MOSCOW, December 15 (RIA Novosti)
Vremya Novostei
Australia blocking Russia's way to East Asian Community
Participants in the first East Asian summit in Kuala Lumpur yesterday voiced their differences on "the Russian issue." Australian Prime Minister John Howard said Russia's entry to the East Asian Community threatened the emerging regional security architecture. The Indonesian delegation suggested making a pause with Russia proceeding with the integration without Moscow. Experts think routine financial and economic reasons, not political ones, are behind the anti-Russian move.
Australia was skeptical about Russia's participation in regional organizations before, says Vyacheslav Amirov, academic secretary with the Center for Asian Pacific Studies of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations, the Russian Academy of Sciences. Moscow and Canberra "compete in deliveries of raw materials and energy resources, mostly liquefied gas, to the Asia Pacific region," the expert adds.
However, Australia should understand that deliveries of its own gas would not be enough to satisfy the needs of the region whose population is half the total population on Earth. There are some one trillion cubic meters of natural gas off Northwestern Australia. This is five times less than in Europe, which imports Russian and North African gas. Meanwhile, the Australian island of Tasmania imports gas from New Zealand to meet its own demands.
Australia has not yet recovered from the "diplomatic growth disease," Amirov says. The former British colony is making its way to position itself in the region whose cultural and political traditions often differ from the Anglo-Saxon stereotypes. The undisguised attempt to leave Russia outside the East Asian Community reveals Australians' ambition to keep other major countries away and become a leader in the region.
Vedomosti
Russia flexes its gas muscle
Russia's gas policy rose to a new conceptual level yesterday. Alexander Medvedev, deputy board chairman of Gazprom, said in Berlin that the market price of gas was $220-$230, while Industry and Energy Minister Viktor Khristenko promised the State Duma in Moscow that Russia would sell gas to Moldova, Georgia and the Baltic countries at market prices.
Gazprom plans to sell gas at $120-$125 per 1,000 cubic meters to the Baltic countries (the current price is $80), for $110 to Georgia ($63), and for $150-$160 to Moldova ($80). This is logical, as Moldova is involved in a conflict with Russia over Transdnestr, Georgia is angry over South Ossetia and Abkhazia, while the Baltic countries cannot forget "Russian occupation" and demand territorial concessions. As for Ukraine, it has sinned so much for so long that it is impossible to enumerate all of its blunders.
This is Gazprom's way of showing the pro-Western countries what market relations are about. The gas price of $50 was a political carrot, while Europe buys gas at much higher prices. Britain paid $1,040 wholesale.
It is regrettable that conversion to market relations with neighbors proceeds in the form of ultimatums. There are not many muscles Russia can flex, and Gazprom has a limited group of clients. A stable volume of European deliveries is stipulated in long-term contracts and the gas monopoly will not be able to sell "Ukrainian" or "Georgian" gas at higher prices to some other country.
The governments of the countries to which Gazprom has issued its ultimatum will have to pay for lack of foresight: you cannot claim independence and yet take advantage of cheap energy deliveries. But price talks should have been launched long ago, so as to draw out the conversion process.
One should put aside ultimatums and threats of "gas withdrawal for technical purposes" and search for compromise. Gazprom may have to do the same at the talks with European Union countries soon. The post-Soviet republics should learn to live as truly independent states; they and Russia would benefit from this.
Gazeta.Ru
Russian helicopter builders left with market crumbs
Russian manufacturers of army helicopters will have to do with one-off deliveries to the world market, which is expected to swell to $96 billion in the next ten years.
Industry leaders, according to Forecast International, a market research company, will remain American companies (out of more than 6,000 military helicopters to be made in the course of the next ten years Sikorsky will account for up to 1,200 units, Boeing up to 1,000, and Bell 897). European concern Eurocopter will produce 546 military helicopters.
Russia is well behind the leading western competitors. "Even the existing targets are not being met. Over the next five years, for example, it is planned to supply 50 Mi-28s to the army. But even that is a negligible quantity," says Alexander Khramchikhin, an expert from the Institute of Political and Military Analysis.
He says Mil and Kamov design bureaus have been vying for deliveries since Soviet times. Meanwhile the helicopters are becoming outdated. The Mi-28 is still in the pre-production stage, although its design dates back to the 1980s. The first experimental helicopter Ka-50 made its maiden flight on June 27, 1982, with development work starting back in the middle 1970s.
Commercial medium and heavy civilian helicopters, according to Forecast International, will be supplied above all to the armed forces, their civilian use being very restricted: in the ten years only 37 civilian versions of such aircraft will be turned out, with Mil and Kamov being some of the leaders in this market segment. The FI report makes a point of saying that helicopters of these models have found acceptance in the western countries, as evidenced from their increased use.
But in the shorter term this market segment may undergo a sea change. This is connected with the launching of the Sikorsky S-92 helicopter, a machine that combines the best features available in the S-70 Black Hawk and SeaHawk series. The helicopter passed certification tests at the end of 2002.
Biznes
Russian publishers ask for foreign newsprint
Russian pulp and paper mills failed to provide enough newsprint to Russian publishers and printing houses this year. The situation will deteriorate next year and publishers see the only remedy in lifting the 15% duty on the import of newsprint.
Leonid Makaron, president of the Guild of Press Publishers (GIPP) and general director of the Pronto-Moscow holding, said the problem started in the mid-1990s.
"As much as 80% of the Russian newsprint is exported," said Marina Pereverzeva, GIPP deputy president.
Alexei Agureyev, director of information projects at the Volga pulp and paper mill, explains the crisis by "timber wars." "Investors do not risk investing into the sector that is rocked by endless corporate conflicts," he said.
"The sector's modernization is lagging behind the publishing and printing business," said Anatoly Chernovol, deputy president of RAO Bumprom. He said the mills had been built before World War II and total investment into the sector was below $400 million, although it takes $1 billion to build one proper mill. Chernovol said that foreign investors would not come to the market because of "high raw materials risks."
The Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) is aware of the problem. But Olga Yesafova, chief FAS specialist for control and supervision in the chemical industry and environmental management, said they thought that only surplus newsprint was exported.
The only way to remedy the situation is to lift the 15% import duty on foreign newsprint, publishers and printers say. "This will force the Russian mills to increase production and make publishers less dependent," said Makaron.
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
Audit Chamber proposes new tax policy
The Russian Audit Chamber intends to close all the loopholes that allow people to minimize their profit tax by using the income tax. It has proposed to introduce a progressive tax scale on companies' profits. A 13% tax will remain for those with lower incomes while a minimum of 25% tax will be imposed on those who earn over $5,000 a month, a source in the Audit Chamber said.
The Audit Chamber's proposal has much in common with the recent proposal of former Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, who is currently the head of the Russian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. He believes that the gap between the incomes of the poor and the rich is becoming a social problem. Therefore a 13% income tax should be preserved for the poor while the rich should pay 20% to the budget. Apart from that, he said, a flat tax scale was introduced for five years and the term was about to expire. However, the finance minister's press secretary Gennady Yezhov has refuted this statement, saying that "the law was adopted for no specific term."
Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin has also denied the rumor about plans to change the income tax scale. He said in Russia, where a part of business is still "in the shadow," a 13% income tax fulfills the function of legalizing incomes and improving the investment climate, as well as the fiscal function.
Experts also consider the idea of restoring a progressive tax to be counterproductive. "The government's and authorities' failure to keep their promises undermines confidence," said Yevsei Gurvich, head of the Economic Expert Group. "Instability worsens the business climate more than anything else and if tax rates are changed too often, businessmen will be unable to make long-term plans."
Gurvich added that "the very idea of introducing a flat tax scale was wrong." It did not help to do away with shadow business and unaccounted wages. Meanwhile, social injustice is growing because people with low incomes have to bear the main burden of taxes. The majority of developed countries use a progressive scale. However, "nothing should be changed for the time being," he said.
Novye Izvestia
Russians fail to understand true democracy, but willing to develop it in CIS
Over half of Russians consider their country to be the leader of democratic development in post-Soviet republics and are willing to share their experience with other nations. Analysts say that the very notion of democracy is understood in Russia differently than in the West.
A survey of 1,594 people conducted by the All-Russian Public Opinion Research Center, VTsIOM, in early December shows that 52% of people consider Russia a more or less democratic state. As many as 33% said Russia was far below democratic standards.
Respondents see Ukraine following the Orange revolution last year and other former Soviet republics as lagging far behind Russia with regard to democracy. "What Russia has adopted from Western experience is only the superficial aspects of democracy, i.e. parliament, the multi-party rule and separation of powers, but we lack basic democratic institutions," comments Leonty Byzov, VTsIOM's head of the analytical department. "Meanwhile, these institutions are much more important than the freedom to elect." He described Russian democracy as "normative."
In the survey 44% of respondents spoke in favor of promoting democracy in former Soviet republics and 42% against it. They do not believe, however, that support should be financial. Most of those who do say that Russia should invest in spreading democracy to its neighbors say that the money should first of all bring revenues to Russia and Russians. It should be allocated to support Russian and Russian-speaking population (49%), Russia-oriented political parties (33%) and education in the Russian language (29%).
At the same time, Russians very strongly oppose the idea of accepting America's assistance in developing democracy. Another survey by VTsIOM, also conducted in early December, shows that 51% of respondents perceive U.S. aid to Russian democracy negatively.
