September 12, 2000    
This Date's Issues: 4506  4507  4508

Johnson's Russia List
#4507
12 September 2000
davidjohnson@erols.com


[Note from David Johnson:
1. Reuters: IMF expert upbeat on Russia, hopeful on Ukraine.
2. "ransitions Online: Jen Tracy, OUR TAKE: Romancing the Stone.
A TOL editorial on the charming Mr. Putin.
3. Reuters: Power grid failure shuts Russian nuclear plants.
4. AFP: Vodka war shakes, stirs Russia.
5. gazeta.ru: The Price To Pay For Berezovsky's Shares.
6. David Jones: Krasnoyarsk 26.
7. Reuters: OPEC output rise seen having little Russian impact.
8. Moscow Times: Face the Nation: Putin and the Kursk Families.
(Transcript of meeting)
9. Trud: Vyacheslav Nikonov, TIME FOR IMPROVING THE STATE.
10. Washington Post: Sharon LaFraniere, Russian Media Crackdown 
Nothing New for Regions.
11. Wall Street Journal: Guy Chazan, Chechnya, Kursk Debacles 
Prompt Russia to Slash Military by 800,000.]


******


#1
IMF expert upbeat on Russia, hopeful on Ukraine

WASHINGTON, Sept 11 (Reuters) - A drive toward a workable, law-based society 
and economy is prompting new optimism about Russia, a senior official from 
the International Monetary Fund said on Monday. 


John Odling-Smee, responsible for ties between the IMF and countries of the 
former Soviet Union, also said he hoped Ukraine would soon be able to finish 
work on a reform program which the IMF could back with cash. 


Speaking to an IMF publication, IMF Survey, he said countries across the 
region needed to build opportunities for investment, liberalize their 
financial systems, protect property rights and curb corruption. 


"We have been very concerned about Russia's fiscal difficulties, which at 
least up to last year came about largely because enterprises were not willing 
to pay the full amount of tax and the government did not have the authority 
to extract the tax from them," he said. 


"But...I think there are grounds for optimism, including the quality of 
debate within Russia in the last six or 12 months about what is needed. 


"I've been very impressed with the consistent and clear message coming from 
the current Russian leadership that they have to behave like a civilized 
country, which is a special expression used in Russia that means a law-based 
society and economy." 


Odling-Smee said reforms had been slow in Russia's neighbor Ukraine, but the 
authorities had recently made good progress on reforms. 


"I am hopeful they can complete a structural reform package that would really 
signify a break with the past and would ... show that Ukraine was now joining 
the countries that are moving toward a market economy at a decent pace," he 
said. "If that is the case, I expect that the IMF would resume funding." 


The IMF halted its latest loan to Ukraine last year amid doubts on reforms 
and after an independent audit found that the Ukrainians misled the fund 
about reserve levels. 


Ukraine last month repaid $100 million of IMF money ahead of time and agreed 
that future IMF cash would be subject to tight controls. 


Odling-Smee said the misreporting found in Ukraine and elsewhere might simply 
be continuing a Soviet-era tradition of not telling the center about what was 
going on. There was no evidence that countries had misappropriated IMF cash. 


"No evidence has been found so far of any misappropriation of IMF cash in the 
sense of IMF money falling into the wrong hands," he said. 


*******


#2
Date: 11 Sep 2000 
From: "Transitions Online" <mail@tol.cz>
Subject: New at TOL


OUR TAKE: Romancing the Stone
A TOL editorial on the charming Mr. Putin
By Jen Tracy


More than ever, I wish I had spent this past Saturday night in a bar-and
that I was not a member of the weaker sex. Instead, with the excited
anticipation of a Russia-watcher and former Moscow reporter, I stayed home
to watch Russian President Vladimir Putin on CNN's "Larry King Live."
Looking to find more fuel for the anti-Putin fire, I sat in front of the
television--an hour early just to make sure I didn't miss anything--with
pen and paper in hand.


For the first 30 minutes, however, the high-profile interview could just as
well have been between a silly old man and nicely polished stone. The only
thing that brought life to the dialogue was Larry King's hot pink, oxford
shirt. King's high-school questions were not exactly hard-hitting. They
talked about the ongoing war in Chechnya, freedom of the press, the sunken
Kursk submarine, the U.S. National Missile Defense system, etc. Putin was
hardly shaken by the talk-show guru's lack of research and knowledge of the
real issues. And, like a high-school student, Larry seemed to have
forgotten to do his homework. Or, was he asked to take it easy on Mr. Putin?


Questions like "Why should you care, Mr. Putin, whether we have a national
missile defense system," and "you don't really want to keep the press from
saying bad things about you, do you?" didn't cause the Russian leader to
falter. Rather, he was given the opportunity to reiterate statements he has
given thousands of time. Not once did he falter, not once did he hesitate.
His answers were sober, intelligent, and, well, predictable. Meanwhile,
King stumbled through pronunciations of such names as Boris Berezovsky and
Vladimir Gusinsky. Putin barely moved, and as he repeated things he's said
over and over, his face was expressionless and stony.


But then something highly disturbing happened and the brightness of Larry's
shirt faded into the background. Putin grinned.


At the same time that my disappointments with Larry King were fomenting, my
hatred of Vladimir Putin started to recede--all because of a grin. Now I'm
in trouble, I thought. After all, many of us have spent long hours hating
Putin, berating him for press censorship, a brutal campaign in
Chechnya--maybe even for orchestrating last year's bombings of Moscow
residential buildings in order to gain popular support for a second war. We
wanted to catch him with his pants down on "Larry King Live."


In light of this, it was to my horror that every time he grinned his
charming, modest, and playful grin, I found myself liking him. As the
interview became more personal, and Putin shed his grim demeanor, my mind
began a very dark and troubling battle with itself. No, I will not let this
happen, I repeated out loud over and over.


When the conversation took a turn toward the sauna, however, it was more
than I could take. King asked Putin about a cross he always wears, a cross
his mother gave him. "There's a funny story about that cross, actually,"
Putin says. A while back, when he was enjoying the sauna at his dacha with
a friend, he had taken the cross off so it wouldn't be damaged. "But a fire
broke out and we had to run out of the sauna house naked," he said. He had
my attention. I remember something about how the cross was the only thing
that survived the fire and was amazed by that--but I was still thinking
about the naked bit. Vladimir, Volodya, was looking right at me, grinning
when he said it.


If I didn't know better I would have sworn he addressed me personally,
saying "You like me, don't you? You spend all your time hating me, but you
just can't help it, can you?"


That wouldn't have been the first time Putin has deeply troubled the mind
of a journalist determined to see him exposed for what he really is--a
Russian Pinochet. In her column for "The Moscow Times," staff writer and
"TOL" contributor Anna Badkhen complained of having erotic Putin dreams,
and she documented the similar dreams of others. She's rather upset that
she has laughed at his subtle jokes and nodded her head in approval of his
intelligent discourse--after all, she knows who he really is, and she
refuses to be fooled.


I once authored a story called "Putin, A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing."
Journalists, especially female ones, would do best to constantly remind
themselves of this, because that is one charming sheep.


******


#3
Power grid failure shuts Russian nuclear plants
By Peter Graff

MOSCOW, Sept 11 (Reuters) - A failure in its crumbling electric grid forced 
Russia to shut down several nuclear reactors over the weekend, including 
those at a gargantuan top-secret fuel reprocessing plant, officials said on 
Monday. 


Officials assured the public there was no danger, but the head of the huge, 
secret Mayak reprocessing plant, in the remote Ural mountains, said only his 
staff's ``near-military'' vigilance, had prevented serious trouble. 


The incident follows a catastrophic accident on a nuclear submarine last 
month that killed all 118 crew and a fire that gutted Moscow's television 
tower, and draws further attention to the dangerously decrepit state of 
Russian infrastructure. 


``Everything is fine,'' an employee in the press office of the Atomic Energy 
Ministry said, adding that there was no danger. 


Reactors at Mayak were shut down on Saturday after the power grid failure cut 
off the plant's outside electricity supply for 45 minutes, its director 
Vitaly Sadovnikov told Itar-Tass news agency. He said no dangerous materials 
had been emitted. 


Workers were restarting the first of the reactors on Monday. Reports did not 
say how many reactors had been affected in all. 


A reactor at the Beloyarsk civilian nuclear power plant in nearby Sverdlovsk 
province was also shut down, provincial power company Sverdlovenergo said in 
a statement received by Reuters. It also reported no leaks of radiation. 


Sverdlovenergo said the power cuts were probably caused by a short circuit on 
a high voltage line in its grid, but that an investigation was underway. 


QUESTIONS ABOUT NUCLEAR SAFETY 


The shutdowns, especially those at the Mayak plant, go to the heart of 
questions about nuclear safety in Russia. 


Mayak -- in Ozyorsk, a closed town of 86,000 people surrounded by a double 
wire fence -- is the biggest nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in the world, 
handling radioactive material from all across Russia. 


It was here that the plutonium for the first Soviet nuclear bomb was produced 
in 1949. The town's very existence was once a secret. 


It is now also the site of a cavernous depot, being built with U.S. help, to 
keep 6,000 bombs' worth of plutonium and weapons-grade uranium from falling 
into the wrong hands. 


``We were saved from major trouble by the near-military discipline which we 
still retain at the plant,'' Sadovnikov told Tass. ``The staff responded 
well, demonstrating the knowledge of their equipment and not permitting any 
harmful emissions.'' 


The U.S. embassy said it could not immediately comment on whether American 
projects at Mayak were affected. 


Tass quoted the head of the Beloyarsk civilian power plant as saying workers 
were also attempting to restart their reactor. 


``None of the station's employees can remember such sharp fluctuations in the 
power and frequency of the charge in the Sverdlovenergo grid,'' Oleg Sarayev 
said. 


``Thanks to the precise safety system of the nuclear power station and the 
flawless discipline of its workers, the block was shut down according to 
procedure.'' 


Two non-nuclear power plants in the region were shut down as well, 
Sverlovenergo's statement said. 


******


#4
Vodka war shakes, stirs Russia


MOSCOW, Sept 11 (AFP) - 
A vodka war is raging in Russia, with competitors being slain by hitmen, 
hundreds of thousands of bottles seized by police and more than 20,000 people 
dead since January after drinking bootleg liquor.


The "kings of vodka" are locked in a pitiless struggle to conquer a market 
worth some 12 billion dollars split equally between the legal and the black 
markets, according to experts quoted by the daily Kommersant and the weekly 
Profil.


Sergei Kolesnikov, a member of the Smolensk regional assembly in the west and 
owner of a big vodka plant, was shot dead with his driver in July, the victim 
of killers hired by a group controlling the local bootleg market.


Ten days earlier Valery Mironov, one of the main vodka suppliers in the 
Moscow region, had been riddled with eight pistol bullets in a suburb of the 
capital.


In Moscow itself the methods used are scarcely less ferocious: two top men at 
Russia's leading vodka manufacturer Kristal are battling for the leadership 
through bomb scares, intervention by armed groups and mutual threats.


In 1999, vodka production in Russia totalled 1.34 billion litres, up 60 
percent from the previous year. But this already impressive figure only 
represented half the real production, with the rest coming from clandestine 
distilleries.


While small producers stay faithful to the old methods, hiding stills in the 
countryside, most of the bootleggers operate on an industrial scale.


Police in April discovered a clandestine distillery run by two Chechens near 
Moscow. The enterprise operated around the clock employing 120 workers, all 
Chechens, and produced 10,000 bottles of vodka a day -- bringing in millions 
of dollars in profits within just a few months.


In June near Moscow police seized a warehouse containing no less than 150,000 
bottles of illicit vodka, while their colleagues in the southern region of 
Stavropol intercepted trucks carrying 100,000 bottles of hooch.


One month earlier, 220,000 litres of 96-proof alcohol heading for a 
clandestine distillery was seized in Saint Petersburg.


According to the interior ministry, 25 million litres of vodka was seized in 
1999 and 4,700 distilleries were found in the most unlikely places: strategic 
military units, garages, peaceful retirement homes or plush country 
residences -- like the one belonging to a Volgograd "godfather" whose cellars 
concealed 26,000-litre vats.


This contraband vodka is responsible for the deaths of thousands of people 
every year. The number of deaths from adulterated liquor went up by 47 
percent over the first six months of this year and is already approaching 
24,000, the figure for the whole of 1999, according to MP Gennady Kulik.


Bootleg vodka often contains industrial alcohol or other surprising 
ingredients. In April, one trafficker arrested near Moscow admitted that he 
made his vodka with Fialka, an alcohol product used to clean windows.


Even in the time of the Soviet Union with its police state, the authorities 
never managed to tame the vodka linchpins.


Today, a bottle of vodka costs around 60 rubles (nearly two dollars) in the 
shops, or half that if it is "illegal"... ample reason for the private stills 
and the clandestine distilleries to continue working overtime in Russia. 


******


#5
gazeta.ru
September 11, 2000
The Price To Pay For Berezovsky's Shares
In addition to Sergey Dorenko's controversial analytical political debate TV 
show, another weekly political show Vladislav Flyarkovsky's Nedelya was also 
pulled off the air on Saturday. The debate continues as to the motives behind 
the weekend's censorship of political debate on Russia's TV screens. 
Some observers claim that the two shows were pulled off the air because 
both the TV journalists gladly accepted Boris Berezovky's offer to join the 
committee to manage his steak in the ORT channel. 


The timing of Berezovsky's announcement that he intended to transfer 
management of his ORT stake to journalists and representatives of the 
intellectual intelligentsia apparently happened to coincide with the 
finalizing of seasonal changes to the major channels' program schedules. The 
directors of ORT and TVC explained the decisions to take Dorenko's Authors' 
Program and Flyarkovsky's Nedelya off the air as part of the seasonal 
rescheduling. 


Sergey Dorenko has never before encountered threats to his program. It is a 
well known fact that he was a vital instrument in destroying the Unity's and 
Putin's opposition in the parliamentary and presidential elections 
respectively. 


After Dorenko's show was cancelled, he gave a lengthy interview to Media-Most 
radio station Moscow Echo and convened a press conference at the Interfax 
news agency. 


Rumours emerged that he would leave ORT for the independent, Media-MOST owned 
channel NTV and even that his silenced Saturday show would be broadcast on 
NTV the same day at 22:30. However, the rumours proved unfounded. According 
to Dorenko's aides, NTV did not broadcast Dorenko's Authors' Program due to 
"technical and legal subtleties."


It is most likely that Dorenko was denied NTV airtime because Yevgeniy 
Kiselyov, director general of NTV, was against catering for his rival on his 
own domain. Television sources reported that: "Kiselyov needs manageable 
people, Dorenko is not that kind of person."


One TV insider joked, "Why does he need the job anyway, he was paid some $1 
million for the anti-Luzhkov campaign, and has earned enough to not to worry 
about anything." 


After the anti-Luzhkov campaign was complete, Sergey Dorenko's rating dropped 
almost 2-fold as did his funding, but the renowned TV journalist is not eager 
to retire. 


He began criticizing Vladimir Putin for his conduct during the Kursk disaster 
and has blamed him for being responsible for taking his program off air. Many 
observers assume that it is unlikely that Sergey Dorenko will reappear on 
ORT. 


Dorenko's latest program that was pulled off the air Saturday could well be 
shown on Wednesday, September 13th, on TV-6, owned by Boris Berezovsky. 
Dorenko is reportedly negotiating with TV-6 director general Alexander 
Ponomaryov. A TV-6 spokesman confirmed that negotiations are on, but no 
agreement has yet been reached. 


As for the management of TV Center's decision to cancel the weekly analytical 
program "Segodnya", hosted by Vladislav Flyarkovsky, Gazeta.Ru the channels' 
management for comment. 


"TV Center Channel is continuing to introduce changes to the schedule. We are 
aiming to decrease the number of political programs The TVC management 
consider there are too many such programs so Flyarkovsky's Nedelya program 
will be cancelled. Flyarkovsky has been offered four new projects. At the 
moment he is thinking over the proposal." 


Mr.Flyarkovsky could not be reached for comment. 


One cannot help thinking that the real reason for the sacking of the hosts of 
the two prime-time shows is due to their willingness to accept Berezovsky's 
offer to enter his ORT share trust. Vladislav Flyarkovsky could not even 
conceal his joy. 


As for NTV director general Yevgeny Kiselyov, on his regular Sunday evening 
political revue program Itogi he politely turned down Berezovsky's offer, 
saying that it would conflict with his interests in NTV. 


Mila Kuzina, staff writer 


******


#6
From: "david jones" <harlech@bigpond.com>
Subject: Krasnoyarsk 26 
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 09:49:12 +1000


Soon after the sinking of the Kursk submarine, our own 60 Minutes tv
programme here in Sydney Australia covered a story about the remaining
nuclear submarines that are simply decaying in some of Russia`s ports. If
they were allowed to deteriorate they could pose a threat and one expert
said that an explosion of the nuclear 
reactors on board a ' Kursk type ' submarine would be equivalent to 20
Hiroshima bombs.


What was even more disturbing however was last weekend`s 60 minutes program
featured an item about the former secret Soviet city, Krasnoyarsk 26 which
was built deep inside a mountains in the heart of Siberia.


The Australian reporter Richard Carleton told us that this city with a
population of 100,000 was built for one purpose only which was to produce
weapons of mass destruction. It was so secret that it did not appear on any
map and was concealed from western spy satellites.


Three massive nuclear reactors that have been built underground supplied
the weapons aresenal of the former USSR. The most bizarre elements of
Richard Carleton's story was that the factory was actually designed to keep
on manufacturing more bombs even after a nuclear Armageddon.


One American expert interviewed by Richard Carleton said '' this is a level
of insanity that even the United States never quite matched ''.


The most worrying part of this story is that these three large nuclear
reactors are still in service but are now used mainly to provide heating
and energy for the city's population. Because of the budget restraints in
Russia, they can`t afford to change the source of power supply away from
nuclear to fossil fuels even though it is acknowledged that as time goes by
the greatest risk is the continuing safety and security of the plant which
continues to manufacture plutonium at a staggering rate.


I am fascinated by Krasnoyarsk 26 and how world events have led Russia from
a situation of keeping an entire city so secret to now allowing TV cameras
through its enormous underground caverns to warn us about the impending
dangers from this facility where recently the security guards left their
post to search for food.


I wondered if any of your other readers were aware of this location?


******


#7
OPEC output rise seen having little Russian impact
By Aleksandras Budrys

MOSCOW, Sept 11 (Reuters) - OPEC's decision at the weekend to raise crude oil 
output will not affect volumes of crude exports by Russian oil companies, nor 
will it have a strong impact on Russia's economy, analysts said on Monday. 


Ministers of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries agreed on 
Sunday to lift output by 800,000 barrels per day from October in an attempt 
to beat down prices, which hit a 10-year record of over $35 a barrel last 
Thursday. 


``At $25, we reckon, the (Russian) companies will still be making eight or so 
dollars a barrel net profit, while at $35 they are making almost $15 net 
profit,'' said James Henderson of Renaissance Capital, a Moscow brokerage. 


``The margins are still very large even at lower oil prices and I don't think 
we are going to see export volumes decline,'' he said, adding that Russia's 
export volumes have been at 2.2-2.3 million barrels per day in the past 6-12 
months. 


``A fall in the oil prices from $35 to $25 and even to $20 is not a disaster 
for oil companies.'' 


Analysts say Russian companies will use every possibile avenue to increase 
their exports and cash in on high prices. 


``The prices abroad will still be higher than on the domestic market, and 
therefore exports will grow,'' said Ivan Mazalov, oil analyst at Moscow 
investment bank Troika Dialog. 


He said Russia could still raise crude oil export capacity. 


``It is generally believed that (pipeline monopoly) Transneft is working at 
the limit of its capacities, but they kept saying that in previous years, 
when exports were lower,'' he said. 


NO STEEP PRICE FALL SEEN SOON 


Analysts said the OPEC agreement was unlikely to make oil prices plunge in 
the near future, but they said a more significant decline could be expected 
later, although not to the levels of two years ago, when they were at $9 per 
barrel. 


``By the start of next year the price will fall to some $25 per barrel, but 
by the end of the year it will be at around $18-$20,'' said Vladimir Nosov of 
Flemings UCB. 


``When the price of oil is high, more expensive projects come on stream and 
not necessarily in the OPEC countries. Supply volume increases and the price 
goes down, then expensive projects are conserved and the price is fixed at a 
lower level.'' 


But Troika's Mazalov said that crude price may reach the level of $18 per 
barrel as early as the beginning of 2001. 


``OPEC is unable to set an exact oil price, but only the direction of its 
movement. When the price was $9 they wanted an increase to $18, but what they 
got was $33,'' he said. 


Analysts noted that a fall in oil prices had been widely expected in Russia 
and the government had drafted the 2001 state budget on the basis of crude 
prices of $18-$19 per barrel. 


``They have evidently been prepared for such a development,'' Fleming's Nosov 
said. 


Russian news agencies quoted Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Kudrin as saying 
any fall in world oil prices resulting from OPEC's decision would not hurt 
spending. 


``We are ready for any change in the market this year,'' Interfax quoted 
Kudrin as saying. 


*******


#8
Moscow Times
September 12, 2000 
Face the Nation: Putin and the Kursk Families 


On Aug. 22, more than a week after the sinking of the Kursk nuclear 
submarine, President Vladimir Putin traveled to the northern port town of 
Vidyayevo and met with the relatives of Kursk crew members _ all 118 of whom 
are believed to have died in the catastrophe. Last month, the weekly 
Kommersant Vlast magazine published what it identified as a transcript of 
that meeting _ noting that the recording was made surreptitiously, as 
dictaphones were not permitted. Below are excerpts from that transcript; the 
full text is available on our web site at www.TheMoscowTimes.com. 


Vladimir Putin: Hello. We have a meeting planned at fleet headquarters, but I 
thought that I should see you first _ 


Man from hall: We can't hear! 


Putin: OK, I'll speak louder. I want to speak to you about the situation that 
has occurred. An appalling tragedy. Commiserations and so on have been made 
and I, too, join in expressing my condolences. 


Woman: Cancel the day of mourning immediately! 


Putin: I won't say much. In other words I will talk a lot. I believe it would 
be right if I answer your thoughts. Unfortunately, this is perhaps the first 
case where we are unable to explain what happened in the ocean depths. 


Regarding the day of mourning _ as you can guess I am just as much an expert 
on the sea as any of you who have come here from all parts of the country, 
and so all my actions are based on experts' observations. I have been hoping 
like all of you, and to be honest, I will hope to the last. A day of mourning 
has been announced because it has been established beyond doubt that people 
have died. I am talking about people who have definitely died, people who no 
one has any doubt have died. 


We know this is the case. It does not mean that we should just stop 
everything and give up hoping and working. It means that as far as those who 
have definitely died are concerned, we must ... (unclear). As regards how 
many such tragedies there have been and how many there will be, we shouldn't 
forget what has already been. There were tragedies before, when it seemed 
that we lived in a successful country. There have always been tragedies. The 
thing is, it's hard to imagine and it's hard for me as well ... . You surely 
know that our country is in a difficult position and that our armed forces 
are in a similarly difficult position, but I too never imagined that they 
were in such bad shape. So that this isn't the case we must live within our 
means. We must have a smaller, better-equipped, technically perfect army. 
We're not going to go and blow money we shouldn't have 300 million we should 
have 1 million or 800,000 we should have 30 boats perhaps less, but they must 
be well-equipped the crews should be well-trained, they should have 
life-saving equipment. We should have all of this. _ 


n n n 


_ Woman (shouting): Why didn't they call foreign specialists immediately? 
Why?! 


Putin: I can answer that. Because we know that we have rescue services and 
divers. The submarine was built at the end of the '80s and was designed with 
all the individual rescue services for the sub built-in. In other words, a 
submarine is built and comes with all the rescue facilities built-in. The 
Northern Fleet had these services at their disposal. Therefore at my first 
question [Defense Minister Igor] Sergeyev called me on [Sept.] 13th at seven 
in the morning _ . 


Man: The sub went down on Saturday and he calls on Sunday! 


Putin: Just a second, I will answer. Contact was lost with the sub at 23.00 
on the 12th. They began a search. At 04.30 they found it. On the 13th. In 
other words, I knew nothing about this. Nothing about what was going on. The 
defense minister called me on the 13th at seven in the morning and said, 
Vladimir Vladimirovich, there has been an emergency during a training 
exercise, contact has been lost with a submarine, we have located it, it is 
lying on the seabed, we have identified it _ it is our sub and rescue work is 
under way. 


My first question. This was my first question: Igor Dmitriyevich, what is the 
situation with the reactor? What is being done to save the people on board? 
Do you need anything? Do you need any help from any ministry, department or 
from the country? The whole country is ready to help. What must be done? We 
will do everything that is within or power. And if it is not within our 
power, then say what else is needed? We will act immediately. In other words, 
the answer was quite clear. 


But now it is clear. The military truly believed that they had all the means 
for rescuing the sub, I repeat _ (noise in the hall) _ wait, I'll just finish 
answering this question _ because they believed that they had all the means 
for carrying out the rescue. Since the sub, I repeat, was designed with them 
on board. The Northern Fleet has them. They proceeded on the basis of this 
assumption. As far as foreign aid is concerned. As soon as foreign aid was 
offered _ on the 15th _ then [Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov, commander of the 
military fleet] accepted it at once. Let's work it out. 


(Noise in the hall, shouts.) It is true, true. Television? They're lying. 
Lying. Lying. There are people in television who bawl more than anyone today 
and who, over the past 10 years, have destroyed that same army and navy where 
people are dying today. And here they are today leading the support for the 
army. Also with the aim of discrediting and collapsing the army once and for 
all! They have been stealing money to their hearts' content for the last few 
years and now they are buying everyone and everything! These are the laws 
they have made! _ 


n n n 


_ Woman: Vladimir Vladimirovich. Do you know how much an officer is paid? 


Putin: Yes I was told that the average officer's salary _ 


(Shout): A lieutenant? 


Putin: No, I don't know how much a lieutenant earns, but the average wage of 
an officer is _ just a moment _ about 3,000 rubles [about $108]. 


(Emotional outburst in the hall): How much?! 


(Shouts): And a captain? 


Putin: No? Well, 6,000. 


(Shouts): How much?! Are you joking?! 


Putin: I am reading from a document that I have _ (noise in the hall). 
Please, a little quieter, I can't hear. 


Woman: (unclear) _ he got 2,500. What kind of money is that? For an officer 
that's a disgrace! 


Putin: Yes, it's a disgrace. _ 


n n n 


_ Woman: My son worked for 15 years in the North. He didn't drink or smoke, 
but he couldn't buy anything for his children. He's only earned an apartment 
by dying! Why?! You should have looked after the living! 


Putin: I don't want to say this, but you give me no choice. I am prepared to 
answer for the 100 days I have been president. For the remaining 15 years I 
am prepared to sit with you on one bench and ask these questions of others. _ 


n n n 


_ Woman (shouting, voice breaks with every sentence): Tell us honestly_ 
surely we have our own specialists? We are in despair! People are hysterical! 
Tell us honestly! Take their stripes! Look for specialists! Get them! It's 
too much! Look for them, don't abandon them! Look! We don't want your money. 
We want them alive! We had everything! Our children had fathers and our wives 
had husbands! They believed in the state, that the state would save them! You 
don't understand how they believed! 


Putin (quietly): We invited all the specialists who _ 


(Shouts): You could have saved just five! Bastards! 


Woman: They offer us help! Why don't we accept?! Our oil companies from 
Murmansk! They have pontoons down in Africa! They offer help! But no we don't 
need anything, because they don't trust our boys! 


n n n 


_ Young man: Vladimir Vlad-imirovich! There is a situation in the navy. I 
know of several families that haven't managed to register their marriage. I 
don't know. My wife _ that is the wife of my brother _ they didn't manage to 
get married, but she is already eight months pregnant. I mean, is there any 
way of getting over the law, documents somehow, move her surname somehow, or 
the child _ Is it possible? 


Putin: It is. 


Man: Who do we go to? 


Putin: I'm telling you, we'll take care of it. 


Man: So who should I go to tomorrow _ 


Putin: There's no need to go to anyone! We'll take care of it and that's all 
there is to it! 


Man: You're saying we'll take care of it, but tomorrow I have to leave. I 
need to take my brother away and my mother to Moscow. 


Putin: Does she live here? 


Man: She is staying here. 


Putin: No, does she live here? 


Man: She hardly goes out at all, she's virtually bedridden. 


Putin: No, just a second, does she live here permanently? 


Man: Who, my mother? 


Putin: No, your wife. 


Man: Yes _ they didn't have time to get married _ 


Putin: We will sort this problem out _ Speak to the commander or to Irina 
Yuryevna. Irina Yuryevna, where are you? There, go to Irina Yuryevna the wife 
of the crew's captain. _ 


n n n 


_ Woman (shouting): Eight days. It was already clear on the second day that 
nothing was working, right? The Norwegians came along and got it open in 
eight hours! So _ explain that! 


So what do you have to say about that?! So, we _ why didn't the military 
command realize that nothing would work out in eight days? Couldn't they see 
that? Or did they see it and simply lied to us sitting here for eight days?! 
(voice breaks) 


Putin: They didn't open it over eight days, not because they did or didn't 
predict it. They couldn't get it open because there was a storm that hampered 
their work. 


Young man: The Norwegians got in one hour! Why all the damn secrecy ... do we 
call them, don't we call them ... 


Putin: The Norwegians came on the fifth day and got in on the sixth. The 
Norwegian government doesn't have this kind of diver; they were commercially 
hired. 


Woman: There must surely be some specialists in the country? 


Putin: There aren't any on the planet. _ 


n n n 


_ Man: Much can be said now ... I have a wife ... she is not here at the 
moment, but I want to say thank you on behalf of all the mothers for coming 
here today ... 


Putin: It's not the first time. I travel around the whole country, if you've 
noticed. But we have a population of 140 million. 


As far as the Northern Fleet and other fleets go, they've seen me more than 
once. 


Another man: I too am grateful, but on their behalf I ask you ... (unclear) 
that you ask forgiveness of all the widows and mothers ... 


Putin: If you think back to the start of our conversation ... I began with 
this. But what can I say? You're right. You are absolutely right. It's just 
that I virtually started our conversation with this. 


******


#9
Trud
September 9, 2000
[translation from RIA Novosti for personal use only]
TIME FOR IMPROVING THE STATE
By Vyacheslav NIKONOV, President of the Politics Fund 

The central and regional authorities compete with each 
other in any country. Each of them is pulling the blanket to 
itself.
The outcome of this confrontation depends on who is politically 
stronger at the given moment. And hence there is nothing unique 
in the history of battles between the Kremlin and regional 
leaders; the same happens everywhere in the world. And there is 
nothing surprising in the apparent domination of the centre, as 
Putin is stronger now. 
The president is fighting an extreme that presents great 
danger to each federation - excessive autonomy. The regional 
authorities, following not very wise advice of Boris Yeltsin, 
bit off much more sovereignty than was good for state 
interests. We could see from the example of the Soviet Union 
that the loss of control over constituent members of the 
federation leads to separatism and is fraught with the 
dissolution of the country. 
Consequently, measures that Putin took to strengthen 
centralised power were steps in the right direction. He has 
deprived (quickly and in a bloodless manner) the governors of 
the possibility to fulfil the functions of national legislators 
in the Federation Council, which were not characteristic to 
them. He has introduced a mechanism of federal interference in 
the affairs of regional barons, and ensured greater 
correspondence of local laws to the federal constitution. The 
regions were put under additional control of the state in the 
person of representatives of the president in seven newly 
established districts, and the budgetary money will be largely 
redistributed in favour of the federal authorities. The power 
vertical is growing stronger before our very eyes. 
However, while fighting regional freedoms, we should not 
forget about another highly dangerous extreme, which is 
threatening the federation - excessive centralisation. World 
practice shows that centralised administration is not 
necessarily more effective from the viewpoint of the interests 
of the economy, state development, defences, and ensurance of 
social and other civil rights. 
There are many drawbacks in unitary state systems, firmly 
controlled from the centre. All conflicts and signs of 
dissatisfaction are directed to the capital city, which results 
in the quick loss of prestige of the central authorities and 
the growth of separatism. In this case, the centre is bound to 
bear responsibility for minor problems, such as the removal of 
garbage and the paving of streets, which it cannot do. At the 
same time, the regional authorities show no responsibility or 
initiative.
Self-government is withering away and serious people refuse to 
occupy the posts of governors on whom nothing depends. In 
addition to this, unitarism in multiethnic states leads to 
ethnic conflicts. It was not by chance that ethnic authorities 
enjoyed considerable autonomy in the "prison of nations," as 
the Russian Empire was described, and even had their own 
legislation that differed considerably from the national one. 
I write this because some hot heads suggest that the 
reform of the federation should be carried on towards the 
liquidation of the Federation Council, the replacement of 
elected governors with appointed persons, and so on. This is a 
recipe for catastrophe.
In such large and heterogeneous country as Russia, excessive 
centralisation is as dangerous as regional arbitrariness. While 
tightening the screws, one can easily cross the line beyond 
which lies the destruction of the federation. 
All federative states have two-house parliaments. And this 
is not a whim, for a parliament is not just a legislative, but 
also a representative body. And not only the interests of the 
population as a whole (concentrated mostly in several densely 
populated centres), but also of regions should be represented 
in federative states. Elected heads of regions are a genetic 
element of federative states. The introduction of a one-house 
parliament and appointed governors would mean the end of Russia 
as a federative state and the need to overhaul the foundations 
of its constitutional structure. The expediency of this measure 
is highly questionable. 
It is vital to find the golden mean between the extremes 
of regional anarchy and super-centralisation and create an 
effective system of collaboration of the centre and the regions 
and mutual respect for their interests. 
To do this, we should carry on the reform of the 
Federation Council with a view to ensuring that its members are 
not appointed by the regional bosses, but are elected by the 
people and hence responsible to it. 
It would be more reasonable if the Council of State, where 
all governors are represented, were a more significant agency, 
compensating, to a degree for the governors' painful loss of 
their status of federal politicians. Judging by everything, the 
Council of State will most likely play an insignificant (and 
possibly even cosmetic) role of a consulting agency. 
Judicial bodies of power play the key role in settling 
disputes between the centre and the regions in all federative 
states. But in Russia this right mostly belongs to the 
president and executive agencies. This clearly offers major 
possibilities for activating the Constitutional Court, which 
only recently started making decisions on regional legislation 
that created precedents. I think it would be highly expedient 
if federal district courts were created in the seven federal 
districts, whose main task would be to hear collisions created 
by contradictions between the normative base of the constituent 
members of the federation and federal laws (which frequently 
contradict each other, too). 
We should not destroy the federative structure of the 
state. Instead, we must improve it. 

******


#10
Washington Post
September 11, 2000
[for personal use only]
Russian Media Crackdown Nothing New for Regions
By Sharon LaFraniere


MOSCOW, Sept. 10- When Yefim Shusterman, founder of Volgograd's largest 
newspaper, hears Moscow newscasters and media barons complaining about a 
Kremlin-ordered press crackdown, his first reaction is: Come to Volgograd. 


The media have felt pressured for years in that city on the Volga River, 650 
miles due south of Moscow, ever since the regional governor began dangling 
subsidies for postage, newsprint and the like before media owners who toed 
his line. Then, this summer, most media outlets in Volgograd signed an 
agreement with Russia's domestic security service voluntarily censoring what 
they say about it.


Under the agreement, the Federal Security Service, a successor to the KGB, 
agreed to provide information about its activities, and journalists agreed to 
convey the information to the public "without giving any commentaries." Any 
negative information about the FSB, as the agency is known by its Russian 
initials, cannot be published or broadcast until the FSB is contacted and 
"competent bodies look into it."


Irina Chernova, an investigative reporter who follows events in Volgograd for 
the Moscow-based Center for Protection of the Rights of the Press, said she 
was "terrified" when she read the agreement. In essence, she said, it asked 
newspapers to act as the FSB's mouthpiece.


Shusterman, whose independent newspaper Inter has 144,000 readers, said he 
politely thanked the FSB officer who called to ask if he had received the 
document in the mail. He said he rejected it on the grounds it violated the 
federal mass media law that expressly gives journalists the right to comment 
on the facts they gather. He said he has suffered no repercussions for his 
refusal to go along.


But most Volgograd editors signed the document without a word of protest. The 
FSB told Chernova's group that 30 of 37 media outlets agreed to the deal, 
although at least three newspapers demanded that certain passages, such as 
the restriction on commentary, be crossed out. One of them was the weekly 
Moskovsky Komsomolets-Volgograd, whose deputy general director, Yevgeny 
Romanov, called the agreement "a feeble attempt" at control.


Igor Kuznetsov, head of the Volgograd regional FSB press office, and his 
deputy, Vladimir Meshalkin, described the agreement as an attempt to provide 
the media with more accurate, more complete information. Meshalkin said in a 
telephone interview last week that the only purpose was "to restore greater 
order" to media coverage of the FSB.


Kuznetsov said the FSB did not violate journalists' rights and that it only 
asked them to voluntarily give up their legal right to publish their own 
judgments. He told a Russian newspaper such agreements were common in other 
regions.


The idea took off in Volgograd. Regional offices of the Interior Ministry and 
the federal tax police approached newspapers, television and radio stations 
with almost identical agreements, according to local journalists and 
Chernova, who writes for the Moscow daily Novaya Gazeta.


The agreement is another example of what media rights groups say is a 
concerted attack on media freedom outside Moscow. In the capital, attention 
is riveted on what appears to be a series of anti-media moves by President 
Vladimir Putin--from the Russian army's mistreatment in Chechnya of Andrei 
Babitsky, a reporter for the U.S.-funded Radio Liberty, to the arrest and 
brief imprisonment of media tycoon Vladimir Gusinsky, to alleged Kremlin 
threats against Boris Berezovsky, another media magnate.


Part of the Kremlin's strategy came to light earlier this month, critics 
said, with the disclosure that the federal government's 2001 budget for 
expenditures on the media has been classified top-secret. That means the 
public won't know which journalists are financially dependent on the federal 
officials they cover.


Oleg Panfilov, who runs a press rights group called the Center for Journalism 
in Extreme Situations, said the media come under attack in Russian regions 
every day. In a recent interview, he reeled off a series of examples, ranging 
from the confiscation of a reporter's videotape on an explosion in Ryazan in 
southern Russia to a police raid and search of an often critical newspaper in 
Yekaterinburg in the Ural mountains.


Panfilov said the most immediate danger from Putin's attempts to control the 
media is that regional authorities, already practiced at stifling the press, 
will regard the Kremlin's actions as a green light for their own crackdowns.


"The governors have been fighting with the mass media for a long time 
already," he said. "And now that they see that the federal authorities regard 
these things calmly, they will finish the local press."


Shusterman agreed. His newspaper is one of the few--if not the only one--in 
Volgograd that does not survive on financial handouts from the governor's 
office, he said. With the benefit of cheaper postal fees, paper and printing 
costs, his state-funded competitors can charge a fraction of what he does. 
Shusterman has to publish his newspaper with profits from a clothing store 
and some kiosks he owns.


In his view, the real struggle for freedom of the press is in the regions, 
and the press is already down for the count. "Here in the provinces," he 
said, "the independent press is going to die first."


*******


#11
Wall Street Journal
September 12, 2000 
[for personal use only 
Chechnya, Kursk Debacles Prompt Russia to Slash Military by 800,000
By GUY CHAZAN (guy.chazan@wsj.com)
Special to THE WALL STREET JOURNAL


MOSCOW -- Will the Kursk nuclear submarine disaster be the spur Russia needs 
to reform its destitute and dilapidated armed forces?


That was the hope after Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev confirmed 
reports Friday that the country's military was to be slashed by around a 
third over the next three years, to 850,000 men.


Coming soon after last month's sinking of the Kursk, with the loss of 118 
men, the news suggested that Moscow was finally ditching its delusions of 
grandeur, more than 10 years after the end of the Cold War.


Russia's army is already a shadow of its former self. Its strength has fallen 
to 1.2 million from around two million men in 1991. With not much improvement 
in its fighting ability, the question remains one of quality, not quantity: 
Will Russia ever move towards a professional army like that of the U.S. or 
Britain, or stick to a conscript force, its ranks padded with barely trained, 
badly equipped and mostly unwilling teenagers?


There are signs that President Vladimir Putin may be serious about reform. At 
a meeting with relatives of the Kursk crew, he admitted Russia could no 
longer afford to keep the army in its present size. "We need to live 
according to our means," he said. "We need to have a smaller army, but one 
that's better equipped and technically perfect."


The Kursk disaster showed the hazards of trying to maintain super power 
status on a shoestring. No one knows for sure what sank the submarine. But 
cutbacks in maintenance programs left the Northern Fleet vulnerable to 
accidents of this kind.


Meanwhile, Russia's military weakness is revealed every day in Chechnya, 
where its forces continue to suffer heavy casualties almost a year after they 
occupied the republic and months after they claimed to have broken rebel 
resistance.


Still, analysts agree that reducing the army's strength is no panacea when 
what is really needed is root- and-branch reform. For many, the problems lie 
with Russia's military doctrine. Critics say it is shot through with 
Soviet-era paranoia, and defined by an obsolete view of the world that still 
sees the North Atlantic Treaty Organization as the main threat to Russia's 
security. The current doctrine envisages mass mobilization to deter a NATO 
invasion -- a gargantuan feat with the armed forces in their present state. 
Slimming down the army is futile unless Russia scales back such ambitions.


"It's mission impossible," says says Dmitry Trenin, defense analyst with 
Moscow's Carnegie Center. Russia, he says, should finally concede that war 
with NATO is in the realm of fantasy. "The Kremlin needs to demilitarize its 
relations with the West."


Russia seems to be backing away from strategic parity with the U.S., shifting 
precious resources away from its nuclear missile force to conventional units. 
Money saved from personnel cuts will be used to buy new hardware. But modern 
weapons are pointless in an army of young conscripts who don't know how to 
use them.


"You can buy as many new tanks and guns as you like, but if you give them to 
badly trained troops, then you're asking for another disaster like the 
Kursk," says Pavel Felgenhauer, a commentator on military affairs. "The only 
solution is to professionalize the army."


Russia's rag-tag conscript army faces a permanent shortage. Vast numbers of 
young men ignore the call-up. Terrorized by stories of hazing and mounting 
casualties in Chechnya, parents spend thousands of dollars in bribes to 
shield their sons from the draft. The result has been chronically low 
staffing levels. "Even with an army of 1.2 million, Russia can commit no more 
than 100,000 men to any military operation at any one time," Mr. Trenin says.


Privately, many generals agree that Russia should imitate Europe, where 
traditional conscript armies are giving way to smaller professional fighting 
forces. But they say the way things stand, Moscow simply can't afford to pay 
for such an army.


An all-professional force would also be resisted by generals, many of whom 
benefit materially from the present state of affairs. Some have been known to 
use conscripts as cheap labor to build summer houses. Cuts in personnel will 
also lead to layoffs among officers, who with the economy in its present 
state are unlikely to receive adequate retraining for civilian life. A 
buildup of resentment could store up trouble for Mr. Putin in the future.


Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev "cut the army by a million men in the 1950s, 
to try to rid Russia of its Stalinist legacy," says Yevgeny Volk of the 
Heritage Foundation. "But that cost him the army's support: And in 1964 he 
was toppled in a coup. Putin should take note."


So far, Mr. Putin has shown he has the courage to attack some of Russia's 
most powerful vested interests. He has curbed free-wheeling regional 
governors and cracked down on the country's media barons. But no one knows 
yet whether he has the courage to move against the army -- one of Russia's 
most conservative and reform-resistant institutions.


******