June 12, 2000    
This Date's Issues: 4362 • 4363

Johnson's Russia Lit
#4363
12 June 2000
davidjohnson@erols.com


[Note from David Johnson:
1. Reuters: Putin says Russia outgrows democratic ``romanticism''
2. New York Times: Bruce Blair, Trapped in the Nuclear Math.
3. Washington Times: Bill Gertz, Russia publishes nuclear arms book.
4. Moscow Times: Andrei Zolotov Jr., Alexy II Celebrates 10 Years of Change.
5. AP: Muslim Cleric Appointed to Chechyna.
6. gazeta.ru: Voloshin Out To Avenge Chubais.
7. The Russia Journal editorial: Chubais, investors bicker over Titanic.
8. Jamestown Foundation Monitor: UNION OF RIGHT-WING FORCES AND YABLOKO HEAD TOWARD A MERGER.
9. Financial Times (UK): Valery Gergiev, artistic director of the St Petersburg Kirov, tells John Adamson of his hectic schedule around the world.]


******


#1
Putin says Russia outgrows democratic ``romanticism''
By Gareth Jones

MOSCOW, June 12 (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin, speaking on a national 
holiday which marks the birth of a free Russia, said on Monday that Russians 
had shed their illusions that democracy could be built up quickly in their 
country. 


But he told a glittering Kremlin reception attended by most of the country's 
political elite that it was their ``sacred task'' to restore citizens' faith 
in Russia's post-communist course. 


``Ten years ago we were more romantic and, I think many would agree, even 
naive. We thought we could build a new state simply and quickly,'' Putin, a 
47-year-old former KGB spy, told a glittering Kremlin reception in televised 
remarks. 


``We have had to give up such illusions. Now we have acquired difficult, 
sometimes bitter but nevertheless useful experience,'' he said, referring to 
the tumultous changes of the last decade. 


Putin, only Russia's second democratically elected leader in its long and 
bloody history, said the country had made big advances since it declared its 
largely symbolic independence within the Soviet Union on June 12, 1990. 


``A multi-party system has appeared, laws on property ownership, freedom of 
the mass media. Constitutional changes have occurred,'' he told the 
gathering, which included his predecessor and destroyer of Soviet communism, 
Boris Yeltsin. 


``But now we know how difficult it is to reform the economy and the social 
sphere, to create the democratic institutions of a civil society,'' Putin 
added. 


He said he had met many disillusioned people during his travels around Russia 
who had no stake in the new Russia. 


``It is our sacred task to show these people the way to the end of the 
tunnel. We shall do all we can to make Russia a united, strong and respected 
state,'' Putin said, proposing a toast to national prosperity and well-being. 


Other guests at the Kremlin banquet included Yeltsin's wife Naina, the head 
of the Orthodox Church, Patriarch Alexiy II, Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov 
and most of the country's political elite as well as leading cultural figures 
including film maker Nikita Mikhalkov and pop icon Alla Pugachyova. 


PUTIN VOWS SUPPORT FOR ARTS 


Earlier, Putin handed out awards to Russians working in the field of the 
arts, including Mikhalkov and actor Oleg Menshikov and vowed state support 
for the cash-strapped cultural industry. 


``The state should constantly support culture but should not direct it,'' 
said Putin, pledging freedom of expression for Russia's writers, artists and 
directors. 


Some commentators have in the past expressed concern about Putin's commitment 
to free expression, noting his background in the secret services. Before 
becoming prime minister last summer, Putin headed the FSB domestic security 
agency. 


Putin added that the arts had suffered financially after the fall of the 
Soviet Union because the government had considered its role to consist merely 
of lifting political controls and allowing culture to flourish ``of its own 
accord.'' 


``We quickly discovered that such a (laissez-faire) approach leads to 
degradation and decline in culture, which means a weakening of the state 
itself,'' Putin said. 


Independence Day is a low-key holiday marked mainly by Russia's rulers, and 
no parades or other large-scale popular celebrations were planned. Many 
Muscovites were out of town at their country homes or 'dachas' enjoying the 
hot summer weather. 


******


#2
New York Times
June 12, 2000
[for personal use only]
Trapped in the Nuclear Math
By BRUCE G. BLAIR
Bruce G. Blair, a former Minuteman missile launch officer, is president of 
the Center for Defense Information and a co-author of "The Nuclear Turning 
Point." 


WASHINGTON -- Both President Clinton and Gov. George W. Bush would like the 
Pentagon to get along with fewer nuclear warheads, and the Russians are eager 
for talks to push the numbers down. But top American military officers insist 
that current nuclear policy prevents them from shrinking our arsenal to fewer 
than 2,000 to 2,500 strategic weapons -- and that going lower would threaten 
our security. The reason for their position is a matter of simple arithmetic, 
buried in the nation's strategic war plan and ultimately linked to 
presidential guidance. 


Defense officials do not talk openly about the nuclear targets in the 
strategic plan. But for 25 years, beginning with a background in the 
Strategic Air Command, I have studied strategic policy and operations and 
have had extensive contacts with officials who are knowledgeable in these 
areas. I have been able to develop current estimates, and they lead 
inexorably to a conclusion that our leaders are clinging to outdated planning 
that helps keep an unnecessarily large number of American and Russian 
missiles pointed at one another on hair-trigger alert. 


The strategic war plan consists of a very long list of targets in Russia and 
a shorter list of targets in China. The Pentagon says the United States must 
be able to destroy these targets to meet current presidential guidance on 
nuclear war planning, a directive issued in late 1997 to get the number of 
warheads down from even higher levels required in earlier plans. 


Oddly enough, the target list has been growing instead of contracting since 
the last strategic arms reduction treaty, Start II, was signed in 1993. The 
list has grown by 20 percent over the last five years alone, according to top 
military and former administration officials. The vast bulk of the targets 
are in Russia. Three other former republics of the Soviet Union -- Belarus, 
Ukraine and Kazakhstan -- were dropped from the strategic plan in 1997, yet 
the list of sites the Pentagon says we must be ready to destroy has grown 
from 2,500 in 1995 to 3,000 now. 


My research and interviews indicate that there are about 2,260 so-called 
vital Russian targets on the list today, only 1,100 of them actual nuclear 
arms sites within Russia. By this calculation, we have nuclear weapons aimed 
at 500 "conventional" targets -- the buildings and bases of a hollow Russian 
army on the verge of disintegration; 160 leadership targets, like government 
offices and military command centers, in a country practically devoid of 
leadership; and 500 mostly crumbling factories that produced almost no 
armaments last year. 


American strategic planners have historically set the level of damage that 
they wish to inflict on vital targets at 80 percent. This is tantamount to 
requiring our forces to be able to destroy 80 percent of the 2,260 Russian 
targets, which in turn requires the ability to deliver nearly 1,800 warheads 
to their targets. It is no accident that we have about 2,200 strategic 
warheads on alert, according to numbers provided by Strategic Command 
officers. Virtually all of our missiles on land are ready for launch in two 
minutes, and those on four submarines, two in the Atlantic and two in the 
Pacific, are ready to launch on 15 minutes' notice, officers say. The 
land-based missiles must leave the ground fast enough to be sure of being in 
the air before Russian missiles can destroy them. 


If 1,800 warheads have to be delivered quickly, the Pentagon says, we need a 
larger arsenal because of the demands of maintenance. For instance, typically 
6 to 7 of the 18 nuclear-armed submarines are port-bound at any time and 
cannot be counted on to survive and deliver nuclear warheads if we are 
attacked. Thus the United States needs one-third more sea-based strategic 
weapons than it can expect to deliver in wartime. 


And Russia is not our missiles' only target. Responding to the 1997 
presidential guidance, the Pentagon put China back into the strategic plan 
after a hiatus of about 20 years. For China, we now have two so-called 
limited attack options, involving a handful of nuclear weapons on submarines 
and bombers, for striking nuclear targets, leadership sites and critical 
industries. Compare this with scores of limited attack options against 
Russia, each using from a handful of weapons to more than 100, as well as a 
few major attack options, the smallest of which would send more than 1,000 
strategic warheads to attack Russia's nuclear complex. 


There are also many hundreds of secondary targets in China, Iran, Iraq and 
North Korea that have weapons assigned to them, though not on immediate 
alert, further driving up the size of the arsenal. 


Add it all up, and at least 2,500 American warheads are deemed necessary to 
carry out nuclear war against Russia and China, countries that Al Gore 
recently said represent our vital partners, not our enemies. 


Getting to below 2,000 warheads will be difficult unless the target 
requirements are eased by new presidential guidance. Of course they could be, 
if our leaders would bring our war plans up to date. No thoughtful American 
general, much less any political leader, really believes that deterrence 
depends on the scale of nuclear bombing with which Russia and the United 
States now threaten each other. 


Almost without exception, our leaders regard the attack options that unleash 
thousands of nuclear warheads as absurd and grotesque. They do not believe 
that a cold-blooded, deliberate nuclear strike by either Russia or the United 
States is remotely plausible. The only circumstances for nuclear war that 
they do consider plausible involve the use of one or a handful of 
nonstrategic weapons, like nuclear-tipped cruise missiles, against a country 
other than Russia. 


Deterrence would remain robust with far smaller arsenals on far lower levels 
of alert. The United States and Russia should aim to cut the numbers of their 
nuclear weapons to the low hundreds and to take all of them off hair-trigger 
alert, with a view to eventually eliminating them under existing treaty 
obligations. As a first step, the United States could drop to 1,500 warheads, 
the ceiling the Russians are pushing for. 


Such a force could consist of 10 submarines armed with a total of 480 
warheads; 300 Minuteman III land-based missiles with one warhead apiece; 20 
B-2 bombers with 16 weapons apiece, for 320; and 50 B-52 bombers modified to 
carry 8 warheads apiece, for 400. 


A better option would be to retire the B-2 and B-52 nuclear bomber force from 
the arsenal and have the submarines in this mix carry 1,200 warheads. But 
planners cringe at the thought of removing a leg from the vaunted triad -- 
the mix of missiles, submarines and bombers carrying nuclear weapons -- a 
vestige of cold war rivalry between the Navy and the Air Force. 


Even without relying on launch on warning, 1,500 warheads would be more than 
adequate to destroy 250 targets of any choice in retaliation for any surprise 
attack under normal conditions, and to destroy 1,000 targets in retaliation 
to an attack in a crisis. If the threat of this much nuclear retaliation does 
not deter a prospective adversary, it is difficult to conceive of anything 
that would.


*****


#3
Washington Times
June 12, 2000
[for personal use only]
Russia publishes nuclear arms book 
By Bill Gertz (gertz@twtmail.com)


Russia's Defense Ministry and military industry have produced the first 
public encyclopedia on its strategic nuclear arsenal that provides 
unprecedented details about Moscow's weapons systems.
The book was produced in cooperation with arms exporters and is a 
comprehensive collection of photographs and diagrams on most Soviet, and now 
Russian, strategic weapons systems, including intercontinental ballistic 
missiles, nuclear missile submarines, bombers, and testing and support 
facilities and equipment.
For example, the book lists the nuclear yield of the warhead for 
Russia's newest road-mobile ICBM, the SS-27, at 0.55 megatons — or the 
equivalent of 550,000 tons of TNT. It also states that the missile is 
accurate enough to place the warhead within 0.9 kilometers of its target.
A diagram shows the flight path of a 10-warhead missile fired from a 
submarine. The re-entry vehicle maneuvers during flight and guides each 
warhead to a target over an ocean — an implicit reference to the United 
States.
The book also shows a photograph of the 1-kiloton nuclear warhead used 
on Russia's anti-aircraft missile interceptors that is "designed to engage 
single and multiple air targets at altitudes of 7.5 kilometers . . . up to 40 
kilometers."
The highly detailed information contained in the book on Russian 
missiles has raised questions among some U.S. national security officials and 
experts that Moscow is preparing to put its nuclear warhead and missile 
know-how up for sale.
One U.S. defense official said the book appears to be a "sales brochure" 
for Moscow's weapons exporters, who helped to produce the publication. The 
information also could be used by states like North Korea, Iran and Iraq to 
assist the development of their long-range missiles, the official said.
A copy of the book, "Russia's Arms and Technologies: The XXI Century 
Encyclopedia," was obtained by The Washington Times from its U.S. 
distributor, TommaX Inc., a New Jersey company that specializes in defense 
and aerospace technical data. The 511-page first volume on Strategic Nuclear 
Forces costs $495.
TommaX President Thomas J. Langan said the book provides a never-before 
look inside the Russian nuclear complex. "Some specific information has been 
released for the first time and will be very useful to our intelligence 
community," Mr. Langan said.
A Defense Intelligence Agency spokeswoman had no immediate comment on 
the book.
Russia's Defense Minister Marshal Igor Sergeyev stated in the 
introduction that the series on the Russian weapons will help boost exports 
of Russian arms and technology.
In addition to providing information about Russia's weapons systems and 
equipment, the series will show the "major directions of the Russia's 
military-technical policy at the beginning of the 21st century and its 
potentialities to export arms, military equipment and defense technologies," 
the defense minister said.
As for the strategic nuclear arsenal, Mr. Sergeyev stated that nuclear 
weapons still are needed after the Cold War because of new dangers, including 
the increasing number of countries with nuclear arms.
"Under these circumstances, Russia's nuclear weapons, strategic above 
all, continue to be the most important deterrent and strategic stability 
factor," he said.
Mr. Sergeyev did not say Moscow intends to sell nuclear weapons and 
equipment. However, he said conventional arms sales will continue. The book 
will "help Russia implement its new strategy in the field of 
military-technical cooperation with other countries," he said.
He made no mention of Russia's new nuclear doctrine that places a 
greater reliance on the use of nuclear weapons in conflicts because of the 
decline in conventional forces since the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991.
The book has new details on Russian nuclear command and control 
facilities, including mobile command posts, spy satellites and communications 
networks used to send orders to nuclear missile submarines.
It also contains diagrams that show the layout of nuclear missile 
submarines and mock-ups showing the placement of components inside missiles.
Facts about Russia's mobile missile launchers, including important 
specifications that could be useful in making copies, also are included.
The book reveals details about once-secret Russian nuclear research 
centers, and contains photographs of the remote arctic nuclear weapons test 
facility at Novaya Zemlya, where several secret tests were recently detected 
by U.S. intelligence agencies.
As for bombers, Russia's air-launched nuclear cruise missiles are shown 
and details about the characteristics of the missiles are included, as well 
as diagrams showing aerial refueling capabilities.
Nuclear storage facilities, bomb containers and their security systems 
also are shown, information that analysts say would be useful to saboteurs or 
thieves.
Henry Sokolski, a former Pentagon weapons proliferation specialist, said 
the book highlights the danger of spreading strategic nuclear weapons 
information to rogue states.
"It is not just people pulling stuff down from the Internet or from the 
United States that people can learn about strategic weaponry or procedures 
for their use," said Mr. Sokolski, director of the Nonproliferation Policy 
Education Center.
Russia has been identified by the CIA as a major proliferator of weapons 
of mass destruction and missile systems, including sales to China, Iran, 
Egypt, Libya and Syria.


******


#4
Moscow Times
June 13, 2000 
Alexy II Celebrates 10 Years of Change 
By Andrei Zolotov Jr.
Staff Writer


The political and cultural elite joined church officials this weekend in 
lavishing praise on Patriarch Alexy II and celebrating his 10 years as head 
of the Russian Orthodox Church. 


The decade since he was "enthroned" June 10, 1990, has seen a dramatic 
revival of the church and growth of the patriarch's influence in political 
and social affairs, achievements attributed to a large extent to his 
background, vision and talents as an administrator and diplomat. 


But at the same time, the expectations of a miraculous religious revival 
going hand-in-hand with the country's democratization, which flourished among 
intellectuals 10 years ago, have been let down. And several weak links in the 
post-atheist reconstruction of the world's second-largest Christian church 
leave its future far from certain. 


Born in 1929 in independent Estonia, Alexei Ridiger received a religious and 
cultural upbringing unavailable to his Russian-born counterparts. He then 
made a tremendous career in the government-controlled Russian Orthodox Church 
and became its chancellor - the No. 2 administrator - in 1964, during Nikita 
Khrushchev's wave of religious persecution. 


After his election as patriarch at the pivotal moment in Russian history, he 
supported Boris Yeltsin during the 1991 attempted coup, but emerged as an 
impartial peacemaker during his 1993 armed clash with the parliament. 
Although seen as Yeltsin's friend and supporter, he differed with his 
administration several times, most notably during the adoption of the 1997 
law on religion and during the debate about the burial in 1998 of the remains 
of the last tsar. 


Most recently, he has supported Moscow's campaign in Chechnya and dismissed 
its foreign critics as one-sided. But he also urged the authorities to treat 
civil ians and Chechen fighters who surrender with mercy. 


"The Russian Orthodox Church has a huge role in the spiritual gathering of 
the Russian lands after many years of life without faith, moral destruction 
and theomachy," President Vladimir Putin said Friday at a ceremony and 
concert at the Rossiya Concert Hall. "Not only the reconstruction of the 
destroyed churches is under way. What is being rebuilt is the traditional 
mission of the church as a key factor of stability and unification of 
Russians around common moral priorities." 


Following a concert and reception Friday, in which the guest list read like a 
who's who of the Russian elite, the church celebrated with a solemn service 
Saturday at the newly reconstructed Christ the Savior Cathedral. About 70 
bishops and 400 priests and deacons sang "Many Years" to their patriarch 
along with thousands of believers. All national television channels and major 
newspapers considered it necessary to mark the patriarch's anniversary. 


"Undoubtedly, he will go into history as the patriarch of church revival," 
said Sergei Chapnin, editor of Sobornost Orthodox Internet magazine, on 
Monday. He said that among Alexy's chief achievements was his success in 
preserving the unity of the church at a time when, weakened by 70 years of 
persecution, it faced post-Soviet upheavals on the periphery of the former 
empire and within the Russian Federation. 


Schisms that occurred in the Ukraine, Estonia and in Moldova, where some of 
the Orthodox clergy and flock broke away from the Moscow Patriarchate with 
the urging of local nationalist politicians, were painful for the patriarch, 
who made canonical and administrative unity a top priority of his reign. The 
church has avoided internal reform for fear of a split between modernists and 
arch-conservatives. 


Under Alexy, churches rose again in the thousands around the country, and his 
ability to raise his personal authority to a degree unimaginable to his 
modern-era predecessors has helped maintain the clergy's high authority in 
society. "That is a unique, miraculous event, considering that almost all 
institutions and figures in society have been undermined," Chapnin said. 


The patriarch's stewardship has seen the number of Orthodox dioceses in the 
former Soviet Union nearly double (from 67 to 128) and the number of parishes 
more than triple, from some 6,000 in 1988 to more than 19,000 today. There 
are 480 monasteries today while there were mere 18 in 1988. The number of 
priests and deacons grew from about 8,000 to more than 20,000. 


Alexy himself made it clear in his anniversary interviews that he treasures 
the unity of the church. Expressing his support for Putin's idea of 
centralization of authority, the patriarch said in an interview with RTR 
state television that after the fall of the Soviet Union there were moves to 
create independent Orthodox churches in each of the post-Soviet states. "Yes, 
we had schisms, there were attempts to divide us, but we always tried to 
preserve the vertical of authority," the patriarch said. 


Under Alexy, the church has suffered from a number of intrigues and 
corruption scandals. 


Alexander Morozov, an independent political analyst who writes on church 
issues, said Alexy has failed to build up an apparatus commensurate with the 
church's expanded tasks. The Patriarchate works today out of the same two 
small buildings on Chisty Pereulok, where Alexy's predecessors had worked. 
Although a deft administrator himself, the patriarch lacks a team of 
qualified associates. And while many new bishops have been ordained in recent 
years, there does not seem to be a group capable of leading the church past 
the achievements of the older generation. 


Alexy also has not created a system of financial accountability and 
transparency, which has led to a number of high-profile corruption scandals 
and accusations that the high-rolling lifestyle of church hierarchs is funded 
at the expense of social work and church reconstruction. 


While direct government subsidies to the church would be unconstitutional and 
the majority of parishioners are impoverished, the spectacular reconstruction 
of churches has been financed in part by murky deals. The state has granted 
the church tax breaks and oil export licenses, which have allowed 
church-affiliated private companies to exploit the gains and share the 
revenues with the hierarchy. 


In the past two years, the patriarch's personal affiliation with a 
controversial businesswoman, Gulnaz Sotnikova, has raised many eyebrows. 
Sotnikova, who leads a charitable fund, is reported to have used the 
patriarch's connections to create favorable conditions for her air cargo 
business. 


The patriarch defends the church's economic activities by saying the church 
must have "economic independence" from the government and powerful financial 
groups. 


Alexy's deteriorating health - he is reported to suffer from diabetes, angina 
and to have had more than one heart attack - has contributed to what some see 
as a stagnation in church life in the past couple of years. 


Along with a number of unsolved issues, the absence of a clear successor 
leaves the prospects of religious revival in its second decade unclear. 


******


#5
Muslim Cleric Appointed to Chechyna
June 12, 2000
By YURI BAGROV

NAZRAN, Russia (AP) - In a bid to win local support, the Kremlin on Monday 
named a pro-Moscow Muslim cleric to head President Vladimir Putin's 
administration in rebel Chechnya. 


Mufti Akhmad Kadyrov ``has the greatest authority among the local 
population,'' said Yegor Stroyev, speaker of the upper house of parliament, 
who announced Kadyrov's appointment. But many Chechens distrust Kadyrov, 
regarding him as a Kremlin puppet. 


The mufti reportedly has been the target of several assassination attempts 
and his son was wounded by a remote-controlled bomb last month in an attack 
blamed on rebels. 


The rebel Chechen government dismissed him as the republic's top mufti last 
year after Kadyrov talked with Putin, who was then the prime minister, in a 
meeting that rebel leaders called a betrayal. The Kremlin continues to regard 
him as Chechnya's top Muslim cleric. 


Putin last week called for setting up a provisional administration under his 
direct control in Chechnya, suspending Chechnya's status as one of the 89 
republics of the Russian Federation by denying it the right to elect its own 
regional government. The action must be approved by parliament, but 
underlines the Kremlin's determination not to grant Chechnya independence. 


The Russian government is eager to create a local administration to gather 
support for Moscow and help to deflect international criticism of its harsh 
military campaign in the republic. Most Chechens support independence and 
want Russian forces out of the republic. 


Russia repeatedly has claimed that it has crushed organized rebel activity 
and that the insurgents are on the verge of defeat. But the estimated 2,500 
rebel fighters continue to mount hit-and-run attacks on Russian forces and 
have begun suicide bombings. 


On Sunday, two Russian policemen were killed and one was wounded when a 
suicide bomber set off an explosive in the trunk of his car when he was 
stopped at a roadblock in the capital, Grozny, the military command said 
Monday. 


Russian forces clashed at dawn Monday with rebels attempting to infiltrate 
the town of Argun, east of Grozny, the regional Interior Ministry said. ``A 
tough cleanup operation is under way,'' where the rebels are believed to be 
hiding, the ministry's press service said. 


The Russian offensive against Chechnya, which began in late September, has 
stalled for months in the rugged southern mountains. 


The military spokesman said Russian troops have been put on high alert 
against rebel offensives Monday, Russia's Independence Day. Col. Gen. Gennady 
Troshev told the Interfax news agency, ``for us, for the army, there are no 
holidays at war.'' 


In Moscow, Kremlin spokesman on Chechnya Sergei Yastrzhembsky on Monday 
rejected any foreign mediation in ending the war. In an interview with 
Interfax, he said ``there is no place for foreign mediation on a political 
settlement in Chechnya. 


He was responding to an appeal Sunday by rebel Chechen President Aslan 
Maskhadov for Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad to mediate 
negotiations. 


Russia has said it will not negotiate with the rebels, calling them 
terrorists. 


The Russians were driven out of Chechnya in a 1994-96 war. They re-entered in 
September after Islamic militants based there seized several villages in the 
neighboring Russian region of Dagestan, and after about 300 people died in 
apartment bombings the government blames on Chechens. 


*****


#6
gazeta.ru
June 10, 2000
Voloshin Out To Avenge Chubais
The conflict between the Chairman of RAO United Energy Systems of Russia, 
Anatoly Chubais and the company's minor foreign investors, was sanctioned and 
encouraged by the head of presidential administration Alexander Voloshin. 
Voloshin wants to get even with Chubais for prevented him from participating 
in the formation of the new government. 


The group of western minor shareholders of RAO UES are dissatisfied with 
the plans for the company's restructuring and have insisted that a special 
shareholders' meeting be held to discuss whether to dismiss Anatoly Chubais. 


The conflict between the western shareholders and Anatoly Chubais sounded 
strange from the very beginning. The plans for the restructuring of RAO UES 
that the foreigners have been criticizing so strongly, was published back in 
early April. The foreigners initial reaction was to submit a few critical 
reports, however, they made no public declarations of their opposition, let 
alone for Chubais' dismissal. 


Now, that the restructuring plan has been approved by the RAO board of 
directors, the foreigners have suddenly demanded to that an emergency 
shareholders' meeting be held whereat they intend to call for Chubais' 
dismissal. It is doubtful that RAO UES' western shareholders are so 
unpractical and unsophisticated in business that it took them a whole month 
to realize the negative impact that Chubais' program would have on their 
shareholders' rights. 


Gazeta.Ru has learnt that the anti-Chubais campaign was initiated not by the 
Western investors but by the head of the Presidential Administration 
Alexander Voloshin. Gazeta.Ru's correspondent was informed by a competent 
source in the White House, the seat of the Russian parliament, that Alexander 
Voloshin was the one who directly initiated the critical reports published in 
the Financial Times and Washington Post by the representatives of Hermitage, 
Barings and Branswick. 


Relations between Voloshin and Chubais have always been far from ideal. 
Voloshin is the governmental representative in RAO UES and is the head of the 
company's board of directors. The first time their relations were seriously 
spoiled was in the spring of last year. The then-president of Russia Boris 
Yeltsin was dissatisfied with Voloshin and intended to replace him with 
Chubais. Chubais received the offer, but being well aware of Yeltsin's 
unpredictable behavior decided not to take the risk and turned down the 
offer. 


Another serious quarrel between Russia's chief energy man and the head of the 
Kremlin administration occurred quite recently, during the cadre formation of 
the new government under the new PM Mikhail Kasyanov. Having successfully 
lobbied Kasyanov's candidature for the prime minister's post Voloshin 
intended to increase his influence on the government and to help his men, 
first and foremost Viktor Kaliuzhny and Nikolai Aksyonenko, keep their key 
posts. Competent sources assert that Voloshin nearly acheived his goal; 
Kalyuzhny accompanied Putin on a trip to Tashkent after practically all the 
appointments had been made and portfolios distributed. 


However, Vladimir Putin realized that if he surrounded himself with the men 
of one clan, it would threaten his ability to make independent decisions. As 
a result, Kaliuzhny left the post of the Fuel and Energy Minister, and the 
vice Prime Minister Aksyenenko was demoted to a regular minister's post. 


At the same time, the people from Chubais' team took key governmental posts. 
Alexei Kudrin became not only the Finance Minister, but in fact, a first vice 
Prime Minister. Viktor Khrisenko is the second "first" vice PM and German 
Gref has been appointed to head the key Ministry for Economic Development and 
Trade. Voloshin realized he had been defeated in that "cadre" war but 
resolved to fight back. 


According to some versions, Voloshin himself holds a stake in a number of 
western investment firms including the minor shareholders of RAO UES, who 
have launched the campaign to sack Chubais. According to another, more 
plausible, version the head of the Presidential Administration grabbed the 
opportunity and offered support to the dissatisfied shareholders. 
Additionally he manage to take advantage of the ambitions of two former 
high-ranking officials; Boris Fedorov and Dmitry Vasiliev who are now 
responsible for protecting foreign investors' rights. 


On the whole, Voloshin`s campaign against Chubais has been initiated with 
great skill. Until now, the support of foreign investors has always been 
Chubais` strong point. Whatever the Russian people and opposition economists 
said about him, Chubais could always use western PR specialists who helped 
him in any situation. Voloshin has chosen cunning tactics and the right 
allies, Fedorov, Vasiliev and the Western media. Chubais is now on the ropes. 


Ivan Chelnok 


*****


#7
The Russia Journal
June 12-18, 2000
Editorial: Chubais, investors bicker over Titanic


The struggle between the one-time free-market crusader-cum-CEO of Russia's
electricity grid RAO UES, Anatoly Chubais, and his once erstwhile allies,
UES foreign investors, is becoming increasingly interesting.


There is little doubt Chubais is up to his old tricks ­ his talk of
breaking up the UES monopoly in order to create more competition in the
electricity industry is spurious. Perhaps such a move might work in other
countries ­ where one region can compete with another for consumers ­ but
not in Russia, a country where regional electricity companies simply don't
have the funds to maintain equipment to service their own region, let alone
compete for another. Given the absurdly low charges for electricity (if
there is a charge at all), the ability to undercut a competitor is nil.


Chubais, it seems, is aiming to ensure that he no longer carries the can
for the blackouts that take place in Primorsky Krai or Kamchatka, by
splitting off these companies. That and/or he is looking to undertake
another nasty little privatization, the best parts of which will go to the
Chubais clan, including the man himself.


Chubais’ glory days are over. He is highly intelligent and realizes that
his life in politics is finished ­ the antipathy toward him among the
Russian public is too high, and his credibility too low. Most likely
Chubais, the man who brought the oligarchs into this world, has decided
it's time for him to join that exclusive club. He is looking to become a
very wealthy and highly influential businessman (if he isn't already).


As for the foreign investors, there is nothing innocent about them either. 


UES was never a good investment. It is a rusty old ship that requires
billions of dollars in investment just to keep it trundling along. The
notion of raising tariffs ­ triggering bankruptcies and mass unemployment
across the country ­ is so politically charged that even someone of the
political caliber of Chubais (he does have skills, it is just that they are
rarely applied to good deeds) could produce such a miracle.


Hence the main aim of investing in UES was speculation, a front if you
like: "Chubais the crusader at the helm," the "giant Soviet company that
would be turned around and made profitable" and so forth was all talk
designed to drive up the share price. 


It is unlikely that many of the investors seriously believed that the
company could be reformed and resurrected. But there was good money to be
made speculating that it might. As a result, what we are probably
witnessing is the ironic situation where many foreign investors in UES are
behaving in the best tradition of the "Red Directors," completely resistant
to finally having to face the reality of UES' situation. 


Of course, while Chubais and the investors trade blows, the Far East
continues to experience blackouts and UES sinks further into the mire. As a
fight, it will be interesting to watch. For the population, it is just
another case of their being pawns in the game.


Putina steps out … into prison


Lyudmila Putina's decision to visit a women's prison on her first foray
into public since officially becoming Russia's first lady was well timed
and well chosen. 


In a country where the majority of the population is mired in social
crisis, the plight of the country's prisoners is too easily swept under the
carpet. 


Why devote scarce resources to criminals when honest people are also
suffering? In Russia, it's a fair question.


But more than 1 million people are serving time in Russian prisons and
penal colonies, about 60 percent of which were built before 1917. Prisons
are marked by levels of overcrowding, bad diet and poor hygiene ­
particularly in pretrial detention centers ­ that horrify prison reform
campaigners. This situation has led to an explosion of tuberculosis and
other diseases among the prison population.


For its part, the government did approve an amnesty for 120,000 convicts in
late May, but there are still 16-year-olds languishing in jail for crimes
such as petty theft. 


This is a catastrophic situation, one that simply does not get the
publicity and reporting it deserves. Hence, Lyudmila Putina's decision on
her first outing ­ something bound to draw maximum media interest ­ to
visit a prison was a thoughtful and responsible one. She is to be commended
for it.


*******


#8
Jamestown Foundation Monitor
June 12, 2000


UNION OF RIGHT-WING FORCES AND YABLOKO HEAD TOWARD A MERGER. The Union of 
Right-Wing Forces (SPS) and Yabloko are moving toward either a merger or a 
coalition, the leaders of the two liberal groups said yesterday. In a 
televised joint interview aired yesterday evening, Yabloko leader Grigory 
Yavlinsky and SPS leader Boris Nemtsov said they saw no obstacles to the 
unification of the two political movements, adding that their ultimate goal 
was either to form a single democratic party or to create a coalition which 
would include other democratic parties and groups. Both leaders said an 
agreement between the two groups would be signed soon. Nemtsov said it was 
important for democrats to unite in order to prevent the establishment of 
an authoritarian system. "This agreement is necessary not for Yabloko and 
SPS, but for the country," he said. "Very many people turned out to be 
absolutely unprepared for the onslaught to change the existing system [by] 
certain figures--[from the] Kremlin, above all. Certain high-level 
representatives of the [presidential] administration want to establish a 
dictatorship in the country, and by no means a dictatorship of the law, but 
a dictatorship of a corrupt bureaucracy" (NTV, June 11). Earlier this 
month, Nemtsov warned that Putin's measures to limit the power of regional 
leaders and centralize Russia's political system smacked of "political 
adventurism" (see the Monitor, June 2, 8). But while Nemtsov and others 
have expressed misgivings about the Putin administration's potential 
authoritarian leanings, both Yabloko and the SPS have other Putin 
initiatives, including its plan to institute a flat 13 percent income tax, 
which the Duma approved last week.


Yabloko's central council yesterday declared that it would continue to work 
toward creating a wide democratic coalition and a unified list of 
candidates for elections to local self-government organs. Yabloko 
spokeswoman Yevgenia Dillendorf said that the group had called on its 
regional branches to take practical steps toward creating democratic 
coalitions and democratic deputies' groups in local legislatures. She said 
that Vladimir Lukin, Yabloko's deputy chairman who was formerly Russia's 
ambassador to Washington, had been given the authority to sign 
corresponding agreements with the SPS and other democratic groups.


Sergei Yushenkov, a State Duma deputy and a leader of Russia's Democratic 
Choice, which is headed by Yegor Gaidar and a part of the SPS, said over 
the weekend that democratic leaders had come to realize that as separate 
parties they would not be able to overcome the 5-percent barrier required 
for party representation in the State Duma. Yushenkov said the merger 
between the SPS, Yabloko and other democratic groups would take three or 
four years to merge, but that without such a merger, the democrats could 
not expect to win more than 40 Duma seats in the next election. With a 
merger, he said, they could gain 100 seats in the next Duma (Russian 
agencies, June 10). The Communist Party of the Russian Federation and 
Unity, the pro-Putin party, currently dominates the Duma. The SPS has the 
third largest representation, followed by that of Yabloko.


******


#9
Financial Times (UK)
10 June 2000
[for personal use only]
PERSPECTIVES: Rehabilitating rarities from the rostrum: LUNCH WITH THE FT:
Valery Gergiev, artistic director of the St Petersburg Kirov, tells John
Adamson of his hectic schedule around the world


"I need to recharge." Valery Gergiev takes a sip from his pre-lunch Bloody
Mary after a gruelling morning's rehearsals. Revitalised, he rattles off
the highlights of the St Petersburg Kirov's five-week season at Covent
Garden - which starts on Monday - like a dervish calling a horserace. 


The artistic director of the Kirov is the most sought-after conductor in
the world, and his excitement is pal-pable. Singers with names that sound
like obscure vodka brands - Pavlovskaya, Trifonova, Diadkova - seem set to
become as talked about as Domingo and Hvorostovsky, who are also part of
the show. "You know," says Gergiev, "we will show you masterpieces of the
Russian tradition that people hardly know here in the west." 


We are seated in the bar of the Oxo Tower restaurant on the River Thames.
"Food-wise" things are not going well. A Prada-clad minion has just
informed me that our table, booked for half an hour ago, is still not
ready, and has advised us to admire the view. 


Half the time allotted in Gergiev's frenetic schedule has already gone, and
Lunch with the FT, thus far, has consisted of a single stick of celery, the
garnish in the maestro's Bloody Mary. 


Oblivious to my concerns, Gergiev is in full spate. As well as spectacular
new productions of Mussorgsky's Khovashchina and Prokofiev's War and Peace
- with a Cecil B. de Mille cast of extras - he is also conducting a series
of relative rarities: Tchaikovsky's Mazeppa, Rimsky-Korsakov's The Snow
Maiden, and a virtually unknown opera by Prokofiev, Semyon Kotko, which
receives its British premiere on June 28. 


With almost anyone else on the rostrum, the programme would virtually
guarantee financial disaster. Such is Gergiev's reputation, however, that
full houses are all but assured. Charismatic, intelligent, and still only
in his mid-40s, he has the Met, Covent Garden, Salzburg, Vienna, Berlin and
La Scala falling over each other to bid for his time. As a senior member of
the Vienna Philharmonic remarked to me recently: "He has the sort of star
quality we have not experienced since the days of Karajan." 


Back in Oxo-land, things are still behind schedule. We are finally given
two menus and shown to our table. But it is another 20 minutes before
anyone returns to take our order: sea bass followed by duck for my guest,
wild mushroom risotto and chicken for me, and a bottle of chablis. 


Gergiev returns to talking about Semyon Kotko, which promises to be the
great discovery of the Kirov season. Described discreetly in the advance
publicity as a "Soviet" work, it is one that is not so much in need of
revival as rehabilitation. It is, in fact, a Stalinist opera, written on
the eve of the notorious Nazi-Soviet Pact of 


1939 and with an overtly propagandist text. Stalin's state prosecutor,
Vishinksy, when not occupied with his master's purges, had a hand in
revising the plot. 


Did Gergiev think, I asked, that its Stalinist politics compromised the
opera as a work of art? After all, if Richard Strauss had written an opera
called, say, Horst Wessel, for Goebbels in 1939, a revival would not be
altogether criticism-free. 


Gergiev has clearly anticipated the question. "Always with Prokofiev, the
music is up here," he gestures above his head. "The politics is down here -
far below. And always there is satire and irony." He fixes me with a gaze
that has the intensity of an oxyacetylene welder. "Prokofiev, too," he
says, "suffered under the system." 


The legacy of the old Soviet "system" occupies us as we toy with our
impec-cably capitalist starters. He announces his sea-bass is excellent;
which is as well because my risotto clearly started out as wallpaper paste. 


"Of course, the Soviet system was repressive, and did many terrible
things," Gergiev concedes. "But for musicians, it did much good. In
nurturing talent from all parts of the union - not just Russia - it was
very successful." 


He himself, after all, is one of its products. Brought up in the Ossetian
Republic in the Caucasus during the last days of the Soviet empire, his
abilities were spotted early, and he was sent to study the piano and
conducting at the Leningrad Conservatory. There, his prodigious talents
ensured he was already conducting in the Kirov's Mariinsky Theatre in his
early 20s. 


Gergiev was a double beneficiary of the system; it was the break-up of the
old Soviet Union under Gorbachev that catapulted him to overall control of
the company. In 1988, with "workers' democracy" breaking out all over
Leningrad, the Kirov elected him artistic director and chief conductor at
the absurdly young age of 35 - to the scandal of the local party bosses. 


But if Gergiev and his newly revivified company are a product of the
post-glasnost world, I nevertheless sense a certain nostalgia - when it
comes to music at least - for the old days when great musicians never had
to look at a balance sheet, and the likes of David Oistrach or Sviatoslav
Richter were almost sacred figures, with a calling to bring music to all
corners of the land. 


One of these visitations, he recalls, had a profound impact on his own
career. "The first time I heard Richter give a piano recital was in
Vladikavkaz in Ossetia. I was 14, and studying piano. It was a town with a
small hall, far from anywhere. But he played in a way that made me realise
what great music-making was. 


"I think this is important - for musicians to go to perform in the distant
parts of the country. I do this myself. No matter how remote, you never
know when one of the 14-year-olds in the audience will have great talent,
and be inspired, and be - who knows? - the next Prokofiev." This sense of
music as vocation extends to rehearsals, where, famously, he has little
patience with those who do not share his own high standards. 


"I am not understanding of musicians who say, at exactly 5pm: 'We stop.' As
though they are counting the seconds: tick, tick, tick." His right
forefinger does an imitation of the second hand on a clock. 


"In Mariinsky, they know me now. Sometimes we finish early, other times I
say: 'But we are not ready. Twenty minutes more and we can make great
performance.' And we stay until the piece is right. What is Pounds 5,000
for overtime, if we can make the performance a hundred times better?" 


The irritation in his voice suggests that not all of these overtime battles
have been won. He plunges his fork into a last slice of duck as though it
is a Musicians' Union official advocating a work-to-rule. Our waiter, who
seems to be on his own work-to-rule, eventually returns to offer pudding.
Our allotted hour for lunch has long been exceeded, but to my surprise,
Gergiev is keen to accept. We both opt for cherry pie, which turns out to
be delicious. 


I ask him about his plans for the future. His workload is almost suicidal:
in the next 12 months a new Ring cycle for St Petersburg, Don Giovanni for
Salzburg, Tristan for Glyndebourne - not to mention his commitments to the
Kirov and the Rotterdam Philharmonic, of which he is also artistic director. 


But it is his plans for St Petersburg that are clearly his dearest
ambitions. If completed - and it sounds as though they will need several
hundred million pounds of investment - they will make the Kirov and its
home, the Mariinsky Theatre, the centre of one of the largest cultural
projects in Europe. Not only will there be a full restoration of the
Mariinsky but also a series of related projects, including a new school for
singers and instrumentalists, housing for the precious Kirov archives, new
spaces for rehearsals and concerts, and facilities for the growing number
of foreign visitors, drawn by the city's musical life. 


Gergiev is just getting into his stride when an anxious PA arrives to
remind him that the car has been waiting outside for half an hour, and he
is now horrendously late for a meeting with the executive director of
Covent Garden, Michael Kaiser. "Just five more minutes, please?" he asks,
and she retreats, shaking her head in a state of high anxiety. "Michael is
a friend," he assures me when she has gone. "He will understand." 


"St Petersburg?" I prompt, as we order our second double espresso. 


"Yes, yes. I have seen what the Lincoln Centre did to regenerate that part
of the Upper West Side of New York. We can do this, too, in St Petersburg."
The idea has already won the backing of the new Russian president, Vladimir
Putin, a St Petersburger who has no doubt noticed Gergiev's value both as a
cultural icon and as a foreign-currency earner. 


"He even telephoned me, in the middle of the war in Chechnya, you know, for
a long conversation about the Kirov. Putin knows the city and what it needs." 


In the meantime, Gergiev has proved himself highly adept at winning western
corporate sponsorship for the Kirov's projects, including Philips, Siemens
and Daimler-Chrysler. His social charm is almost as much of an asset to the
company as is his musicianship. More than one chairman's wife, after an
evening seated beside him at dinner, has departed smitten and determined to
see that a hefty corporate cheque is soon on its way to "that
extraordinarily nice Mr Gergiev". 


But he is aware that the success of his own plans for St Petersburg depend,
in part, on a race for time against Russia's new breed of property
developers. "Maybe I have two or three years," he says. "Then some oligarch
will come along and we will have cheap, commercial building around the
Mariinsky and the opportunity will be gone." 


As we leave, the sun comes out, and nice Mr Gergiev notices - I think for
the first time since we arrived - the Oxo Tower's panoramic view of London.
But it is not St Paul's cathedral that catches his eye. We are looking
south, and the sun is glinting off council tower blocks - a vast postwar
planning catastrophe. 


He is visibly shocked at its ugliness. "So many boxes," he says, "so many
boxes. This is a mistake I hope we will avoid in St Petersburg." 
******

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