The “third term” of Vladimir Putin seems to remain aurally till the very presidential elections in 2008. On the 17 of April the first deputy press agent of the Head of the state Dmitry Peskov expressed his opinion on the problem in quite a square manner. According to his words, Putin “absolutely definitely” would retire in a year, after that Russia would receive a “new president”. Do those who wish to bring home Vladimir Putin not to leave his post after 2008 have a chance? The experts whom “Strana.ru” examined say that it is impracticable.
Konstantin Simonov, President of the Centre for current politics in Russia:
-Discussions about the third term will be held for along time and they will never shut down. I’m sure, that Mironov`s initiative is not the last. To my mind, Putin warms up interest to the topic. His aim is clear. This year he demonstrates to the political elites that it is still early to charge him off. Others started to predict out life without Putin too early. Whereas he underlines anyway: “Why do you want me to retire? I still have a lot to do”. Putin doesn’t want to be associated with the “lame duck” after the manner of American presidents. Though Putin insists not on thinking of the third term, nobody believes him. That`s why Mironov is only the latest person, but not the last one. As for me, I don`t believe in the third term. But I should say again that there will be a lot of those wishing to fix their love to the president.
Mikhail Vinogradov, Director General of the Center for Current Politics in Russia:
Veshnyakov’s firing was not policy-induced although he did conflict with the United Russia.
There is a certain reason for the appointment of Vladimir Churov as new chief of the Central Election Commission. First, he is loyal to Putin personally and is not affiliated with parties, clans or groups. These are important qualities in the view of the possible competition during the presidential race – between several candidates supported by various power coteries.
Secondly, Putin is consistently designing the political system that will be there after he checks out. The first step in this direction was the passing of three-year budget. This way Putin is using the currently available political resource to program economy policy for three years – through the end of the first half of the future president’s first term.
In relation to this, appointment of a loyal person as CEC’s chief shows that the president wants to lay the foundation of the election system that the next president will have to observe.
Churov does not have a law school degree but it’s not that important – Veshnyakov never had one as well.
YUKOS’s gas assets and 20% of Gazprom Neft will be auctioned on April 4. Analysts believe that Gazprom should be the main bidder. However, it seems that in fact Gazprom does not plan to take part in the auction.
Yesterday, it became clear what could be the subject of discussions between chiefs of Gazprom and Eni – Aleksey Miller and Paolo Scaroni. Vedomosti report that the Italian Eni and Enel and Grigory Berezkin decided to attend the auction on April 4. Earlier, Gazprom’s Chairman of the Board of Directors Aleksey Miller met with Eni CEO Paolo Scaroni, after which the companies issued press release that stated that Eni would access Russian production projects in the nearest time.
Earlier it was thought that two lots would be put up for the auction – Gazprom Neft’s shares and gas assets of YUKOS. However, it was then decided to unite the lots, in which Gazprom was interested. This would be logical – the gas fields are located in the Yamal-Nenets autonomous district, where the major Gazprom’s producing units are located, and the shares of the oil subsidiary is an attractive slice to place on the exchange or trade with a strategic partner. “Bundling the lots is convenient from the technical standpoint too – one does not have to tender twice, which saves efforts and paper,” comments IAC Panorama expert Anvar Amirov.
Bidders for Arcticgaz and Urengoil emerged well before the decision to bundle Gazprom Neft’s shares and the YUKOS’s units. Among one of the most probable bidders is chief of ESN Group Grigory Berezkin. His company – Energogaz (49% owned by Eni and Enel) filed to the Federal Anti-Monopoly Service back in December 2006 requesting permission to buy these companies. Analysts say that Gazprom was behind this. “The acquisition of the assets by the ESN-Italians alliance seems logical in the context of the Gazprom’s interest in the gas distribution market of Italy,” believes Director General of the Center for Current Politics in Russia Mikhail Vinogradov.
Tuesday, Central Election Commission elected Vladimir Churov – former deputy of LDPR and Vladimir Putin’s fellow employee in the St. Petersburg City Hall – as its new chief. Experts believe that ahead of the elections instead of the ambitious Veshnyakov the CEC needed just the technical director it has got. Churov does not have a law school degree but this will be compensated by the experience of working as watcher in elections overseas, experts say.
Vitaly Ivanov, Vice-President of the Center for Current Politics in Russia .
- The new CEC’s head has to be completely opposite to what Veshnyakov has been. Especially in the recent year, the former chief was overly ambitious and wanted to be a significant and independent political figure. He thought he could not just watch how the election law and rules of the political game were observed but also set those rules himself. That is exactly why he was fired. Consequently, his successor has to show that nothing like that will ever happen again. Churov himself has stated that does not intend to comment on the law but rather execute it and force others to follow it. I am confident that Vladimir Churov will be hastily preparing for the big elections in December 2007 and March 2008. His predecessor did the bigger part of the job. He will only have to maintain his office. Churov does not have a law school degree but had worked as elections watcher overseas. Besides, chief of CEC – is an administrative position that does not require deep knowledge of all the intricacies. All he needs is manager qualities and if the president trusts him than I believe he has all it takes. This reminds me – “There are already enough experts there without you, and what I need is my man.” There is no doubt Churov is loyal to President Putin.
The mastermind behind the attack on the Ukraine’s Fuel and Energy Minister Yuri Boiko should be looked for in Ukraine, said Director General of the Center for Current Politics in Russia Mikhail Vinogradov in an interview to Rosbalt. According to the expert, it is impossible to trace what sources were used for the publications on alleged ties between Yuri Boiko and Semen Mogilevich and their contacts with RosUkrEnergo. “There is no information on the Energy Security for Europe’s website, to which the publication refers, or among official reports of the British parliament or US Department of Justice, Vinogradov noted. – The Largest world mass media have not referred to the subject as well – not a single high-profile publisher ever mentioned a report that was allegedly read during the forum in London. Since this information did not attract the attention of world press, it means that it is untrue. Thus, the canard that was spread by Russian and Ukrainian news agencies cannot have an impact on the upcoming IPO of RosUkrEnergo if one is planned.”
“The attack on Boiko is what Yuliya Timoshenko wanted. She had accused the minister of signing the agreement to receive Russian gas via RosUkrEnergo (Gazprom’s subsidiary). On the one hand, this information discredits President Viktor Yuschenko and the cabinet headed by Viktor Yanukovich. On the other – gives Timoshenko additional political points,” the expert comments. According to him, the canard will not have any effect. “The urges in Ukraine to refuse from mediators and proceed to direct contracts with Gazprom may force the gas prices for Ukraine surge to $230 for each thousand cubic meters. And this price will make the Ukraine economy collapse. It is hard to imagine a better present for the Ukrainian opposition, for which the worse the better, Vinogradov believes.
The story was the following – several Russian and Ukrainian mass media reported that British parliamentarians planned to carry out investigation toward Yuri Boiko, which, allegedly, had been mentioned in the Energy Security for Europe report during the Ukraine’s Energy Summit in London. However, one of the forum’s organizers Steven Butler claimed that there had been no such report.
According to Yuri Boiko, “the information that was spread on some informational websites is mere provocation.” “The British parliament has other important things to do than to attend our cabinet’s problems,” the minister noted.
By Alexander Shatilov, the Deputy director general of the Centre for current politics in Russia
Many experts correctly suppose that educts can be considered as a starting point of a Duma campaign in December 2007. This becomes possible in view of four key features of the spring electoral round.
First, the educts with high probability can be considered as “face” of the political preferences of the Russians and thay will develop during the federal elections. This is explained by the relatively short terms till the date of elections in December (nine month in all). Events prove voters don’t principally change their electoral leanings.
Second, regions that held elections are known as highly representative political sample from the point of view of both population and political spectrum. The previous elections touched 14 regions in all the seven federal districts including Moscow, Leningrad, Samara, Tyumen, Stavropol and Saint-Petersburg. It is 21,4% as a whole, that makes the fifth part of all the Russian voters.
Third, new rules of struggle have for the first time undergone a green test -an updated legislation for the electoral process organization and political parties has become operational. On the 11-th of March legislative assemblies of Dagestan, Moscow and Saint-Petersburg regions were elected according to the proportional system entirely. It was forbidden to place disreputable political advertising as well. All these developments also touch parliamentary elections in December 2007. That’s why current results are very illustrative. The revocation of the notorious column “against all” has become another principal innovation.
Many critics predicted that national interest in the elections would descend and people would demonstrate low presence on the polling stations. There were also attempts to associate abolishment of the minimum presence limits according to the new electoral legislation with the so called indifference of voters to the traditional political parties and failure of the elections. During the spring campaign 10 of 14 regions abolished presence limits, except Dagestan and Komi (25%), and Vologda and Moscow regions (20%).
Nevertheless reality didn’t prove all the fear mentioned. 42% voters registered participated in the elections. It corresponds to the last years indexes during the spring elections and it noticeably exceeds educts of the united voting day on the 8 of October (39%). Surely, the question is about average indexes, and these numbers can differ here and there depending on the certain region specific. Though a voter demonstrated participation enough to disprove critics` statements for the abolishment of the presence limits.
Firth, the previous regional elections lighted the spectrum of the political powers that possess real perspectives to reserve seats in the future parliament.
“United Russia” still withholds high-end positions. Moreover it dominates in the “Ohotny Ryad”. The party managed to gain almost 61% mandates in regions, to secure premium place in 13 regions due to the proportional system. “United Russia” even improved their result in March which they purchased during the last parliamentary elections (46%-now and 37,8%-in 2003).
The general second place of KPRF (15%) and not so much behindhand indexes of “Just Russia” (almost 15%) are no more than preliminary claims yet. KPRF has been suffering recessionary situation (it didn’t offer an agenda and no participant challenged “the old party” as it was in 2003). “Just Russia” will hardly succeed in improving their results in December, because they depleted electoral resources of the base parties (it is enough to compare data with the previous results of the Party of life, Party of pensioners and “Fatherland”). It is possible to increase the number of followers only by offering a positive programme rather than by unfoundedly accusing “United Russia”, because in December a voter will think of stability and not of “Just Russia’s” fairness.
LDPR is the last players of the “great 4”. It will probably take seats in the next State Duma. The result of liberal democrats in Komi Republic (13,65%) confirm this. The electorate of the party doesn’t grow and reduce.
The Chechen republic found a new president-Ramzan Kadyrov, the son of the former leader Ahmad Kadyrov. His allies gave voice for appointment of Ramzan Kadyrov as a next president soon after death of the first head of postwar Chechnya. However the Kremlin opposed. The reasons were neither ideological nor political. Ramzan Kadyrov was 27 at that moment whereas the post of the regional head is aimed at a person from 30 and older. That days a staunch politician Alu Alkhanov became a president. And later, on the 15-th of February, president Vladimir Putin accepted the resignation of Alkhanov from the presidential post of the Chechen Republic. Ramzan Kadyrov was commissioned interim president of Chechnya. Even then no one doubted about his presidential future. After the so called half-monthly “probation” Vladimir Putin nominated Ramzan Kadyrov on the presidential post.
So that to follow appearance of the competition, polpred of the president in the South federal district Dmitry Kozak presented three contenders to Vladimir Putin. Among them are Kadyrov and another two persons, whose surnames were of no importance. Ramzan Kadyrov is known to be popular among the “Kremlins” and Vladimir Putin personally. From another side, Chechen people like and respect him. That’s why even the severe oppositionists will not have the subject to speak of Kadyrov as a “prokremlin” creature.
By Konstantin Simonov, the Director General of the National Energy Security Fond
Relations between Church and State are becoming more designing. It is considered to transfer gross property into ownership including land. The topic of Eastern Orthodoxy is still of high priority. Whilst the question is about facultative but no one can predict whether it will become compulsory or not. In this situation there is nothing for it but to hope that school children will be given the possibility to which religion to study. The diversity of different concepts and doctrines must be absolute.
By the way, the latest argument is operated aggressively by Darwinians, that are facing efforts to change the basic version of the descent of man and to teach religious version. One explains their intentions by the right of each pupil to know each of the versions. As an answer to this some raggers from an American university presented a mock “creative” theory explaining the descent of man from Flying Spaghetti Monster. Its authors demand on bringing their opus in textbooks so that not to abuse freedom of choice.
I also succeeded in a new religion doctrine and I would like to impose it into facultative. It is limited for our state and it let us go back to our roots that we are looking for so long. There`s no point in reminding that we naturalized Christianity and our ancestries were pagans and offered worship to nature. That’s why we should go back to nature. What is important about nature at present? Nature gas, surely. Methane, more properly. It may become the key fuel type, so we can consider the XXI century as methane epoch. It will give energy and life to people. The authors of other religions acknowledged a specific gas role as well. One can’t but discover ring on the gaseous state in the phrase “God spirit tossed over the water”.
Russia is known to possess huge stocks of nature gas. Why not to assume this as an argument for our nation exclusiveness? Ready to hand we define our national mission – to share gas with other nations deprived by nature. But gas sale is not just a commercial transaction. It is sacred action and we ought to indue others with this value. And they must pay adequate price without bargaining. This light instantly retrieves problems of neighbor conflicts. Special methane status immediately explains why nature gas price is growing like the wind. We share the supreme good rather than just sale hydrocarbon.
Thanks to that we may understand advance in price for gas at home market and liability of its preservation. And those Europeans will be condemned into religion intolerance in case they accuse us of energy security. And generally we may answer a lot of questions. For instance, public is against building of a new “Gazprom” office in Saint Petersburg. But they watch at the skyscraper as a business house. And if to admit that it is cultic building? One should show tolerance. And the legitimacy of power acquires quite different sounding. That’s why I believe that I may pretend on the school course easily.
The historic autonomy of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which has pioneered fundamental research in Russia since its founding by Peter the Great three centuries ago, is under threat from government proposals to bring the institution under much tighter state control and end its academic freedom, according to academy members.
"This is really a war," Alexander Nekipelov, vice president of the academy, said in an interview at the institution's august administrative headquarters, a czarist palace on Moscow's Leninsky Prospekt. "I am sure we are going to win it, but of course we cannot help being worried by the situation."
Members of the academy, which in 1980 defied Soviet demands that it expel dissident physicist Andrei Sakharov, view the plan as part of a broader trend of increased official control over key parts of Russian society. They contend that the effort is also driven, in part, by bureaucrats who are greedily eyeing the organization's rich portfolio of property, which includes prime real estate in Moscow and St. Petersburg.
"The academy needs reform," said Alexander Shatilov, deputy director of the Center for Current Politics in Russia. "The question is whether it needs the kind of reform the government wants."
Oksana Goncharenko, leading expert with the Center for Current Politics in Russia
The main feature of the legislature elections held March 11 was the open opposition between the two “administrative parties” - United Russia and Just Russia. Results showed that United Russia sustained dominating status on the regional level, whereas Just Russia achieved the top-priority goal – advertise and boost awareness of its brand. On the other hand, Mironov’s followers so far failed to accomplish the mission to position the party in the leftist wing during this campaign. The Just Russia’s core voters are still few, I believe not more than 10%. The votes that the party got over this percentage may be attributed to specific situation in each separate region, namely, outflow of communist voters.
As for SPS, this party looked well against the background of Yabloko. Due to specific features of this election campaign, the parties had different strategies. SPS was trying to tune cooperation with local governments, refraining from heavy criticizing. This party’s campaign was expensive and did help SPS’s candidates to get into legislatures in five regions. However, the general picture is not too good: average percentage was 6.86%, below the 7% minimum that is.
The content of the rightists’ campaign was typical and filled with “social slogans.” In theory, candidates of SPS repeated what United Russia, Just Russia, and party KPRF had claimed, showing that all liberalism had evaporated. It is far too early to guess whether SPS gets into the State Duma. There is still enough time before the general election and it is still unclear, how well will the Union balance on the edge of the 7% barrier. In case the Civil Force, for instance, stirs up, it ma spoil things for SPS, as a result of which none of the two will get into the parliament. As for Yabloko, this organization shows tendency toward radicalization and movement to the periphery. The party’s chances to get into the Duma are minimal. Although at the same time, the Yabloko’s efforts may mobilize liberal electors, potential voters for the rightists, which may have a negative effect for the SPS’s outlook. From this standpoint, odds are for no rightists in the next State Duma.
United Russia dot good results in the election. In the future, regional administrative resource will be used to calm competition between United Russia and Just Russia. The recent race showed that hot fight of the two parties results in third forces winning. These traditionally opposition players stay away from the fighting and thus get a chance to enjoy better support. In this case, these third forces are the communists and LDPR. Elections in St. Petersburg demonstrated this clearly. The communists, who had kept clear of the competition between the two parties, got 16% of votes, which is a very high result for St. Petersburg. KPRF had estimated that they would get from 10 to 12%, whereas the result was better exactly because the party had stayed out of the conflict, hadn’t interfered or discredited its image resorting to scandalous stunts. That is why the administrative resource in the regions will be used to calm the opposition between the two parties to prevent repeating of the mistakes.
