Center for Defense Information
Research Topics
Television
CDI Library
Press
What's New
Search
CDI Library > Johnson's Russia List

Johnson's Russia List
 

 

August 24, 2000    
This Date's Issues: 4472 4473



Johnson's Russia List
#4473
24 August 2000
davidjohnson@erols.com


[Note from David Johnson:
1. AP: Jim Heintz, Russian Sub Families Hold Tribute.
2. Bloomberg: Putin on Sunken Nuclear Submarine; Military Reform.
3. The Times (UK): Alice Lagnado, How the mother of a Kursk sailor was silenced.
4. The Times (UK) editorial: CANDID CAMERA. Russia's past recaptured in a chilling incident.
5. New York Times: Alla Yaroshinskaya, A Putin Supporter Recants.
6. Vremya MN: RUSSIA'S POPULATION DECLINING STEADILY FOR VARIOUS REASONS.
7. Izvestia: Yevgeny KRUTIKOV, KURSK SUBMARINE ACCIDENT FAILS TO BECOME POLITICAL DISASTER.
8. Peter Lavelle: Untimely Thoughts: The Meaning and Usage of Adversity.
9. David Price: Russia and the danger for the European Union.(two books)
10. Moscow Times: Yevgenia Albats, Dangerous Death Throes Of Soviet Beast.
11. RFE/RL: Sophie Lambroschini, Chechen Refugees In Ingushetia Survive In Makeshift Camps.]


*******


#1
Russian Sub Families Hold Tribute
August 24, 2000
By JIM HEINTZ

MOSCOW (AP) - Grieving relatives of the 118 sailors who died in a nuclear
submarine headed out into the cold gray Barents Sea on Thursday to lay
flowers on the waves above the sunken warship, Russian television said. 


Before setting off from Vidyayevo in northern Russia, where the submarine
Kursk was based, many relatives of the crew clustered to watch the laying
of a foundation stone for a memorial to the vessel. 


Ambulances and medical workers stood at the edge of the crowd to help any
relatives who became overwhelmed. The disaster has been a grueling ordeal
for the survivors, many of whom found out about the sinking only from
television reports, then endured days of waiting before the announcement
that their sons and husbands were dead. 


The flowers they were to lay on the waters include a wreath from President
Vladimir Putin, news reports said. 


Many of the sailors' relatives declined to join in a national day of
mourning on Wednesday, demanding that the bodies of their sons and husbands
be retrieved from the sea floor first. 


Their bitter stance underlined widespread criticism of the government's
slow and confused response to the Aug. 12 sinking of the Kursk. Much of the
criticism has centered on Putin, who remained on vacation during the first
days of the crisis and made his first public statement on the Kursk four
days after it sank. 


Moving to allay popular criticism, Putin on Wednesday said he felt ``fully
responsible and guilty'' - an unusually candid statement in a country with
a long tradition of authoritarian leaders. 


Despite widespread dismay over the Kursk crisis, Putin's support does not
appear to have been badly undermined, a poll indicated. 


The poll by the All-Russia Center for Public Opinion Research shows Putin's
approval rating at 65 percent. That was down only one percentage point from
the previous poll, the newspaper Segodnya on Thursday cited poll director
Yuri Levada as saying. 


Many had expected that Putin would respond to the Kursk disaster by firing
top brass. Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev and navy chief Adm. Vladimir
Kuroyedov submitted their resignations Wednesday over the loss of the Kursk
but Putin said he would not accept them. 


Seeking scapegoats would be ``the most mistaken response,'' he said on
Russia's RTR television. 


Speaking firmly and somberly in the television interview, Putin defended
his initial silence and the slow response to foreign offers of rescue help.
He said the navy acted as quickly as it could given how little was known
about the submarine's condition. 


He also promised to restore the honor of the beleaguered military and the
nation. 


``It grieves me, the theory lately that together with the Kursk the honor
of the navy also drowned, the honor of Russia,'' Putin said. ``Our country
has survived a lot.'' 


``We will overcome it all and restore it all, the military and the navy and
the state,'' he said. 


The Kremlin has promised compensation to the families, who had relied on
the sailors' meager salaries for subsistence. The federal government
promised a one-time payment equal of an average of $7,000 per family -
equal to 10 years of pay for a submarine officer, said Deputy Prime
Minister Valentina Matviyenko. 


Concern has been growing about the ship's two nuclear reactors and other
weaponry. The Norwegian Nuclear Protection Authority said Wednesday it had
found no sign of a radiation leak. 


The cause of the explosion that mangled the ship was unclear. 


The Russian high command says the most likely reason was a collision with a
foreign submarine, although no concrete evidence has been provided. A
likely scenario was an internal malfunction and explosion in the Kursk's
torpedo compartment. 


*******


#2
Putin on Sunken Nuclear Submarine; Military Reform: Comment

Moscow, Aug. 24 (Bloomberg) - Russian President Vladimir Putin commented on
the Russian nuclear sub Kursk, which sunk last week in the Barents Sea,
with the loss of the entire crew of 118. He also spoke about the state of
the Russian Army and required reforms to cut budget spending. His remarks
were in an interview broadcast by state-owned RTR television. 


On the sub accident investigation: 


``If someone is guilty, they should be punished. There is no doubt about
that. But we need objective information about the causes of the tragedy and
the pace of rescue work. Only after that can we make conclusions. 


``I can tell you: the day before yesterday Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev
and yesterday the Commander-in-Chief (Vladimir Kuroyedov) and the Commander
of the Northern Fleet (Vyacheslav Popov) tendered their resignations. 


``But their petitions won't be accepted. They will not be accepted, I
repeat, until full understanding is gained of what happened, what the
causes were, whether there are any culprits, whether they are really guilty
or this was just a concurrence of tragic circumstances. 


``There will be no sweeping punishment induced by emotional outbursts or
concurrence of circumstances. I will be with the army, I will be with the
navy, I will be with the people. Together we will rebuild the army, the
navy and the state. I have absolutely no doubt about that. 


``All this gives us ground to maintain that sweeping accusations against
the military of incompetence or of failing to inform punctually are
unfounded and unfair. 


``But this does not mean, as I already said, that we should not probe
thoroughly and in-depth into the causes of the tragedy and into how the
situation developed. 


``This of course, will be done by both the technical commission, the Office
of Prosecutor-General and the Federal Security Service, which will ensure
operational monitoring of the instituted criminal proceedings.'' 


On citizens' morale after the sub accident: 


``You know, our country used to go through years of ordeals. We and our
ancestors faced greater catastrophes, but we have survived them. 


``Russia always had a future. What we are going through now is a really
terrible event. But I am sure that such events should consolidate society,
consolidate the people rather than divide it. 


``I am confident that together we will overcome the negative consequences
we have faced in the last years -- natural, social and industrial. 


``You know, rather prominent and experienced people, who have been in
politics for many years tell me that it is essential to be hard,
demonstrate one's will, dismiss someone or, what would be better, put
someone into prison. 


``This is the simplest way out of this situation for me and, to my mind,
the most erroneous. This has already been done more than once.
Unfortunately, this does not change the state of things in essence.'' 


On the consequences of the accident on the political establishment in Russia: 


``I feel fully responsible and guilty. 


``Some are trying to use this tragedy in an unscrupulous way (and) trying
to blow some political gills in order to gain political capital or secure
group interests. 


``Those who say that the people who helped ruin the army, the navy and the
state for a long time turned out to be in the first ranks of seamen's
defenders are right. Some of them have even collected a million each. 


``They'd better sell their villas on the Mediterranean cost of France or
Spain. Only then they would have to explain why all this property is
registered in false names and law firms. And we would ask them perhaps
where they got the money.'' 


On the recovery of the sailors' bodies and social protection for their
families: 


``We, of course, must take care of the seamen and their families, must
think of the future of the army and the navy and must draw, without any
doubts, certain conclusions. 


``We will try to do what we can to retrieve everybody who are aboard the
Kursk and bring them to the shore. 


``There are different technical options. 


``The simplest and the best solution is to cut the submarine's hull. 


``This will be an international project. 


On the army reform: 


The army ``should match, on the one hand, the needs and, on the other hand,
the possibilities of the State. The Army should be compact, up-to-date and
well-paid. 


``I hope very much that we will be able to make positive changes.'' 


``This, of course, requires some time. 


``We have grounds to hope that following the implementation of the
decisions taken by (Russia's) Security Council, we shall in the end will
attain the decided-upon parameters. 


``Discussions of military reform have been going on in our country for
quite a while -- for at least eight years and maybe even a decade -- but,
unfortunately, there has been little headway in this respect. I hope very
much that we will be able to secure positive changes.'' 


On the project to lift the Kursk and foreign assistance: 


``Under discussion. . . is an option to lift the submarine and transport
it to shallow water. Various options are possible. We are busy working this
out with both our specialists and partners abroad. 


``Incidentally, I would like to avail myself of the opportunity and thank
foreign Heads of State and citizens for the assistance they have given and
for messages of condolence coming in to Russia. 


``It transpires that our main partners - Norwegian specialists -- are
unable to resolve this problem by acting alone either. 


``As the Minister of Foreign Affairs has told me, they will apparently add
equipment with the assistance of Dutch specialists. So, in any case, to
bring the sunken submarine to surface or penetrate into it will be an
international project.'' 


On the accident chronology, rescue work and public information: 


``Let us restore the chronology of developments: 


``Contact with the submarines was lost. At 07.00 I was informed of that by
the Defense Minister. 


``What the military knew at that moment was as follows: 


``First, that contact with the submarine was lost, second, that it was
lying on the seabed and, third, that contact with it was re-established
with the aid of technical means. This was all they knew. 


``Those were military exercises. What was to be told to the general public
at that moment? 


``Of course, it was possible to say that contact with the submarine was
lost. But this was an unconventional situation. Such situations do happen. 


``One can, of course, dispute that and criticize the military but I would
not censure the military for that. 


``Immediately after it became clear that the situation was critical,
information about that was released to the media on August 14. Rescue work
was started immediately. 


``The very fact that the submarine was spotted four-and-a- half hours later
was an indication that rescue work began. 


``Now let us consider the question whether the military had all the
necessary manpower and technical resources for the rescue work or they had
not. 


``Not everyone knows but it must be apparently mentioned now that the
submarine design, which had been worked out in the middle of the 1980s,
made provisions that rescue means and submersibles are produced together
with the submarine and those were employed by our seamen. They were at the
disposal of the Fleet, they were serviceable and it was precisely on them
that the seamen counted. 


``When the defense minister reported to me that they had everything
necessary, he spoke the truth. This was how it was envisioned by the
designers. 


``Let us now take a look at how the situation concerning foreign assistance
developed. The first official assistance offer came on August 15 and the
seamen immediately consented to it. The sides began to fix technical
parameters and make arrangements for joint work. 


``As we know, five days elapsed from Aug. 15 and only on the sixth day
Norwegian divers opened the submarine's hatch. This means, however sad it
would be to say this, that even if we immediately applied for foreign
assistance on Aug 13, the days of August 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th
would have passed all the same. 


``I draw your attention to the fact that the Norwegian divers are not naval
ones. They are commercial firm divers, whose services are engaged at oil
drilling rigs operating on the shelf. 


``I am confident that if our petroleum companies begin to develop the
shelf, they would have similar divers. 


``The question as to why the Navy had no divers is a principled, the most
important one and an answer to it is also understandable in principle. 


``The answer is precisely that the rescue means that were provided for by
the designers in conjunction with the submarine were regarded to have been
sufficient. 


``Besides, without submersibles, even with the use of divers, it is
impossible to rescue people. The following fact is evident: simply opening
a hatch would have killed survivors. Therefore, without a submersible it is
not possible to do anything either.'' 


******


#3
The Times (UK)
August 24, 2000
How the mother of a Kursk sailor was silenced
FROM ALICE LAGNADO IN MURMANSK


RUSSIAN television took pictures of a grieving mother of a Kursk submarine 
sailor being forcibly injected with a sedative after an attempt to confront a 
senior minister about her son's death. 


The film, which shows the middle-aged woman collapsing almost immediately 
after the injection, is a stark reminder of the violent methods employed by 
the KGB against dissidents.At a meeting with relatives of the sailors at the 
naval community of Vidyayevo, where the Kursk submariners were based, the 
woman is first seen trying to address Ilya Klebanov, the Deputy Prime 
Minister in charge of investigating the accident. Overcome by grief, the 
woman begs the minister to answer her plea for help nearly a week after the 
Kursk went down, killing 118 men. 


"How much longer are we going to have to endure this?" she asks the minister. 
"They are there in a tin can . . . and for £35 a month. Do you have children? 
Surely not!" she cries. 


As she speaks a naval officer approaches her in an apparent effort to calm 
her, but she is too distressed to take any notice, in the extraordinary 
incident caught on film by a crew from the local television station in 
Murmansk. 


"Take off your medals!" she shouts at him. As the officer tries to take her 
arm she keeps her gaze fixed firmly on the minister. The next moment a medic 
approaches her from behind and injects her with a sedative. She falls to the 
floor. 


The family liaison officers at the Vidyayevo naval base said: "We give 
sedatives to the relatives and not just to them, to us too. You know, here 
it's not considered to be that terrible. The men from the Kursk were our 
friends." 


The reaction reflects a view in the Russian Navy that such actions are 
acceptable. The Russian Government, and particularly the armed forces, has 
been slow to realise it can no longer control the media. 


*******


#4
The Times (UK)
August 24, 2000
Editorial
CANDID CAMERA 
Russia's past recaptured in a chilling incident 
Photographs of the mother of a Kursk submarine victim, published in The Times 
today, bring graphically to mind a Soviet reality that Russians and 
Westerners hoped had vanished forever. The first shows the angry mother 
yelling: "Our sons are in that tin can for $50 a month." That moment was 
televised worldwide last weekend. The next, captured by a French TV film, was 
not. These pictures show, first, a woman with a syringe behind the mother as 
officials restrain her from in front; and then the mother, apparently 
unconscious, being dragged away. 


These pictures, which Moscow has not yet commented on, cast the most deeply 
sinister hue over an already sombre picture. The sinking of the Kursk has 
left the families of its 118 dead inconsolable. It has also brought political 
trouble for President Putin. In an extraordinary development, he fled the 
Northern Fleet's home port of Murmansk at the dawn of a nationwide day of 
mourning yesterday, when the bereaved families threatened to boycott his 
planned memorial ceremony. Their refusal to trust official reports that their 
relatives are really dead may be a desperate denial of reality, but their 
rage over official blunders throughout the failed rescue attempt is both 
understandable and echoed by millions of their compatriots. 


The embarrassed official response - if officials who use such methods are 
capable of embarrassment - may well be to attempt to pass off this chilling 
footage as the solicitous administration of a needed tranquilliser. More 
likely, it was exactly what it seems, an inexcusable assault on human 
dignity. The only appropriate response would be the promise of a thorough 
inquiry and publication of the full facts. 


Russians must demand no less, for their country has moved on from gulags and 
punitive psychiatry. This incident will compound their suspicions of official 
accounts of this national tragedy. Yet in truth, incompetence and uncertainty 
have been more in evidence than a malign conspiracy to conceal. Even in the 
West, governments are prone to mishandle disaster; and Russia is a beginner 
in communicating with public opinion in moments of grief and shock. There 
were no public admissions of failure in Soviet days; those who died in 
crashes and explosions went quietly to the grave. Only family, or neighbours 
in secret military cities, heard the truth. The rest of the country subsisted 
on suspicion and rumour. 


Today, by contrast, every Russian knows what to be angry about. The 
embarrassment for Mr Putin of being vilified by the Kursk mothers was public, 
as were all the other uncomfortable revelations that earlier leaders might 
have suppressed. Until now, Mr Putin has profited from comparisons with Boris 
Yeltsin; but Russians may now recall Mr Yeltsin's impulsive warmth with 
nostalgia. Mr Putin fled, when he might have embraced. 


Cold though his manner is, Mr Putin is belatedly trying to respond to the 
outraged national mood. Yesterday, he told the nation that he felt to blame 
for the tragedy. He refused offers from defence and navy chiefs and the 
Northern Fleet commander to resign - an explicit rejection of what he called 
the "mistaken" Soviet-era tendency to blame a convenient scapegoat. 


There is more transparency in Mr Putin's attempts, however inept, to adjust 
the dynamic of the relationship between the government and the governed than 
could be seen in Soviet days. But his response to the shocking Murmansk 
photographs will show whether he is still at home with KGB methods, or 
whether he understands the needs, and the rights, of voters in a modern 
democracy. In such a State, reality cannot be airbrushed out. 


******


#5
New York Times
August 24, 2000
[for personal use only] 
A Putin Supporter Recants
By ALLA YAROSHINSKAYA
Alla Yaroshinskaya, who has written extensively on the 1986 Chernobyl
disaster and nonproliferation, was a member of Boris Yeltsin's Presidential
Council. Her latest book is "Kremlin Kisses," a novel. This was translated
by Antonina W. Bouis. 


MOSCOW -- I voted for Vladimir Putin, despite his K.G.B. past. Just five or
six years ago such an act would have been unthinkable. 


When Mr. Putin kept his election promises and swatted the oligarchs, the
oligarchs screamed about suppression of freedom of speech but the rest of
impoverished Russia totally supported him. He didn't drink vodka, didn't
play tennis with his bodyguards, didn't sit in steam baths while Russia
crumbled. He traveled all over the country, shook state debts and taxes out
of oligarchs to pay pensions and salaries, and tried to maintain the
country's face as a great power before the world and, even more important,
before its people. 


Some of my friends among the Moscow intelligentsia and former leaders who
found life after political death in the new parliament assured me that
fascism was coming. But like the people who live outside the Ring Road,
Moscow's Beltway, I did not share their hysteria. I tried to understand Mr.
Putin, and I liked almost everything he was doing. 


Knowing the situation in the country well, I was just afraid that he would
get in over his head. I found justifications for his errors. People were
living in the expectation that Mr. Putin offered Russians a last chance to
live normally. I hope our chances haven't sunk along with the submarine in
the Barents Sea. 


At first, the disaster played out like Chernobyl 14 years ago. Then as
today, there was silence, and then they lied. Everyone lied. Then, as now,
the Soviet authorities refused Western aid to liquidate the catastrophe in
the first crucial days -- at Chernobyl, this was when there was the
greatest radiation danger. (I discovered this refusal six years later in
secret transcripts of Politburo meetings.) 


I realize that emotions are not the best advisers in any situation, and
haste is good only in catching fleas. But it is clear that our leaders have
tried to play games again, even as they offered their belated bursts of
candor and remorse. The military's versions of what happened -- a training
error, a leftover bomb from World War II or a collision with an undefined
"large object" -- send conflicting signals. The last account, which sounds
the most conspiratorial, actually sounds plausible, because such collisions
have occurred regularly. 


According to unofficial data, Soviet and Russian subs have had about 150
accidents. Fourteen collisions between Soviet or Russian atomic subs and
vessels of other nations are known. Soviet and Russian subs have collided
with American ones at least 10 times, most recently in 1992 and 1993. 


The problem now is that any statement of blame is suspect, and will
continue to be unless Russia calls in a commission under aegis of the
United Nations to investigate. 


Yesterday, Mr. Putin expressed "responsibility and guilt," something
Mikhail Gorbachev never got around to after Chernobyl. Mr. Putin also faced
the angry relatives of the submarine's crew in a marathon meeting. But
contrast him with the president of Latvia, who immediately interrupted her
vacation and returned to work after a bombing at a shopping center in her
country last week, even though no one was dead at the time (one person has
since died). 


Russians, who have taken the tragedy of the submarine's crew personally,
are once again disillusioned with their leaders. The difference now is that
they have learned to express their anger effectively. In 1986, Vladimir
Putin was a K.G.B. agent in East Germany. He no doubt remembers that
Chernobyl, or rather its cover-up, was the beginning of the collapse of the
Communist empire. 


*******


#6
Vremya MN
August 23, 2000
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only] 
RUSSIA'S POPULATION DECLINING STEADILY FOR VARIOUS REASONS
By Olga PAPKOVA, Marina SOKOLOVSKAYA

According to the Interfax agency, the State Statistics 
Committee (Goskomstat) of Russia has reported a decrease in the 
country's population by 425,000 people. The so-called natural 
decrease in the population grew compared with the first half of 
last year, but then it was compensated by 18.6 percent through 
migration growth. Now the picture is different. The available 
data in absolute figures are as follows: about 623,500 children 
were born and 146,200 people died in Russia over the first six 
months of this year.
At the same time, in an interview given to the Vremya MN 
newspaper, press-secretary of Goskomstat Olga Kolesnikova 
explained: "All the data on the country's population now are 
estimates. The last population census was carried out in the 
Soviet Union in 1989. At that time, the Russian Federation's 
population numbered 147 million. The next census will be 
conducted in 2001. After it, we shall know the exact population 
figures and what we are in the mirror of statistics.
In 1993, Russia's population was estimated at 148.3 
million people. This insignificant growth was achieved at the 
expense of migrants.
Back in the late 1960s, demographers warned that Russia's 
population would tend to decline.
It would be a mistake to connect the decrease in the 
number of the population only with the events of the last 
decade. It is rather the result of our state policy pursued 
over the past 90 years, and also the consequence of wars, 
revolutions and economic upheavals.
Besides, the tendency to switch over to the pattern of a 
family with 1-2 children is characteristic of all 
industrialised countries, in which women are active members of 
society who want to do more than just look after children. 
We asked specialists in various spheres to comment on the 
available data.
According to the Ministry of Health, the main causes of 
early deaths in Russia are food poisoning, fatal accidents, 
suicide and murders. The country's eternal problem is still 
alcoholism. Last year alone, 2.1 million people were kept under 
medical observation in medical and prophylactic centres for 
alcoholism and alcoholic psychosis. In the 1990s, per capita 
alcohol consumption in this country exceeded 10 litres a year 
(according to standards of the World Health Organisation, the 
situation is considered dangerous when this figure exceeds 8 
litres).
Vladimir Iontsev, head of the demography department at 
Moscow State University, said that the death-rate higher than 
the birth-rate is typical of the majority of industrialised 
countries. However, in those countries even small population 
enables the country to develop normally. For Russia, population 
shortages, especially in the northern and Far Eastern regions, 
are fraught with unpredictable dangers, up to the country's 
split into separate industrial regions.

*******

#7
Izvestia
August 24, 2000
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only] 
KURSK SUBMARINE ACCIDENT FAILS TO BECOME POLITICAL DISASTER
By Yevgeny KRUTIKOV

The attitude of Russians to authorities and personally to 
President Putin following tragic events in the Barents Sea has 
remained practically unchanged (within a permissible margin of 
error), according to recent polls. Russians mourn sincerely and 
deeply the perished sailors, but most of them are refusing so 
far to draw any socially relevant conclusions from their 
emotions. 
There are practically always people who believe that the 
President and government are to blame for everything: an 
average of 5 to 7 per cent of those polled by all kinds of 
sociological services invariably blame authorities for all 
their personal and national troubles. They are a special brand 
of people, who unfortunately are very active politically and 
publicly (especially in the spring and on days when magnetic 
storms rage).
The attitude of an emotionally steadier electorate to Vladimir 
Putin in the wake of the sinking of the submarine Kursk has 
remained practically unchanged. It is almost 60 per cent of 
Muscovites, according to ROMIR findings. Another 3 per cent 
changed their attitude to the President for the better.
His rating has been steady and unfaltering. It is immune 
to everything. A gap between the emotional perception of the 
sailors' deaths and a public perception of the event as an 
element of political life has proved to be so wide that it even 
ruled out any change, however insignificant, in the degree of 
trust (or mistrust) of authority on the part of society. Also 
powerless was the "magic of television," which is so believed 
in by most of professional "wordmongers": two major and popular 
television channels have every day for a full week been playing 
up the subject of responsibility of authorities and Putin 
personally for all real and imagined peculiarities of the 
submarine's sinking and the subsequent rescue operation. They 
failed. But it is unlikely that people have become more 
resistant to the hypnotic effects of the television screens. 
Simply no one is drawing socially relevant conclusions. 
On the one hand, there seems to be a kind of political 
apathy - once they like the President they no longer pay any 
attention to his moves, inaction, triumphs or mistakes. A 
situation in general traditional for Russia - with the state 
leading a life separate from that of the people, while public 
opinion polls only serve to reflect seasonal fluctuations in 
sympathies and antipathies. But on the other hand, it is not so 
much political apathy as an emotional block. People are 
treating the death of sailors as a human tragedy in which any 
moves by authorities (even blamable) are secondary. Everyone 
empathises with the families, and even absolute landlubbers 
have learned over the past week to respect navymen, but they do 
not project their attitude to the state as a whole. 
In fact the stable ratings enjoyed by authority - 
regardless of real developments - have demonstrated these past 
days one more substantial difference between the Russian and 
the western civilisations. Russians (alas or not - it depends 
on whether you like it or not) prefer not to exert pressure on 
the authorities and do not demand from them a full account of 
their actions. The prevailing view is roughly the following: we 
have elected you and will now keep loving you until you stick 
in our throat, but meanwhile do not prod us too much for no 
valid reason, for otherwise we will start criticising you in 
our kitchens might and main. It is a kind of "social contract" 
and it suits everybody.
Authorities feel they are 100 per cent protected against public 
opinion convulsions in-between elections and are on friendly 
terms with pollsters and spin doctors whose public role in such 
a situation, if one may put it so, is somewhat different from 
the one prearranged for them, upon pondering the gist of these 
professions. Society meanwhile glumly goes about its personal 
business, translating, whenever needed, a national tragedy into 
personal emotions. 

Public Opinion 

The Russian President's rating has fluctuated recently 
either way by as much as 8 per cent, according to the Public 
Opinion Fund (FOM). The record low was registered in the 
closing days of June - when the fewest number of Russians (64 
per cent) said that they thought well of the President. During 
that period, incidentally, the number of those disliking Putin 
was not at its maximum - there were more of those who were 
indifferent to the President or just gave no thought to it. 
Another drop in popular sympathies made itself visible after 
July 20, but so far, judging by published findings, it has not 
yet reached the June low. 
VTsIOM ratings show comparable changes in the assessment 
of Putin as a top official. The number of those approving his 
moves was the lowest early in July (61 per cent), then began to 
grow to a record 73 per cent, and by tragic August 21 had 
fallen to 65 per cent. The likely reason is that only a handful 
of citizens blame Putin for the accident and possibly the 
failure of the rescue operation. Most of the Russians consider 
the cause of the tragedy to be ill luck (37 per cent), 
negligence or unpreparedness of admirals and inadequate 
equipment (42 per cent in total), or even NATO's intrigues (14 
per cent). Putin can be faulted only for "weak control" over 
the military - this reason is cited only by 21 per cent of the 
respondents. 

*******


#8
From: "Peter Lavelle" <plavelle@metropol.ru>
Subject: Untimely Thoughts: The Meaning and Usage of Adversity
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000


Untimely Thoughts: The Meaning and Usage of Adversity
Peter Lavelle


The Kursk tragedy has given all reason for pause. Will this catastrophic
event be compounded if nothing is learned from it? Will the loss of so
many young men and the pain and suffering of the families and loved ones be
all in vein? I believe that, in wake of this enormous loss, a valuable
opportunity exists for both the Kremlin and society-at-large to learn and
make meaningful the loss of the Kursk's crew. If not, we all become
murders of their memory, a crime legitimizing a crime of benign neglect.
If we allow this to happen, we become an accessory to their early and
meaningless passage. Such an event demands that we take a stand and make a
claim about the importance about our children, neighbors, and the person we
do not know riding the Moscow Metro. The usage of adversity is the ability
and desire to find something constructive and meaningful from a tragedy. I
thought this was what political life without Yelstin & Co. was supposed to
be about Mr. Putin. 


As a child, submarines were my hobby and passion. My greatest hope was to
be a captain of a "boat", to command a vessel in the "Silent Service". My
poor eyesight always bedeviled me though. I followed the saga of the Kursk
- mostly via the Internet, refusing to seriously consider the accuracy of
domestic sources - in anxious quietude. Knowledge of the American Scorpion
and Thresher tragedies were always on my mind. The chances of survival
"when there is a problem" in the submarine service is only comparable to
space missions. When things go wrong, they tend to go very wrong. The
Kremlin's attitude to the human element - even if this is this tragedy
negatively impacted national prestige, the importance of those drafted into
this service, some of whom had never seen the sea - can only leave one in
the most distraught of states. This is arrogance to the extreme,
detrimental to the very "reason of state" itself. 


Of course the game of who is blame has already begun - careers destroyed
and advanced. Even military doctrine, shamefully politicized and made
public over the last few weeks, may finally be revised. This country's
military presence in the world may now be in he balance. More importantly,
now we stand to see what kind of learning curve the Kremlin has. Will
Putin use this tragedy as a means to do what he has claimed to be his goal
upon his assumption to the presidency - the development of an effective
state under responsible leadership? Will he have the determination and
fearlessness to finally rid the state of "rent-seekers", those who make
such horrible events not only possible but also more likely? Mr. President
seize the moment!


For those who claim the president intends to destroy freedom of expression,
last week's media coverage of the tragedy should allay these fears (for
now). Mr. Putin has been supremely embarrassed and shamed in the public
sphere. The moral outrage of the average Russian has been noted. The
president will recover from this, but the seed of mistrust and continued
despair have been planted. Instead of moving forward with the belief of
almost invincibility, Putin will now have to be ever more concerned with
those he is charged to serve and protect. Tragedy, unlike successes, tend
to pull communities closer together. On the heels of the Moscow bombing,
outrage has energized the nation. Moral outrage is the only power of the
powerlessness when democracy either does not exist or has been rendered
vacuous. The loss the Kursk will not be quickly forgotten. For those who
doubt this, I draw your attention to the dramatic and world historic events
that culminated in Gdansk twenty years ago. The power of the powerless is
indeed something to be mindful of, even feared -certainly respected. As
has been said time and again, Russia (and Russians) is never as strong or
weak as she may appear. Russia has a collective inheritance - a collective
memory - that should not be underestimated. 


The Kremlin's omissions and commissions of the last week is not an
apparition of Bolshevik-like behavior, as some have claimed. The
Bolshevik's were motivated by an ideology of hatred and destruction. Their
goals eliminated countless millions lost in the name of an illusory future.
They built what they intended reality: an intellectual and cultural
wasteland, a moonscape for the true believers of their faith, a society
that could not even recognize itself. It is extremely doubtful the reasons
surrounding the sinking of the Kursk go beyond incompetence and
irresponsibility. Putin is not Lenin. However, Putin is now being forced
and challenged to learn what Russian politics and social demands can and
should mean under the conditions of modernity. I still think he is up to
the task, to believe otherwise is to completely write-off this country and
her people. The revolution continues. 


Peter J. Lavelle
Head of Research
IFC Metropol
Moscow, Russia 
plavelle@metropol.ru 


*******


#9
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 
From: David Price <Bron@compuserve.com>
Subject: Russia and the danger for the European Union


Dear Mr Johnson,
Your readers may be interested in two books about Russia:
1. 'Russia and the danger for the European Union' and 
2. 'New Cold War or Common European Home?'


They are published by the independent Schuman Project in Brussels,
Belgium. (web site: www.schuman.org) Robert Schuman was the European
Union's founding father. His prime aim in founding the EU was to create a
new type of peace system to enhance freedom and security. The action he
undertook fifty years ago of reconciling former enemy states and
introducing Community (or supranational) law provided the democratising
basis for EU's present, secure, personal freedoms, human rights and
prosperity. 


In the 1950s Schuman predicted the fall of the USSR; his political action
to unify Europe took that 'certainty' as he called it as part of its logic.
Today the EU has a 1300 km border with Russia. 


1. 'Russia and the danger for the European Union'. Russia's burgeoning and
pervasive mafias and its authoritarian (and unpredictable) government could
shake the foundations of the European Union and its enlargement to the
East, the book says. Russia's economy has dropped by half, resulting in a
depression far worse than the Great Depression of USA (31%). A humiliated
Russia is suffering the shock of change from super-power to super-pauper.
Its economy is based on 'robber-capitalism', corruption and rising
nationalism. The IMF considers Russia among the world's most corrupt
countries. Is this any basis for a flourishing democracy, internal and
European security? RUSSIA IS A CENTRAL PROBLEM OF EUROPE TODAY.


The danger. The West's present response is likely to leave Europe more
divided than ever, the book warns. Beyond rich and poor Europe, NATO and
non-NATO Europe, a grey area will be the bone of contention between the
West and a rising, perhaps desperate, new Russia.


Robert Schuman foresaw the fall of the USSR before 2000. He created an
alternative system of security when he founded the EU. The pioneering
supranational or Community method that he initiated not only forged a moral
bond reconciling former enemies but created a new system for regulating
international relations and increasing internal freedom and democracy. It
should be applied again to heal the continent.


The European Union has a historic opportunity and duty to help an
impoverished and humiliated Russia choose a democratic path. The central
and eastern European countries, candidates for the EU membership, can act
as a bridge in a new community between the enlarged EU and the former
Soviet Union. The step by step policy options are spelled out.


$18 plus postage 270 pages


2. 'New Cold War or Common European Home?' In the 20th century 60 million
Europeans, both civilian and military, died in wars. Further untold
millions were maimed, locked in gulags and concentration camps for their
politics, beliefs or race. With the great European Revolution of 1989,
Europe was offered a historic opportunity for peace-enhancing unity of the
whole continent. Instead the European Union began decades-long negotiations
for membership. What did Robert Schuman say Europe should do when, as he
predicted, the Soviet Union would collapse before the turn of the century?
Agree as first condition on 80,000 pages of European regulations on matters
like pesticide use and fish farming? Or establish the real bases for
lasting peace based on the 'break-through' that brought former enemies
together? That 'break-though' relates to the method and philosphy and has a
half century record of success. 


'It is our duty to be ready,' Schuman said. The book provides positive
criticism how EU and US policy can be changed to rescue Europe's
blood-stained continent.
$7 plus postage 100 pages


The books can be obtained from 
David Heilbron Price, 55 rue de Mot, B-1040 Brussels, Belgium. 
tel/fax: 010 322 230 7621 email: dhp@schuman.org 


The Schuman Project involves in-depth biographical research into Schuman's
political and philosophical approach to peace and European unity. A number
of other papers are available on historical, legal and political subjects
relating to Schuman's work. 


*******


#10
Moscow Times
August 24, 2000 
POWER PLAY: Dangerous Death Throes Of Soviet Beast 
By Yevgenia Albats 


August has become a truly Russian month: tragic and incomprehensible. 


Of course, it is merely a coincidence that the dramatic events surrounding 
the Kursk sub f that symbol of former Soviet might f were unfolding on 
exactly the same dates as the 1991 attempted coup (Aug. 19-21). Nevertheless, 
an ATV independent television documentary that commemorated those three 
fateful days in 1991 was aired the same day the Kursk crew was pronounced 
dead, and the film assumed a special, somewhat unexpected meaning: We won 
then; we lost now. 


Of course, it is also a coincidence that the Kursk tragedy was unfolding on 
the same date as the Russian financial system was pronounced dead two years 
ago (Aug. 17, 1998). But whether you believe in the spell of dates or not f I 
do not f you cannot help seeing that these three dramatic events are closely 
linked. All three events are signs of the same process: the death throes of 
the former Soviet empire, the military-industrial complex of which was the 
backbone of the system, providing both ideological and economic grounds for 
the empire's existence. 


A monster dies hard. And that death is taking its toll. The failure of the 
August 1991 coup, which led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union later that 
year, was seen by many as the final victory of democratic forces over the 
totalitarian state. That was an erroneous perception. Minds worldwide were 
ensnared by the dreadful illusion that the 70-plus years of communism were 
simply an accident in our history, and that all it takes is to replace the 
bad, old guys f communists f with the new, young guys f democrats f introduce 
private property and the free market, and the nation would emerge as a 
democratic state. It did not. And it will not soon do so, as the events 
surrounding the Kursk tragedy have clearly shown. 


The August 1998 financial crisis was seen by many as an unfortunate setback 
in the development of the new Russian state, caused by the corruption of its 
bureaucracy and misdoings of the oligarchs. That, too, was an erroneous 
perception. That crisis, in fact, signified the collapse of the Soviet style 
of management, which was no longer capable of running the country in the 
changing conditions of its exposure to the outside world. Yes, a new economy 
has emerged over the last nine years, but it accounts for only a small 
segment of the former Soviet state. 


But the spine of the Soviet system, its military industrial complex, which 
consumed 40 per cent of the Soviet GDP and 70 percent of its labor force f 
that big, fat monster is still alive. The inertia of its large body has 
slowed down the inevitability of events like that of the Kursk before. The 
1998 financial collapse accelerated the agony and has made the outcomes of 
that process even more dangerous. But our authorities and their international 
counterparts chose to close their eyes, hoping that time would do the job. It 
will, yes, but at great cost. 


Today, it is clear that what was predicted by some analysts long ago has come 
to pass: The state has become a ticking bomb f or a conglomeration of many 
ticking bombs f comprised of its nuclear subs, nuclear power stations, 
plants, chemical factories and many other thousands of components of the 
Soviet military-industrial complex. Stripped of finances to keep those bombs 
secure and under control, the dying body has started to decompose. Yes, it is 
true that the final collapse of the Soviet military-industrial complex will 
mean the end of the Soviet superpower as well. 


The problem is that this agony is extremely dangerous, not just for Russia, 
but for the entire world. Therefore, the international community should be 
prepared to invest money to make the death of the Soviet military-industrial 
complex as peaceful as possible f if that is still possible. 


Yevgenia Albats is an independent journalist based in Moscow. 


******


#11
Russia: Chechen Refugees In Ingushetia Survive In Makeshift Camps
By Sophie Lambroschini


Many of Chechnya's 200,000 refugees now living in neighboring Ingushetia are 
preparing themselves for a second winter of war that, they fear, will be 
worse than the first. In part one of a two-part series, RFE/RL correspondent 
Sophie Lambroschini reports from Ingushetia on the refugees' grim lives 
inside makeshift camps. 


Sleptsovsk, Ingushetia; 23 August 2000 (RFE/RL) -- At the Soglasye camp in 
Ingushetia, Chechen refugees are getting ready for another winter. Adam and 
Yakha are building what looks like a pen for livestock out of tree branches 
only 10 meters away from their big green tent. Adam is very proud of his 
construction -- the thin branches woven around four pillars don't need a 
single nail -- hardly affordable after eight months away from home.


But this coop is not for the two calves munching at a clump of sun-burnt 
grass nearby. It's for Adam's family. Covered with clay, with a tiny "window" 
inside, it will make a home for his nephew, his wife and their new-born baby. 


Facing a second winter away from their homes, Chechen refugee women in army 
tents in the camps, or on abandoned farms elsewhere in Ingushetia, say it 
will undoubtedly be worse than last year. They say: "We've already spent a 
winter here, that's why we're afraid. The tents are rotting away. Rain is 
coming through the roof, everything is wet and the children are small. You 
can see we don't have any floorboards, no comfort at all." 


The tents were set up as makeshift homes for the thousands who fled across 
the border last autumn, when Russian bombs leveled many villages in Chechnya. 
By now, they are full of holes, their wooden ground planks rotting away. The 
refugees have exchanged for food what few valuable possessions they were able 
to bring with them -- a television set, a gold chain, or a diamond earring. 
Their quilts and clothes have withered away. 


But despite the growing difficulties, many Chechens still prefer the relative 
safety of the camps to the haphazard violence in their home republic. Yakha 
is convinced that few are going back because they trust neither the Russian 
authorities nor the separatist fighters. She says:


"The people don't believe [in peace] because so far Russia has not managed to 
do anything. Russia thinks that it has won, but it is very wrong. Any minute 
the [Chechen fighters] can take back a village. So, at any moment, the 
bombings can begin again -- do we really need that? To have lived like 
gypsies for eight months and then die? If you go home [to Chechnya] you go to 
war, not home. If you have the strength to fight you should go right away. 
Take up arms and go. Because you can't live there [in any other way] "


Zara is from Gekhi-Chu, a Chechen mountain village south of Achkhoi-Martan. 
She arrived at the Soglasye camp with her two sons only in March, after the 
worst of the fighting was over. Zara feared that her sons would be taken away 
by the Russian military and tortured in a so-called "filtration" camp until 
the family could find enough money to bail them out. Survival, she says, is 
possible only outside of Chechnya:


"There's no work there, we have to eat. There's nothing to eat [in Chechnya]. 
If you don't earn any money, you can't do anything there."


As part of her preparations for the coming winter, Zeinab recently went to 
her Grozny home to get what she could. 


"I went home to clean up. It was such a mess. There was nothing left in the 
room . I brought back one teapot, three spoons and a fork -- and two chairs 
that I had left at the market."


There are other signs in the camps of longer stays to come. A sign outside 
one shop reads "shoe repair." And the Austrian humanitarian aid organization 
Hilfswerk is setting up sewing factories in the camps. In Soglasye, the 
factory has been working for almost two months, employing 15 women.


The women refugees at the sewing machines signed a six-month contract with 
Hilfswerk. The Austrians supply the cloth, needles and thread. They financed 
the construction of the small wooden building and pay some $35 (1,000 rubles) 
as a monthly salary. The products -- children's dresses, trousers and smocks 
-- are picked up each month and distributed to the handicapped and to 
orphanages.


Other humanitarian aid organizations are also continuing their efforts in the 
camps. A new shower block financed by the International Red Cross is 
functioning in Soglasye, supplied daily with fresh water. The camp's field 
kitchen is again working on a regular basis, thanks to the combined efforts 
of the Red Cross and the Russian Ministry for Emergency Situations. 


Khedda Omarkhadzhiyeva, a psychologist working for the French organization 
Medecins du Monde finds another sign of prolonged exile in the continuing 
in-flow of new refugees Her job is to monitor and treat post-traumatic 
syndromes in children -- and often in their parents as well. By working with 
them, she has an overview of the coming and going of some 5,000 to 6,000 
refugees.


Omarkhadzhiyeva says that the number of new refugees is growing. According to 
her, some of them are coming back after several months spent trying to sit 
out the war at home. The children she sees now are often even more 
traumatized than before.


"The condition of the children is a lot worse. Most often, that's linked to 
the unexpected bombing and shelling by the air force and the artillery -- the 
army took even more severe measures. This is reflected in the children 
because they are the most sensitive part of the population. The symptoms of 
psychological trauma change from one person to the other -- fears, fits, 
fainting, insomnia, aggression, moodiness. Recently, we had some difficult 
cases -- girls mainly -- who even in the camps lost consciousness simply 
because they heard helicopters flying overhead."


But children living with their parents in camps do have access to schooling. 
That means that camp life even under leaking tents has its advantages -- 
particularly, the ready help of humanitarian organizations. For that reason, 
places in the camps are now hard to obtain. "Getting a place in a tent," as 
it is called, needs the authorization of Russia's Emergency Situations 
Ministry -- and can cost $140 (3,500 rubles) in bribe money. 


*******

Web page for CDI Russia Weekly: 
http://www.cdi.org/russia
Archive for JRL (under construction):
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson

 

Return to CDI's Home Page  I  Return to CDI's Library