Gazeta
Russia's rightists to forge alliance
It appears that the SPS (Union of Right Forces) and Yabloko are preparing to change their names. According to some sources, both organizations may establish a common party that would also involve Mikhail Kasyanov's Democratic party. But it is still unclear who will lead this merger as Russia's liberals have so far failed to remove this stumbling block.
SPS' participation in regional elections shows that its long-time identity is largely playing a negative role. Alexei Makarkin, deputy director of the Center for Political Technologies, believes that the SPS "is obviously linked with Chubais, Nemtsov, the defeat of 2003 and the dashed hopes of December 1999."
So, will Russia's right forge an alliance?
Dmitry Orlov, general director of the Agency for Political and Economic Communications: "I do not think that SPS and Yabloko will join hands during the federal election campaign. Nor is Kasyanov likely to head these structures. The SPS and Yabloko face some evident contradictions. Their quite ambitious leaders will prove unable to unite around Kasyanov. The SPS should not overlook the "Chubais factor" because he will not confront the Kremlin. Moreover, Chubais considers his relations with Putin to be more precious than Kasyanov."
Alexei Mitrofanov, the LDPR (Liberal Democratic Party of Russia) faction: "They will not appoint a common presidential candidate. Chubais is another problem because the SPS is his party. And Chubais will not quarrel with Putin over Kasyanov. Nor will he want to lose his job as Unified Energy System of Russia CEO and lots of money."
Sergei Baburin, leader of the Narodnaya Volya (People's Will) party: "The new party could have a multi-tier structure, namely, a leader, a party chairman and a general council secretary, for satisfying the ambitions of [liberal] leaders. They should not hesitate to establish new posts, and everything will be okay."
Eduard Limonov, leader of the National Bolshevik party: "It would be foolish and shortsighted to involve Kasyanov in some party, even if it is a consolidated party. The right wing should nominate Kasyanov as an independent presidential candidate. However, Kasyanov would lose political weight if he agrees to join the new party. Those who are trying to enlist his services can hardly be called clever. And they are not realists either."
Kommersant
State control of public organizations undermines civil society
Russian President Vladimir Putin said again: "The state should monitor the financing of political operations by foreign sponsors." The Kremlin may accept some compromises to soften the scandalous amendments to the laws on public associations and on non-profit organizations, which the State Duma approved November 24 in the first reading. But the government will never give up the main conceptual idea that the state should assume control of all public and non-profit organizations.
These moves are directly connected with the danger of "color revolutions," which the Kremlin regards as one of the main political threats.
But the authorities' ideas are not acceptable to the overwhelming majority of public organizations.
Lyudmila Alekseyeva, head of the Moscow Helsinki Group: "It is a horrible bill that should not be discussed but immediately discarded. I hope that during his meeting with the deputies the president will see that they have gone too far this time. If not, then this will disgrace him and the country in the G8, whose revolving presidency he is scheduled to assume."
Valentin Gefter, director of the Human Rights Institute: "We have been told the government's position: they gave us the Public Chamber and now we have given them the ability to control us."
Irina Yasina, program director of the Open Russia Foundation: "My question is, why the main condition for registration is not the compliance of the organization's charter with the constitution, but the names of its founders? Our founder is Mikhail Khodorkovsky - and now we will have to re-register without him."
Yelena Bonner, human rights champion, wife of the late Andrei Sakharov: "The government's desire to control private operations is destroying and not creating civil society. We do not need a law on public organizations whose operations are not connected with crime. They are covered by criminal law."
Oleg Orlov, chairman of the Memorial human rights center: "The law cannot be improved; 80% of its articles should be thrown out because they actually ban the operation of foreign public organizations."
Izvestia
Will Russia reinstate a single-party system?
The United Russia party, due to hold its congress in Krasnoyarsk this Saturday, advocates a party-based government ever more insistently. The party is clearly confident that it will win the forthcoming parliamentary elections, and its presence in every sphere of the country's public political life is evident. Can it be that instead of creating a bright and progressive future, the partisan government concept may reinstate the Soviet-era single-party system?
Dmitry Rogozin, co-chairman of the State Duma's Rodina (Motherland or Homeland) faction: We have in fact established a one-party system reminiscent of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). It has one guiding force and all kinds of pseudo-political structures. A partisan government would fit nicely into this system.
Mikhail Leonyev, TV commentator: We must have a political partisan system. Only one party has ruled Japan's political life in the entire postwar period. And does anyone have serious misgivings about Japanese democracy? If Russia is unable to create such a political system, then it is either not ready for or does not want a representative democracy.
Yulia Latynina, journalist:
We should not over-estimate the importance of United Russia, which facilitates the political process, but does not act as a guiding force. President Putin and his circle of confidants will establish the next government. The blame for this lies with the Russian people, rather than the authorities. The people get what they want.
Farid Mukhametshin, Chairman of Tatarstan's State Council:
A one-party government will not lead to a single-party system. The law on the procedure for forming the State Duma stipulates that representatives of several parties must be elected to the Russian Parliament. This is a mandatory pre-condition. I think several parties will jump over the ten percent election barrier. And a party that comes in second in the elections will form the opposition. It would therefore become possible to talk about a real opposition resembling that in civilized countries. In any Western country, the party that comes in second in the parliamentary election becomes oppositional. It criticizes the government and the winner's parliamentary faction. Russia will eventually adopt this system, too.
Vedomosti
State buys its way into economy
Officials regularly plug the line on the key role of private initiative in Russia's development, while the state consistently plugs buying into the economy.
Statements by Igor Shuvalov, a presidential aide ("State capitalism is not our future, we regard entrepreneurs as the engine of social development") or the resistance put up by Economic Development and Trade Minister German Gref to the Gazprom-Sibneft deal cannot stop nationalization. Its stages are well known: Yuganskneftegaz was sold indirectly sold to state-owned Rosneft; Gazprom shares were bought out by the state from its subsidiaries; Sibneft was absorbed by the same state monopoly; Guta Bank was purchased by state-controlled Vneshtorgbank; Silovye Mashiny was purchased by state-owned national power grid UES of Russia; and lastly AvtoVAZ, which has been virtually nationalized.
One can only guess what motivates the choice of branches and enterprises where as the president famously said: "the state has vested interests." Nor is it clear how "legal market mechanisms" are chosen to meet these interests. Sources close to AvtoVAZ say, and with reason, that it makes no sense for the state to buy the auto giant's shares and spend up to $500 million - the stock belongs to the plant and it is enough to change its management.
Investors are skeptical of the state as the owner: AvtoVAZ shares dropped 11% at the news only to edge slightly up later. The same happened to Sibneft, which went down 9% on the first day of its nationalization, and there were losses chalked up by the state.
Since the process, despite the harm it does to the economy, is still under way, it is obvious that the country needs a policy of nationalization setting the rules of the game. That is better than pretending that nothing is happening. After all, legislation on nationalization exists even in such a bulwark of economic liberalism as the United States. And additions and amendments to it are being made to this day.
Gazeta.Ru
Holland closes Yukos case, Lithuania to sell refinery soon
On November 24, the Amsterdam District Court refused to uphold a Yuganskneftegaz lawsuit on arresting the Yukos mother company's foreign assets. This was a predictable decision, experts say. However, Rosneft officials claim the court has issued a preliminary verdict.
This decision makes it possible to sell off Yukos' foreign assets, including its stake in Holland's Yukos Finance B. V., which owns part of the Mazeikiu Nafta refinery on Lithuanian territory, and which also owns a stake in Slovakia's Transpetrol oil pipeline operator. The company needs money in order to repay its massive tax debts. TNK-BP, Poland's PKN Orlen and KazMunaiGaz of Kazakhstan all want to lay their hands on Mazeikiu Nafta.
"The situation around Mazeikiu Nafta will soon be resolved. They are going to sell the Lithuanian refinery within the next few days. And there will be nothing left to arrest," said MDM-Bank analyst Andrei Gromadin.
"There is only one difference. The Russian court is acting in Rosneft's interests, while the foreign court is acting in line with the law. There were no weighty reasons for arresting Yukos' foreign assets," AVK analyst Mikhail Bakulev noted.
Rosneft has reacted calmly to the Dutch court's verdict.
"This is a preliminary decision. We are going to wait for the final court verdict," corporate spokesman Nikolai Manvelov stressed. Commenting on this statement, Eduard Kucherov of Baker Tilly Rusaudit said Rosneft had obviously appealed the Amsterdam District Court's decision in a higher court.
"Certainly, Rosneft will claim the right to own foreign assets in the future. Some obscure company may buy Mazeikiu Nafta, as had been the case with Yuganskneftegaz. Quite possibly, Russia may acquire this refinery. But it is unclear whether Russian officials will strike a bargain with the government of Lithuania," Bakulev said.
Nezavisimaya Gazeta
Alaska buyback? Not for another 10 years - Russian expert
Russian experts are commenting on the proposal by Washington Post business columnist Steven Pearlstein that only Alaska's sale to Russia for $1 trillion would recoup U.S. costs.
Mikhail Delyagin, director of the Institute for Globalization Problems: "Russia should create a civilized state in the first place before buying Alaska. I think in about 10 years' time we will cope with the consequences of our national catastrophe, and the American problems will reach their peak. It is not before that that we can speak of a buyback. Incidentally, Alaska may have a lower price tag by that time."
Sergei Markov, director of the Institute for Political Studies: "Why buy an almost deserted territory, snow and ice, when our people suffer suffocating poverty, and health, education and other services are in ruins? Russia has vast tracts of land that it is unable to develop, for example Siberia, where there is the threat that it may be populated by other nations. Adding a new province will not make matters easier."
Dmitry Oreshkin, head of the Merkator research group: "It all sounds like a joke, although the patriots will be pleased. They will shout that it is a restoration of historical justice. They think along 19th century or Stalin-era lines when the perceived wisdom was that a state's territory is its might. Meanwhile, Holland, which is equal to Moscow and the surrounding area in size, is economically more influential than Russia with its 17 million sq. km. It is a hare-brained plan. What Russia does not need is new territories. We are living in an era when infrastructure, rather than territory, is important."
Yevgeny Yasin, head of research at the Higher School of Economics: "If we are concerned with the problem of sterilization (excessive finances), we should first eliminate all obstacles to free entrepreneurship. In our case, it is the very opposite: we are continuing to nationalize, and so the question has cropped up: why shouldn't we buy Alaska back?"
