Johnson's Russia List #5598 14 December 2001 davidjohns on@erols.com A CDI Project www.cdi.org [Note from David Johnson: 1. Reuters: Russian govt upbeat as 2002 budget passed. 2. Luba Schwartzman: ORT Review. 3. The Economist (UK): Russia and Afghanistan. All smiles, for now. Gingerly, Russia is returning. 4. Baltimore Sun: Douglas Birch, Mischief marks 'The Battle for Moscow.' Mayor's iron grip on city council is under Kremlin-inspired attack. 5. Post-Soviet Armies Newsletter. 6. The Electronic Telegraph (UK): Toby Harnden, Secret US deal with Putin over ABM treaty. 7. MSNBC: Dana Lewis, Can Putin profit from no ABM? Russian leader could turn loss into gain on world stage. 8. Interfax: Maverick MP suggests Russia has "free hand" if USA abandons ABM Treaty. 9. Nezavisimaya Gazeta: THIS IS NOT A CRIME, BUT A MISTAKE. Comments on America's likely withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. 10. Washington Post: Jim Hoagland, Split Vision of America. 11. Novaya Gazeta: SO FAR, RUSSIA HAS ONLY SCORED A HUMANITARIAN VICTORY. Northern Alliance losing influence in the power struggle in Afghanistan. 12. Wall Street Journal: Jeanne Whalen, Russia's Central-Bank Reserves Continue Slide, Weakening Ruble. 13. Washington Times: Arnold Beichman, Russia's addiction problems. 14. The Guardian (UK): Revelry in Russia. Andrea Osbourne celebrated Christmas in Moscow, and got raided by the police during lunch.] ******** #1 Russian govt upbeat as 2002 budget passed By Darya Korsunskaya MOSCOW, Dec 14 (Reuters) - Russia's government said on Friday it was optimistic about the economic outlook for next year after the lower house of parliament passed the landmark 2002 budget in a fourth and final reading. The State Duma passed the bill with an easy majority for the government, paving the way for the budget to be approved by the upper house and then to be signed by President Vladimir Putin. A sharp fall in oil prices since early September, due to fears of a slowing global economy and after the attacks on the United States, had overshadowed previous debates on the 2002 budget, the first to be drawn up with a planned surplus. Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said he was confident Russia's economy this year would surpass the expected growth rate even though lower oil prices are estimated to lead to a fall in government revenues of around $1.0 billion. "In 2001, GDP growth will be more than 5.5 percent. This is one of the highest growth rates compared with other countries," said Kudrin. "This is the level we have always dreamt of. We have managed to maintain growth even in conditions of declining oil prices." "We shall fulfill all our obligations, both domestic and foreign," Kudrin said. " We are optimistic about 2002." He also told reporters that the goverment maintained its forecast for consumer price inflation at 18 percent. The government has said it will be able to meet its spending and revenue plans next year even if oil prices fall as low as $15 a barrel, well below the minimum expected of $18.5 a barrel. The 2002 budget surplus is expected at 1.63 percent of gross domestic product if oil prices meet government targets. GDP growth is seen at 4.3 percent and inflation at 10-13 percent. Russia posted its highest GDP growth in 2000, when the economy expanded 8.3 percent boosted by high prices for oil. Inflation was 20.2 percent. The inflation target for this year of 18 percent is above original government forecasts of 12-14 percent. Kudrin said a mission of the International Monetary Fund, which completed its work in Moscow at the start of this week, had also maintained its positive outlook on Russia's economy despite the lower oil prices. He said the IMF expected Russia to keep a positive balance of payments and maintain its growth in GDP and gold and hard currency reserves. ****** #2 ORT Review www.ortv.ru Compiled by Luba Schwartzman (luba7@bu.edu) Research fellow at the Institute for the Study of Conflict, Ideology and Policy at Boston University HEADLINES, Thursday, December 13, 2001 - President Bush has officially announced that in 6 months the US will withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Moscow's position remains unchanged: The 1972 Treary is "an important, key element of security strategic stability" not just for the two signatories, but for the world as a whole. Many other nations support this position. - President Putin has spoken with several world leaders -- including Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Askar, Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and PRC Chairman Jiang Zemin -- about the US decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty. - Presidential Plenipotentiary to the Northwest Federal District Viktor Cherkesov has awarded the engineers from the Malakhit Construction Bureau who worked on the Gepard submarine with medals of honor. The Gephard was transferred to the Northern Fleet a week ago. Now, together with several submarines of the same class, including the Samara, it is being prepared for a journey out to sea. The sailors have been waiting to leave the port for months. - Official FSB spokesman Ilya Shabalkin has told reporters that a group of fighters suspected of participating in major terrorist acts in Chechnya has been captured in a special federal service operation in Argun. In addition, one of field commander Khattab's close associates has been killed. - The board of Lukoil has made an unexpected offer -- to cooperate with Yevgeny Kiselev's team at TV-6. - Yakutian President Mikhail Nikolaev will not participate in the 23 December presidential election. The local election committee has taken him off the list of candidates and the Republic's Supreme Court has found his registration to be illegal. Nikolaev announced that he was withdrawing his candidacy last night, but did not give a reason for his decision. Later he said that he left the race because of shortcomings in the legislation. - The constitutional court has ruled that Moscow city authorities cannot take property away from private owners without a special court decision. - Electricity has been shut off in several cities in Chechnya, including Grozny. According to the electricity company, GosEnergo, this is a special operation by the Russian military prompted by reports that field commander Khattab has been seriously injured (leg and shoulder). This information has not been officially confirmed. - Russian Orthodox and Muslim spiritual leaders gathered in the Christ the Savior Cathedral for the two-day Sixth Annual All-Russian Peoples Forum. Special attention will be paid to the events of September 11 and its consequences. The problems of globalization of the modern society and the moral aspects of the uneven distribution of power and wealth will also be discussed. - The trial of Chechen terrorist Salman Raduev is almost over. Defense lawyers for Gaisumov and Alkhazurov asked for a lesser punishment for their clients in their final statements. Tomorrow, General Presecutor Ustinov will appear again and all of the accused will be able to say their last words. Atgeriev and Raduev's lawyers will speak on Friday. - Deputy Prime Minister Valentina Matvienko will meet with the leaders of the North Caucasus region to discuss the socio-economic development of North Ossetia. Matvienko will also visit several orphanages and children's half-way houses. - Over thirty questions will be raised at today's plenary meeting of the State Duma, including the question of electronic subscription, which will allow Russians to pay their bills and buy real estate on-line, and a law that will make car insurance mandatory. - Georgian Speaker of Parliament Nino Burdjanadze has expressed the hope that Russian-Georgian relations will improve. - A unique art show has opened in Arkhangelsk: European tapestries and Russian hand-woven floor runners will appear in the same exhibit. - In the Krasnodarsk krai, children have revived the spirit of Timur, the hero of Andrei Gaidarov's children's books. The members of the group Timur and his Team go on hikes, play games, take part in various competitions, and, most importantly, help the elderly. None of the 170 kids (7 to 16 years old) have read Gaidarov's books, which have been taken off the school curriculum, but they plan on taking care of this literary gap -- in a week they will put on a play based on Gaidarov. ****** #3 The Economist (UK) December 15-21, 2001 Russia and Afghanistan All smiles, for now Gingerly, Russia is returning DECLARE victory and stay at home. That, at first sight, sums up Russia's policy in Afghanistan. The caution is understandable: Russians regard the Soviet Union's ten-year war there rather as Americans remember Vietnam. So far, Russia has firmly refused to send troops to fight the Taliban or to keep the peace. It played no significant role in the Bonn peace talks, though it praised the outcome. "The decisions made in Bonn are— excuse my immodesty—a mirror reflection of our position," said Russia's hawkish defence minister, Sergei Ivanov, last week. Russia's first problem is that Afghanistan (unlike Vietnam for America) is too close and too dangerous to ignore. It borders on three former Soviet republics: Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan. All three are badly governed and potentially unstable. At home, Russia has its own problems with extremist Islam of the kind that flourished under the Taliban. So far, the war has gone as Russia wanted. Several big pitfalls have been avoided. America has not—yet—attacked Iraq. The Taliban collapsed pretty neatly, and the new interim government includes nobody Russia really objects to. The chief ministries are held by members of the Northern Alliance, which Russia has financed and armed in past years. Domestic opposition to Russia's stunning foreign-policy volte face that helped American troops to get into Central Asia has been muted and ineffective. President Vladimir Putin has been able to portray Russia as a trustworthy and useful ally, and the American gratitude thus won will ease future talks with the West about trade, security and finance. The Taliban's defeat also lets the Central Asian regimes breathe more freely, at least for a while. The most-feared Islamic guerrilla, Juma Namangani, who led insurgents in Uzbekistan, is reported to have been killed in Afghanistan. The next question for Russia is how to improve its standing in a country where local memories are still bitter, and its own muscles wasted. For now, that means relief work. Despite the colossal suffering inflicted on Afghanistan during the Soviet war in the 1980s, this is not as daunting a task as it might sound. Urban and educated Afghans look back on the Soviet-backed regime as at least less bad than the chaos and bigotry that followed it. Older Afghans have genuinely warm memories of the Russian aid that used to flow into the country in the 1960s and 1970s. That included building the highest tunnel in the world, under the Salang pass. Russia is now going to mend the tunnel, damaged in 1992, and will help to clear mines. It has set up a field hospital in Kabul. In the longer run, however, Russia has its own interests in the region. The biggest of these is keeping a large say in how the energy reserves of Central Asia reach world markets. Given a stable Afghanistan, ambitious plans for gas and oil pipelines will look more practical. Russia currently benefits hugely from the stranglehold created by the Soviet-era pipeline system, particularly over Turkmenistan, which can sell its plentiful gas only to Russia at artificially low prices. A danger exists that, if trouble breaks out again, Russia will start meddling in internal Afghan politics, supplying favoured commanders with arms and cash. Not everything has gone swimmingly, even in recent weeks. Russia has supported the Northern Alliance more firmly than America would have liked, for example in its unexpected advance to Kabul. Soon afterwards, the speed with which Russia deployed its own large armed aid mission in the Afghan capital, through Bagram airport, left some westerners very annoyed. Yet the American secretary of state, Colin Powell, was eager to smooth over that difficulty when he visited Moscow this week. He said it had been an "an honour and a pleasure" to help Russia use the airport. All smiles, then, for now. ****** #4 Baltimore Sun December 14, 2001 Mischief marks 'The Battle for Moscow' Mayor's iron grip on city council is under Kremlin-inspired attack By Douglas Birch Sun Foreign Staff MOSCOW -- Moscow's enormously popular Mayor Yuri Luzhkov has held an iron grip on the city council for almost a decade. But his considerable power over Russia's largest and most important city may be threatened by a shadowy challenge from the government of President Vladimir V. Putin. The prize is control of Moscow's $8 billion annual budget, vast real estate holdings and eagerly sought construction permits. "It's a fight for a very delicious morsel called Moscow," says Oleg Lurye, a reporter with the independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta. "It goes without saying that they are trying to divide it. Luzhkov wants to keep eating this morsel by himself, but the Kremlin is eager to snatch it from him." In the pale light of the northern winter, Moscow's voters will go to the polls Sunday to elect 35 candidates to four-year terms on the council, called the city Duma. In the past, it's been a sleepy race. The council has mostly served as a rubber stamp, dominated by the mayor's allies and cronies. Serious candidates have ritually pledged allegiance to Luzhkov, easily defeating hundreds of fringe hopefuls. But this year, mischief has marked the contest. Well-known political figures have been forced off the ballot for alleged tax-dodging and illegal gifts. Well-financed name's-the-same challengers have popped up to challenge incumbents in some districts, creating confusion. And there are reports that major corporations are funneling millions to some Kremlin-backed candidates, while city officials are lending "administrative assistance" to Luzhkov's favorites. Never mind, say Lurye and others, that Luzhkov's Fatherland party officially joined forces this month with the Kremlin's Unity movement, created two years ago to back Putin's allies in parliamentary races. That detente was all a smokescreen, they insist, for the bitter behind-the-scenes struggle between two of Russia's most popular politicians -- the calculating Putin and the blustery Luzhkov. Russia has traditionally been ruled from the top down, and Kremlin leaders have seldom tolerated independent centers of political power. In opposing Luzhkov, analysts here say, Putin's government appears to be following the centuries-old Russian tradition of undermining any and all potential rivals. 'Deeply hidden war' "It's not an obvious war, it is a deeply hidden war," says Mikhail Delyagin, one of seven candidates who filed for the deputy's seat representing the city's 25th legislative district, which includes the campus of Moscow State University. With his doctorate in economics and his experience as an adviser to former President Boris N. Yeltsin, Delyagin thought he would be welcomed into the race. Instead, he says, he was targeted by political foes. Last year, he says, he bought and sold some shares in the Kremlin-controlled gas company, Gazprom. He says he lost money on the deal. But during the campaign, someone opened a bank account in his name and deposited "dividends" from the shares worth 25,000 rubles --about $870. Then a citizen Delyagin had never heard of filed a complaint with the city election commission, accusing the candidate of avoiding taxes. Delyagin says it was the first he had heard of the money. Federal tax authorities declined to prosecute. But the elections board booted him off the ballot. Every credible independent candidate, he charges, has been forced off the ballot. Nikolai Moskovchenko, one of the most outspoken and popular of Moscow's Duma deputies, has criticized the city's ties to the construction industry and its policy of building luxury housing, supposedly to help subsidize housing for the poor. He has also opposed City Hall's plans to raise rents on city-controlled housing for middle- and lower-income Muscovites. "It will be very, very expensive," Moskovchenko says. "The way they are moving this so-called housing and communal reforms, it will hurt a lot of people." Angered by such impertinent questions, the mayor had Moskovchenko ejected from a meeting of Duma members -- something Luzhkov had no right to do, the deputy says. Moskovchenko was removed from the ballot after someone alleged that he had tried to bribe voters at a public meeting by handing out bottles of vodka. "I didn't bribe anybody," he says. "The Sicilian Mafia is nothing compared to what is happening in Moscow." Today there are only 172 candidates, compared with 350 four years ago. While Communists remain popular with many older voters, only 11 managed to make it into the race. "These elections are dirtier than any we've had previously," Delyagin says. The cost of running a credible city Duma campaign has, by some estimates, escalated in the past four years, from an average of $50,000 in 1997 to $300,000 this year. Some candidates may spend $1 million to win a job that pays just $4,800 a year, plus a car, a cramped office and a secretary. Some aspiring deputies have criminal records; many claim to head dubious nonprofit organizations. One who drives around in a BMW filed papers with the electoral commission claiming that he had no income. "We wondered how he bought gasoline," a current Duma member said jokingly. Name's the same Others challengers have names suspiciously similar to those of incumbents. In District 27, Deputy Andrei Shirokov finds himself pitted against a field of candidates including Gennady Shirokov, a retired Interior Ministry official. Fourth District Deputy Igor Antonov, president of a nonprofit group called Hope, faces a challenge from Mark Antonov, who says he is head of an anti-crime group called Hawk. In the 32nd District in affluent western Moscow, the incumbent Yabloko party deputy Evgeny Bunimovich faces a well-financed rival with a name that rhymes with his -- businessman Alexander Ronanovich. Ronanovich claims to be head of a mysterious organization called Millions of Friends, although it is not clear who these friends are. Politician with most to lose The politician with the most to lose in this election, Luzhkov, isn't even on the ballot. The 65-year-old mayor, a graduate of the Moscow Oil Institute and former state chemical industry bureaucrat, was first elected mayor nine years ago. He has won re-election since by overwhelming margins, in large part because while cities across Russia failed to meet the payrolls of civil servants, Moscow never missed a payday. He is also credited with transforming Moscow into a more cheerful place by doing everything from planting millions of flowers to lighting the city up at night. But during the 1999 presidential elections, Luzhkov helped lead Putin's opposition. The mayor said on one TV talk show that under Putin's patron, Yeltsin, Russia was "being robbed in a way that is unprecedented in its cynicism and permissiveness." During these elections, Luzhkov has kept quiet. But few here doubt that the Kremlin is squeezing him. Even many of Luzhkov's political foes find it unsettling. "I have never supported Luzhkov, but I must confess that the current Kremlin-inspired attack on City Hall scares me," Boris Kagarlitsky, a Moscow-based sociologist, wrote in The Moscow Times. Luzhkov's government has its share of corruption and the mayor's administration is among the nation's "least democratic," he wrote. But Kagarlitsky fears Kremlin "reformers" would be less responsive than Luzhkov to public pressure. Luzhkov still has formidable power. His hand-picked candidates get what is called "administrative assistance" from the city government -- including, reportedly, free ads in newspapers friendly to the mayor and help in producing television ads from employees of the city's TV Center. To better understand what he calls "The Battle for Moscow," Lurye of Novaya Gazeta went to political power brokers representing Luzhkov and the Kremlin and announced that he wanted a city Duma seat. The well-known investigative reporter didn't try to hide his identity but claimed he was interested in a political career. No problem, he was told. "They said my rating was very high, and each of them offered me their services," he says. "And they promised to raise a lot of money, too." Lurye came away convinced that Luzhkov is headed for defeat. "I consulted with both teams, and came to the conclusion that the Kremlin's revenues were much bigger," he says. Because there is no public slate of Kremlin- or City Hall-backed candidates, Lurye says, the impact of the election won't be known for weeks. "But it will be clear as soon as the Duma starts to reject Luzhkov's decisions," he says. What would happen to the legendary mayor then? "He has two options: to stay as a puppet, without making any decisions," Lurye says, "or he can quit. And as far as I know his character, he would rather resign." ******* #5 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 From: Post-Soviet Armies Newsletter Subject: Post-Soviet Armies Newsletter Elisabeth Sieca-Kozlowski, Post-Soviet Armies Newsletter Editor, is pleased to inform you that the 9th issue of INSIGHT - a new online-only PSAN publication providing insights and analysis - has been released today and can be consulted on PSAN http://www.psan.org/. December 2001 : INSIGHT Vol. 1, Issue 9 : - Françoise Daucé, Citizenship vs Military Professionalisation in Russia INSIGHT Vol. 1, Issue 10 - David Meltzer, The Grand Strategy of the USA ******* #6 The Electronic Telegraph (UK) 14 December 2001 Secret US deal with Putin over ABM treaty By Toby Harnden in Washington GENERAL Colin Powell has said that yesterday's American withdrawal from the 1972 anti-ballistic missile treaty was "orchestrated" with Russia in an act of co-operation that would previously have been unthinkable. In his first interview with a British newspaper since becoming secretary of state, he said that President Bush had discussed his decision with President Putin beforehand. He said: "For those who have predicted catastrophe, they are going to find out that an arms race does not break out between the US and Russia. In fact, at the same time Russia heard our notice of withdrawal they agreed to cut their weapons to our level." The Bush administration believes that a missile defence system will defend both America and Russia against the threat of nuclear attack from "rogue" states. Gen Powell said that he and Mr Bush had spent the first months of the new administration building a fresh relationship with Russia. President Putin had agreed that the US abrogation of the treaty, effective in six months' time, would not damage Russia's security. Last night Mr Putin said on Russian television that America's move was mistaken but not unexpected and signalled that he wanted to keep Moscow's warming relations with Washington on track. ******* #7 MSNBC December 13, 2001 Can Putin profit from no ABM? Russian leader could turn loss into gain on world stage By Dana Lewis NBC NEWS MOSCOW—For months Russia has voiced its strong opposition to a U.S. withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty. When President Bush formally announced the pullout on Thursday, a top aide to Russian President Vladimir Putin described the decision as “no surprise. But it is a great disappointment.” “WE KNEW IT was coming,” the Kremlin source said on condition of anonymity. The inevitability of Washington pulling out of a 30-year-old bedrock of U.S.-Russian relations was noted by President Putin in a special address on Russian television Thursday night. “The U.S. leadership spoke of this several times, and this step was not a surprise for us. However, we consider it a mistake,” he said. Russia has steadfastly maintained the ABM is a cornerstone to nuclear deterrence. The formula is basic. The Russians say there’s no point signing accords on controlling offensive weapons without a treaty controlling defensive measures, too. The ABM was a key ingredient in the “mutually assured destruction” recipe that guided the United States and Soviet Union through five decades of frosty ties. In Cold War terms, if either side launched a nuclear missile the other side would respond in kind — and both countries would risk being wiped out in a nuclear exchange. By scrapping the ABM, Russia feels vulnerable because there won’t be nuclear balance. “For the Russians, there’s a link between offensive and defensive systems, and they think that link has been destroyed, or is likely to be destroyed,” said Robert Nurick of Moscow’s Carnegie Institute. Nurick, who helped negotiate nuclear arms treaties in the 1970s under the Carter administration, said the Kremlin is “at a bit of a loss as to what to do next, and the big issue is whether there will be any binding obligations they can count on.” ALL BETS OFF? Putin has been clear in previous statements — although his budding friendship with Bush has toned down his rhetoric of late — that if Washington scraps the ABM treaty, all arms agreements between the two countries could be thrown out the window. And there have been growing signs of discontent in Russian defense circles. Russian defense ministry officials and analysts have warned that Russia could back out of the START-1 treaty, which has rigid and complicated inspection regimes for American and Russian teams to monitor the decommissioning of nuclear arms. Russian military officials have said in private that Russia’s response to a U.S. missile defense shield could include placing multiple warheads on its latest generation nuclear missile — the TOPOL — or halting the decommissioning of older generation SS-18 intercontinental ballistic missiles, of which there are currently about 180 with up to 10 warheads each. A QUESTION OF TIMING The Bush administration’s timing — which the White House links to the dramatic change in national security priorities since Sept. 11 — is being questioned in Moscow. “The U.S. used our enormous help to conduct the anti-terrorist operation in Afghanistan,” noted Vladimir Lukin, Russia’s former ambassador to Washington and member of Russia’s lower house of parliament. “Then the U.S. announces its position on ABM. It’s a sign, and a bad sign at that,” he said. Other Russian politicians vented their fury. Vyacheslav Volodin, leader of the pro-government Fatherland-All Russia faction in parliament called the United States “a superpower that is trying to dictate its rules to the world.” Many Russians believe Washington could have — and should have — negotiated a compromise on the ABM to allow testing of a missile defense system, instead of giving notice to ditch the ABM agreement. MOSCOW-CRAWFORD AXIS But most criticism has been drowned out by cheerful appearances by Bush and Putin, whose back-slapping informal get-togethers since Bush’s inauguration culminated in a summit at the U.S. president’s Texas ranch last month. If the U.S. was determined to do away with what it calls a Cold War-era treaty, there may have been no better time to strike the match. In his TV address Thursday, Putin sought to minimize the impact Bush’s decision will have on Russia — and suggest that Russia still has enough nuclear punch to overwhelm a future American missile shield. “As is well known, Russia and the U.S., unlike other nuclear powers, have for a long time possessed effective means to overcome missile defenses,” Putin said. “Therefore I fully believe that the decision taken by the President of the United States does not pose a threat to the national security of the Russian Federation.” Analyst Nurick said that Putin, by acknowledging the inevitability of the end of the ABM accord, is already planning for the post-ABM era. “More broadly what I think Putin and the people around him are looking for is a reply to what they view as their overture for integration with the West,” Nurick said. “This is the way he’s described his program at home, the currency he’s used.” In the end, Russia may be forced to swallow America’s resolve to pull out of the ABM treaty, but the Kremlin will be looking for something to sweeten the bitter pill. Post-Soviet Russia has for years been seeking to reclaim the role of superpower — and take a seat at the important tables of Western security, economic and political decision making. After months of failed negotiations, Bush’s withdrawal from ABM is finally out in the open. If the result really was no surprise for the Russian president, prepare for Putin to call in his bets. NBC’s Dana Lewis is based in Moscow. ******* #8 Maverick MP suggests Russia has "free hand" if USA abandons ABM Treaty Interfax Moscow, 14 December: A heated debate preceded the State Duma's rejection on Friday [14 December] of moves to include a draft appeal to the US Congress on that country's administration's decision to pull out of the 1972 ABM Treaty. While 226 votes are needed to have this decision passed, as few as 161 members voted for it in the first attempt and 174 in the second attempt. Vadim Bulavinov, deputy head of the People's Deputy group, started the debate by calling on the associated Duma committee to consider the possibility of abrogating START-2 in response to the US decision. Yabloko's Aleksey Arbatov said that an address to Congress had been drafted and suggested debating the draft. The draft expresses the Duma's dim view of the US pull-out from the treaty and warns of possible negative consequences of that move, he said. Because the United States will be preparing for the actual pull-out for six months, Congress will actively debate that issue, so it is important that "our opinion be present in that debate", he said. Yabloko's deputy chairman of the Duma Vladimir Lukin supported this view. The Duma's support is very important for the Russian president's position, he said. The president had described the US intention as a mistake. The Duma can express its view in less diplomatic terms than those used by the president and influence in this way the position of Congress, Lukin said. The Duma's ratification of START-2 last year was a wrong step, because "we were cheated", Yuriy Nikiforenko, a communist, said. Speaker of the State Duma Gennadiy Seleznev responded by saying that neither the previous nor the new US president had sent START-2 to the Senate. Liberal Democratic Party leader Vladimir Zhirinovskiy called on the Defence and International Affairs Committees to give up the idea of passing a statement on this issue. "We need not be subservient to certain Foreign Ministry bureaucrats," he said. Russian defence experts, rather than members of parliament, should be speaking on this issue, he said. Duma members insisting on passing a statement are acting rashly because US President George W. Bush's announcement plays into Russia's hands, Zhirinovskiy said. "We now have a free hand and are under no commitment to destroy our missiles," he said. In effect, it is we who have cheated them, he said. ******* #9 Nezavisimaya Gazeta December 14, 2001 THIS IS NOT A CRIME, BUT A MISTAKE Comments on America's likely withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. Author: not indicated [from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html] POLITICAL AND MILITARY ANALYSTS ARE DISCUSSING THE LATEST STATEMENT FROM THE US GOVERNMENT, WHICH INTENDS TO WITHDRAW FROM THE ABM TREATY OF 1972. TO WHAT EXTENT WILL THIS DECISION AFFECT RUSSIA AND ITS PLACE IN THE WORLD? OUR EXPERTS TRY TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. The United States is going to withdraw from the ABM Treaty. This treaty is one of the most vulnerable spots of the Russian establishment. President Putin has repeatedly said (including his recent visit to the United States) that the ABM Treaty was a cornerstone for securing strategic stability. The United States authorities did not share this point of view, but they refrained from withdrawing the treaty all by themselves, although Russia was aware of the fact that tearing the treaty was just a matter of time. Nevertheless, Moscow hoped that activization of bilateral relationships, Russia's participation in the anti-terrorism coalition would make Washington count with Russia's interests.in this connection, we turned to experts asking them how Russian-American relations are likely to develop in future, if withdrawal of the US from the treaty implies its unwillingness to taka into consideration Russia's opinion. Alexei Arbatov, deputy chairman of the Duma committee on defense: "The decision of the president of the United States on withdrawing from the ABM Treaty was not aimed at insulting Russia. But this will lead to it. Firstly, the ABM Treaty is the major document in Russian- American relations in the sphere of limiting strategic weapons and stability. Secondly, the United States does not yet have a program for testing and deploying anti-missile systems, which would call for rejecting the ABM Treaty. The United States could have done a lot of tests and research without withdrawing from the treaty, but adding amendments to it together with Russia. To quote Talleyrand, this move is worse than a crime, it is a huge error. Having done this, the United States has shown that it is going to take decisions by itself, leaving other countries behind the stage. This is a great error in relations with Russia. The decision of the US authorities has delivered a severe blow at Russia under conditions of unprecedented goode relations between the two countries and their military collaboration in the operation against international terrorism. This has also worsened mutual efforts in non-proliferating nuclear weapons and preventing terrorists from getting at them." Konstantin Kosachev, deputy chairman of the Duma committee on foreign affairs: "The one-sided denouncement of the ABM Treaty of 1972 on the part of the United States can be considered from three points of view: a military, am economic and a political ones. From the military point of view, this decision does not threaten Russia's security much. We possess all necessary technologies for getting over anti-missile systems. It is China who should be really afraid. From the economical point of view, this step of the White House is extremely unfavorable for Russia, it will demand increase in nuclear arsenal. As for the political aspect of the problem, this decision of the United States goes against the new atmosphere of trust and collaboration, set between our countries after the terrorist acts of September 11. The US administration could have expressed good will without driving president Putin into a corner with such statements. In this situation the reaction of Moscow should be immediate. We should announce to the United States at once that after six month Russia will withdraw from the START-1 Treaty. I would like to remind you that this is the first in the history of the United States one- sided withdrawal from an international treaty." Andrei Fiodorov, head of the Center for Political Research and Consulting, "This should not be taken as a slap in Russia's face, since we were aware of the US intention to withdraw from the treaty. They did not conceal it. If they announce it in a rather harsh form - like there would be no further consultations - this would be really closer to a slap in the face. If the United States says that it is withdrawing from the treaty, yet it is ready to discuss this problem with Russia, this is another question. I have just come back from Washington, and I have got an impression that the US authorities count on mild reaction of Russia in connection with their withdrawal from the treaty." Volter Kraskovsky, Colonel-General of aviation, commander of rocket-space defense troops back in 1986-1991, "The United States and Russia are no longer rivals. However, partner relationships between the two countries should not imply concessions and one-sided disarmament from the Russian side (which, unfortunately, has been obvious over the past 15 years). Objectively, the impending withdrawal of the United States from the ABM Treaty leads to spreading indisputable military superiority of the United States on land, in air and in sea to near space. That is why the ABM Treaty of 1972 may undergo only one type of modification - working out and signing a new document by most countries of the world community. It cannot be allowed that only one state dominate in near space and dictate its will. The one-sided withdrawal from the treaty brings Russia to re- considering the whole system of agreements with the United States, concluded earlier, on limiting strategic weapons and the Treaty on short- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles. First of all, it seems wise to "freeze" agreements on heavy intercontinental missiles with parting warheads of individual pointing (PW IP). It is them that serve as the best means for overcoming technically perfect anti- missile systems. Despite the fact that these missiles were made in Ukraine in Dnepropetrovsk for the most part, and their warranty lifetime is drawing to an end, they can serve for another 20 years. And during this time a lot might change in the world to a great extent. Besides, it would be good to speed up retooling Topol and Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missiles with PW IP. Resuming serial production of short- and intermediate-range missiles is of special importance to Russia, since possible threats are situated exactly at such distance from the state frontiers of the Russian Federation. Re-considering of agreements on deploying arms in space is also quite possible." (Translated by Daria Brunova) ******* #10 Washington Post December 14, 2001 Split Vision of America By Jim Hoagland Russians were asked in a recent poll to choose the foreign nations they consider their best allies and their worst enemies. The United States came out No. 1 on both lists, as 42 percent said friend and 43 percent responded foe. The Russians are not alone in having a split strategic vision in this moment of vast global change. President Bush treats Moscow as a valued ally in America's war in Central Asia one day, only to announce the next that he will withdraw from an arms control treaty that Russia says must be preserved. Bush showers tender praise on President Vladimir Putin in Crawford, but offers Putin no strategic comfort on NATO or missile defense. This spate of seeing double can be prevented from destabilizing U.S.-Russian relations. The task now is to construct a new working partnership that will make differences over NATO, missile defense and other divisive questions manageable as they become secondary to broader political and economic forces. That optimistic result will require a strong, counterintuitive commitment from Bush. Bush rides high in public approval at home as the war in Afghanistan goes well. Citizens crave strong homeland defense -- the global era's label for the issue Richard Nixon called law and order. Why would Bush see a need to compromise on fundamental issues now? His recent deeds say loudly that Sept. 11 did not change him or America, as Russia and Europe might initially have hoped. Sept. 11 changed the world, this White House argues, by making it essential for both friends and foes to become more responsive to Bush's agenda. This is the true essence of the Bush Doctrine. "Bush seems now to be practicing multilateral unilateralism," says Russian political scientist Vyacheslav Nikonov, who reported the split-vision poll results. Bush's decision to withdraw -- six months from now -- from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty would seem to undermine his coalition-building efforts. But the initial muted reactions from Moscow suggest that Putin is willing to take an arrow in the chest at home, where he is accused of selling out to Bush, while they work together against Central Asian-based terrorism. One week before the ABM announcement, Washington also turned good intentions into hurt feelings in Moscow by abruptly pulling back from a far-reaching effort by British Prime Minister Tony Blair to wrap Russia into NATO decision-making on peacekeeping, nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and counterterrorism. Blair's intent was to soften the blow of a new round of NATO expansion next year that could include the Baltic states. Unable to resolve its internal conflicts over Russia and NATO, Washington blocked meaningful consideration of the Blair proposal by NATO's foreign ministers. The Bush administration in effect called a timeout at the line of scrimmage and told Blair to come back in June for Washington's final answer. American arrogance? Hegemony riding high? The 43 percent in the poll are likely to see Bush's moves in that light. But four opportunities exist for Washington and Moscow to create a broad bilateral relationship that can resolve the ally-enemy conundrum positively: •Washington should get serious about joint development of missile defenses with Russia. As Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has testified to Congress, it is in U.S. interests for a friendly Russia to be able to shoot down an incoming missile launched accidentally or by a rogue state. Only a serious offer of joint development can remove the sting of ABM Treaty withdrawal. • The NATO issues Blair has identified for joint decision-making with Russia are points on which Russian and U.S. interests converge. Washington should not be the main obstacle to a clearly defined NATO-Russia council. • Russia's growing importance as an oil power provides Bush and Putin with a common business language. Both Texas and Russia gain from oil prices stabilized in the $20 to $22 per barrel range rather than OPEC's $22 to $28 target. • To pursue Bush's converging campaigns against terror and weapons of mass destruction, the United States should strike commercial bargains with Russia over Iraq and Iran. Buying out Russia's $7 billion claim in back debts from Iraq is a cheap step in clearing the way for the campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein that is needed. Inherent optimism tends me toward this glass-half-full vision of what is possible in U.S.-Russian relations beyond the ABM Treaty. But it will require a coherent worldview and integrated staff work by the Bush administration, two elements still often missing. Unless that changes, the world will quickly join Russia's 43 percenters in seeing the glass as half-empty, and draining rapidly. ******* #11 Novaya Gazeta No. 90 December 10-16, 2001 SO FAR, RUSSIA HAS ONLY SCORED A HUMANITARIAN VICTORY Northern Alliance losing influence in the power struggle in Afghanistan Author: Yelena Milashina, Sergei Mikhalych, Filipp Petrovich [from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html] THE NORTHERN ALLIANCE IS UNDER PRESSURE IN AFGHANISTAN. IT STILL RELIES ON RUSSIA AND RUSSIA ALONE. THERE IS SOME TIME FOR POLITICAL MANEUVERING, BUT NOT A LOT OF IT. IT'S BECOMING APPARENT THAT THE AMERICANS ARE MOST LIKELY TO GET CONTROL OVER AFGHANISTAN. An Afghan update in the wake of US talks on Afghanistan Hamid Kamzai, a member of the former royal family who organized an anti-Taliban rebellion near Kandahar and is still fighting over there, has been appointed the provisional leader of Afghanistan in the wake of the UN talks on Afghanistan in Bonn. This choice may be called a compromise which the Northern Alliance was forced to accept. Eager to retain their power, its leaders suggested four candidates for provisional head of the republic. The list did not include Rabbani, General Dustum, or any other leader of the anti-Taliban coalition. "We have always emphasized our readiness to pas over the power when the city has been liberated," said Foreign Minister Doctor Abdulla. "As for our suggestions, they are a compromise which cannot, however, be called a one hundred percent compromise." What Abdulla meant by counting percentages would become clear a bit later when he flew to Dushanbe for a meeting with Defense Minister of Russia Sergei Ivanov only two days after the Bonn conference. The Northern Alliance still relies on Russia and Russia alone. There is some time for political maneuvering, but not a lot of it. The provisional government, where the Northern Alliance's positions remain fairly solid (it controls all security ministries and departments which is of a paramount importance for a country at war) will last six months. Preparations for and organization of Loja Jergu is its major objective. Loja Jergu is a conference of elders representing all social and political forces and all ethnic groups. It is this conference that will have to make a decision on who is going to rule the country - the Americans, Russians, or Afghanis themselves. Everyone knows after all that all this inter-Afghani strife is a front for interests of Russia and the United States. America has already taken over some strategically important objects where military bases may be deployed if needed. Abdulla was forced to tactfully duck our direct question concerning the Americans' presence in Afghanistan. "The subject of the American military bases has not been discussed yet," he said. Muhammad Fakhim is the de facto leader of Afghanistan while Kamzai is away from Kabul, fighting elsewhere. This state of affairs will continue until Kamzai officially assumes the duties of government chairman. Fakhim is much more categorical on the matter of American bases. "They will go away when the counter-terrorism operation is over," he said. "The issue of American bases here is not discussed. There are no preconditions for that..." Moreover, several months ago in his interview with RTR channel Fakhim said, "We cooperate with the Americans while they do not meddle in our domestic affairs." What about Russia? Soviet military specialists considered themselves absolute masters there for decades. Pressed for money in 1992, Russia left the then-national leader Najibulla without its support and all but voluntarily abandoned its influence with the region. It wants to get it back now. As matters stand, the Russian presence in Afghanistan is unquestionable even though the rumors of the Russian paratroops' "Pristina-like dash" turned out to be only rumors. There is only an Emergency Ministry base in Kabul. It is not guarded by emergencies workers, of course - but so what? The Center of Disaster Medicine has established a hospital, and the first operation took place several days ago. Specialists have already come to Kabul to study the matter of reconstruction of the Salang tunnel destroyed during the war. For the time being, Russia dominates only in the humanitarian sphere. "Russia alone fulfills all promises with regard to assistance to Afghanistan," said Refugees Minister Nazari. It is not bad, but it is cold comfort for the foreign policy ambitions of Russian politicians and generals who backed the Northern Alliance, which is rapidly losing influence. Reports came when we were leaving Bagram that Uzbek General Dustum who had fought on the side of the united anti-Taliban front refused to honor decisions of the Bonn conference and that the northern provinces he controls are beyond the zone of influence of the new government. It so happens that Dustum's decision was made when US Secretary of State Colin Powell was visiting Tashkent. It certainly seems that Russia's activity in Afghanistan made the Americans think of something beyond the capture of bin Laden. If we indulge in speculation, it becomes apparent that the Americans are most likely to get control over Afghanistan. Because they have more money to throw around and because they are wise enough not to support the force that tomorrow may lose control over the situation in the country. As one well-informed Afghan put it, "Russia has spent too long considering Afghanistan from various angles. It is frantic now, but its pockets are empty." ****** #12 Wall Street Journal December 14, 2001 Russia's Central-Bank Reserves Continue Slide, Weakening Ruble By JEANNE WHALEN Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL MOSCOW -- Russia's central bank reserves fell by more than $1 billion (1.11 billion euros) for the second week in a row, to $36.1 billion, weakening the ruble and perplexing the market, which had grown accustomed to watching Russian reserves soar. The central bank gave no reason for the fall, leaving analysts to speculate. Some said the central bank had spent the money to offset a recent rise in ruble-selling prompted by seasonal factors and uncertainty about the Russian economy amid lower oil prices. Other analysts said the government might have used the money to make an external debt payment. Analysts said they weren't overly worried by the fall but would be if the trend continues. The last time Russian reserves fell by more than $1 billion in a week was August 1998, the beginning of Russia's financial crash. Russia's reserves had been growing by an average of $1 billion a month this year amid high oil prices and strong economic growth. Then, in the last week of November, reserves fell by $1.3 billion as Russia paid off a Eurobond. Reserves fell by another $1.2 billion in the first week of December, the central bank said Thursday, without elaborating. The ruble fell in Thursday trading to 30.19 rubles to the dollar from 30.08 rubles to the dollar Wednesday. Alexei Zabotkin, an economist with United Financial Group in Moscow, said he believed the central bank had spent the reserves to support the ruble to combat seasonal speculators, who are selling rubles in anticipation of a yearly drop in the ruble's value that takes place during the first two weeks of January. To a lesser extent, the ruble-selling could also reflect fears that the Russian economy will suffer if oil prices continue to fall, he said. Oil, which contributes 35% of Russia's export earnings, has tumbled to two-year lows in recent months, to about $18 a barrel, amid a global economic slowdown. Russia's federal budget next year is pegged to $18 oil but can be adjusted to cope with prices as low as $14.50. Mr. Zabotkin estimated that the ruble would weaken by only 5% to 10% next year even if oil prices fall to an average of $16 a barrel. ******* #13 Washington Times December 14, 2001 Russia's addiction problems By Arnold Beichman These chilling words were spoken last year by Russian President Vladimir Putin: "Year by year, we, the citizens of Russia, are getting fewer and fewer. We face the threat of becoming a senile nation." The population of Russia has dropped from 148 million in 1992 to 145 million in 2000. Were it not for the return of ethnic Russians from former Soviet republics, Russian population losses would be even greater. So says a Rand Corp. study titled "Dire Demographic Trends Cast a Shadow on Russia's Future." These trends project a Russian population of less than 100 million by 2050. But there is an even more alarming development that threatens Russia's demographic future: Drugs, specifically cocaine, are being used by more and more Russians each year. Close to 3 million Russians use drugs regularly. In Kaliningrad, a city of 2 million, close to 30 percent of the population are drug addicts, according to Russian statistics. In fact, Russia has become the world's new drug trafficking center for the Colombia drug cartel. Russia is developing into a major market for Colombian cocaine, according to a leading Colombian newspaper, El Pais. The daily quotes an Interpol source as saying, "In Russia, Colombian drug traffickers have been able to secure total control of the market." What seems incredible is that a kilo of cocaine in Moscow costs three times more than it does in New York City. Narco-trafficking profits, divided between the Colombia drug lords and Russian Mafiosi, have been estimated at $600 million annually. Citing the Russian Embassy in Bogota as its source, El Pais reports that no less than 40 tons of Colombian cocaine are shipped annually to ports of the former Soviet Union. The article quotes a former Russian ambassador, Ednan Agaev, as saying that "barely 5 percent of the cocaine entering our country is discovered by the authorities." As for Russia's grim population trends, the story gets worse with each passing year. Deaths of working-age males, now double what they were in the 1960s, have contributed most to declining life expectancy. Male life expectancy is now below that in Guatemala, Indonesia, Iraq, Mexico, Morocco and the Philippines. The death rate for Russian working-age males is about four times that for U.S. males of the same age group. For example, a 20-year-old Russian male has a 1-in-2 chance of reaching age 60, while an American male has a 9-in-10 chance. Even more astounding is that Russian male life expectancy is now 13 years less than that of Russian females which, says the Rand study, is "one of the largest differences by sex in the world." Even so, Russian female life expectancy is eight years lower than that of American women. Julie DaVanzo and Clifford Grammich are joint authors of the Rand publication. The chief reasons for rising Russian mortality is alcohol consumption and binge-drinking. Russian male deaths fell sharply, and male life expectancy reached its highest levels ever between 1984 and 1987 during an anti-alcohol campaign that: • Reduced in-state alcohol production and raised state prices for liquor. • Campaigned against the bootlegging of samogon, homemade vodka. • Enforced compulsory treatment of alcoholism. The anti-alcohol campaign, successful as it was, had one drawback: It was exceedingly unpopular. So it was abandoned after which two phenomena occurred: Alcohol consumption and mortality soared hand in hand among Russian males. A good deal of this disastrous state of affairs can be blamed on a failed and failing Russian health care system, if it can even be called a system. Funding has been declining since the 1960s. In the mid-1990s, the new Russia was spending per capita 4 cents for every dollar that the United States was spending on health care. And as a topper, says the Rand study, many physicians earn less than bus drivers or baby-sitters. Such findings spell disaster for a country with an aging population and a decline in working-age males. These are matters of domestic concern. What about Russia's position as a world power? Its huge landmass includes 12,000 miles of borders. Demographic trends will mean a serious drop in military personnel and economic trends a drop in defense spending. In 1998, Russia was spending, in real terms, 15 percent less per soldier than the USSR spent in 1985, the Rand study finds. The study suggests an ominous prospect, and that is, "Such pressures may force Russia to rely on weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, for its security." Arnold Beichman, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, is a Washington Times columnist. ******* #14 The Guardian (UK) December 13, 2001 Revelry in Russia Andrea Osbourne celebrated Christmas in Moscow, and got raided by the police during lunch Andrea Osbourne I have always disliked Christmas ­ trudging around the packed rainy London streets is not easy at the best of times, but it becomes particularly loathsome during the festive season. The tinny ring of electronic renditions of Hark the Herald Angels Sing and the ubiquitous So Here It Is Merry Christmas - bah humbug. But this year would be different - I was living in Moscow to study Russian. A group of us expats planned a Christmas Day meal and celebrations. Lots of snow added to the festive feeling. Some of our number had been planning weeks ahead, and on the day produced not only a turkey with stuffing, but a jar of Roses and boxes of crackers complete with hats. Table groaning with goodies, we sat down to eat. But, no sooner had we pulled the first cracker, than came a knock at the door. And another one. And another one. Each one louder than the last. Who could that be? All the invited guests were here ­ and you just don't knock on doors in Russia without making a prior arrangement. Santa? My friend went to the door. We could hear men's voices. It was the police, and they wanted to come in. Now in Russia you can be arrested for not to carrying identification at all times - even in your own home. If you are unfortunate enough to have dark hair and eyes (obviously Georgian or worse ­ Chechen) then the demand for "documenti" quickly becomes part of your daily life. OK, let them in we said, until a small cough from the other side of the table confirmed otherwise. Unfortunately, Jill had forgotten to bring her passport. Ohmigod ­ what should we do. Now it may have been a bit too much Christmas spirit, but with her likely arrest looming, we figured hiding her in the wardrobe in the next room was the only option. By the raised voices coming from the front door, it was obvious our friend couldn't stall the police any longer and they were intent on coming in. We bundled her into the wardrobe and shut the door. In they came - three Russian policemen in full Russian winter dress of fur and padded camouflage. It wasn't just their dress and burly size which was intimidating, but the fact they were all armed with Kalashnikov automatic rifles, and handguns. Now out on the street, this doesn't seem so threatening (trust me, you just get used to it), but in a tiny flat, the three large men carrying guns across their chests seemed to fill the whole room. "Documenti!" growled one. A loud "miaow" came in response. Oh no, we had shut the cat in the bedroom and, sensing something wasn¹t quite right in the wardrobe, she started to miaow loudly. We scurried to produce our passports, keeping an eye on the three policemen as they scanned the room looking to see where the offending noise was coming from. They flicked through our documents with disappointment ­ our residents permits were all in order. "So, who owns this flat?", their leader demanded. "I rent it," replied my friend. Their faces brightened. "You must pay the tax," said one of them. Ah, here we go. I should mention here that Russian police regularly try and extract "taxes" from Westerners. Fortunately, our Russian was good enough to argue back. "No, we rent the flat ­ we don't pay the tax." "Yes, you have to pay the tax," they insisted. I picked up the phone and loudly asked in Russian for the number of the British Embassy, but the police didn¹t budge. They were obviously not going to leave without their money. We needed to get rid of them before they decided to investigate the miaowing which was continuing unabated from the other room. With inspiration founded on pure panic, my friend piped up: "No, we don't pay the tax ­ our landlady said she would pay the tax ­ let me find her address for you." Brilliant. She quickly scribbled the address down on a piece of paper, and the police, sensing they weren't going to get any money from us, made do with a chance to extract some cash elsewhere. But one thing puzzled us. Why had they chosen this flat which just happened to be full of "foreigners"? Under Soviet rule, every block of flats had a caretaker, whose job was to report the goings on of the entire block to the KGB. So the old babushka in the flat below, doing her Soviet duty, had phoned the police to report that there were "foreigners" in her block, and the police had seized the opportunity to making some extra cash. Unfortunately for them, they left empty-handed. We let our friend out of the wardrobe, who was OK if a little shaken, and sat down to finish our meal. And the old woman downstairs? Well, after dinner we took up the rugs, put the CD player on the floor, turned up the volume as far as it would go, and danced for hours. So Here It Is, Merry Christmas. ******* ------- Web page for CDI Russia Weekly: http://www.cdi.org/russia Archive for Johnson's Russia List: http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson With support from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the MacArthur Foundation A project of the Center for Defense Information (CDI) 1779 Massachusetts Ave. NW Washington DC 20036