October 28, 1999     
This Date's Issues: 3590 3591 3592

Johnson's Russia List
#3591
28 October 1999
davidjohnson@erols.com


[Note from David Johnson:
1. BBC: Sue Lloyd-Roberts spends a day in Samara, a city on the Volga in Russia, to see life from a Russian child's point of view.
2. Moscow Times: Andrei Piontkovsky, Primakov and Putin Tempt Russian Soul.
3. Interfax: NEARLY 35% OF RUSSIANS LIVING BELOW POVERTY LINE - LABOR 
MINISTER.
4. Interfax: RUSSIA'S NEXT PRESIDENT MAY BE SWORN IN ON AUG 9, 2000.
5. Interfax: PUTIN LIKELY TO MEET WITH CLINTON IN EARLY NOVEMBER - GOVT 
SOURCES.
6. Itar-Tass: US Aims to Upset International Security Principles.
7. Jamestown Foundation Monitor: FLIGHT OF CAPITAL ACCELERATES IN RUSSIA. 
8. David Wheeler: Re: 3587- Mendelson/Student Visas.
9. International Herald Tribune: Jim Hoagland, It's Time to Rethink the Old Notion of Sovereignty.
10. Baltimore Sun: Tom Bowman, U.S., Russian military ally against Y2K bug.At midnight Dec. 31, they'll sit side by side to watch for mistakes.
11. Reuters: Economists see glimmers of hope on Russia.
12. Reuters: How much debt relief for Russia?
13. Moscow Times: Andrei Zolotov Jr., Journalists Bemoan Chechnya Coverage.
14. Interfax: PRIMAKOV DENIES FAVORING MASSIVE REPRISAL IN RUSSIA.
15. Israel Radio: Gideon Remez, Block That Pipeline!
16. The Times (UK): Giles Whittell, Top Russian beauties eclipse Monroe.]


*******


#1
BBC
October 27, 1999 
Eyewitness: Russia - a child's eye view 
The BBC's Sue Lloyd-Roberts spends a day in Samara, a city on the Volga in
Russia, to see life from a Russian child's point of view. 


Sasha and Igor set up their stall at seven in the morning - there's stiff
adult competition in the computer games end of the market and, unless
they're early, they don't get a look in. 


Children trading on the market compete with adultsAt 14, they run their own
stall and keep the profits. A few stalls along, Andrei isn't so lucky - he
works for a 16-year-old who pays him 50 cents a day. But Andrei hasn't much
choice. 


"My mother works in a bread factory, she doesn't make enough money so I
have to work as well," he said. 


A recent report says that of the 28 million children in Russia, 6 million
are not enrolled at school but are forced to work to feed themselves or
their families as the country suffers the consequences of economic collapse. 


Begging booming 


Samara is a typical provincial city with problems no worse than any other -
certainly the poverty and crime rates don't compare with Moscow or St
Petersburg. 


But its very normality illustrates how the collapse of a system which
offered jobs for life and social security is having devastating effects on
children, everywhere. 


As in any Russian city, by mid morning its churches and cemeteries are busy
- they're the traditional begging grounds for war veterans and widows,
only these days the professional beggars are getting much younger. 


Eleven and nine-year-old Masha and Misha say they have to beg because
their parents are ill. Fourteen-year-old Vlodya says: "Of course my parents
know I'm here - they told me to come!" 


I ask another boy, Yuri, to take me home - when the children say their
parents are "ill", it's often a euphemism for alcoholism which the main
reason so many children are on the streets today. 


Yuri says his mother is an alcoholic. His family present the image of
modern Russia. 


Since the collapse of the rouble last year, they all beg - only the seven
year old says with pride that she goes to school - but looking at her
older, glue-sniffing sister, one wonders for how long. 


Petrol wars 


Turn up at a petrol station after school in Russia today, and you're likely
to be served by children. 


Though these children do go to school they work afterwards. Here the
16-year-old is in charge - he says he only works for cigarettes and sweets
- his 12-year-old staff are more desperate. 


And it can get dangerous - there are frequent battles between rival petrol
station gangs - an 11-year-old boy was recently doused with petrol and set
alight. 


But work like selling, begging or working at garages appears benign
compared to some of the criminal activity which more children in Russia are
being forced to turn to as the economic situation here worsens. 


Drug dealers 


They like to tell you that in the old Soviet Union there was no crime. 


No-one believes that, but crime among children was rare. 


In the last two years, the number of offences committed by under 16 year
olds has increased from 2% to 10%. 


A lot of the children here are serving six to eight-year prison sentences
based on drug-related charges - they say that in Russia today, children
can't escape the drug dealers. 


Nowadays, they start as young as 7 years old. Before it was 20 year olds,
then they wouldn't let the younger kids get a look in. It's out of control. 


Working the streets 


Children scooped off the streets by police all tell the same story -
they've had rows or been beaten up by alcoholic parents; they've run away
from home and are now living by begging and stealing. They're locked up
behind bars at night - it's to protect them from their elders, I'm told. 


Meeting 14-year-old Tanya, you understand why. She started working for a
pimp a year ago. Wasn't it difficult at the beginning? 


"No, not at all. I mean, you can get the clients easily enough. You just
stand on the street, there are lots of other girls doing it. Lots of men
drive past and then they take you somewhere, you do it and they give you
money. No, it's not difficult to find someone to pay you to sleep with them. 


"I was never threatened, exactly, but they wear you out with the sex,
though, you know what I mean? For example we'd go to a steam bath and there
wouldn't be just one man, like we'd agreed, but lots of them. And they'd
just come up to me - they wouldn't even ask, they'd just do it." 


Tanya then said she had to go - it was eight o'clock and time for work.


******


#2
Moscow Times
October 28, 1999 
SEASON OF DISCONTENT: Primakov and Putin Tempt Russian Soul 
By Andrei Piontkovsky 


Two bursts of popularity occurred in Russia during the last year - those of 
former Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov and of current Prime Minister Vladimir 
Putin. They are very different people. One thing, however, unites them - 
neither their real accomplishments nor the scale of their personalities 
corresponds to the expectations people have of them, expectations that are 
reflected in opinion polls. That means that each one, in his own way, has 
managed to touch some deep-seated irrational layers in the Russian political 
subconscious. 


We'll begin with the case of Yevgeny Primakov. Dear Yevgeny Maximovich, 
looking more and more with each passing day like dear Leonid Ilyich Brezhnev, 
is the most outstanding mediocrity of our political class. The hysteria over 
the desirability of Primakov that took hold over the summer when the 
political blocs were forming spoke not so much about Primakov as about the 
hollowness of the Russian political class itself. Primakov's lucky ability to 
remind us of Brezhnev both in appearance and in the essence of his politics 
brought him - until recently - growing popularity with a tired and 
disoriented society. 


His ratings in the polls surprisingly correspond with the results of a spring 
poll that asked respondents who they consider to be the most outstanding 
political figure of the 20th century. The poll was led with a comfortable 
margin not by Stalin or Lenin or Gorbachev or Sakharov, but by Brezhnev. In 
Brezhnev and his Primakov incarnation, the post-Soviet myth of the golden age 
is actualized for average Russians. The Brezhnevesque nature of Primakov's 
popularity has become so obvious that even Primakov himself has consciously 
begun to exploit it. He recounts with visible satisfaction the poll results 
that place him and Brezhnev on the same level. More and more, he imitates 
Brezhnev's gait, his manner of speaking, his gesticulations. 


Of course, the Russian voter is not so naive as to assume a new Brezhnev can 
substantially improve his life. But, instead of appealing to the reason of 
the Russian citizen, the Brezhnev/Primakov image appeals to a subconscious 
complex of ideas about calmness, stability and passivity. One of Russia's 
most popular folk songs is about the carriage driver who falls asleep in a 
blizzard. Electing as president good old grandad Primakov would be like 
choosing the fate of the carriage passenger sweetly dozing in the blizzard. 
The idea of a Primakov presidency is the idea of a hospice, one that almost 
captured the public imagination. 


But then a new character has appeared on the Russian political stage. He 
appeals to a quite different layer of the popular psyche: a young, energetic 
secret service officer, issuing sharp, distinct commands, sending troops deep 
into the Caucasus, bringing horror and death to terrorists and all Russia's 
enemies. And the feminine soul of Russia - yearning for an authoritative 
master - is ready to abandon the solid old Primakov for the young lover hero. 
(As another near-folk song goes, "to any traveling spellbinder you'll give 
your untamed beauty.") 


Primakov and Putin, with their modest merits and shortcomings, themselves 
have a rather peripheral relationship to the searching of the restless 
Russian soul. Each of them just happens to personify two archetypes of the 
Russian idea of authority - the head doctor of the hospice and the macho 
pseudo-hero. 


******


#3
NEARLY 35% OF RUSSIANS LIVING BELOW POVERTY LINE - LABOR MINISTER


MOSCOW. Oct 27 (Interfax) - A total of 51 million Russians, or
34.6% of the country's population, are now living below the poverty
line, Labor and Social Development Minister Sergei Kalashnikov said at a
Wednesday news conference.


******


#4
RUSSIA'S NEXT PRESIDENT MAY BE SWORN IN ON AUG 9, 2000


MOSCOW. Oct 27 (Interfax) - Russia's next president may be sworn in
on August 9, 2000, the Central Election Commission chairman said on
Wednesday.
This will happen if the election results are declared invalid and a
new election is called, Alexander Veshnyakov told parliament during the
first reading of a draft law on presidential elections.
Under the projected law, the president-elect would have to take
office on the 30th day after the election results are published.
Under the draft law, the presidential election would have to be
held on June 4. The upper house would have to formally set the date no
earlier than January 4 and no later than February 4.
A possible runoff election may be held on June 25.


******


#5
PUTIN LIKELY TO MEET WITH CLINTON IN EARLY NOVEMBER - GOVT SOURCES


MOSCOW. Oct 27 (Interfax) - Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin
is likely to meet with U.S. President Bill Clinton in early November,
Russian government sources told Interfax on Wednesday.
The sources said the meeting could take place in Oslo, where events
will be held to mark the anniversary of the assassination of Israeli
Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, and at which Putin will represent Russia
and Clinton the United States.
"The Russian prime minister and the U.S. president are expected to
discuss the entire range of problems of mutual interest," a source said,
declining to provide any more details, but noting only that these are
being discussed through diplomatic channels.


******


#6
US Aims to Upset International Security Principles.


MOSCOW, October 27 (Itar-Tass) - The United States actions are aimed at 
upsetting international security norms and principles, Colonel-General Leonid 
Ivashov, chief of the Russian Defence Ministry's international military 
cooperation agency, stated in Krasnaya Zvezda (Red Star) newspaper issue on 
Wednesday. 


He noted that these actions of the Washington administration amount to 
usurping the right to make decisions for other states and whole regions, 
attempting to destroy progress reached in strategic nuclear arms limitation 
over many years. 


The United States is not quite conscientiously observing the START-1 Treaty. 
It resorts to various pretexts and is trying to interpret the text in such a 
way as to have an opportunity to build up its military potential, to go 
beyond the framework of the treaty. 


The same happens with regard to the 1972 ABM Treaty. The treaty has been 
perfectly effective for almost three decades. And now Washington, insisting 
on an equal number of nuclear delivery vehicles, claims also greater 
defences. And this means tipping the strategic balance. This move, naturally, 
does not suit Russia. Other countries are not pleased, either. The People's 
Republic of China follows these attempts with concern. These was a sharp 
response from France. 


The US adopts a typical pattern, Ivashov notes. First, a threat is invented. 
Then a decision is made and the funding is started. Then the decision is said 
not to be final, and negotiations to alter the treaty are suggested. The 
arms-twisting tactic is adopted unless the partner agrees. "The Russian side 
precedes from the need to keep the START arms limitation going, while 
preserving and strengthening its mainstay, the 1972 Antiballistic Missile 
Treaty," Ivashov noted. 


******


#7
Jamestown Foundation Monitor
27 October 1999


FLIGHT OF CAPITAL ACCELERATES IN RUSSIA. Russia in early August seemed to
be making progress in restoring its external creditworthiness. The first
quarterly tranche of the IMF standby had added US$640 million to Russia's
reserves, and a deal was concluded with the Paris Club of official
creditors postponing some US$8.0 billion in debt-service payments until
late 2000. Russia was racking up US$2.0-2.5 billion monthly trade
surpluses, monthly inflation rates were down sharply, and the average
exchange rate rose from US$1 = 24.7 rubles in April to US$1 = 24.3 rubles
in July. The deficit on the balance of payment's capital account dropped to
US$1.6 billion in the second quarter, from US$4.1 billion in the first
quarter, suggesting that the flows of capital out of Russia, while still
large, were at least slowing. 


This momentum has now dissipated, and capital flight has accelerated. The
average exchange rate dropped from US$1 = 24.3 rubles in July to US$1 =
25.5 rubles in September. This decline would have been worse if the Central
Bank of Russia (CBR) hadn't intervened on the foreign exchange market to
support the ruble. But these interventions also reduced the CBR's cash
foreign exchange reserves from US$8.2 billion at the end of June to US$6.6
billion at the end of September. Preliminary CBR data released this week by
the Finance Ministry show that a capital flight broadly measured during the
third quarter rose to US$10.9 billion (http://www.eeg.ru/review.html). This
is more than triple the second quarter's US$3.3 billion outflow (thus
defined), and is on par with the US$11.4 billion capital outflow recorded
in last year's disastrous fourth quarter.


A number of factors are responsible for the acceleration in capital
outflows. The government and CBR since July have partially liberalized the
foreign exchange market, in order to bring Russia's foreign exchange regime
back into conformity with IMF requirements on currency convertibility. The
terrorist bombings in Moscow and other Russian cities, the resumption of a
full-scale war in Chechnya, and the intensification of the media
mudslinging in the run-up to the December 1999 parliamentary elections have
brought domestic political instability to new heights, and no doubt helped
convince more Russian companies and households to keep their money overseas
or under their mattresses. 


Perhaps the most important cause of the increased capital flight have been
the rising tensions in Russia's relationship with the International
Monetary Fund (IMF). Moscow's relations with the Fund have deteriorated
noticeably since August, even though Russia has been hitting most of its
fiscal targets. At the behest of G7 governments, the IMF in late September
attached additional conditions to the release of the next US$640 million
tranche, which had been slated for September. Release of the tranche is now
conditioned on proof that the CBR's internal control systems have been
improved, as well as on selling off the CBR's foreign subsidiaries and
introducing more transparency into the Russian banking system. Statements
by IMF (and World Bank) officials suggesting that higher military spending
on the war in Chechnya could run afoul of Moscow's fiscal targets and
endanger continued lending have further complicated an already difficult
situation. 


Should the Fund's new conditions not be met, the IMF could declare Russia
to be out of compliance with the program upon which the standby credit is
based. This could halt the on-going negotiations with Moscow's London Club
creditors, and undo the limited progress that has recently been made in
repairing Russia's external creditworthiness. 


******


#8
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 
From: "David Wheeler" <dwheeler@intrstar.net>
Subject: Re: 3587- Mendelson/Student Visas


It's not just student visas, and it's not just Russia. I personally know of
two recent instances where Ukrainian citizens were denied visas to visit the
US for legitimate purposes. The first was a personal friend of mine who had
showed me great hospitality on three occasions in Ukraine and who wanted to
visit me here, but was denied a visa in Kiev on four different occasions --
the final time, with me accompanying him to the embassy. The other was a
student who had (after two years) returned to Kiev for a visit, but had
great difficulty getting a visa to come back and finish his course of study.


In the first situation, I obtained letters from my church saying that we
would be responsible for him and his wife, and a certified statement from my
bank that I had sufficient funds to provide for him for an extended time,
all to no avail. I had a US Senator's office launch an investigation. They
were told that decisions re granting of visas are made by the individual
interviewer on the spot, and that there is no appeal. The foreign national
has 15-20 minutes to convince that one person that he/she has a legitimate
reason for the visit, and will return to Uk/Rus when the visit is over.
Again, their decision is final.


Sounds like a crummy system to me. That's too much authority to place in
one person's hands; those interviewers are often the lowest employees on the
totem pole, I was told, and let the power go to their heads.


******


#9
International Herald Tribune
October 28, 1999
[for personal use only]
It's Time to Rethink the Old Notion of Sovereignty
By Jim Hoagland The Washington Post


NEW YORK - It can bring no solace to the people of Grozny as they count their 
dead from indiscriminate Russian missile and artillery attacks, but their 
suffering does not go unmeasured. The savage assault on Chechnya brings home 
the need for a new international consensus. Kofi Annan is trying to forge it.
Three times in the past seven months a national government has gone to war 
against its population, etching in blood its sovereign ''right'' to kill as 
many of its people as it sees fit. Serbia and Indonesia were halted by 
international outrage and reaction. Kosovo and East Timor were detached from 
their control and taken over by the United Nations. A doctrine of 
humanitarian intervention seemed to sink roots.


But Chechnya shows that it is still two steps forward and one back. Russia 
pursues a rain of death on a defenseless regional capital without important 
foreign constraint or meaningful criticism.


European and U.S. official reaction makes Chechnya sound as if it were a huge 
Third World train wreck. The loss of life is ''tragic'' or ''regrettable'' 
but not something that has to be acted upon. (The exception is Germany, where 
Foreign Minister JoschkaFischer voices genuine outrage.) Russia is likely in 
the short term to conclude that sovereign murder still pays.


But in a 90-minute discussion in his 38th floor suite of offices this week, 
UN Secretary-General Annan made clear to me that he cannot ignore 
bloodletting even on the territory of a Security Council permanent member.


He has dispatched an envoy to Moscow to push for a visit to Chechnya by a 
special UN team. The team would examine the need for humanitarian aid and, 
Mr. Annan added, ''be the eyes and ears of the international community.''


Most of his predecessors would likely have avoided doing anything in this 
case. But the cascade of atrocity in Rwanda, Kosovo, East Timor and elsewhere 
has made him a man with a mission. He began to spell it out in a startling 
speech to the UN General Assembly on Sept. 20 and defined it more fully in 
our conversation.


States now have to respect ''individual sovereignty - the human rights and 
fundamental freedoms of each and every individual as enshrined in the UN 
Charter'' as well as state sovereignty, Mr. Annan told the General Assembly. 
Nothing in the charter precludes ''rights beyond borders.'' He told me he set 
out to challenge ''the old consensus,'' which is rooted in the Treaty of 
Westphalia and the United Nations' own once unshakable acceptance of the 
doctrine of noninterference in the ''internal'' affairs of member states.


He smiled when I asked if that made anybody nervous. ''Yes. For example, 
China was nervous, India was nervous, and Russia was very nervous. ... The 
Russians have been consumed by Chechnya for a long time. I think they feared 
Kosovo would be seen as a precedent for Chechnya, and other regions in the 
Caucasus. Before, this concern was theoretical. Now ...'' His voice trailed 
off, leaving the obvious unsaid.


Russia of course is nothing like Serbia or Indonesia in power terms. Russia 
possesses nuclear arms, a Security Council veto and a government that has 
mostly cooperated with the United States and Europe on crucial questions in 
this decade. There is no risk of the NATO cavalry riding to Chechnya's rescue 
or Bill Clinton calling Boris Yeltsin a Hitler.


But Russia is pursuing scorched-earth tactics that resemble the Serbian and 
Indonesian treatment of their subject peoples. And Mr. Annan is not willing 
to let realpolitik hand out free passes on humanitarian intervention.''Today 
what is internal doesn't remain internal for very long,'' he told me. ''We 
have to examine our willingness to act in some areas of conflict while 
limiting ourselves to humanitarian palliatives in other crises that ought to 
shame us into action. We have to find rational guidelines or an understanding 
of the spectrum on which the choices of intervention exist. We need a new 
consensus.''


This elegant but steely Ghanaian diplomat, in his third year as 
secretary-general, has ordered a staff report on intervention. He stimulated 
a General Assembly study group on the same subject and hopes to get the 
Security Council deeply involved in his six-to-12-month effort to, in effect, 
modernize sovereignty.


''The founders of the United Nations in 1945 came out of a world war 
determined to stop conflicts between states. The time has come for our 
generation to look at its responsibilities toward civilians who in today's 
wars are deliberately targeted.''


Mr. Annan did not add the words ''by their own governments,'' but he did not 
have to. The shells falling in Chechnya made the point for him.


*******


#10
Baltimore Sun
27 October 1999
[for personal use only]
U.S., Russian military ally against Y2K bug
At midnight Dec. 31, they'll sit side by side to watch for mistakes
By Tom Bowman
Sun National Staff


WASHINGTON -- When midnight strikes on Dec. 31, U.S. and Russian military 
officers will be sitting side-by-side at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado, 
trying to ensure that the gremlins of Y2K don't spur an accidental launch of 
nuclear weapons.


They hope to dispel fears that a year 2000 computer glitch will blind 
Russia's early-warning system or send the false signal that Washington has 
launched a missile, leading to the ultimate nightmare: a decision by Moscow 
to counterattack.


Experts for both nations say they are confident there is no serious threat of 
a Y2K-related missile launch. But to guard against even the remote 
possibility, the Center for Year 2000 Strategic Stability at Peterson will 
use information from U.S. satellites and ground-based sensors fed through 
computers that are clear of any Y2K bugs.


Any uncertainties or misunderstandings detected in Moscow would be resolved 
by the Russians hunched over computer terminals in a windowless second-floor 
room in Colorado Springs.


"If something pops up on a Russian screen in Moscow, that could be validated 
at Peterson," said Maj. Perry Nouis, a spokesman for the Air Force Space 
Command, which is running the center.


Still, some members of Congress and nuclear weapons experts want U.S. and 
Russian officers to go further, with one critic calling the much-vaunted 
centera "Band-Aid" approach. These critics contend that the only sure way to 
prevent a mistaken nuclear exchange is to "de-alert" thousands of nuclear 
missiles -- which can be fired in minutes -- by removing warheads or the keys 
used by officers to initiate a launch.


`Unjustifiable' readiness


"Maintaining hair-trigger readiness for nuclear confrontation is 
unjustifiable in today's world," said Rep. Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts 
Democrat. "The potential for a missile launch due to misinterpretation of 
warning systems may well be higher on Jan. 1, 2000, than at any other time 
since the start of the Cold War."


Last week, Helen Caldicott and 10 other anti-nuclear activists took out a 
full-page ad in the New York Times in which they pressed for the United 
States to de-alert the estimated 2,000 nuclear weapons that can be fired in 
minutes. Such action, they said, is "the only sure way" to prevent a mistaken 
nuclear attack.


"I think Y2K is another in a long list of reasons why we should not maintain 
our nuclear weapons on hair-trigger alert," said Bruce G. Blair, a nuclear 
weapons expert at the Brookings Institution.


Blair has long pressed for a missile de-alert, fearing that a coup or even a 
low-level Russian officer could precipitate a nuclear exchange.


In the early 1990s, Blair said, President George Bush de-alerted hundreds of 
B-52 bombers, as well as 450 of 1,000 Minuteman missiles, while Russian 
President Mikhail S. Gorbachev made similar moves.


But the United States still has 2,400 land- and sea-based nuclear warheads 
poised for immediate launch out of its 6,000-warhead inventory, Blair noted, 
and Russia has a comparable number set to launch in minutes.


Power of 100,000 Hiroshimas


The estimated 5,000 hair-trigger missiles from both sides have the blast 
power of 100,000 of the atomic bombs that hit Hiroshima, Blair added.


"They could be fired almost immediately to targets halfway around the 
planet," he said. "We shouldn't have to be worrying about these things 10 
years after the Cold War. We should be able to relax a little bit."


Last year a government-wide study recommended against any further effort to 
de-alert the nuclear force. Those who took part in the study said they feared 
that the United States' immediate ability to launch nuclear weapons could be 
dangerously delayed by weeks or even months.


"These things are very, very tedious processes," said a senior Pentagon 
official involved in the talks. Further de-alerting could leave America's 
nuclear forces vulnerable to a surprise attack, the official said, noting 
that the once hair-trigger B-52s now take 24 to 48 hours to achieve alert 
status.


Warheads removed from Minuteman missiles could take weeks or months to be 
made ready for launch.


And despite the end of the Cold War, officials based their decision against 
further de-alerting on uncertainty in Russia, he said, such as the possible 
"re-emergence of a hostile Russian leadership."


They also foresaw difficulties in verifying whether Russians would abide by a 
de-alert status and the fear of a "race to realert" should a crisis occur, 
the official said.


What emerged from the study was a decision for "shared early-warning" data 
between the United States and Russia, a move that will begin in December and 
continue through January, the Pentagon official said. A permanent U.S. and 
Russian center is expected to open in Moscow in 2001.


In addition, the United States has agreed to notify Russia before it launches 
any rocket, even one bearing a satellite into space.


Both the senior defense official and Blair say they doubt there will be any 
misinformation or false alarm caused by Russia's early-warning system, even 
if it is infected by a Y2K bug that causes a computer to misinterpret the 
last two zeros to mean the year 1900. More likely, they say, computers would 
simply shut down and offer no data.


But Blair says that even if the computers "go black," it could be 
disconcerting to Russian leaders who have the ability to launch missiles 
within minutes.


`Accident waiting to happen'


In 1995, Russia's early-warning system registered a false alarm after Norway 
launched a scientific rocket. Moscow could not be sure whether the launch 
came from U.S. or British submarines operating in the area, Blair said.


That peaceful rocket "activated President Yeltsin's nuclear briefcase," Sen. 
Richard G. Lugar, an Indiana Republican, said at a Senate hearing last month.


The problem was finally recognized after about eight minutes, Blair said. He 
noted that the Russians have a 10-minute window between a possible enemy 
rocket launch and a decision on whether to launch a counterattack.


"The real culprit is not Y2K but rather the hair trigger on U.S. and Russian 
forces," Blair said. "The high combat readiness of these arsenals, 
particularly Russia's, is an accident waiting to happen."


But the senior defense official said he was confident that the sharing of the 
early-warning data and the notification of any U.S. missile launches are 
enough to prevent any mistaken nuclear exchanges.


"We think we're taking the steps needed to deal with the potential problem," 
he said.


******


#11
ANALYSIS-Economists see glimmers of hope on Russia
By Janet Guttsman

WASHINGTON, Oct 27 (Reuters) - Deep international pessimism about economic 
prospects in Russia has given way to occasional glimmers of hope as 
U.S.-based experts revise their downbeat view and look at the latest signs of 
growth. 


The picture is still mixed, but the experts say the positive patches are 
larger than they were before. Just as Russia's real economy never lived up to 
wild expectations during the boom investment years around 1994, the black 
image of Russia's economy might better be drawn in shades of gray. 


``Russia is never as strong as it seems, but at the same time it is never as 
weak as it seems,'' said Thane Gustafson, author of the new book ``Capitalism 
Russian Style.'' 


``This year is going to show positive growth and there are reasonable 
expectations that 2000 will see even stronger growth.'' 


In the 14 months since Russia defaulted on some debts and devalued the 
rouble, scraps of positive news on the economy were part of a broader 
negative picture: Russia did not fall apart. Debt to the International 
Monetary Fund fell this year even as the fund halted payments on its latest 
loan. 


If growth does materialise this year -- the IMF still forecasts flat output 
-- it will be only the second year of rising output since the Soviet Union 
fell apart in 1991, and will be fuelled by domestic production, not by 
foreign firms. 


Gustafson, head of the Eurasian department at Cambridge Energy Research 
Associates, told a news briefing that a series of governments appointed since 
the August 1998 default had kept economic policies ``surprisingly sound.'' 
Policy remained reform- oriented even without the reformers ousted after the 
crash. 


Local firms are reaping the rewards of last year's massive rouble devaluation 
which priced foreign goods out of the market and sent industrial output 
soaring -- production was a staggering 20.2 percent above year-ago levels in 
September, with strong growth in sectors like pharmaceuticals. 


The rouble is currently trading at around 26 to the dollar, compared with 6.3 
to the dollar before the crash. 


At the same time Russia's endemic barter system is losing ground to healthier 
cash payments, which mean good firms have a chance of becoming profitable and 
bad ones are being allowed to fail, said Anders Aslund, who tracked the 
Soviet economy as a diplomat for Sweden and now works for the Carnegie 
Institute. 


``There has been a qualitative change,'' Aslund said. ``What we are seeing 
now is that monetization is increasing and arrears and barter are falling. 
Some enterprises are going bankrupt and others are becoming profitable.'' 


The better economic news comes -- ironically perhaps -- during the only year 
in Russia's post-Soviet history when the IMF has really got tough on its 
biggest single borrower. 


A $4.5 billion loan approved in July is being used only to repay old debts, 
and even payments from that loan have been delayed while the fund waits for 
Russia to give more information about central bank operations and to release 
an independent audit on the subsidiaries of its central bank. 


IMF data showed Russia repaid a net $2.8 billion to the IMF in the year to 
Sept. 30. It now owes the fund some $16.7 billion, down from a peak of $19.6 
billion in July 1998. 


Pressured by its biggest members, the IMF had in the past bent its lending 
rules for Russia, paying in the spring of 1996 as a crucial presidential 
election loomed despite doubts about Russia's ability to deliver on its 
economic promises. 


``The IMF lost its economic credibility in the spring of 1996... It got its 
credibility back when it let Russia fail in August last year,'' said Aslund. 


But Washington officials are also worried about the cost of Russia's latest 
military incursion into independence-minded Chechnya, and about the health of 
the whole banking system. The default and rouble crash left many banks 
heavily exposed. 


Further concerns centre on corruption, money laundering and capital flight -- 
billions of dollars have flooded out of Russia in the years since the Soviet 
Union fell apart and too many officials are said to be ``on the take.'' 


Russia ranked a miserable 82nd in a ranking of 99 countries according to 
their perceived degree of corruption by watchdog Transparency International. 
Transparency International stressed that some 90 countries were not included 
in its review because the assessors did not have enough information. 


*******


#12
EMERGING MARKETS-How much debt relief for Russia?
By John Paul Rathbone

LONDON, Oct 27 (Reuters) - Russia's Finance Minister is expected to throw his 
full weight into London Club debt talks next week as a two month delay in 
getting fresh funds from the IMF increasingly underlines the economy's 
precarious solvency. 


Despite an expected balance of payments surplus of over $20 billion this 
year, Finance Minister Mikhail Kasyanov has said Russia could face a cash 
crunch in November if support is not forthcoming from the International 
Monetary Fund. Under pressure from the U.S. Congress, the IMF has held up a 
$640 million loan tranche pending extra guarantees of financial transparency. 


Despite the urgency, analysts said Wednesday the debt talks -- Russia's sixth 
round since negotiations with London Club bankers to reschedule $32 billion 
of Soviet-era debt began in May -- were unlikely to yield a deal before a 
self-imposed December 2 deadline. 


``Kasyanov's coming to this round will probably create more momentum. Both 
sides are interested in a deal, but it is still very ambitious to expect one 
this year,'' Paribas' head of emerging Europe fixed income research Stuart 
Brown said. 


DEFAULT FEARS GROW AS IMF DELAYS 


Some analysts give only a 30 percent chance agreement will ever be reached to 
reduce Russia's crippling foreign debt mountain. J.P. Morgan estimates at 
least $8 billion in capital flight will whittle away budget resources 
available for debt payments next year to two thirds of the $13 billion 
required. 


The looming short term credit crunch has scared investors and analysts, with 
Russian bond prices falling from July highs despite signs of an economic 
recovery and industrial growth data not seen since the early 1990s. 


``In our view the risk of default on Eurobonds is still significant, 
particularly as Russia's relations with the G7 and IMF have deteriorated 
recently,'' Merrill Lynch analyst Andrew Kenningham said. 


Over the longer term, however, Russia's ability to pay is expected to improve 
from 2004 as growth picks-up. Such arguments undercut Russia's position it 
needs up to a 60 percent debt write off on its Soviet-era debt in order to 
sustain payments. 


``Russia needs substantial debt relief, or new official lending, in the next 
four years worth some 50 percent of its Soviet-era debt payments,'' JP Morgan 
economist Ralph Suppel wrote in a recent study. ``(But) from 2005, the 
country can probably generate excess debt servicing capacity. There is thus 
no case for a major debt write-down,'' he added. 


However willingness to pay, as well as ability to pay, lies at the heart of 
the London Club talks. Russia has fallen behind on $815 million of payments 
on its Soviet debt even as it has kept current on about $16 billion of 
Eurobonds contracted by the Russian Federation since 1992. 


Creditors want the Soviet debt to be swapped into bonds with similar Eurobond 
status. Russia has so far stalled -- although with Kasyanov back at the table 
after skipping the last round, both sides are expected to talk turkey when 
they meet on October 29. 


``It's important to remember what one of the talks' long term objectives is: 
Russia's return to capital markets to find an alternate source of funds to 
multilaterals,'' one analyst said. 


``Even if they got a deal tomorrow they wouldn't be able to go to market 
until the second half of 2000 due to the elections. So even if they don't get 
a deal for a year it need not be a problem,'' he added. 


*******


#13
Moscow Times
October 28, 1999 
Journalists Bemoan Chechnya Coverage 
By Andrei Zolotov Jr.
Staff Writer


Whether you get your news about the Chechen conflict from Russian news 
organizations or from the Western press, the information you are getting is 
fragmented and partisan, said journalists participating in a televised 
discussion. 


Foreign and Russian reporters took part in Tuesday's show "Glas Naroda," or 
Voice of the People, on NTV television to discuss media coverage from the 
Caucasus. The very topic of the show, hosted by leading NTV anchor Yevgeny 
Kiselyov, testified to the emerging public discussion on whether the 
reporting is news or propaganda for the warring sides. 


While Russian journalists largely report from Russian military positions and 
tend to downplay civilian casualties, Western reports from inside Chechnya 
are centered on the destruction of Chechen villages and the suffering of the 
civilian population. 


Despite many outcries from the studio audience accusing Western reporters of 
"anti-Russian" bias and acting as "saboteurs," 52 percent of the audience 
said at the end of the program that they were not satisfied with Russian 
coverage of the conflict. 


Coverage is defined in large part by the type of access reporters are given. 


In early October, the Chechen government organized a trip for Western 
reporters, taking them, under guard, to areas hit by Russian bombs. Others 
have traveled to Chechnya on their own, guarded by "trusted" gunmen. 


Last week, Press Minister Mikhail Lesin took a group of reporters, foreign 
and Russian, on a junket accompanying Prime Minister Vladimir Putin as he 
visited troops in the region. 


Still, Western reporters complained Russian authorities have denied them 
access to the Russian military positions. 


Novye Izvestia newspaper journalist Valery Yakov, one of the first Russian 
reporters to write reports criticizing the conduct of federal troops during 
the 1994-96 war, said the Russian press and the Chechen terrorists bear 
responsibility for the escalation of the current conflict, which he said is 
turning into a repeat of the previous campaign. 


"Through our passivity and through the kidnappings by Chechen bandits [which 
prevents journalists from traveling to Chechnya] we are playing into the 
hands of the Federal Information Center and the FSB's public relations center 
and helping the authorities escalate this operation," Yakov said Wednesday in 
a telephone interview. 


Yakov said he has not traveled to Chechnya for the past six months. Even with 
his connections among Chechen fighters, he fears being kidnapped. He also 
said that despite the formation of the Rosinformcenter, Russian authorities 
still restricts information to reporters. "They used to send you away, now 
they smile at you, that's all," he said. 


Much of the discussion on Tuesday's show was on whether interviews with 
Chechen warlords Shamil Basayev and Khattab could be reported, or whether 
Chechen fighters should or should not be called "terrorists." 


NTV's Yelena Masyuk, who spent three months in Chechen captivity, said 
journalists should show both sides, but said the Chechens make that hard. 


Dmitry Babich, the foreign editor of the liberal Moscow News weekly, said 
Wednesday that Grozny's organizing of trips for Western reporters was 
"cynical." "For three years, Chechen leaders did not need reporters to show 
their clan strife," Babich said. "Now they need them again." 


He criticized some Western reporters for portraying Basayev and Khattab as 
"heroes." At the same time, the antipathies of the Russian press are 
understandable, he said. "It is wrong to demand that NTV, for example, 
suddenly forget Masyuk's kidnapping and return to the ranks of Chechen 
resistance," he said. During the 1994-96 campaign, NTV was seen as favoring 
the Chechens. 


The whereabouts of several Russian reporters in Chechnya are not known. 
Moscow News correspondent Dmitry Balburov has not contacted his editors since 
Oct. 4. 


Thomas Seifert, foreign editor of Austrian News magazine, tried last week to 
travel to Chechnya but was turned back by Russian troops near the border. 


He said authorities, who complain of the West's media coverage, should 
provide better access to Western journalists. 


At the same time, he advised the Chechens to rethink their media policy. 


"There is nothing the West can do about this war," Seifert said. "They should 
address the Russian audience, because only the Russian people can stop this 
war." 


******


#14
PRIMAKOV DENIES FAVORING MASSIVE REPRISAL IN RUSSIA


MOSCOW. Oct 27 (Interfax) - Former Russian prime minister Yevgeny
Primakov, at a joint session of the educational councils of the Moscow
Institute of Power Engineering and of the University of International
Ecology and Political Science, termed "rubbish" assertions that he is in
favor of massive political reprisals in Russia.
"We shall never launch any political reprisals against dissidents.
Nor can any massive reprisals be made in the economic sphere," Primakov
said.
He said, however, that "the most shameful violations of economic
law cannot be disregarded."
He said that economic amnesty would be possible on the condition
that "the resources illegally removed from the country be invested
solely in the Russian economy."
On the subject of foreign-policy problems, the former prime
minister said that the world tends to create a single-polar system and
that "NATO-centrism" is undermining the role of the United Nations."
Primakov also criticized the United States' activities as regards
the creation of anti-missile defense systems, which could kill the ABM
treaty.
He also opposes "the drawing of the Baltic states into NATO."
"There is a red line in NATO's enlargement, and that line runs along the
borders of the former Soviet republics," he said.
Commenting on why he has preferred the Gusinsky-Tarpishchev-
Yastrzhembsky group to the Berezovsky-Abramovich-Voloshin group, he said
that "these lists are far from complete." "My attitude to some of them
is normal and to others sharply negative. Believe me, I have every
reason to say this," he said.


******


#15
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 
From: Gideon Remez <remgin@mail.netvision.net.il>
Subject: Block That Pipeline!


Dear David,


As Isabella Ginor's sidekick, I feel like an old friend of yours. As
Foreign News Editor at Israel Radio, may I contribute the following to
your list?


Best regards, Gideon Remez


Block That Pipeline!
(Commentary prepared for Israel Radio, Wednesday night, October 27,
1999)
By Gideon Remez, Foreign News Editor


Sure, the young Armenian who with his brother and uncle (?) shot up the
Parliament in Yerevan might have had a personal grudge. Sure, as a
supporter of the nationalist Dashnak party he might have been sore at
its loss in the May election, fair or otherwise. Sure, like most
Armenians, he might have been fed up with economic misery -- he
reportedly shouted "enough of drinking the people's blood." But still,
I'm betting that like every other important development in post-Soviet
Armenia, this one too is connected with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict --
and with Russian petro-geo-politics. The timing of, and message sent by,
the attack are just too familiar and typical to be ignored.


The late, new Prime Minister Vazgen Sarkisian (previously, as longtime
Defense Minister, the hero of Armenia's victory in Karabakh) had come to
Parliament directly from a meeting with President Robert Kocharian
(former President of the Karabakh Armenians) opposite Under Secretary of
State Strobe Talbott, who had arrived from Baku on a shuttle-diplomacy
mission and went on to Ankara one hour before the shooting started. In
recent months the US has been trying very energetically to bring
Kocharian together with his Azeri counterpart, Haidar Aliev -- whose age
and poor health seem to be fast closing this "window of opportunity".
If, to the Israeli ear, that sounds like a paraphrase on Hafez Assad or
Yasser Arafat and their respective disputes with Israel, the similarity
doesn't stop here. Talbott has been pushing for at least the draft of an
Azeri-Armenian accord to be agreed in time for his pal, Bill Clinton, to
announce at the OSCE summit in Istanbul next month. At least in
Azerbaijan, the loser of the Karabakh war in terms of territory and
refugees, Talbott's latest stopover was followed by open predictions
that this goal was within reach (and resignations of hardliners who
didn't like it). For the Armenians, the US could offer financial aid
(though they would be well advised to note how the Senate shot down the
grants promised to Israel and the Palestinians for their Wye River
agreement) as well as the boon of a lifting of the Azeri energy boycott
and the Turkish economic blockade (which the Turks predicated on an
accomodation with their Azeri allies). Kocharian and Sarkisian, with
all their militant records on Karabakh, looked like bowing to political
and economic reality and accepting some kind of land-for-peace
concession -- which was enough for Armenian extremists to want them
dead.


For Clinton this was more than a matter of personal prestige and
strategic gain, the OSCE itself and Russia having failed to bring more
than an edgy cease-fire to the Armenian-Azeri front (well, Russia didn't
try too hard). But for the US, a more central consideration was that a
Karabakh settlement would permit oil and maybe gas pipelines to be laid
along the shortest route from the Caspian Sea to Turkey and points west,
bypassing for good the dependence on the Russian pipeline. For that very
reason Russia kept on arming Armenia (some more Mig-29's were sent only
last week) and destabilizing Azerbaijan and Georgia (the latter
containing another alternative oil route) to the extent of instigating
assassination attempts on their leaders by local opponents. An almost
identical scenario seems to have been played out in Yerevan today, or
were the Russians simply in uncharacteristically good luck? One way or
the other, any settlement has been back-burnered and any investor in any
project running through Armenia and/or Karabakh properly deterred.
Incidentally, on the very next day Russia was to resume construction of
the pipeline detour around Chechnya.


********


#16
The Times (UK)
October 27 1999
[for personal use only]
Top Russian beauties eclipse Monroe
FROM GILES WHITTELL IN MOSCOW


THE most beautiful woman this century, according to several hundred thousand 
Russians, is an actress who had passed her prime before Brezhnev came to 
power and is barely known outside the former Soviet Union. Elina 
Bystritskaya, well-preserved at 71, was the first choice of readers of 
Komsomolskaya Pravda when asked to name the 100 most beautiful women of the 
century. 


A classical actress who trod Moscow's boards in Soviet-approved plays during 
the age of Stalin, Ms Bystritskaya graced the front of a four-page pull-out 
section of the newspaper yesterday, leaving Audrey Hepburn, Raisa Gorbachev 
and Naomi Campbell trailing in her wake. The list's top ten includes 
Anastasia Vertinskaya, Alla Larionova and Lubov Orlova, all of them famous 
from Minsk to Khabarovsk. Marilyn Monroe and Brigitte Bardot came seventh and 
ninth respectively. Elizabeth Taylor was the highest-ranking Briton at No 25, 
followed by Samantha Fox, the former Page 3 girl, at No 53. Hepburn came 
56th, Campbell 57th and Joan Collins was 79th. 


Russia's readers showed catholic taste compared with their American 
counterparts, who routinely ignore the rest of the world in similar surveys. 


Hollywood actresses were everywhere, including Kim Basinger at No 11, Pamela 
Anderson at No 15 and Jodie Foster at No 30. 


Germany was represented by Claudia Schiffer (No 34) and France by Catherine 
Deneuve (No 31), as well as Bardot. 


"The most important thing for Russians when assessing beauty is to have 
classical, regular lines - big eyes, a straight nose, everything in 
proportion," Irina Mikhailovskaya, a beauty editor at Russian Vogue, said 
yesterday. "Our notion of beauty is subconsciously formed by the old Russian 
icons." 


If so, there are some heretics among Komsomolskaya Pravda's readers. At No 46 
on their list of the century's most beautiful women was a doyen of the Moscow 
disco scene - Boris Moiseyev, a man. 


Pin-ups of the Slavs 
This century's ten most beautiful women, according to the Russian poll are: 
1 Elina Bystritskaya
2 Irina Alferova 
3 Anastasia Vertinskaya 
4 Alla Larionova 
5 Lubov Orlova 
6 Ludmilla Khityaeva 
7 Marilyn Monroe 
8 Natalia Varley 
9 Brigitte Bardot 
10 Michel Merce 
******