#5 - JRL 8096 - JRL Home
gazeta.ru
March 2, 2004
Two versions but little optimism as Fradkov nominated for PM
Irina Alyoshina, Aron Tsypin

Vladimir Putin’s nomination of a little-known civil servant Mikhail Fradkov as a candidate for the prime minister post has not added clarity as regards to the future course of the new government. All experts polled by Gazeta.Ru praise Fradkov for his bureaucratic skills but at the same time believe that he will step up pressure on businesses

While Kasyanov’s dismissal from the Prime Minister’s post less than three weeks before the presidential election was seen by many as a PR-stunt on the part of the Kremlin, nominating little-known Mikhail Fradkov is perceived as its equally illogical sequel. Little has been heard of Fradkov since the Federal Tax Police Service, which he had headed was disbanded last March. After this move, Putin appointed Fradkov Russia’s envoy to the European Union in the minister’s rank and since then he worked in Brussels.

In his farewell address to the outgoing Kasyanov government last week Putin explained his decision to change the chairman of the government by his wish to be open to the voters, to show them what awaits them after the poll. However, Fradkov’s nomination is hardly likely to give the voters any clues about the future government’s policy.

Upon recovering from a brief shock brought about by the surprise nomination politicians and experts have suggested two main theories of what can be behind the nomination.

Some observers assume that Mikhail Fradkov is but another one of the so-called ‘technical’ prime ministers - the government chaired by him will become a technical body which will implement the Kremlin-dictated policy.

The appointment of Viktor Khristenko as the acting prime minister last is seen as a possible proof that this theory is true. After sacking Kasyanov, Putin demonstrated the way of his thought by choosing typically ‘technical’ bureaucrat Khristenko as temporary replacement. A week later, Putin proposed even more ‘technical’ official Fradkov as a candidate for the PM post.

Presidential candidate Irina Khakamada believes that by sacking the government Putin sought to get rid of the increasingly influential Mikhail Kasyanov, and not by the president’s desire to change the political course. Putin “did not demonstrate any new course, but mere solved a personal problem by removing Mikhail Kasyanov,” holds Khakamada.

Analysts agree that Fradkov is an ideal candidate for the role of obedient executor of the Kremlin’s will. But as the will in question is still somewhat obscure, analysts tend to be highly cautious in their estimates of the future government.

“Mikhail Fradkov has held top state posts for many years, yet it impossible to make any conclusions concerning the future government’s policy proceeding from that appointment,” holds Yevgeny Yasin, the head of the Higher School of Economics and a former economy minister. In his opinion, Fradkov’s main advantage is his loyalty to the Kremlin. “Mikhail Fradkov is, of course, a decent yet at the same time a very cautious man. He is civil servant in a good sense, a good administrator. His loyalty by no means can be called into doubt. I think that is what will be the main criterion for his activity.”

Mikhail Delyagin, the director of the Institute for Problems of Globalization, is convinced that “Fradkov has a great common sense, is a conscientious, accurate, efficient and a loyal man, who does not seek public attention… Considering all that no one will ever make him a political prime minister, he is a technical prime minister.”

Alexander Shokhin, a former vice premier and State Duma deputy, presently the head of the supervisory board with the Renaissance Capital financial group, agreed with Delyagin, surmising that most likely in May, when Putin, freshly re-elected for his second term, is to appoint the new government, Fradkov will keep his post.

Other analysts, albeit agreeing that Fradkov is but a technical figure, have already begun to speculate on the future course of the new government. In their opinion, the prospects are anything but cheerful. And although earlier warnings that the so-called St Petersburg force-wielders, or ‘siloviki’, could come to power, have seen no confirmation so far, Fradkov’s appointment is still seen by some as another step towards strengthening of the power-wielding component in the Kremlin’s policy.

Moreover, Fradkov’s professional experience fits well into that theory. Back in early 2003, when the Federal Tax Police Service, headed by Fradkov, was disbanded, some experts surmised that in truth the agency was closed not due to its ineffective performance but so as to set up a new super-powerful ministry on its basis, the financial intelligence.

Fradkov himself was believed to have put forward the initiative. Several law enforcement agencies, the Tax Ministry, as well as several Finance Ministry departments were to be incorporated into the new ministry. A sourse who refused to give his name told Gazeta.Ru that “the Tax Police Service was disbanded only to be transferred to the Interior Ministry, and, acquiring access to gigantic information potential, to revive as a phoenix in the form of a gigantic economic police organ, uniting all fiscal agencies, tax authorities, customs services and banking control.”

Remarkably, such a scheme may as well be adopted by Fradkov’s government for implementing the ongoing reform of the civil service, which, among other things, envisages cutting back on the number of governmental agencies.

The fact that Fradkov used to be the head of the the Tax Police gives little optimism to many observers. Leonid Smirnyagin, Professor at the Moscow State Univiesity, former aide to the presidential administration, has told Gazeta.Ru:

“The tax police service was an independent and publicity-shy organization that managed to accumulate piles of compromising materials regarding everyone during the period of its work. It is an ideal weapon in the concealed bureaucratic struggle.”

Murtaza Rakhimov, the President of the Russian internal republic of Bashkortostan, has expressed hope that Fradkov would focus on combating corruption. “This problem is ripe, and Fradkov sees all the oligarchs through, he cannot be easily tricked,” Rakhimov said.

On their part, oligarchs do not see any threat in Fradkov’s appointment. Igor Yurgens, a vice-president of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, called Fradkov an “absolutely balanced” person. In his opinion, Fradkov’s appointment is “quite an adequate move that gives a positive sign for moderate liberals and is not likely to radicalize the situation in the country”.

Vladimir Detenich, head of the analytical department of the Olma Investment Company, though concerned about the appointment of the former tax police chief to the post of the premier, rejoiced that “at least all high-profile tax cases were investigated not when he held the post.”