Author – Konstantin Simonov, Director general of the Center for Current Politics.
First of all, the situation about the Shtokman project can be rather conflict. Permanently delaying announcement of the short-list of partners, Gazprom causes their increased irritation. Foreign partners start thinking that it wants to get from them more acceptable conditions and even impose solution of tasks coming beyond their cognizance. The situation has already taken place. It was when Russia negotiating conditions of entry to the WTO tied to link them to the Shtokman project.
On the one hand, Russia’s tactics is quite reasonable taking into consideration Shtokman’s unicity. On the other, it should not cross the line. Moreover, the list of potential winners can be predicted quite easily: two American companies, which will take investment burden, and two Norwegian ones, which will carry out technical part of the project. Of course, the question is in distribution of shares, but Gazprom may introduce country’s quotes, so the Americans (Conoco è Shevron) and Norwegians (Hydro è Statoil) will decide themselves how to divide shares within the general quote. What concerns Total, its participation in the Shtokman project is under a big question. It seems doubtful that even the first payments to the budget will help the company. (The payments relate to getting profitable oil within the frames of PSA on Khariaghinsk project.
We cannot but hope announcement of Gazprom’s partners in the Shtokman project at last will take place in May. Otherwise it will play against our interests, especially on the eve of the G-8 summit, where Russia is going to claim itself as an energy superpower. In this context we need not new conflicts with Western customers of energy resources. Relations with the EU develop with difficulties recently. Though everybody understands well that neither Russia can do without the European market nor Europe can develop without the Russian gas, at least during the next five-seven years. Projects of entry to the Chinese market are a strategy of the future, like the search of an alternative to the Russian fuel at the European market. The very idea looks rather fantastically.
As a result the sides doomed to cooperation permanently frighten each other, and this process can last in May as well. Despite Russia’s evident irritation, the European Union will proceed insisting on signing the Transit protocol to the Energy Charter and the idea on buying gas on the EU borders within the frames of a single framework agreement.
– Konstantin Simonov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics in Russia, candidate of political sciences.
Vitaly Ivanov, Head of the Center for Political Projects of the Institute for Social Planning, Candidate of Legal Science
NG publication of translated fragments of the report entitled “Incorrect Direction of Russia: What the USA Can and Should Do” prepared by American politicians and experts under the aegis of the Foreign Policy Council stirred a wide response both in the West and in Russia. Today, we are publishing the article by two Russian political analysts looking into the parts of the document available in our country. Notably, one of the authors is employed by the Public Planning Institution - a think tank affiliated with the Kremlin. That is why the text that we today offer to our readers can be seen as an unofficial reaction of the close to the Kremlin circles to the contemporary views of those, who works on the US policy in relation to Russia.
American politics is strongly ideologized by those, who claim that the USA has a unique mission to deliver liberty and democracy to the people. These are not only diligently mystified neoconservators that are adding their features to the policy of the acting administration. The neocons are merely one of the factions of the Republican Party, not the largest at that. There are also other groups of republicans – the democrators, who are unfriendly to the neocons. The Democratic Party also has many those, who are eager to remake the world (and those who were doing this when Clinton was president), and they are not all identical in their ways.
Simply put, the entire American democratization principles ideologically stems from the Protestant and Judaic messianizms and liberal-leftist universalism. The common roots do not rule out the profound tactical and strategic controversy, rivalry on the inter- and inside-party level, animosity and conflicts. However, from the strategic standpoint, they are all the constructors of the “glowing city on the hill”, some global “empire of democracy.” And they all have always been ready to sacrifice the national interests of America, the lives of its citizens, its resources, and so forth, to this dream of theirs. Someone of them truly believes that it will be an American empire or at least that the USA will become the main center and a power subject in the world empire. It is obvious now that even things will start working out with the empire, the Americans will have a burden to heavy that will squash them. In some way, it is already crushing down, although the global democracy idea is far from being ok.
Who are the richest people in Russia? The Russian edition of the Forbes magazine has published the top 100 richest people in Russia. Comparing to the previous year, the rich turned richer. The number of dollar billionaires in the golden 100 increased from 30 to 44 persons. This process is going on in all countries. The overall possessions of the people in the list has increased as well and overwhelmed $100 billion. Today, the richest people in Russia own a $250 billion property. At that, the gap between the rich and the poor continues to grow.
Correspondent: In the first place of the richest people in Russia is entrepreneur and governor of Chukotka Roman Abramovich, whose property is evaluated by Forbes at $18 billion 300 million, however, the most successful figure in the list is Lukoil Chief Vagit Alekperov, who got to the second position. For the year, his possessions boosted by $8.6 billion – by over 200%.
Last year, the majority of the figures in the rating made fortunes in oil, gas, metals, and timber exports. This year representatives of other business were successful too – construction, retail trade, groceries production, casino owners, and mobile communications operators.
However, the main source of wealth in Russia is still control over its subsoil reserves, notes Director General of the Center for Current Politics in Russia Konstantin Simonov.
Simonov: If we scrutinize the Forbes list, both the new and the previous, we will see that it is headed by the co-owners of the Russian rough companies that unfortunately come as a fundament for the Russian economy today.
It has the owners of oil concerns, the owners of metallurgic firms, coal, timber and other companies. It is clear by they are prospering: the prices of oil and gas are soaring and driving the profits of their companies; secondly, capitalization of their firms increases as well.
Galina Sapego, analytical expert with the Center for Current Politics in Russia (CPCR):
Gazprom’s claim to raise gas prices for Byelorussia is a reaction to the protracted transition of 50% interest in Beltransgaz that the Byelorussian side had promised. Last year the tariffs for Byelorussia remained unchanged and in the context of the gas conflict with Ukraine, when it was unclear why the prices for Byelorussia were low, Gazprom explained that the Byelorussian side agreed to concede the stake in Beltransgaz.
In fact, the pledge was not given clearly. Byelorussia said ‘da’ but under condition that it will carry out independent evaluation of the stake. Naturally, the value estimated by the Minsk turned out higher than the real price according to Gazprom. The Russian side is unwilling to receive the stake at such price but this is exactly what Minsk wanted. Formally, Byelorussia is willing to sell the stake but it sets unacceptable for Russia conditions. The recent announcement by Gazprom is a reaction to the breach of agreements between Minsk and Moscow.
Boosting prices of the Russian gas hurts Byelorussian economy. Spokesman of the National Bank of Byelorussia said the country’s economy can withstand only a 10% raise – which is around $50 for a thousand cubic meters. Moscow wants to raise the price by nearly 5 times.
Naturally, the Byelorussia’s economy will fail to handle such increase and it is likely to lead to an economic crisis. The prices for citizens will soar by the same number, which will drive discontent, housing services in Byelorussia are extremely high. Moreover, industries’ production can turn out unprofitable. Russia is dictating economy to Byelorussia, and thank to that, production at Byelorussian enterprises is competitive.
By the 7th official gathering in December, United Russia will elucidate ideology and present the new program. The party’s general council approved of the amendments to the program last weekend. Experts link the changes to the ideology with the upcoming resignation of Vladimir Putin, who has been the party’s ideology and program in one.
The party members were receiving booklets of three basic colors – from the new series of United Russia Library in the Emergency Ministry’s train center shortly before the opening of the General Council’s gathering on Saturday. The 3-volume brochure entitled Ideas, Leaders, Actions was edited by candidate of historical sciences (senior vice speaker of the State Duma) Oleg Morozov. The work dwells on the conservatives ideas, leaders, and platforms of various conservative parties across the globe.
At the rostrum, Morozov explained: conservatism for Russia is an ideological tradition based on the ‘ideas of Russian unity, preservation of territorial, social-economic and political integrity as a condition for national sovereignty. Unlike the Russian rightists and leftists, we believe ourselves to be the legatees of the tsar’s and socialistic Russia. Faithfulness to the century-old traditions of serving for the sake of the Motherland is our supreme conservatism” – concluded the vice speaker to the applause.
On the 11th of Aril the investigator for particularly important cases of the General Prosecutor Office of Ukraine signed out a decree of force delivery of ex-head of the National Security Service (NSS), old supporter of Yulia Timoshenko and the second person in the list of BUT – Alexander Turchinov and his ex-deputy Andrey Kozhemyakin as a witness. Timoshenko commented on such news the following way. “They (officials of the General Prosecutor Office on recommendation of members of ‘Our Ukraine” who have connections with them – author's note) issue a writ against these decent and honest people”. In her opinion, the sudden actions of prosecutor officials were called to bowl Timoshenko down during negotiations on formation of a “coalition of democratic forces”. As the leader of BUT claimed, if Turchinov is arrested, “129 people’s deputies and 6 million persons who voted for us will destroy the pre-trial detention center where he is detained“.
Expert of Analytical Department of the Center for Current Politics Halina Sapeha commented on Yushchenko’s attempts of forced pressure on potential participants of the “orange revolution”.
- What aims does the Ukrainian President pursue by initiating a trial against the second person in BUT?
- In my opinion, the answer is evident: he tries to make Timoshenko refuse from claims for the position of Prime-Minister of Ukraine. The time for a public trial against one of the heads of BUT was chosen deliberately. This is the very moment when negotiation between “Our Ukraine” and BUT are in its pride and the fate of the “orange coalition” is under the question because of Yulia Timoshenko’s premier ambitions. Despite all the declarations of the “orange” politicians that they will observe the law, they have already shown that the approach they use is often rather selective. Formally the bodies, controlled by Yushchenko, act legally. If there are facts of law violations they should become public. On the other hand, there are a lot of questions relating the time of initiation of criminal case. It looks like during the long time the fact of an official crime is kept secret and it captures the headlines only in the moment necessary for executive branch. Thus Yushchenko brings discredit on himself as a democratic politician.
The great meeting presided by the President took place recently in the capital. It was related to realization of the national projects and marked with some bright moments. The most noticeable of them is Vladimir Putin’s dialogue with minister of education Andrey Fursenko, which showed that the head of the state understands very well both the level of competence of this official and his ability to organize work. And though in this noticeable dialogue the question was about a definite issue of “lost” additional payments to teachers, but observers made a conclusion that the head of the state gave to understand through such a public punishment that he is not satisfied with the activity of the minister of education. Neither are majority of teachers and professors. And so this minister has made more innovations.
The system of higher education in Russia is always rebuilt to get rid of reminds of that really unique experience accumulated in the Soviet times and due to which the Soviet education was considered one of the best in the world. The end of all the reforms, conducted by the state, - denationalization of universities and inclusion of education into the market is as clear as day. At the meeting with businessmen the president approved privatization of universities with the right of business to become their co-founders. Head of the holding “Bazovyi element” Oleg Deripaska has already expressed his readiness to manage a university invested into it a lot of money. Experts think that both the state and business pursue their goals.
First of all, we need intellectual factories to form a new managerial elite.
At the end of the last week it became known that Daimler Chrysler and Group GAZ signed an agreement on buying business assets of Sterling Heights Automotive Plant. GAZ bought both equipment and licenses for production of two models of cars. The plant will be dismantled and removed from Michigan to Nizhegorodskaya oblast, where it should be launched under supervision of American specialists.
Of course, it’s a good idea. We can dream about Russia’s jump to the post-industrial epoch and make daydreaming projects of development of hi-tech in our Motherland. However the reality is that technological lag of our country is too big. We always hear of hundred thousands of Kulibins, who invented what is possible and not. But as there is no realization of these genius ideas in practice, the thought comes to mind whether our unrecognized geniuses invent really necessary things. And can we reach the leading world powers with help of their inventions.
Author – Director general of the Center for Current Politics Konstantin Simonov.
However, experts warn that the ‘orange coalition’ in Ukraine promises to be unstable
The winner of the parliament election in Ukraine – Viktor Yanukovich’s Party of Regions – can fail to use the fruit of its victory and become opposition. The majority party will not achieve any posts in the future government because the ruling coalition will be formed by the ‘orange’ – Nasha Ukraina, Blok Yulii Timoshenko, and the Socialistic Party of Alexander Moroz. However, the struggle inside the coalition is only beginning – Timoshenko claims for the premier post, and President Yuschenko is not yet ready to make concessions to his former associate. Experts see that the future coalition will be instable and the premier prospects for Timoshenko – shady.
The runners for Rada finally resolved their coalition preferences. According to the Ukrainian Constitution a coalition has to be established if no party has a majority of votes in the parliament (226). Otherwise the President can dismiss Rada and set a date for new elections. However, Rada is not facing the dismissal: on Wednesday, the political council of Nasha Ukraina backed establishment of a parliament coalition with the Blok Yulii Timoshenko and Alexander Moroz’s socialistic party. The pro-presidential Nasha Ukraina achieved the third result in the election – 13.94%. The second place was one by the Blok Yulii Timoshenko, the fourth – by Socialistic Party of Ukraine with 5.67%. The Communist Party of Ukraine headed by Petr Simonenko also got into the Rada with a little over 3.6%. The election was won by the Viktor Yanukovich’s Party of Regions (with 32.12%) that will have to assume opposition as of now.
Nevertheless, experts considered it possible that the Yanukovich’s party would alliance with the pro-presidential Nasha Ukraina which was repeatedly claimed by one of the party’s main donors, businessman Rinat Akhmetov. However, this ‘fake marriage’ as put by Akhmetov, failed. According to RBC Daily, the Regions Party demanded several key positions in the government including the premier seat, which was inadmissible to Viktor Yuschenko.
Experts also see other reasons behind the failure of this alliance. “The Union with Yanukovich would undermine Yuschenko’s positions as leader of the ‘orange revolution’ – Timoshenko has been criticizing the president for betraying the values of the revolution and he began giving her grounds to spin this idea” – said analyst with the Center for Current Politics Galina Sapego in an interview to RBC Daily.
Transition to digital broadcasting will have been finished by 2015, the minister of information technologies Leonid Reyman is sure. For this it is necessary to solve the problem of frequency deficit and to increase the quality of satellite signals. Still there is no money even for repairing rusty satellite antennas. Private investment is necessary for modernization of the branch.
Comrades will have taught
The corrosion of antennas darkens the perspectives of development of satellite connection in Russia. Leonid Reyman reported that at present 10 satellites operate, but the operation term of some of them will expire in 2007 and 2009, therefore it is necessary to put 8 satellites into operation to overcome the deficit of signals.
“It is clear that this task cannot be solved without the state help”, hinted the minister to first deputy premier Dmitry Medvedev. But the latter did not pay attention to the hint.
Expert of analytical department of the Center for Current Politics Ivan Fedyakin assessed the cost of creation of a satellite at 20 mln. dollars. “At the West large companies start such projects, and their investment is repaid, Ivan Fedyakin commented on the situation to “Vzglyad”. – However our businessmen are not ready for such investment”.
