membership I don't think we should
take it. If Russia takes it, it will lead to much bigger confrontation
between Russia and the U.S. than we already have because of the war
inYugaslavia. The period of Cold War passed and I don't consider
Russsians want to have smth like that once again. It took many years
and efforts in order to obtain some kind of balance in our
relationship and from my point of view we shouldn't break it like
this. Then the euro is a newcomer. It's future is still uncertain.

14. [#4] Our country should accept it. But the problem is wheather it
is going to be proposed. Russia is not in EU yet. We should think why.
I think, that international relationships of Russia are not organized
in a proper way. We are not communicating with appropriate partners,
strong & experienced. Russia should look towards West not East as it
has been doing most of the time. That's the problem: we should choose
Europeans as our priviliged trade & economic parterns. Teh we would be
able to expect such a suggestion. Thus, the currency relations with
Europe will not be unnecessary. Even more, it would be helpful,
leading to success.

15. [#5] I think it shouldn't, because another denomination of
currency in my country will totally undermine the Russian economy.
Denomination causes inflation and we have it already.

16. Yes, it should. it membership with Europe can make this alliance
the strongest in the world. The bigest & the most powerful, because of
the territory, amount of people who are able to work, the volume of
trade market. Europe is not every far from teh U.S. in economical
means, together with Russia it can dominate in the world market. There
are many opportunities in these country, Europe can use them & help
Russians to overcome the difficulties it has in the period, whin it
tries to become a market-oriented country: Besides, Russia & Europe
are in the same continent.

17. Yes, it should. But for at least 10 years it wouldn't be offered
euro membership. I think that following this membership would highly
help to save our economy and to make Russia wone of the most developed
and powerful counties.

18. Yes, because if it (Russia) is offered euro memberhsip then it
have stronger economy then it is now because euro members are no
fools. Russia is a very promising country so if it joines the euro
club sometime it would be easier to undermine the dollar's hegemony.

19. I suppose Russia should join the euroclub immediatelky for the
sake of the whole world's secure. If it willb e offered and we will
reject Europe will look an odd place, former communist countries will
be NATO oriented, and Europe will be all by itself. The problem is it
well never be offered.

20. Yes, I think Russia must become a member of EU because now it is
not so powerful as it was, for example, 20 years ago. I consider
Russia as an European country, and it would do bad for Russia if it
becomes a member of EU. Russia and EU can give something useful each
other. It will make both Russia and EU more powerful and strong.

21. The Russia should be the member of this euro club, In spite of
many economic problems. This can help Russia to correct it economy.
But other countries are afraid of economic crisis in their countries.
Russia is not very poor country, it economy can improve.

22. To my mind, Russia should accept euro membership if offered, cause
it'll strengthen our country's economy & make it easier to deal with
the rest of Europe, though in the beginning the launching of euro to
our economy may cause some difficulties.

23. I think Russia should accept euro membership in future because it
will be good defense from America.

24. In my point of view Russia should accept euro membership. Our
economy is not very strong and balanced. And I think that this
membership will be the motivation for our country. This will help to
stop the devaluation of ruble. The euro will get the control of the
Russian economy and in one day it will be as strong as America's now.


A smaller group of about a dozen sophmore students majoring
International Economics sat for the same exam, with the following
replies to the same question:

1. No, it should not. Russian economy is already weak. It depends on
America greatly. If it offers it - no way of being a really strong
country. I think after such offering the rate of Euro will be as much
big as a dollar now. It won't help - The only way is to change the ec.
and political structure of Russia.

2. I think no: (It's is my position). Because Russia is strong enough
to live with our single currency and new "shock" from new currency we
don't need (that is my posistion).

3. I think if Russia accept the euro membership it won't save it.
Russia needs more strond leader to survive, to avoid the following
total corruption (for example America).

4. I'm absolutely agains it. Russia is strong enough to live with our
single currency. Joining euro'll mean to Russia to sustain Europe
countries with all those things they need: raw materials, cheap labor
. . . I think the only thing we need is to integrate within Russia &
to build common market inside our country. Well, anyway, euro-members
won't propose to Russia to join euro membership. Euro-countries won't
pull up our currency because it's unprofitable, still, but we will
live to see.

5. Yes. If Russia accept this common currency it make easier internat.
trade reduce exchange rate uncertainty. It also can help to stabiliese
our economy. But of course there is need in time for it.

6. I think yes, because Russia won't loose anything from this bargain
and may be this will keep Russia to overcome it's financial crisis.
But in my opinion the EU contries will be against Russia's entry to
the Euro club.

7. My position Russia must accept the euro membership. Russian economy
will be supported by 11 European countries. It's good. If Russia has a
stable currenty it attract investments. R. imports 5 times less than
it exports so it is more suitable to pay in convert money (not to buy
dollars for rubles and loos money). It will reduce inflation.
Posibility to buy euro goods with out transaction costs.

8. No. Russia has no stable currency. It's developing country. For
Euro members it's not profitable to accept. The euro will go down
because of this.

9. I think that Russia should accept this offer because it may help to
stimulate its economy and to provide its with foreign investors. Other
European counteries wll have to try to help Russian economy to stable
their own currency. It connect Russia (or link) with reacher European
countries.

*******