On Tuesday Prime-Minister of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovich will arrive in Sochi at the EurAsEC summit. During the work of intergovernmental group Russia-Ukraine he hopes to get an answer on the gas issue from his Russian colleague Mikhail Fradkov and to prepare for the first session of the interstate commission headed by Russian leader Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko. Experts are sure this is not a total list of topics under consideration.
To come to an understanding. On Tuesday Viktor Yanukovich will make his fist official foreign visit as a chairman of the Ukrainian government. In the first instance the Prime Minister, so familiar to our politicians, is going to Russia.
It was supposed that Yanukovich would visit Moscow, where he meets with his Russian colleague Mikhail Fradkov and President Vladimir Putin. However on the 15th of August in Sochi the EurAsEC summit will be opened, so Yanukovich had to change his direction and tomorrow his plane will land on the Russian coast of the Black Sea.
As Yanukovich claimed that primarily he intended to get an answer on the gas issue. The Ukrainian Prime Minister underlined that he was not going to insist on cancellation of present agreements with Russia concluded under Timoshenko’s premiership. “I never said we would change or cancel anything. We will make attempts to come to an understanding with suppliers of energy carriers to our Republic to provide transparent supplies and conclusion at interstate level under participation of the government”, Yanukovich made it clear.
Ukrainian policy. In the formal part of the dialogue Deputy Director of the Center for Current Politics Vitaly Ivanov expects discussion on Ukraine’s entry to the Northern-Atlantic Alliance “Yanukovich will have to answer somehow on the NATO issue. Statements on this issue in the “Universal” are too vague”, the political analyst shared his opinion with the newspaper “Vzglyad”. Besides, Ivanov says, “various aspects of trade relations” will be discussed at the Russian-Ukrainian negotiations. “We are the largest trade partners. In the nearest future Ukraine will remain the largest transit country of our gas. So we are doomed to work together”, concluded Vitaly Ivanov.
The “United Russia” counts on getting at least half of places in regional parliaments. They expect to get the lowest result in Primorye – 35%, the highest result – in the Republic of Tuva (80%).
On the 8th of October elections to regional parliaments will be held in nine regions in Russia. The “UR” participates in all the campaigns. Party’s sources recognized that the Kremlin demanded the “United Russia” would clear the bar” in comparison to the recent elections and would get at least halve of places in parliaments, “Vedomosti” writes.
According to the summary table of approximate results of the elections, provided by the edition, the “United Russia” expects the lowest result in Primorye – 35%, the highest result – in the Republic of Tuva (80%).
Experts were surprised with objectives of the “United Russia”. For example, Deputy Director of the Center for Current Politics Vitaly Ivanov regards “United Russia’s” forecasts in Tuva as extremely optimistic.
But the experts believe that “Vedomosti” diminished the targets in Primorye, the Jewish Autonomous Region, where local legislators canceled the column “against everybody” on the eve of the election. The cancellation of the column is tactically profitable for the “united Russia”, as it reduces quality of the electorate, but in case of low turnout it increases results of the “UR”.
Experts agree that the most expected result can be got in Chuvashia – 44% and in Karelia – 50%. In Karelia the “United Russia” has the only serious competitor – “Yabloko” headed at the elections by businessman Vasiliy Popov.
At regional elections on 12th of March 2006 among 8 federative subjects the “UR” got the highest result in the Khanty-Mansijsk Autonomous District (55%), the lowest result – in the Republic of Mountain Altai (27,2%). The average result of the Party in spring 2006 is 47,2%.
On the eve the briefing of deputy head of the Presidential Administration Vladislav Surkov took place. Today all the mass media comment on his speech. At the broadcasting station “Mayak” we are discussing it with Konstantin Simonov, Director general of the Center for Current Politics. - Konstantin Vasilievich, in your opinion, what are the main points of Vladislav Surkov’s speech? On what should one focus?
Simonov: In general, there was nothing new in the speech. We deal with decoding of the theses that were proclaimed earlier, in his speech to businessmen containing for the first time the words “sovereign democracy”. Then those theses were developed in his speech to the members of the “United Russia” at the beginning of this year. The text of the speech is available on the site of the “United Russia”; nobody keeps it in a secret. This is the third large speech mainly devoted to the problem that Vladislav Yurievich calls the “sovereign democracy”. To call things by their proper names, in opinion of the Russian executive branch, Russia corresponds to all the standards of the modern democracy. But at the same time it is going to be governed by itself, that is it leaves for its national elite the right to govern the state and its raw and other resources. Here it is the first time of division of democracy into “sovereign” and “regulated” one. Earlier the word “regulated” did not exist as an antithesis to “sovereign”. In fact, it was said that there are democracies governed by external forces and those governed without foreign interference. Russia belongs to the second category and thinks it does not need, firstly, standards and, secondly, elites, imposed from abroad. This seems to be important.
That is in fact here we compare our experience with the experience of transformation of a number of countries of the post-Soviet space. I mean the change of elites in Ukraine or in Georgia, where the process of renewal of elites took place with active participation of external actors. Russia, precisely the Russian executive branch, directly makes it clear that it will do everything to prevent such a scenario, because it thinks it can reproduce the national elite that is ready to govern the state and its raw asserts, energy resources and so on.
Author: Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics in Russia
There is no Gogol’s museum in Russia. They don’t open it in Moscow because they don’t have an appropriate collection for one. In Europe they would sculp wax figures. This sort of Gogol’s museum would be handy here – because the Gogol’s characters are no dead but in fact living souls despite that 150 years have passed.
Take, for instance, the recent publications claiming that a middle class has established in Russia and is ready to construct civil society and stand for its rights. As if it is dissatisfied with the excessive hand of the state in its life. Saying that establishment of a new social system will start soon. They point at many examples, for example, the strike of car owners.
Here’s when Manilov’s character comes to mind – his dreams were just as bright. The majority of the middle class is living thank to a symbiosis with the state. The mentioned car owners are fighting not against bribes down the road but against the ban on right-wheel cars or against tow trucks. Because they are not pleased with the system in general. A bribe to a traffic officer usually costs less than the penalty you have to pay for a violation. If drivers paid for all their violations as they have to, the majority of them would go bankrupt a long time ago, considering the level of discipline on the Russian roads. That is why the informal pact between drivers and the state represented by the traffic officers is beneficial for all. However, if extortion surges – people hit the streets standing for their civil rights.
The speculations about private business that anticipates equal rules of the game for everyone are just as naïve. Vice versa, the majority of businesses is based on exclusive access to the state’s wealth, be that budget money, state contracts, licenses, connections with customs executives and tax officers, and so on. The talent of the Russian entrepreneur is often the ability to know how to exist together with officials for mutual benefits or to devise shady deals, cheat clients and partners and the state. The majority of entrepreneurs are Chichikovs, who plan corruption schemes or mess in fraud. Chichikov is close to Nozdrev, who is trying to get things solved by telling tales about connections with the high brass and acquaintance with the mighty of this world, offering you part in questionable enterprises just to cheat you.
Author: Vitaly Ivanov, Deputy Director General of the Center for Current Politics
This week, the State Duma will have to pass the so called ‘ruble bill’ in the first reading and stoke up the dedolarization of the Russian economy and not just economy. In fact, this is not a separate law but rather a set of amendments to the acting laws. They stipulate ban on information on the price (cost) of commodities, services, property, values of affairs, budget indices, state and municipal loans, state and municipal debt in foreign currency (dollars and euro), in conventional units. The ban is valid over retailers and wholesale traders, mass media units, and the bodies of state and municipal authorities. It is even planned to call parliamentarians and other official persons to administrative account for the use of these two words – dollar and euro – in public.
‘Dedollarization’ of the economy was launched a long time ago, this is especially noticeable in the regions (and the further from Moscow, the more noticeable this is). Euro failed to become an adequate replacement for the dollar. That is why ‘rubleization’ is taking place at the same time.
Russia has been claiming to sovereignty of late, even to imperial status. But action lags behind declaration; authorities are not always consistent but nevertheless our country is not the same as two-three years ago. But one shouldn’t debilitate. Currently, the state of the energy markets is extremely favorable for us and our rivals are experiencing serious hardships, which is just the right time to fortify, overcome the dollar, and achieve currency sovereignty.
For this we need to reach total convertibility of the ruble and at the same time its higher prestige first at home and then overseas. The potential goal is to reach the status of reserve currency. The convertibility theme should be discussed by experts – the issue is serious. Is it enough to just lift the remaining restrains on the free capital turnover or should authorities, according to the last president’s state of the nation address, also open exchange trade over oil and gas?
Russia cannot claim to empire status, to sovereignty as long as the salaries of its citizens are calculated in dollars. As long as the information in mass media on budget parameters, exterior debt, values of affairs involving Russian companies are accompanied by the $ sign. As long as politicians, and high brass officials openly use ‘dollars’ in their statements. This is something economic experts do not understand unlike patriots.
Author: Vitaly Ivanov, Deputy Director General of the Center for Current Politics
Recently, the State Duma passed the so called ‘ruble bill’ in the first reading. The draft law is aimed at downplaying the role of the dollar in the Russian economy. The disputes were high already at the first stages of the reading. Discussions over the bill in the second reading promise to be hot as well.
In fact, this is not a separate law but rather a set of amendments to the acting laws. They stipulate ban on information on the price (cost) of commodities, services, property, values of affairs, budget indices, state and municipal loans, state and municipal debt in foreign currency (dollars and euro), in conventional units. The ban is valid over retailers and wholesale traders, mass media units, and the bodies of state and municipal authorities. It is even planned to call parliamentarians and other official persons to administrative account for the use of these two words – dollar and euro – in public.
What can be said here? One should start with the core.
In theory, any state possesses sovereignty – complete independency, that is – it is free to carry out interior and exterior affairs its way. In practice, however, since states have to cooperate with each other, they tend to interfere with each others affairs, and thus no one has sovereignty. But many make efforts to get one. In other words, sovereignty is the claim to independency. Naturally, different states have different results. Some states fail and become second-best or even dependent. Others achieve at least noninterference with their domestic affairs; some turn into empires, that is gain rights and opportunities to influence on other states, take part in the regulation of the global rules of the game. The second the third is of course not sovereignty. A right name for this is autonomy. But I will try not to make things more complicated here.
As for currency, this is, on the one hand, an imperative state’s attribute. Almost every state has its own money units. On the other hand, not every state can secure the role of the main payment unit for own currency – to say nothing of convertibility. Few achieve the status of reserve unit for their currency. Naturally, this depends on the general state of economy, the situation in the world markets, economic and financial policies of authorities, etc. Eventually, however, the core matter is the sovereignty claim. Simply put, if a state has an economic platform for the claim to independency it can make its currency the main payment unit, turn into convertible currency. The state can also partially refuse from sovereignty claims. Refusal of the old European states – Germany, France, Italy, Spain – from their currencies and the transition to euro was the voluntary delegation of a part of their sovereignties to the European Union. EU member – Great Britain – though did not enter the euro zone, allows double price lists. Thus, it also loses some of its sovereignty, but to a lesser extent than Germany and France. But for the time being.
When currency of a country X us used by the people of a country Y as a payment and reserve storage unit, and its authorities demonstrate indices, targets, projects in its figures, this means that Y depends on X. One can say that X has a powerful economy, even greater than the economy of Y, that this has been established historically, that globalization is the general trend. If Y has no sovereignty claims or if they are not big than everything is alright. However, if such claims surface, and a door of opportunities bursts open, it will be necessary to get rid of the currency dependency. This is something the people with economic frame of mind do not understand, but those with the patriotic frame of mind – do.
Russia has been claiming to sovereignty of late, even to imperial status (the concept of the energy empire). But action lags behind declaration; authorities are not always consistent but nevertheless our country is not the same as two-three years ago.
The time is working for us now. But one shouldn’t debilitate. Currently, the state of the energy markets is extremely favorable for us and our rivals are experiencing serious hardships, which is just the right time to fortify, overcome the dollar, and achieve currency sovereignty.
Author – Konstantin Simonov, Director general of the Center for Current Politics.
The closer the G-8 Summit, the more heated political discussion between Russia and western countries, first of all the USA.
About energy nationalism.Everybody heard Dick Cheney’s speech in Vilnius and President Putin's Letter to the Federal Assembly, in which only a deaf did not hear our response to the “comrade wolf”.
Positions are defined clearly. The USA and, in a less degree other western countries, accuse Russia of: à) dismantling of democracy - in domestic policy;á) support of the regimes confronting the West (Iran) – in foreign policy;â) attempts to blackmail Europe (“gas war”). And Bush even accused Russia of “energy nationalism”.
Russia accuses the West of: à) interference in its domestic affairs and double standards;á) “energy egoism” – attempts to impose by political means the energy policy profitable for the West, but not for Russia.
One should say there are no “good” and “bad”, “right” and “guilty”, “selfish” and “unselfish”. Therefore whoever excels appealing to the moral categories, the discussion is not about ideals. The question is about the clash of interests of seller and buyer of energy resources. Reserves of the “commodity” (energy resources, hydrocarbons) in the world are limited. The shagreen leather of oil is shrinking. Even under present level of consumption, according to experts, oil will hold out for no more than 60 years. As economy of China, India, Brazil develops, living standards (which means energy consumption) grow in these countries, grow in leaps and bounds.
One should admit that the darkness at the end of the energy tunnel is already visible. The train of civilization is approaching to it inexorably. And still there are no new sources and energy.
It is quite clear that under such conditions the central question of the world politics/economy is energy security. In fact, it is politically correct designation of rather more dramatic process – the struggle for survival.
The first half of the XX century was under the sign of the “struggle for living space”, the beginning of the XXI century is characterized as the struggle for living energy. The difference is that the struggle for living space: à) in many respects, was the result of misunderstanding, erroneous initial ideology, but the struggle for living energy has more real physical reasons;á) the struggle for “living space” was conducted by means of rude force, but the war for “living energy” was, is and, there is a hope, will be conducted mainly by peaceful means – economic, information, etc.
The three-volume book “Ideas. Leaders. Actions” was presented to the participants of the political education program of the United Russia party. The book opens the series of publications of the “United Russia’s Library” and represents a kind of the encyclopedia of the world thought. Collectors under general editorship of deputy Secretary of the General Council of the Party Oleg Morozov united in the book thinkers of different cultures that in different epochs thought how to make the state efficient and the society happy. The book was presented to the audience of the political education program by Director general of the Center for Current Politics in Russia, candidate of Political Science Konstantin Simonov.
Konstantin Simonov:The most famous and widespread myth is that a conservative is a person resisting any changes. In fact the question is not in necessity of changes, but in forms in which these changes can be made. If the question is about revolutionary changes, about ideas to ruin everything and then to build something else, certainly, a conservative is not an ally or a friend of such political ideologists. For a conservative revolutionary approach is unacceptable. He/she is not afraid of something new, but of that this new will be built on the complete destruction of what has been.
Betrayal of the party by which list such a deputy was elected will be punished with forced “divorce” from the Parliament.
It will be problematic for lawmakers to change their political orientation. According to the bill adopted by the RF State Duma in the first reading lawmakers will be obliged to be members of the party by which list they were elected. It will be impossible to join other faction. The authors of the document are the group of deputies of United Russia and Liberal-Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR). They offer to spread the rules of “pale” to members of regional legislative assemblies of subjects of the Federation.
State Duma’s speaker Boris Gryzlov called the initiative rational and timely. “Adoption of this law is a stage in preparation for the situation, when only political parties will present in the lower chamber, he claimed. – It is necessary to guarantee that there will no changes of party representation”. We remind that in 2007 for the first time the all the members of the Duma will be elected by party lists.
On Wednesday, at an extraordinary session of the Supreme Soviet of the Republic of Khakassia, majority (45 against 15) refused to approve early termination of office of Senator Arkadiy Sarkisyan proposed by Chairman of the Council of Federation Sergey Mironov.
- The attempts of the local authorities to resist Mironov’s wish to remove from the Council of Federation the people that, in his opinion, do not correspond an office of senator have no perspectives, Director general of the Center for Current Politics in Russia Konstantin Simonov believes. Political weight of Mironov is too significant, the situation with recall of the senator from Primorye proved it, when even governor Sergey Darkin always emphasizing his independence sided with Mironov.
