Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Edward Lucas: Irish Daily Mail piece

Expand Messages
  • David McDuff
    Irish Daily Mail piece http://edwardlucas.blogspot.com/2006/12/irish-daily-mail-piece.html Nyet faktov, tolko versii [No facts, only theories] is a Russian
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Irish Daily Mail piece

      http://edwardlucas.blogspot.com/2006/12/irish-daily-mail-piece.html

      "Nyet faktov, tolko versii" [No facts, only theories] is a Russian
      saying that captures perfectly the difficulty of trying to fit the
      attempted murder of Yegor Gaidar, a former prime minister, together
      with the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko (a defector from Russia's
      FSB security service) and the shooting of Anna Politkovskaya, a
      campaigning journalist.

      They could hardly be more different. The other two were outspoken
      figures who already lived in fear of their lives. Mr Gaidar was widely
      respected in Moscow: at most a moderate critic, at least in public, of
      Vladimir Putin's regime. Unlike most retired Russian politicians, he
      cared little for personal wealth: his energies were devoted to his
      free-market thinktank, where his rotund figure and beaming smile
      contrasted with his spartan office: undecorated, when I last visited,
      except for a pile of economic journals and a solitary holiday postcard.

      Though he privately deplored the loss of political freedom in Russia
      in the past six years, Mr Gaidar was happiest discussing the arcane
      details of economic policy. Admittedly, many ordinary Russians loathed
      him, blaming his tough free-market policies in the early 1990s for the
      loss of their savings and the collapse of the Soviet-era economy. But
      few in the Kremlin would agree. Most rich and powerful Russians regard
      him as a hero, whose liberalisation of prices began Russia's recovery
      from the planned economy.

      What could someone like that—a cerebral, establishment figure—have in
      common with Mr Litvinenko, a shadowy ex-spook who publicly accused Mr
      Putin of paedophilia, and Ms Politkovskaya, a journalist whose
      incendiary articles regularly described the Russian president and his
      aides as war criminals?

      The most terrifying explanation is that the Kremlin, or some other
      powerful faction in Russia, is systematically intimidating every kind
      of critic. Ms Politkovskaya because she was their best-known critic in
      the media, both at home and abroad. Mr Litvinenko because he was a
      defector. Mr Gaidar because his brainy liberal views undermine the
      Kremlin's authoritarian and incompetent rule.

      But it is puzzling that the poisoning was unsuccessful. Was this just
      a warning, or was it bungled?
      Mr Gaidar, his daughter and his friends all say that they do not think
      Mr Putin's Kremlin is behind the poisoning (if that is indeed what it
      was). British security officials are hedging their bets. They think
      that a "rogue element" of current and former FSB officers is at work.

      If so, what do they want? Are they doing what they think Mr Putin will
      like? Are they trying to undermine him. Or perhaps to force his hand?

      One of Mr Gaidar's closest friends, Anatoly Chubais, now runs Russia's
      giant electricity company, UES. He is publicly loyal to the Kremlin,
      but privately says he is increasingly worried that bad government is
      starving the country of investment. "It was a miracle that we kept the
      lights on last winter. And this winter will be even harder," he
      confided recently to a visitor.

      He believes that the murders "perfectly correspond to the interests
      and the vision of those people who are openly talking about a
      forceful, unconstitutional change of power in Russia."

      One possibility is that hardliners want to force Mr Putin from power,
      and replace him with someone more decisive and forceful, who will
      overtly rebuild the Soviet empire, rather than doing it behind the
      scenes as at the moment. But that seems unlikely. Mr Putin is the most
      popular politician in Russian history. It would be hard find anyone to
      replace him.

      Alternatively, it could be an attempt by hardliners to force him into
      their camp. If relations with the West deteriorate sharply, then
      Russia's only option will be to abandon any pretence of democracy and
      retreat into an alliance with rogue states such as Iran. But that
      hardly seems likely either. Russia has cultivated good relations with
      European countries such as France and Germany, in order to squeeze the
      countries inbetween such as Poland and the Baltic states. Why abandon
      that tactic when it is working so well?

      The Kremlin's own line is that the whole thing is got up by enemies of
      Russia, chiefly Boris Berezovsky, the London-based billionaire who was
      closely linked to Mr Litvinenko. Both men believe that the Kremlin
      blew up apartment blocks in Moscow in 1999 in order to blame them on
      Chechen terrorists, and create a public panic that would ease Mr
      Putin's path to power.

      One clue is that the Russian constitution says that Mr Putin has to
      stand down as Russian president in 2008. Inside its red walls, the
      Kremlin is abuzz with intrigue about how to manage this "problem". One
      option is to change the constitution, to allow a third consecutive
      term. Another is to ignore it—by declaring a state of emergency—and
      third is to bypass it, by shifting Mr Putin to another job, and
      installing a figurehead as president. Somewhere in this maze of
      intrigue may lie the answer to the serial murders of Russia's critics.

      But the only thing that is really certain is that we do not know the
      truth. Russia's security services are masters in the art of
      "maskirovka" [camouflage]. Whether the aim is to manipulate opinion in
      Russia or abroad, or to intimidate critics, or something else, enough
      false clues will be strewn that we are unlikely to see what is really
      going on until it is too late.


      Edward Lucas is central and eastern Europe correspondent of The Economist.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.