February 4, 2000    
This Date's Issues: 4088 4089 4090

Johnson's Russia List
#4089
4 February 2000
davidjohnson@erols.com

[Note from David Johnson:
1. Reuters: No solution for Chechen conflict - Russian liberal.(Yavlinsky)
2. The Moscow Tribune: John Helmer, THE REAL DECEMBER SURPRISE.(re vote fraud issue)
3. Moscow Times: Robert Coalson, MEDIA WATCH: Journalism Is Hamstrung.
4. APN: Dobrodeev`s new mission. (New head of the All-Russian State Television and Radio Company)
5. Reuters: Russian security chief says no need to fear KGB.(Sergei Ivanov)
6. Reuters: Russian security boss says West poses no threat.
7. AP: Cohen: Moscow May Exploit Dispute.
8. US State Department: Tenet Says Russian Safeguarding of Nuclear Materials is a Concern.
9. Gazeta.ru: Suspended Prosecutor Promises to Reveal All.(Skuratov)
10. Itar-Tass: Forecasts of Dictatorship Due in Russia Groundless-Former PM. (Stepashin)
11. Reuters: RIA says woman held in Starovoitova murder case.
12. RIA Novosti: Pavel Podlesny, RUSSIAN-AMERICAN RELATIONS AS THEY STAND TODAY.
13. Izvestia: MONEY CAN'T BUY YOU LOVE. No. 1 Presidential Contender Has No Need of Oligarchs.
14. Reuters: Russian parliamentary chiefs plan for new session.
15. Christian Science Monitor: Daniel Schorr, Putin: Vote first, ask questions later.] 

********

#1
No solution for Chechen conflict - Russian liberal

MOSCOW, Feb 3 (Reuters) - The leader of Russia's liberal Yabloko party, 
Grigory Yavlinsky, said on Thursday the Chechen conflict had become a war 
against the Chechen people and Acting President Putin had no way out. 

``The conflict began as an antiterrorist operation, now it has turned into a 
war against the people,'' Yavlinsky told Reuters television. 

``It's a crime because thousands of people have been killed and this war has 
no future, no political solution,'' he said in English. 

``There's no signs whatsoever from the side of the Russian government and 
Acting President (Vladimir) Putin that he has any kind of a political 
solution for this conflict. The war is transforming to be a partisan war for 
many years. 

``So it is very dangerous, and a very big tragedy for Russia,'' he said. 

Russia's political elite has mainly supported the war since it began in 
October, although there have been signs that some politicians have become 
more sceptical as the fighting has dragged on. 

Yavlinsky is challenging Putin in a presidential election on March 26, 
although he has acknowledged he has little chance of winning against the 
hugely popular acting president. An opinion poll conducted by the VTsIOM 
organisation last week gave him four percent against Putin's 48 percent. 

Yavlinsky said that if elected his first goals would be to stop the war, and 
introduce transparent and clear rules for the market economy to stop the 
extremely high level of corruption. 

``I'm not sure that can be done by Mr Putin,'' Yavlinsky said, ``He is 
representative of the system which created all these problems in Russia.'' 

********

#2
Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2000 
From: helmer@glasnet.ru (John Helmer)
Subject: THE REAL DECEMBER SURPRISE

>From The Moscow Tribune, February 4, 2000
THE REAL DECEMBER SURPRISE
John Helmer

In Russian villages, they say that if you get turned away at the front door,
try knocking at the back with a rouble.

Is that what Prime Minister Vladimir Putin did last December, in order to 
win 23% of Russian votes for his government-sponsored Yedintsvo (Unity)
movement? Were votes secretly bought, stolen, or dumped to procure
this near-victory, along with the setback or defeat of the Communist
Party, of Otechestvo-Vsya Rossiya (Fatherland-All Russia), and of Yabloko,
all of whom did worse than they had been expecting, and worse than
opinion polls, a month before the December 19 ballot, had forecast?

According to a report circulating in Washington, published this week
by Johnson's Russia List, the real December surprise was the size and scope
of vote fraud. This, suggests the reported comparison between the official
vote tallies and the actual ones, was big enough to switch about 20%
of the votes cast in the proportional race. The claim is that this
cut the Communist Party's total from 33% to 24%; raised Yedintsvo from 14% 
(actual) to 23% (official); and dropped Otechestvo from 21% to 12%.
The charge is also that fraud enabled the Soyuz Pravikh Sil (Union of
Right Forces) to beat the 5% threshold for seating in the Duma, 
and give it 9% instead of 3.4%, while decimating Yabloko's support
from 12% to just 6%. Vladimir Zhirinovsky's party also benefitted by
the same means, jumping from under 5% to 6%.

The claim is substantiated by no evidence. But it offers a picture of
the Russian electorate's preferences that was reported by opinion
pollsters and regional observers a month before the election. Since
there is plenty of evidence of ballot-box stuffing and other tally-rigging
in many regions, the suspicion is reinforced that on December 19 the 
Kremlin and its regional allies were able to pull off a nationwide switcheroo.

The methods are well-known from the last Duma election in 1995. At that time,
Dmitri Rogozin, who headed the Congress of Russian Communities (KRO), and
successfully backed General Alexander Lebed, claimed his organization
had been cheated at the 5% barrier. The official tally registered for KRO in
1995 was 4.3%, too little for representation. The actual vote total, 
according to Rogozin, was 6.2%.

To substantiate the fraud, Rogozin presented me with a souvenir ballot
cast for KRO at voting station no. 823 in the Dagestan Republic. It was
never counted. Instead, it wound up in a sack, with sixteen other sacks, on a 
truck that was intercepted by KRO supporters, before it dumped and buried
its cargo.

Rogozin's KRO ran again last December, even more unsuccessfully, but he 
himself won re-election. Rogozin has risen to become the new chairman of the 
Duma Committee on International Affairs. But this time Rogozin says
the election outcome wasn't achieved by bagging votes.

Rogozin, one of the coolest political strategists in Russian politics,
says he saw the end coming for the Fatherland movement in June, six months

before election day. That was when he took KRO out of the alliance with
Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov, ex-Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, and
Tatarstan president Mintimer Shaimiev. According to Rogozin, they were
an alliance of convenience driven by Luzhkov's and Shaimiev's ambitions, and
Primakov's desire for revenge.

Whether that's true or not, by the time of election day, it is clear a great
many of the regional supporters of the Fatherland-All Russia movement 
deserted, freeing their local vote machines to go into gear for Prime
Minister Putin. The outcome, suggests Rogozin, was roughly what Luzhkov
would have achieved if he had run alone, without the others. 

That also suggests that the methods that are now disparaged as having
switched votes to Unity are the same as Fatherland-All Russia had been
relying on, only to fail. Incidentally, if Luzhkov ended up pretty much
where he started, the outcome cannot be claimed as an achievement of
the propaganda war waged against him by Boris Berezovsky's television
channels and newspapers. 

Not fraud, nor disinformation, but weakness -- especially the weakness
of Primakov -- explains the collapse of Fatherland. And compared
to him, Putin was a contrast in strength and will to win.

Political campaign technicians have acknowledged that vote fraud
in the three Duma elections held so far, and the 1996 presidential
election, can add up to 10% of the total votes cast. However, what was
obvious in the earlier contests is just as evident last December.
Fraud at the regional and local level, in cities and in rural areas,
doesn't produce a single 10% thrust in one direction. Instead,
the fraud in favour of the Communist Party in some areas
matches the pro-government vote-rigging in others. Call this a democracy
of fraud.

Senior Communist Party officials would be the first to accuse the
Kremlin of stealing 9% of their vote on December 19, if they genuinely
thought it had happened. Instead, they say there were violations in
Dagestan, Bashkiria, Samara, Saratov, Bashkortostan, and Moscow.
The Communists don't claim Unity was the manipulator and the beneficiary. 
Among other things, they allege that SPS benefitted in Samara, and Luzhkov 
benefitted in Bashkortostan and Moscow. 

The Communist Party is taking some of these claims to the local courts.
The reason for that is not because the party's campaigners believe the
outcome will change. Rather, they want to punish as many election
operatives as they can, to deter them from repeating themselves in
the coming presidential poll when Gennady Zyuganov will run against Putin. 
There is no Communist Party charge that in December the percentages of the 
parties that won more than 5% of the vote are fraudulent.

Yabloko, the most self-righteous of Russia's political movements, is also
not claiming the votes it lost were stolen. It is silent, because there
was no crime; and also because Yabloko doesn't know how to win them
back again.

*******

#3
Moscow Times
February 4, 2000 
MEDIA WATCH: Journalism Is Hamstrung 
By Robert Coalson 

In the heady days of perestroika and the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia 
was swept by a wave of hope and enthusiasm for its newly born independent 
press. In 1990, the independent newspaper Kommersant, for example, was 
launched with great expectations and fanfare. In 1993, the independent 
television channel NTV began broadcasting, just in time to win international 
distinction for its tenacious coverage of the last war in Chechnya. 

When NTV was created, journalist Oleg Dobrodeyev was enchanted by the 
possibilities offered by independent broadcasting. During the late Soviet 
period, he had earned a reputation as an innovator within the confines of 
Russian state television, especially as the guiding spirit behind the "Vesti" 
news program. Nonetheless, he jumped at the chance to become general director 
of NTV, citing the vast creative opportunities that the new company opened 
up. 

His tenure at NTV came to a sudden end Jan. 21, reportedly over his concerns 
that journalistic standards at the station had fallen dramatically during the 
Duma campaign and the fighting in Chechnya. Apparently these events led to 
irreconcilable differences with NTV owner Vladimir Gusinsky, and Dobrodeyev 
was applauded for making what appeared to be a principled withdrawal. 

It is a depressing sign of the times, then, that Dobrodeyev has now returned 
to the fold of Russian State Television, becoming general director of the 
vast, state-controlled television and radio conglomerate. Obviously, 
Dobrodeyev feels that in post-Yeltsin Russia, the creative and financial 
possibilities of state-controlled media are more attractive than the 
possibilities presented by NTV. 

Still more depressing was the announcement on Jan. 13 that Raf Shakirov, who 
from 1996 to 1999 was the distinguished editor of Kommersant, had also joined 
Russian State Television, becoming general director of the Vesti news 
company. Shakirov was fired from Kommersant in August after the paper was 
bought up by Boris Berezovsky. 

More and more, one gets the feeling that even Russia's most respected 
journalists are throwing in the towel, admitting that "if you can't beat 'em, 
join 'em." In the cases of both Shakirov and Dobrodeyev, their surrender to 
state control severely tarnishes the reputation they gained by their 
seemingly principled resistance to the media oligarchs. 

However, these cases are just the latest examples of a very disturbing 
pattern. I have long marveled at how effortlessly and almost naturally 
Russian journalists move from private media to state media or even into 
government office. 

Other cases come to mind. Perhaps the saddest is that of Alexander Nevzorov, 
hero-journalist of perestroika, who became an odious nationalist Duma deputy 
and media "adviser" to St. Petersburg Governor Vladimir Yakovlev. Now, it 
seems, Nevzorov will be returning to "journalism" with his own program on 
Kremlin-controlled ORT - although its debut has been postponed pending his 
State Duma runoff bid in a Petersburg district. And Mikhail Komissar, founder 
of the independent Interfax news agency, was named deputy head of the Yeltsin 
administration in August 1997. Sacked in December 1998, Komissar effortlessly 
returned to Interfax and business as usual. 

The same phenomenon is often observed on the local level. In the wake of the 
August 1998 crisis, one of Russia's most professional regional newspapers, 
Rossiiskaya Azia, closed down and its talented editor, Irina Levit, almost 
overnight became the head of the municipal press office in Novosibirsk. Also 
in Novosibirsk, the weekly Molodost Sibiri was sorely hit during the last 
mayoral elections there: Its deputy editor was lured away into the mayor's 
press office and started producing a heavily subsidized, free-distribution 
newspaper in direct competition with Molodost Sibiri. 

In short, it would be an understatement to say there is a "revolving door" 
between the nominally non-state press in Russia and the state. This dangerous 
threat to professional journalism here is, in my opinion, one of the 
strongest arguments against those who claim that a state-subsidized and 
non-state press can coexist peacefully here if only the proper legislative 
framework can be created. 

This is nonsense. Independent journalism can never gain a foothold here as 
long as its prestige continues to be undermined by such defections. We are 
still a long way off from the time when most journalists have the 
self-respect and professionalism to laugh when offered a position in some 
politician's press office. 

Robert Coalson is a program director for the National Press Institute. The 
views expressed here are not necessarily those of NPI. 

********

#4
APN
3 February, 2000, 19:35
Dobrodeev`s new mission
APN preface: 
Yesterday, February 2, new head of the All-Russian State Television and 
Radio Company, former NTV television channel director Oleg Dobrodeev was 
presented to the staff. As it was widely announced Dobrodeev had differencies 
in opinion with NTV owner Vladimir Gusinsky regarding coverage of the war in 
Chechnya.

According to APN, Putin in his conversation with Dobrodeev offered him to 
create a new image of the Russian power: «energetic, active, tough.» 
Dobrodeev seemed to be interested in the proposal. Former editor-in-chief of 
«Kommersant Daily» Raf Shakirov will probably become his closest
assistant in 
this task.

APN asked well-known Russian political analysts Iosif DISKIN, Sergei 
KURGINYAN, Andranik MIGRANYAN and Valery KHOMYAKOV to give their comments on 
this Kremlin maneuver.

Putin gets out of «family»`s hand

Iosif DISKIN, doctor of economy, professor, political analyst: Putin forms 
his own informational team, he tries to get out of his predecessor’s 
«family»`s and Voloshin`s control avoiding direct conflict with them. 
Therefore no wonder he begins with RTR channel but not with ORT channel.

I think this plan has been invented not only for election but, mainly, for 
post-election period. Dobrodeev must create Putin`s «civil image»
acceptable 
to the West.

Former opponent becomes a reliable ally

Sergei KURGINYAN, Experimental Creative Center fund president: This 
appointment is very logical. Making Dobrodeev a member of his «team» Putin 
was guided by a classical principle to accept those who are pushed away by 
your foes. It is beleived that in this case these persons` loyalty is 
guaranteed. Shvydkoy was not a symbol of any trend, he was a sum of trends. 
Dobrodeev is a more resolute individual, moreover, he is a high-class 
professional. I hope he cleverly observes interests of the State.

Certainly some of analysts may suggest that Dobrodeev has been introduced by 
the opposite camp. If it's true or not, his future actions will show. As for 
me, I have always considered Dobrodeev a decent person with ideological and 
moral core, that`s why I think it is not an intrusion.

Love alliance but not marriage of convenience

Andranik MIGRANYAN, professor, Reforma fund vice president: That is of great 
benefit for the state channel and for acting power as a whole. Dobrodeev 
enjoys profound respect in the professional community and, as is well-known, 
he had ideological differencies in opinion with Gusinsky. Therefore, it is a 
love alliance but not marriage of convenience between them.

Nevertheless a question is emerging to what extent RTR which is ideologically 
engaged by such persons as Chubais and Gaydar can be changed, even under the 
current circumstances. It is possible that transformation will take place 
within Chubais' new liberal-sovereign paradigm.

Stupid performers discredited themselves

Valery KHOMYAKOV, director of Agency of Applied and Regional Politics: Putin 
tries to change informational politics. He seems to understand that before 
the elections his good name may be hurt by stupid performers. Putin appearing 
everyday on the ORT and RTR screens present a sequel which people can easily 
get tired of. Oleg Dobrodeev is one of the best Russian specialists in the 
information media. I think he will be able to work out a well-thought-of 
informational and political strategy for RTR.

I am afraid of only one thing: the best NTV professionals leaving NTV 
following Dobrodeev.

*******

#5
Russian security chief says no need to fear KGB
By Martin Nesirky

MOSCOW, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Russia and the outside world need have nothing to 
fear from Soviet-era KGB agents such as Acting President Vladimir Putin, 
according to the secretary of the influential Security Council. 

Sergei Ivanov, who spent 20 years in intelligence himself and reads 
English-language spy novels, told the newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda in an 
interview published on Thursday there would be changes to the security 
services but no major shake-up. 

``Now increasingly the idea is being spread, here and in the West, that the 
Chekists are coming to power,'' he said, using the traditional term for those 
in the intelligence services. ``Supposedly this is an obvious threat to 
democracy.'' 

Ivanov, who worked as a spy in Europe and Africa, said those who harboured 
such fears should remember the KGB had employed only the best people. 

``It was done in an extremely demanding and strict way,'' he said. ``They 
only took the cream.'' 

Putin worked as an agent in East Germany in the 1980s and later headed FSB 
domestic intelligence, one of the KGB's successor agencies. He took over in 
the Kremlin from Boris Yeltsin on New Year's Eve and is clear favourite to 
win the March 26 presidential election. 

Ivanov studied in St Petersburg at the same time as Putin and they have known 
each other for years. In his interview, Ivanov declined to say where 
precisely he had served abroad although he denied reports he had been posted 
in Sweden. He speaks English and Swedish. 

Ivanov said there were many questions concerning the effectiveness of the 
security services but denied there would be any dramatic shake-up to recreate 
a monster KGB. There have been consistent reports Putin plans to beef up the 
intelligence agencies and possibly merge some. 

``So there will be no more speculation on this subject, I want to state 
clearly: we have not planned and nor do we plan any kind of mergers, 
enlargements or link-ups,'' he said. ``It's all complete gibberish.'' 

He said this did not mean the security services did not need to look at the 
way they work and change some things. He did not elaborate, although he said 
information policy was one area that needed closer inspection. 

Ivanov declined to give details about where his two sons study and where his 
wife works but lowered his guard slightly to explain why he likes reading the 
spy books of Frederick Forsyth. 

``On the one hand you laugh at the naivete. But on the other hand it is 
interesting to see how the story develops,'' he said. ``There are no factual 
errors, and that's good.'' 

********

#6
Russian security boss says West poses no threat

MOSCOW, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Western sanctions against Russia over Moscow's 
military campaign in the breakaway Chechnya region have little effect on the 
vast country, the secretary of the influential Security Council said on 
Thursday. 

Sergei Ivanov told the Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper in an interview that 
mild sanctions adopted by the European Union were a sign that the West did 
not want to punish Moscow over the four-month offensive. 

``Almost all the money given to Russia through the (EU's) Tacis programme 
goes to pay for Western officials' trips to our country,'' Ivanov, who spent 
20 years in intelligence, said. 

``So fewer of those bureaucrats come to us. Is that really a huge problem?'' 

The EU has repeatedly condemned Russia's military campaign against separatist 
rebels in Chechnya but has adopted only mild sanctions, saying it will shift 
some funds marked for technical assistance to humanitarian aid. 

Russia has said it would retaliate to the EU sanctions but has also assured 
the 15-nation Union that it wants to develop ties. 

Ivanov said he believed it unlikely that the West would take tougher steps 
against Moscow over the Chechen campaign, which has been criticised over the 
use of indiscriminate force and the plight of thousands of civilians. 

``Serious attempts to pinch Russia, I believe, are not in the West's 
interests,'' Ivanov said. ``No one wants to lose the Russian market because 
it is a promising one. And the Europeans and the Americans know that very 
well.'' 

*******

#7
Cohen: Moscow May Exploit Dispute
February 3, 2000
By ROBERT BURNS

MUNICH, Germany (AP) - Defense Secretary William Cohen predicted Thursday 
that Russia and China would try to exploit differences between the United 
States and its European allies on the contentious issue of missile defense. 

Both Russia and China are strongly opposed to U.S. efforts to develop a 
network of radars and missile interceptors that could defend all 50 states 
against a limited attack by ballistic missiles. Many European governments are 
lukewarm to the project, and some suggest it could weaken U.S. ties to 
Europe. 

In an interview en route to Munich from Washington, Cohen acknowledged the 
NATO allies' misgivings. He said some fear the project could lead to a 
dismantling of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. He predicted Russia 
and China will use that issue to drive a wedge between Washington and its 
allies. 

``I would anticipate that the Russians and Chinese will try to dissuade our 
European allies from endorsing or embracing the project, to try to find 
weaknesses and differences of opinion and try to exploit those,'' Cohen said. 

Cohen said he nonetheless remained hopeful of winning Russian agreement to 
amend the ABM treaty to permit deployment of a national missile defense. If 
the Russians did not agree to such changes, the Clinton administration will 
be faced with the choice of withdrawing from the Cold War-era treaty. 

President Clinton is scheduled to decide this summer whether to commit the 
United States to deploying a missile defense. The earliest it could be 
operating would be 2005. 

Cohen, accompanied by his wife, Janet, was in Munich to attend a weekend 
conference on European security. Among the expected topics of discussion 
among government officials and private security experts is the U.S. missile 
defense plan, as well as lessons learned from NATO's war over Kosovo. 

Cohen was scheduled to deliver a speech to the Munich conference on Saturday 
and hold separate meetings with his Italian and German counterparts. He said 
he intended to raise with the Europeans the problem of a time and money lag 
in building up police and other civilian institutions in Kosovo. The slow 
pace of civilian reconstruction is putting an undue strain on the U.S. 
peacekeeping troops there, he said. 

``The message is coming in very loud and clear from the (U.S. Congress) that 
European members must make their contributions'' as originally promised, 
Cohen said. ``Otherwise we're going to have a successful military campaign 
and then have the mission ultimately fail for lack of civilian 
implementation.'' 

********

#8
US State Department
03 February 2000 
Tenet Says Russian Safeguarding of Nuclear Materials is a Concern 
(CIA Director also concerned about Russia-Iran ties) (670)
By Susan Ellis
USIA Staff Writer

Washington -- Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Director George Tenet
says the United States will be concerned about the security of Russian
nuclear weapons and associated materials, regardless of the political
path Russia chooses.

Tenet made his remarks during a February 3 Senate Armed Services
Committee hearing on Threats to U.S. National Security. The committee
also heard testimony by Rear Admiral Thomas Wilson, director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency.

While there is "no evidence to suggest there's ever been a diversion
of a weapon...it's fissile material that I'm more worried about,"
Tenet said during questioning by committee chairman Senator John
Warner, Republican of Virginia. "It's the brain drain that I'm more
worried about, and where people (scientists) who no longer have the
wherewithal to be supported may end up," he added.

Tenet said he is also concerned about "Russian proliferation
activities with regard to countries like Iran." He said Russia's
strategic relationship with Iran goes "beyond a relationship based on
weapons or money, that allows the Russians some leverage in that part
of the world."

Iran's development of the Shahab-3 medium-range ballistic missile,
"and the development of longer-range missiles that have been the
product of extensive Russian assistance" is a concern, he said, adding
"Iran's emergence as a secondary supplier of this technology to other
countries is the trend that worries me the most."

Wilson concurred with Tenet saying that the "safeguarding of nuclear
material and weapons" in Russia is of prime concern. He said that
while Russia is committed to safeguarding such materials, "the
organizations that do that mission are stressed by the same economic
shortfalls and readiness shortfalls as (are) the rest of the armed
forces (in Russia). And while we don't have evidence of loss of
control, until the environment improves, it will be a great continuing
concern."

Senator Ted Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, called the hearing
"enormously important...in preparation for the consideration of the
defense authorization." The Clinton administration's new defense
budget request will be presented to Congress on February 8.

He said the American people must hear "about how the nature of the
threat has altered....I think we have to deal with that changed
threat."

Asked by Kennedy whether a "policy of Mutually Assured Destruction
(MAD)" which provided deterrence for some 40 years, still makes sense
with countries like Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, Tenet responded:
"When you talk about someone like Kim Chong-il in North Korea, I don't
think anyone could tell you what his precise deterrence calculus is."

North Korea's domestic situation, he continued, demonstrates that that
country's leader "views these weapons not just as a military
application, but at the heart of his economic foundation."

Tenet said in his view the United States has "to determine how
forward-deployed we want to be with our diplomats and with our
military, with our intelligence community...and then take these tools
and apply them in a way that maximizes our leverage."

He said he could "make a case for more intelligence dollars" and for
"paying careful attention to the infrastructure of the State
Department," whose facilities and resources have "been decimated
around the world. The flagship of what the United States is is in
embassy and political reporting, and it's the first node of
information that we have."

Tenet stressed that decisions must be made about "how you sustain a
long-term investment in all of these disciplines to maximize the
influence of the United States." The debate is needed, he added,
because many people "have assumed that at the end of the Cold War,
everything is fine, the world is safe, our prosperity saves us. And if
I have learned anything around the terrorist millennium threat, this
country is at greater risk today that it (has) ever been."

********

#9
From: "Kirill Bessonov" <bessonov@gazeta.ru>
Subject: Suspended Prosecutor Promises to Reveal All
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 
Organization: Gazeta.Ru

Dear David,
Please find enclosed an article we`ve published in our edition on Thursday.
I think it may be interesting to your readers since it contains Skuratov`s
own words in an exclusive statement to Gazeta.ru.
Best regards,
Kirill Bessonov

Suspended Prosecutor Promises to Reveal All

The suspended Russian Prosecutor-General and presidential candidate Yuri
Skuratov has promised to tell the Russian electorate the whole truth about
the other candidates. Skuratov explains his decision to Gazeta.Ru.

"There is practically no chance of my case (concerning the suits he had sown
by the Kremlin tailor and for which he allegedly did not pay- Gazeta.Ru)
being heard in court. There is no evidence that would stand up in court.
Furthermore, the investigators realize that a deliberately false accusation
and trial would inevitably be punished. They too could consequently be
brought to trial for breaking the law.

Nevertheless, the case was "revived". This means that the Kremlin was
applying heavy pressure. Maybe Putin was personally involved. I am not
totally sure of this, but I am going to find out.

Next. It is senseless to look for a connection between the developments in
the Borodin case and my own (Borodin is alleged to have embezzled budget
funds. The Swiss authorities want to question him on the matter -
Gazeta.Ru). I know of such attempts, but I tend to think that the Swiss
really do have something on Borodin, while the revival of my own so-called
case is easily explained: it is the reaction to my criticizing Putin in an
interview I gave to Radio Liberty. Practically the very next day changes
were made to the investigation team: its head, the Senior Investigator for
Priority Cases Parshikov, who was wanted to close the case due to lack of
evidence, has been dismissed and replaced by the deputy head of the
Department of Priority Cases, Pimenov. The latter is new to the Prosecutor's
Office and was formerly a military prosecutor. And all this is taking place
right on the eve of a hearing to decided whether the investigation can be
prolonged or not. (Friday, February 4th - Gazeta. Ru).

I don't see any real threat for myself here, but they could kick up quite a
fuss. I reaffirm that at present there is no fight against corruption. Yes,
Putin announced that there would be, but time goes on and he is simply not
doing anything. Why? Unlike him, Primakov, started at once and everyone felt
it. The present situation is puzzling to say the least.

As to the evidence about which we've heard (against Voloshin, Abramovich,
Mamut and Mabetex), it does exist. I don't want to reveal all of the
evidence I have now, but I can say one thing for sure. As I am going into
politics, I will insist that the Prosecutor's Office must deal with both
existing cases (for example, legal action was taken against Abramovich, but
then stopped; why?), as well as open new cases on the basis of existing
evidence. I don't think that given the present situation publications in the
press are a futile thing, although their effect is minimal because the
Prosecutor's Office does not react.

Berezovki's case, which is being investigated by Volkov, has all the chances
to reach court. I see series of factors that indicate this.

First of all, Volkov himself is a decent man and a good investigator. The
decision to stop the investigation was taken under heavy pressure. Secondly,
there is public support and, particularly important, there is support from
the Swiss. Thirdly, there is a certain cooling of relations going on between
Putin and Berezovski, connected with Putin's attempts to distance himself
from Berezovski. The case could be opened after the elections. And the main
thing: there is very sound evidence in the case, which cannot be brushed
aside. My promise to tell the voters the truth about all the candidates is
not just an election publicity stunt. I will do this. The People must know
for whom they are voting. I have information that I collected during my work
in the Prosecutor's Office that can't be just knocked out of my head. I will
reveal to the public what I know and my conclusions from the information I
have access to.

********

#10
Forecasts of Dictatorship Due in Russia Groundless-Former Pm.

ST.PETERSBURG, February 3 (Itar-Tass) -- Former Russian Prime Minister Sergei 
Stepashin on Thursday told here reporters that he believed groundless all the 
forecasts of a dictatorship due in Russia. Stepashin pointed out that there 
were "neither constitutional, nor any other grounds" for it. 

According to Stepashin, it was a serious mistake to attempt linking a 
possibility of reforms' termination to the name of Russia's Acting President. 
"There is no ground to be afraid of economic reforms being reverted," he 
said. Stepashin reminded that they had threatened Russia with a dictatorship 
since 1991, but the threat had not come true. According to the ex-premier, 
there was no threat to freedom of speech and press either. "It is one of the 
main achievements over the past 10 years," he emphasized. Stepashin admitted 
that "there are many in the country, who are tired of lack of discipline, and 
negligence, but order and dictatorship are absolutely different things," he 
emphasized. 

*******

#11
RIA says woman held in Starovoitova murder case

MOSCOW, Feb 3 (Reuters) - RIA news agency quoted police sources in Russia's 
second city St Peterburg as saying on Thursday that a woman was being held in 
connection with the murder of prominent parliamentarian Galina Starovoitova. 

Starovoitova, a human rights advocate and member of parliament since Soviet 
times, was gunned down outside her flat in St Petersburg in November last 
year. 

RIA said the police had searched the woman's flat and uncovered traces of 
gunpowder, similar to that found at the crime scene. It gave no other 
details. 

Starovoitova's murder sparked an outpouring of grief rarely seen in the 
post-Soviet era and Russia's leaders led vast crowds at her funeral. 

Other politicians have suggested the murder was linked to Starovoitova's 
political opponents, dismissing suggestions that she may have been involved 
in commercial activities and her murder could be linked to rivalry in that 
sphere. 

St Petersburg, Russia's imperial capital, has acquired a reputation for 
violent crime related to business and politics. 

*******

#12
RIA Novosti - Moscow Diary, February 2
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
RUSSIAN-AMERICAN RELATIONS AS THEY STAND TODAY
By Pavel PODLESNY, 
head of foreign political research department, 
US and Canada Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences 

Despite a cooling in Russian-American relations after
NATO's military action in the Balkans the political dialogue
between the two countries has continued and has good future
prospects. And this is the main positive result of a three-day
visit to Moscow by US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.
The visit took place amidst the West's anti-Russian
campaign over a military operation against terrorists launched
by federal authorities in Chechnya (a North Caucasian republic
within the Russian Federation). 
And the Chechen theme became, of course, one of the main
ones in the conversations between Albright and Russia's Acting
President Vladimir Putin and Russia's Foreign Minister IgorIvanov.
The US tough stance on the Chechen issue is due, of course,
not to American concern over casualties among the civilian
population (greatly exaggerated by Western mass media), but to
Washington's geopolitical interests and domestic politicalmotives. 
As for geopolitics, here everything is clear -- the US is
interested in weakening Russia's positions in the Caucasus and
wants to assume control over this strategically importantregion. 
The domestic political motivation consists of the fact that
as US presidential elections draw nearer, the Clinton
administration is being subject to increasing criticism on the
part of its opponents for being excessively "soft" on Russia. 
In reply to this criticism Washington is trying to show its
muscles by "pressuring" Moscow, although it probably realises
that it has nothing to "pressure" it with. 
It is true Russia does not get IMF credits, yet gets along
without them, while an attempt to strip it of Council of Europe
and PACE membership failed. 
To argue sanctions against the Russian Federation is very
difficult, for the conflict in Chechnya is its internal matter
and this is accepted by everybody. Just as the fact that Russia
is fighting in Chechnya with international terrorism, and so its
actions serve the interests of the entire world community. 
As for any new "evidence" of Moscow's guilt, Albright
failed to produce any during her visit, nor could she.
A lot of attention at the talks was also paid to reduction
of strategic offensive weapons. Both Ivanov and Albright agreed
that "the sooner the START-2 Treaty is ratified, the sooner
Russia and the US are able to go over to a more detailed and
in-depth discussion of START-3 Treaty." This can be seen, of
course, as a dig at the State Duma lower house of parliament,
which still has not ratified START-2 on the reduction of
strategic offensive arms, signed by the Russian and the US
presidents in 1993 and ratified by the American Senate a yearlater.
It appears the recently elected third Duma will be able
after all to adopt this major document. And if deputies have
remarks to it, the treaty may be ratified as a whole, but with
the proviso that it comes into effect after disputable issuesare agreed. 
With the START-2 ratification completed, it will be
necessary of course to get down to drawing up a START-3 treaty,
which is meant to reduce strategic arms ceilings to 2,500warheads. 
That this is possible is indicated by Albright, who
expressed confidence that "Russia and the US will somehow or
other be able to reach a ceiling of 2,000-2,500 warheads".
Whereas with respect to the need to ratify START-2 and draw
up a START-3 the sides have shown complete mutual understanding,
there are serious differences on the Anti-Ballistic Missile
(ABM) Treaty of 1972. 
The US has long been willing to review this agreement,
which, according to Vladimir Putin, is a "system-forming
document of strategic stability." 
Washington's intention is already this summer to decide the
question of deploying a national anti-missile defence system
banned by the ABM Treaty. 
And although Russia takes a negative view of these US
plans, compromises will still have to be sought. The nuclear
arsenals situation in the world is changing and it is clear that
the negotiating process between Russia and the US on a strategic
stability system must be continued and some earlier agreements
may be reviewed, but not to Washington's advantage.
The fact that instead of a planned 40 minutes the meeting
between Putin and Albright lasted more than three hours points
to the urgency of the problems discussed and to the sides'
desire to find ways of solving them.
The Russian leadership received with satisfaction the words
by the US Secretary of State that America is interested in
creating and maintaining positive trends in the Russian economy.
But it is necessary that this declared interest should be
backed with concrete deeds, by investments. So far there are
none, and Russia is effectively coping with its economicdifficulties alone.
It appears that after presidential elections Moscow and
Washington will step up the negotiating process and will be less
constrained and, without looking at their opponents over their
shoulders, will begin to take those decisions in bilateral
relations that have been dictated by the interests of bothstates. 
And these decisions will determine the way the dialogue
between Russia and the US proceeds in the 21st century. 

*******

#13
Izvestia
February 3, 2000
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
MONEY CAN'T BUY YOU LOVE
No. 1 Presidential Contender Has No Need of Oligarchs
By Svetlana BABAYEVA, Andrei KOLESNIKOV, Alexander SADCHIKOV

A highly conspicuous hint was dropped in the Kremlin the
other day: when asked about oligarchs, a ranking administration
official said: "You are operating in outdated categories--
oligarchs in the 'old' sense of the word, ceased to exist a year
ago."
The relations between the big businesses and the powers that
be that were built in the early 1990s and have been most
beneficial for both parties, are crumbling. What the vacuum will 
be filled with is a big question. 
There may emerge a mighty institute of legislators, like in
the USA, a 'wise party' like in China, or huge ministries like in
Japan. There may appear a bureaucratic machinery 'eternally
pondering problems' Primakov-style, or an all-embracing control
on the part of the secret services. 
The rules of the game are yet to be devised by the next
president and his future entourage.
The talk in expectation of the Duma elections was as
follows: they, i.e. the powers that be, will wait for the outcome
of the Duma elections and then try and 'line up' the big business
the way Putin sees fit. 
But the big business has proved to be wiser: it 'lined up'
on its own even before the elections, having decided that it
would fare better if it did so on its own, rather than under the
pressure from the administration.
Business people acknowledge that the system of interaction
between the big business and the supreme authority has been built
in such a way that Putin owes nothing, or practically nothing, to
anybody. 
Of course, many of them would love to give him money and
render political and technological services to him--in exchange
for post-election loyalty. But the problem is that the acting
president does not want to be indebted to anybody.
Apart from the purely 'technical' nuisances that all sorts
of debts entail, one's dependence on somebody spoils one's image.
Anybody--from Gazprom boss Rem Vyakhirev to Anatoly Chubais
to Moscow mayor Yuri Luzhkov--is free to state support for Putin.
But Putin reserves the right to distance himself from all of
them: the latest public hint at RAO EES leadership's poor
performance provides a graphic example.
On the whole, the big business is now ever ready to
facilitate the process of Putin making it to the presidency.
For this reason, there is no oligarchy in Russia these days.
Rather, there is a monopsony: there are several competing sellers
but only one buyer. 
The situation before the 1996 election was the opposite:
Russian oligarchs had been poring favours on all aspirants for
the presidency. The argument had been that it was better to get
insurance even before the first round, than lose everything
afterwards. Oligarchs had proved to be the winners.
The situation has changed today. They say that oligarchs
have not employed the traditional ruse of not 'placing all eggs
in one basket' this time around. What has followed is a battle of
titans. The struggle is for the opportunity to be visible in the
cause of Putin's election in some way. But it is true that making
it to the list of sponsors does not mean becoming the official
benefactor of the potential 'family'. 
And the 'sellers' are not what they used to be: as a rule,
they are people not backed by financial and industrial empires
the type of Aeroflot, Rosprom or Gazprom. They have indirect
connections to big (and very big) businesses. They are political
scientists, masters of virtual technologies, former business
people and simply bureaucrats. 
But they are the ones who have placed all cards--personnel,
financial and business--on the table for Putin to see. It's your
choice, Vladimir Vladimirovich: the sellers are ready. This is
why saying that Putin's personnel reserves are limited is not
quite correct. The number of 'backups' is vast: the whole nation
is prepared to help Putin make it to the supreme executive
office. 
But thus far, Putin has had no need of a helping hand,
certain natural decline of his rating notwithstanding. His
standing is stable enough to enable him to refuse to accept
financial infusions into his image and election campaign, an
election staff working around the clock or somebody's short-term
assistance in the political propaganda campaign. 
On the other hand, fast and mighty mobilisation of financial
and technological resources may have to be effected 'on the go'
in between two rounds of voting--if Putin does not secure a
landslide victory in Round One. 
The acting president's election campaign is now streamlined
to perform in this regime--just in case.

********

#14
Russian parliamentary chiefs plan for new session

MOSCOW, Feb 3 (Reuters) - Russian parliamentary leaders met on Thursday to 
discuss legislative plans for the new session following December's election 
of a new State Duma (lower house). 

Party leaders from the Duma and lawmakers from the upper house Federation 
Council touched on the contentious issue of constitutional reform but made no 
concrete commitments. 

Communist leader Gennady Zyuganov, whose party remains the largest in the new 
chamber, said he would push for laws to modify the sweeping powers of the 
Russian presidency and bolster the position of parliament and the government. 

``We agreed to...examine the question of amending the constitution to allow 
the normal functioning of the government,'' he said in televised remarks, 
referring to the president's current power to sack cabinets without requiring 
parliamentary approval. 

Amendments to the constitution would require the backing of the head of state 
as well as both houses of parliament. 

Acting President Vladimir Putin, tipped to win a March 26 presidential 
election, has made clear he has no plans to change the present constitution, 
introduced by his patron Boris Yeltsin after the suppression of a leftist 
parliamentary revolt in 1993. 

Putin took the helm after Yeltsin's surprise resignation on New Year's Eve. 

Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the liberal Yabloko faction in the Duma, called 
for an examination of the legal basis for military action in breakaway 
Chechnya but said he had won no support from his colleagues for the proposal. 

Yavlinsky is one of the few senior Russian politicians to publicly criticise 
the campaign and to call for peace talks. 

Sergei Kiriyenko, leader of the reformist Union of Right-Wing Forces bloc, 
vowed to press for adoption of a bill to allow the free sale and purchase of 
agricultural land in Russia. 

He also said his bloc would press for changes in the law protecting 
parliamentarians from criminal prosecution. 

The start of the new Duma has been overshadowed by an angry row over control 
of key committees and the choice of speaker. 

The parties of Kiriyenko, Yavlinsky and former prime minister Yevgeny 
Primakov briefly boycotted the chamber's sessions in protest at a deal 
splitting control of the Duma between its two biggest factions, the 
Communists and the pro-Kremlin Unity faction. 

But the three parties finally backed down and are due to join the Duma's next 
plenary session next week. 

********

#15
Christian Science Monitor
4 February 2000
Putin: Vote first, ask questions later
By DANIEL SCHORR

Russia's Acting President Vladimir Putin, seeking election on March 26 to a 
full four-year term, has what must be the strangest campaign slogan of the 
year. As reported by his press spokesman, it is: "Follow me. We will sort 
things out later." 

And the funny thing is that the Russians - by a majority of more than 60 
percent - seem willing to follow him, with little idea of what he plans to 
do, if, indeed, he himself knows. His Army is bogged down in Chechnya, yet 
that does not seem to detract from his popularity. 

He pulled a fast one last month that shocked a lot of people when he made an 
alliance with the Communists to give him control of the Duma, the parliament. 
How could he? Because he doesn't seem to share the deep hatred of communism 
of his sponsor, Boris Yeltsin, and because he saw this pact with the devil as 
a way to consolidate power. 

Power seems to be what this KGB-trained politician is about. That doesn't 
mean, say scholars whom I respect, that he will turn back to communism. He 
knows there is no going back. Russians have come to like the idea of freedom 
and personal property, however imperfectly enforced. It apparently does mean 
that he seeks more authoritative, if not authoritarian, rule - the strong 
hand that Russians appreciate. 

In recent weeks, Mr. Putin has signed legislation giving security agencies 
increased power to monitor e-mail. He has a committee working on regulation 
of press coverage of the war in Chechnya. An accreditation plan for 
reporters, Russian and foreign, is in the works. Putin wants to screen from 
the world the carnage that is Chechnya. 

One can perceive Putin's tactics but not his strategy. 

Masha Lipman, a very able Russian journalist, has written in The Washington 
Post that Putin's deal with the Communists in the Duma is a "nauseating 
sell-out of reformers," and that Putin believes in nothing "except smooth 
governance for the sake of goals that are not quite clear even to him." 

And yet, veteran reformer and former acting Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar, who 
was in Washington the other day, told me that he has hope that Putin will 
pursue reform once the election is over. 

Putin is certainly doing a good job of keeping them guessing about his plans. 
Assuming, that is, that he has large plans. 

*******

Web page for CDI Russia Weekly: 
http://www.cdi.org/russia