The Center for Current Politics in Russia (CCPR) presented the report analyzing rise and life of the Russian elite.

To what extent will the elite be renewed after resignation of Vladimir Putin? Who will be taken with to the political future? In what way will the federal and regional elites cooperate in the near future? What is the Russian elite in general? The experts of the CCPR tried to answer these questions in their report “Russian elite on the eve of new electoral cycle: composition and structure”.

“In Russia nonpublic nomenclature-political groups, not political parties (in contrast to the West), perform the function of producers of ideology and suppliers of candidates to governmental bodies”, told Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the CCPR. “But recently we can see that nonpublic fight comes to public sphere”.

Simonov believes that we will face interesting and really dramatic elections to the State Duma in 2007, which can be compared to the elections in 1999, when there was a great struggle between pro-Putin “Edinstvo” and “Otechestvo” representing regional elites. Sergey Mironov’s “Fair Russia” can play the role of “Otechestvo” in 2007. Regional elites have already confused because of existence of two influential parties.

However the present situation is different from the situation in 1999. As the authors of the report state, Russia lives in the state of stability. That is the elite in general is united and loyal to the government of the country and its policy. It understands rules of game and in general patriotic, which certainly does not exclude permanent struggle for resources of influence within the very elites. 

The concept of the “sovereign democracy” played important part in this unity of the elite, as it ties “liberals” and “patriots”. At the same time the counter-elite in the opposition was not discovered. The authorities let the system opposition express its opinion, but what concerns other forces… But can we believe that Harry Kasparov and Eduard Limonov are serious forces?

If both the “United Russia” and the “Fair Russia”, created on the base of  RPZh (Russian Party of Life), “Rodina” (Motherland) and Pensioners’ Party, succeed at the Duma’s elections in 2007, our political elite can become schizophrenic. This is the opinion of Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics, as the correspondent of the “Rosbalt” reports.   

According to him, at present politics does not play a dominant role in decision-making process in Russia. “In Russia there are no real political parties, precisely, they exist, but they are not public. If we look at the list of potential successors of Putin, nobody is a leader of a public party”, Simonov said.

According to him, in Russia informal groups, in which the Russian elite is divided, execute functions of parties. “ It is they who determine strategy and ideology of development of the country”, made it clear Simonov.

However, as Simonov believes, as a result of electoral cycle-2007, the elite will have to decide on what party it counts, and this will be an uneasy choice for it.

Vladimir Putin will become Russian Den Xiaoping. Such an opinion was expressed by Director of the Center for Current Politics in Russia Konstantin Simonov in his interview to the Rosbalt.

According to him, after his resignation from the presidential position Putin will keep confidence of the population and become a symbol of the state capital. “The form of his influence on the politics within the country will be simple: his successor will be less popular and have to listen for Putin’s opinion, that is he will be subject to the present President. Thus there will be a unique situation, when ex-President possesses higher rating than his successor. This will let Putin be over the struggle, over the elite, over the President. Thus he will scan functioning of the system built for the years of his presidency", Simonov believes.

It will be remembered that during the “direct line” Vladimir Putin made it clear that he was not going to stand for the third term, but counted on keeping confidence of citizens after his resignation and, together with them, could influence the life of the country.

Author – Vitaly Ivanov, Deputy Director of the Center for Current Politics in Russia

A priori there are three main ideologies: right, left and liberal.

In 1990’ the liberals appropriated the words «right» and «left» in Russian political discourse. As a result, we call “the right” those, who are not “the right” (members of SPS, and moreover of the “Yabloko” (Apple), and so on) or the ultra-right who discredit the “right” community (national-extremists, religious radicals).

What is “the Right”? Nowadays to be “the Right” in Russia means to be patriot, nationalist (in positive that is true sense of the word), to stand for political and cultural conservatism, strengthening of faith and traditional morale. ‘The Right” is not necessarily an “imperialist” or a supporter of “the special way of Russia”, but all of them are in some extent anti-western.

All right, you can tell me, but many “Left” are sincere anti-western, but there are sincere patriots among liberals and so on. Where is the border?

There are many borders, most evident of them concerns priorities. Both “the Left” and the Liberals, if to simplify, consider freedom and material welfare of a person as a key thing. But “the Left” underline social problematic and redistribution of public wealth, but the Liberals – correspondently economics. “The Right” do not ignore importance of economics and social sphere and accept many ideas and projects of “the Left: and/or liberals, but they their priority is above-personal values, for example, patriotism.

It is important to meet “pure” “right”, “left” and liberals. Majority of people share elements of two or even three basic ideologies, though usually it is possible to point out a priority. It is easier with politicians, though almost all of them follow political conjuncture and they are deliberate eclectics. But dominant elements can be discovered in programs, texts, and claims.     

Majority of Russian citizens are natural “right” in their views, but they do not understand it “due to” mass media and “experts” who continue to mark the pro-western Liberals as “the Right”. This is a great mistake and together with the statement that “Russia is a left country it leads to paradox. We did not have and do not have any serious right party (right-left or right-liberal). But all the parties of the first-second echelon use “right” rhetoric – both the “United Russia”, and Communist Party, and LDPR, and the “Fair Russia”. They share “the right” electorate. 

Now the reality is that the perspective of any party depends on a position of the authorities. And the latter is not going to launch a special project for the “Right”. It is a doubtful position, especially at the background of permanent talks on necessity of a “new liberal party”. It is evident that we need a right party or, at least, the strong right movement, which can consolidate moderate nationalists and stop “privatization” of national problematic by radicals and extremists. There is the base of ideas, there are people with authority and brilliant reputation in the “right” community (for example, Natalia Narochnitsksya), and there are many “right” entrepreneurs ready to help.

Power has changed in Japan. However, nothing sensational has happened – the new prime minister of Japan, as predicted, will be Sindzo Abe, 52, who had been in the position of the Cabinet’s general secretary. Abe received the majority of votes of the both parliament houses. This morning, the entire Cabinet headed by Dzyunitiro Koidzumi, whose authority expires September 30, resigned. In theory, this is a mere formality. According to the Japanese laws, the government has to do this on the eve of premier election and new cabinet formation. At the last morning session, Koidzumi thanked government members for the work and left his Tokyo residence.

No surprises were expected. Koidzumi had been in his position since 2001 and it was already clear last year that precisely Abe would top the government in the future. Then, Koidzumi altered the cabinet’s staff and appointed his secretary general. Last Wednesday, the ruling Liberal-Democratic Party (LDP) of Japan voted for Abe to replace Koidzumi as its chairman. LDP that had been headed by the former premier has absolute majority in the parliament. That is why its decisions determine who takes the top state post.

Today, the lower house of parliament elected Abe with 339 votes. Leader of the main oppositionist Democratic Party Itiro Odzava received 115 votes, head of the Japan’s Communist Party Kadzuo Sii – nine, two other candidates – seven and five votes. The upper house also approved of Abe with majority. 136 deputies voted for him, while Odzava received 85 votes. Other candidates gained significantly less.

Abe has already formed the new government. The foreign minister position remained with Taro Aso, 66. The finance minister seat was taken by Kodzi Omi, who had been minister of Okinawa and the North department several years ago. The position of economy and industry minister was assumed by Akira Amari, who was the minister of labor at the end of the 1990’s. Chief of the Defense Office was taken by Fumio Kyuma, who had been in this position at the end of the 1990’s and made efforts toward development of defense contacts with Russia.

The new composition of the cabinet has to be approved by emperor Akikhito, which is, however, a mere formality as well – the representative of the planet’s oldest dynasty does not have real influence on politics. This should be followed by a large number of press conferences.

Abe got to his new position naturally. After all, he is the representative of a real Japan dynasty that has been in the ruling circle for two generations. His grandfather Nobusuke Kisi was once in the government too, and father Sintaro Abe was chief of one of the largest LDP factions and was on several key positions in the Cabinet. His son, the acting premier minister that is, graduated from a law school in Seikei university and then went to study in California. He worked for slightly over three years in a steel-casting enterprise Kobe Steel and then emerged into the world of politics – became his father’s personal secretary. The first time he was elected into the parliament was only in 1993. His impressive leap into the premier seat is the most spectacular promotion in the Japanese history of politics, analysts say. However, Abe’s election cements the tradition that sparked off in the Japanese society during the election of Koidzumi. According to this tradition, the ruling party has only an indirect influence on the outcome of elections. The main quality of the future premier, however, is personal popularity among electors. Although the latter do not choose their leader directly, without the support from the population a candidate will fail to become the premier. So Abe does have the hearts of the people. At least according to the sociological surveys, his candidacy suits around a half of electors. Women like that he has spectacular appearance, is a loving and caring husband. ‘Hawks’ and nationalists choose him as he has the respective reputation. At least the Japanese and international mass media call him a ‘hawk’.

Now, Sabe will become the youngest premier in the history of his country and the first head of Japan, who was born after the end of the World War II. Watchers use this to explain his tendency to serious reforms. With his characteristic strictness he speaks of the North Korean regime, which helps him win the sympathies of the electors. That is why it is likely that the Tokyo’s policy in relation to Pyongyang will toughen and eventually lead to serious sanctions. As for China and South Korea – Abe wants friendship with these states. Currently, Japan’s relations with them are almost frozen. Abe’s predecessor Koidzumi contributed greatly to this as he annoyed the Japan’s neighbors when he annually visited Yasukuni Temple, where the ashes of the Japanese war culprits are berried. The ex-premier was trying to explain that he just wanted to honor the fallen rather than to justify the past war. Abe does not intend to stop paying visits to the temple but hopes that Beijing and Seul will endure if his visits will be unofficial.

In his speeches, he often promised to carry out a constitutional reform that would allow Japan to possess not only defensive armed forces. After all, after the defeat of the military Japan in the Second World War, the country cannot have nuclear weapon or use its army in exterior conflicts. The USA insisted on this to be cemented in the Japan’s constitution. Apart from this, Abe wants to strengthen the Tokyo’s role in the world policy. Analysts predict that the country’s military cooperation with the USA will prosper, and the state’s position in the world arena will boost. The new premier is a conservator. He claimed several times that he wants to restore traditional values of the Japanese society. Particularly, he is against the revision of the emperor’s name law that allows women to take the ‘Chrysanthemum Throne’. Publicity started discussing the need in such amendment because a male heir of the Japanese throne has been born just recently. For over 40 years before him, there were only girls.

However, we are more anxious about the outlook on the Japan-Russia relations. In particular, the new Premier’s attitude to the recent territorial dispute over South Kuril Islands. “I plan to develop relations with Russia, solve the ‘northern territories’ problem and achieve piece agreement between our countries” – said Abe during his election campaign. Expert with the Center for Current Politics Galina Sapego told PRIME-TASS that relations between Russia and Japan will not likely improve with the new premier. On the opposite, due to the recent events (the incident involving Japanese fishermen, mutual harsh statements) the relations can grow colder. Most likely, the policy of permanent pressure on Russia over the disputed territories will continue. After all, the politician, who wants a high rating, should not step away from this fundamental for Japan issue. On the other hand, Abe and his new Cabinet realize that too much focus on this issue will not do the country any good. They have economic interests in Russia, say, the Japanese want an oil pipeline from east Siberia. Our country has resource for a maneuver – the ‘energy advantage’, said the expert. Given that the Russian authorities made it clear they did not want concede the Kurils, excessive stubbornness of Japan will only makes matters complicated. Most likely, Abe will remain belligerent at home but his position in talks will be getting softer, concludes Sapego.

On Monday the Russian officers detained on suspicion of espionage were transferred to Russia. At the same time Moscow started almost total economic blockade of Georgia. The RF Ministry of Transport informed on suspension of transportation with this Caucasian republic. The Ministry of Information and Communication informed on suspension of postal communication and prohibition on postal transfers to Georgia. A number of state companies made similar claims. The State Duma announced a preparation for enactment of a bill on selective prohibition of money transfers. Strana.Ru addressed to Russian experts with the request to analyze causes and consequences of the tough measures taken by Moscow with respect to Georgia.   

Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics:

- The Russian public demanded decisive measures from Moscow with regard to Tbilisi and it got them. As you know about 20-30% of the Georgian GDP is provided due to postal transfers from Russia. Suspending postal transfers to Georgia, Russia will deliver a painful blow. And Tbilisi, in its turn, will try to retaliate. Consequences of such a retaliation strike can be very serious up to an armed conflict. And if the conflict develops, for example, between Georgia and Abkhazia, Russia will drift into it inevitably. What concerns the claims that all of this can lead to military confrontation between Russia and NATO, they are groundless, because Georgia is still not a member of the Alliance. But the relations between Moscow and Washington will sharply deteriorate.

PNA: What consequences will the decision of the CEC concerning the refusal of conducting the referendum on the “third term” have?

Kirill Chistyakov, expert of the Center for Current Politics:

The question is that referendum is not needed for cancellation of the article in the Constitution prohibiting the third term. There is one more simple and legal means that is to adopt the amendment though the parliament. It must be approved by 2/3 in each of the Chambers and by ¾ of regional parliaments. The decision of the CEC is just a formality.

The final decision belongs to the State Duma.  The Chechen Parliament introduced a project to the State Duma concerning amendment of the Constitution and permission for the third term.  The State Duma has to consider the amendment within the nest few months.

Who will be Putin’s successor? This question will remain central in the new political season. If one looks into the problem from a different angle, the question is different – what will Vladimir Putin be after he leaves the president seat?

A famous political scientist speculates about this in an interview to MK.

Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics:

- Today, one can suggest the most fantastic and improbable versions – chairman of the constitutional court, speaker of parliament, leader of a political party, UN general secretary… However, I believe that Vladimir Putin will unleash his final mega-project already before resignation – the world’s most expensive fuel company. Today, our country is not only exporting crudes to the West but is also actively playing in the world markets. For example, it is buying assets of foreign companies, including the power corporations. By acquisitions and exchanges it can grow a huge company, whose authority in the world will be indisputable. Putin could become a chief executive office of such company.

Author – Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics

One of the most popular and even sticking discussions in Russia revolves around the presence of lack of the civil society in the country. There are to extreme views. First: as normal people, we got it – civil society – which is proved by the large number of non-government organizations. Second – the so-called liberal view: the super-strong state has suppressed all civil society shoots, trying to create a substitute in the form of the Public Chamber or other Kremlin-made institutions. If not the authoritarian rule, civil society would bloom. Cut it short, laisser faire, and then economy will prosper and politics will be fair and competitive.

The truth is, as always, between two poles. Recent weeks showed that we do have civil society but its face is ugly. And not because it is handled by the state. It is just that it does not want to be the way the liberals want it.

It does not aim to center on the fight for political freedoms and rights. It wants to take to life its views on the way the country should be, while these views are very specific. Explosion in the market prepared by a group of students is nothing else but a manifestation of the civil activists. Massacre in Kondopoga is just about the same.

The events in Karelia have shown that the modern civil society is actively exploiting the virtual field but is not limited by it. It is like a virus – captures new followers. Institutions, such as parties, appear to be not in demand. Eventually, the state is only suspecting a possible disease but cannot tell when and in what form it will surface.

In economy, the state of affairs is sad as well. The civil society is not dreaming of a weaker state’s hand. I have been trying to point at the fact that economic issues in Russia are often caused not by an excessive state’s pressure on businesses but by the fact that businesses are often based on specific relations with the state. With separate state’s representatives to be more precise – those, who settle issues with entrepreneurs using exactly the civil society represented by the banya, restaurant, dacha and other types of community. The main thing is to take part in sharing apart the state’s money, which is the most profitable business in the country.

Democratic Party congressmen want US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld out of his chair. In the nearest time, the congress may bring out a no-confidence vote. Experts have different views on the possibility of the lay off. Some analysts say President Bush can sacrifice the chief of Pentagon to boost his party’s popularity before the election, others believe Bush will not give up on his associate.

American press stresses that democrat leaders in the Senate and House of Representatives demanded a phased withdrawal of American troops from Iraq before year end in an address to George Bush. Rumsfeld, democrats say, is an unsuitable figure to alter the policy in Iraq.

Deputy Head of US and Canada Institute Viktor Kremenyuk said in an interview to VZGLYAD he would not be surprised to see Rumsfeld laid off. “The logic of the situation is that Bush needs to seek new guilty ones for the aggravation in Iraq” – the expert noted.

Besides, the unclear results of the Lebanon-Israel war also demand a reaction from the White House. In these conditions, ahead of the intermediate polls in Congress due to be held nearest November, Bush can decide to get rid of the unpopular minister.

According to Kremenyuk, the president should not be confused by the fact that the initiative comes from the democrats. “Democrats express the opinion of a whole public layer that thinks Rumsfeld is a liar, failed to secure victory, and influences badly on the president” – the scientist noted. If Bush does not stand for Rumsfeld, republicans will flop the intermediate voting in the congress.

Kremenyuk believes Donald Rumsfeld can be replaced by an inconspicuous figure. “Possibly, this will someone from Rumsfeld’s deputies, maybe somebody from republicans, the person can turn out a surprise” – Kremenyuk said. Rumsfeld’s successor will have to not just change the policy but just stop annoying publicity.

Head of the analytical office at the Institute of Political and Military Strategy Alexander Khramchikhin is confident that Donald Rumsfeld’s head will not roll. “Rumsfeld is a fellow to Bush and one of the founders of his foreign line doctrine” – said the expert in an interview to VZGLYAD. Currently, Rumsfeld is handling a military operation in Iraq, and USA cannot afford now not to finish the war in the Gulf.

Khramchikhin links the democrats’ desire to fire Rumsfeld with the elections; big focus on this topic demonstrates that the campaign is at full speed now. However, this does not mean that Bush will admit his mistakes and abandon his comrade. “There are many candidates to replace Rumsfeld but he will not be fired” – forecasts the scientist.

Center for Current Politics expert Galina Sapego believes Bush has got himself into a tough situation that can unwind in surprising fashion. On the one hand, Rumsfeld can sign in for resignation as he already did once (back then this was refused), on the other, there are no obvious advantages of such act.