On real leadership

I just realized that, in addition to the Latynina piece I mentioned in an earlier post, there was another bit of commentary about last weekend's minisub crisis which caught my eye. What made it all the more surprising was that I found astute commentary in a Moscow Times editorial. The MT always has superb columnists, but its unsigned editorials are usually either bland or excessively hectoring. To be fair, I think this is a problem that plagues a lot of newspapers - in fact, I think I recall seeing a piece in Slate or someplace like that not too long ago about the irrelevance of the unsigned editorial. Anyway, I've lost the thread again. Here's the editorial that I liked so much:

Moscow Times, Monday, August 8, 2005. Issue 3225. Page 8.
A Real Leader Does Not Remain Silent

President Vladimir Putin's silence during this weekend's rescue operation to save the seven men on the mini-submarine Priz revealed the hidden weakness of an administration obsessed with projecting strength. [...]

His decision to remain silent during the crisis appears to indicate a fear of being associated with potential tragedy.

This has been his style since the first test of his presidency, the sinking of the Kursk submarine in August 2000. Despite the criticism he received then, he demonstrated it again with his silence during the seizure of the school in Beslan last year.

He has been exceptionally quick to speak out in other situations, however, such as when the three teenage sons of Russian diplomats were beaten and robbed in Warsaw a week ago.

In keeping his distance during crises, Putin has set an example for his ministers. In Beslan, Federal Security Service director Nikolai Patrushev was sent down from Moscow to oversee the operation, but that was the last the public heard of him. After the disastrous conclusion it was as if he had never been there.

This weekend, it was Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov who was dispatched to Kamchatka to oversee the operation. He arrived, coincidentally or not, just before the U.S. and British rescue teams sailed into the militarily sensitive waters. But until success had been assured, he too refrained from any public role.

The Kremlin seems to understand what television viewers everywhere feel: that if a president, or a defense minister, is on the screen talking about a dangerous situation, he has taken responsibility for how it turns out.

What the Kremlin seems not to understand is that taking responsibility in times of crisis is the clearest sign of confident leadership.

Real leadership is not the studious avoidance of blame. Real leadership is the acceptance of responsibility at precisely the moments when a panicked population needs reassurance -- and when seven men trapped 190 meters under the ocean need unequivocal, unhesitating action from the highest level down.

Kremlin-connected spin doctor Gleb Pavlovsky has attributed Putin's enduring popularity to the fact that he has always been seen as being above the social crises and terrorist attacks of recent years. But escaping responsibility is not a recipe for popularity. It's a recipe for irrelevance.

Putin and his team, as products of the Soviet system, made their careers by being studious avoiders of blame. Some argue that KGB was blessed with many of the most qualified employees in the USSR, but I see no reason to believe that the blame-avoiding, initiative-averse mentality that pervaded the Soviet Union would not have pervaded the organization which turned out to be perhaps the single most influential aspect of the USSR's legacy.

Unfortunately, the last sentences of the MT editorial don't get it quite right. It's true that in a democracy, not being a responsible leader quickly leads to irrelevance and getting voted out of office. In a Soviet-type system (which Putin's Russia is drifting towards), however, getting voted out is not a threat, and everyone knows the figurehead leadership and the staged activities of the legislature, for example, are in fact irrelevant. The leadership is only accountable to itself (i.e., to other elites), and its activities are shrouded from the electorate behind the fancy curtain of the state-run media.

There are many Russians who were taught so well during their Soviet-era youth to avoid sticking their neck out that they haven't been able to change in the many years since they took the red flag down from the Kremlin. Unfortunately, managing a situation in order to avoid blame leads to both inefficiency and a lack of transparency. Obviously, in a situation where a decision needs to be made, it's inefficient (and, in cases where lives are at stake, criminal) to avoid doing so for fear of being blamed for a negative outcome later.

More troubling is the effect on transparency. Even when Putin and his lieutenants do make decisions, excluding ones which seem like sure bets, they seek to muddy the waters around the decisionmaking process, so as to avoid responsibility in the event that a tough decision turns out to have been the wrong one. I know I'm stating the obvious here, and I know that the Bush Administration has not exactly provided a sterling example in its handling of the Iraq War (proving that one doesn't have to have a Soviet upbringing to be inclined to dodge blame and obfuscate after the fact the reasons for which decisions were made) but that's no way to lead a country which claims to be a democracy.

Sorry for the rambling commentary on a commentary, I think I've been blogging for too long today. I'd love to hear comments from anyone who wants to take issue with any of these points and/or start a discussion about this.

Good and bad news from Chechnya

A week ago, Mosnews reported that Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov had declared a ban on all gambling establishments in Chechnya. Kadyrov being Kadyrov, he also had to refute rumors that he was the man behind the gambling business in Chechnya, but at least the thug got one thing right.

Gambling is a huge and growing problem all over Russia, manifested not in a proliferation of fancy casinos (although there are plenty of those) but rather in the exponential growth of down-market slot-machine halls, which suck away the assets of lower-to-middle-class Russians, 10 rubles at a time. Nobody here is making sure these slots return 90-some percentage of their takings, like they supposedly do in Vegas - the estimates I've seen suggest that Russian slots return only 50 to 70% of their takings to the gamblers. It's a special form of highway robbery which preys upon people who are addicted to the momentary escape which the flashing lights and cheap thrill of the slot machines provide.

But I digress. A second bit of good news is that Ingushetia has also decided to ban gambling , apparently taking an example from Chechnya (this has to be one of the few times in the past 15 years - or maybe in recorded history - when taking an example from Chechnya has been a good idea).

And now for the bad, or, to be more precise, disappointing but not surprising, news: Mosnews reports, "Every Chechen Town to Have a Street Named after Slain President Kadyrov." Senseless, and clearly aimed at feeding young Ramzan's cult of personality. Mosnews observes:

Soon after Kadyrov's death, a street in Moscow was named after him. This decision spread a wave of protest among Russian liberal parties that reminded of the fact that before taking Russians' side, Kadyrov was a warlord of a Chechen Islamist formation and called for a holy war against Russia.

Maybe if Basaev gives himself up and spends the last year of his life working with the Russians, they'll name streets after him, too.

This story is actually tangentially related to the ongoing Russo-Polish diplomatic row as well, in that it involves Chechnya and street-naming. Apparently one of Russia's big beefs with Warsaw is that the city government of the Polish capital saw fit to name a square after Chechen rebel leader Djohar Dudaev. Russia's problematic relationship with Poland predates even its problematic relationship with Chechnya, so the ongoing hostility is not surprising, but I always find it odd that small, symbolic gestures can lead to so much taking of umbrage.

In other news today...

Probably the only reason this seems like such a news-packed day is that I'm allowing myself to sit at the Moka Loka cafe at Novoslobodskaya Metro and surf the day away using their free wi-fi. If you sit and watch the news come across the wires all day, you do tend to get the impression that there's a lot of news out there, whether it's an eventful day or not.

One story which emerged today that we'll doubtless be hearing about for a few days at least is the possibility of oligarch-turned-political-prisoner Mikhail Khodorkovsky running for the Russian State Duma. The story was covered by Vedomosti (where the online article has already generated over 250 reader comments) and Izvestiia. Radio station Echo of Moscow has a lengthy article about this on their website, with comments from many Russian politicians, and Lenta.ru has an article titled "Mikhail Khodorkovsky's Summer Offensive" and a shorter story quoting a statement from Khodorkovsky, released by his lawyer, where he says, "If I hear from people who's opinion matters to me, I'll agree to do it." All of the above stories are in Russian - English-language coverage of the story is available from Mosnews ("Khodorkovsky Ready to Run for Parliament" and "Russian Liberals Want Khodorkovsky to Run for Parliament"), and from Reuters, which quotes more liberally from Khodorkovsky's statement - "If I am asked by people whose opinion I trust I will agree, although I know that firstly they will not let me win election, and secondly that new repressions will follow" - and notes that the statement is available on Khodorkovsky's website.

Another big story in Moscow today is the escalating diplomatic spat between Russia and Poland. While Kommersant has an in-depth piece (in English) discussing the underlying reasons for Russo-Polish relations to be heading South, the ostensible reason for the current exchanges of diplomatic notes are a couple of attacks on Polish Embassy personnel in Moscow this week (coverage in English from Mosnews). These followed a recent attack on several children of Russian diplomats in Warsaw, which President Putin for some reason saw fit to speak out about and characterize as "an unfriendly act which should be qualified as a crime," rather than run-of-the-mill, big-city hooliganism which wouldn't merit the attention of a head of state.

And, of course, the narrowly averted minisub disaster is still being discussed. The most interesting commentary I've seen so far was from the always-interesting Yulia Latynina:

Moscow Times, Wednesday, August 10, 2005. Issue 3227. Page 7.
Doomed by the System, Saved by Putin, By Yulia Latynina

The Priz mini-submarine was pried from the depths of the sea with the help of British and U.S. rescuers. Meanwhile, for the last month, the Russian media have been snickering over the misadventures of the space shuttle Discovery.

The pleasure that a certain portion of the Russian public takes in their neighbor's misfortune reveals a surprising difference in cultures and worldviews.

Nothing truly awful befell the shuttle, after all. But in the United States, the system does not punish people for being overly cautious and interrupting a launch. They are only punished when human lives are lost.

After all the trouble with the Discovery came the Priz crisis. The cultural difference between the United States and Russia became strikingly clear. No crash ensued from the Discovery's problems; NASA officials merely put off the launch over and over and dealt with the difficulties in space. They knew that public ridicule might smart but that a disaster would end their careers.

Though the Priz had been stuck for some time, military officials did not announce the accident. Then, one of the crew members' wives called a local radio station in Petropalovsk-Kamchatsky and the truth surfaced.

You can understand their reluctance to face public scorn: Navy officials had just announced that they had successfully conducted naval exercises. And Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov had just won a battle against the U.S. television network ABC, which aired an interview with Chechen terrorist Shamil Basayev.

I've noticed the heightened attention in some of the Russian mass media to the Discovery's problems and had the same impression as Latynina - some Russians will never miss a chance to chuckle about American misfortune, becuase it helps them believe that all countries are as screwed-up as their own. Latynina goes on to make an excellent, if not exactly new, point about the pitfalls of a system where only one person is empowered to make risky decisions (she says she's not trying to "make some big statement," but I'd say that's what she does anyway):

In all likelihood, military officials would have preferred to keep quiet about the Priz, if they had had their way. They knew that every minute counted and that the oxygen supply would only last for so long. But in addition to dreading the potential loss of face, they could not bring themselves to ask for help from the imperialists, when the mini-submarine was tangled in an underwater surveillance device designed to keep those very imperialists at bay.

In the end, they did just that. Why? Probably because President Vladimir Putin ordered them to.

The moment Putin was informed about the Priz, he made a decision. You can imagine him telling his men that all their secrecy and underwater devices didn't matter; the crew had to be saved. So naval officials hustled and called for foreign help.

Putin was haunted by the ghost of the Kursk. At that time, he was given reports that the Kursk problem was about to be resolved. He later ordered military officials to let foreign rescuers help, but it was already too late.

This time, the president did not buy the military's reassuring reports.

Naturally, this is all hypothetical, this theory that the president personally ordered the top brass to get outside help. But I can't come up with any other force besides the president that would be strong enough to make the military do an about-face.

I am not trying to make some big statement about this system, where only the president can make certain decisions.

In more rational systems, such decisions are made at a lower level. For example, when Japanese military officials received the Russian call for help, they sent ships first and then asked for permission from the government.

I am merely stating a fact. The seven men aboard the Priz nearly died because of the way the system established under Putin functions. This system makes ABC public enemy No. 1 and makes hiding dirty laundry the government's main priority.

The Priz's seven crew members owe Putin their lives. Putin went against the system.

Will he be able to do the same thing in other situations? Like, say, when 2008 rolls around?

That last question is a good one, although I'm afraid she means it to be rhetorical.

Moving away from "hard news," the last story I'd like to highlight from today's press is an inspiring story from RIA Novosti about Russian athletes: "Russia taking beach volleyball more seriously." Good to know.

More on Alexander Khinshtein

Incidentally, Khinshtein's been in the news today also. According to Echo of Moscow, he's now going after Abramovich:

10.08.2005 - Chukotka Governor Roman Abramovich and former Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kas'ianov, as it turns out, vacationed together - at least, State Duma Deputy Alexander Khinshtein has come out with a statement to that effect today. Previously, an inquiry by Khinshtein led to a criminal case being opened against Kas'ianov regarding his acquisition of a government dacha. According to Khinshtein, several days ago Kas'ianov was vacationing on Abramovich's yacht in the Mediterranean Sea. The deputy alleges that the "politicians were discussing the upcoming 2007 and 2008 elections." To quote Interfax [not clear whether Echo is quoting Interfax quoting Khinshtein, or just quoting Interfax]: "This fact proves that the Family is consolidating its forces in the lead-up to the next presidential and parliamentary elections."

Well, better lock up Roma, in that case. Clearly something here smells fishy... Good thing Khinshtein is around to get to the bottom of whatever ill deeds are being plotted by these jointly vacationing, yacht-sailing neer-do-wells.

This muckraker-turned-deputy is so odious, that even an apparent break-in at his apartment provokes no sympathy in my mind - but it does keep him in the news! Also from Echo of Moscow:

10.08.2005 - An attempt was made to illegally enter the apartment of State Duma Deputy Alexander Khinshtein in Moscow. Yesterday, the door to the apartment was found open, although Khinshtein's wife had locked the door using two locks when she left home. Alexander Khinshtein does not think that the unknown persons who were able to open reliable locks without breaking them did so in order to perform utility work in the apartment. Furthermore, he does not exclude the possibility that poison may have been planted in the apartment.

Russian tabloid waves the flag for Karimov and Khinshtein

I had been following the story about the US getting evicted from the Karshi-Khanabad base in Uzbekistan out of the corner of my eye - my sister thoughtfully sent me a Washington Post article on the topic, and of course I've been following posts on the issue on Registan.

Then last week at the McDonald's (yes, friends, sometimes while in faraway lands I succumb to the temptation that dare not speak its name, a piping-hot 9-piece bag of Chicken McNuggets) in downtown Chisinau, I started reading the August 2 issue of Komsomol'skaya Pravda Moldova. This is the local version of the Russian tabloid Komsomol'skaia Pravda, which runs stories from the parent publication along with local items such as "Second-hand [clothing] Banned in Moldova." KP also has a Kazakhstan edition, and perhaps others.

Tashkent has given the USA six months to remove its bases" (translated by me)
Viktor Baranets, August 2, 2005

The Uzbek authorities have given Washington an ultimatum - they are to remove from Uzbek territory the Khanabad airbase (twenty airplanes and nearly 800 personnel) within six months. The base has been deployed in the republic since the spring of 2002, when the forces of the antiterrorist coalition were conducting the operation against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Until recently, the Uzbek authorities had not even dropped hints that the Americans should go home. But after the bloody events in Andijan in June [sic. - the events actually occurred in May] everything changed dramatically. The USA accused Tashkent of "crushing democracy." The response was not long in coming: President Islam Karimov advised the Americans to "go home."

They apparently thought he was joking and did not react for some time. But when Karimov once again officially repeated his position, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld traveled to Tashkent in an instant in order to try to save the situation.

But the Uzbek leader didn't give in to the Americans' persuasion (or even to their threats). The Americans immediately took revenge - giving the Uzbeks who had fled to Kirghizia the status of "political refugees," they transported them to Europe and began presenting them as "victims of Karimov's totalitarian regime." Then Karimov demanded, rather than suggesting, that the USA leave Khanabad. And gave them six months to do so.

This escalation of tensions in Uzbek-American relations has yet another, little-known cause: the Khanabad base housed not only airmen but also personnel from one of the branches of the US special services, who were clandestinely preparing a "cotton" revolution in the republic. Now this operation has apparently fallen through.

Why does it matter what a newspaper publishes when it can't even get basic facts straight (it's a striking dereliction of journalistic duty, or at the very least astonishingly bad fact-checking, to report that the uprising in Andijan occurred in June) ? Well, maybe it doesn't, but, say what you will about KP, it does have a large circulation - 30 million per month, counting all of the paper's various editions, according to the proud graphic on the newspaper's front page, and 10,000 for the daily edition in Moldova. This is the type of news read by the average Russian, who's either far away from Moscow where pulp like KP is all that's available or is not inclined to read more responsible newspapers like Kommersant and Vedomosti.

The August 2 KP also provides us with some insight into the thought process, if it can be called that, of Russian Duma Deputy Alexander Khinshtein, the man behind the attempt to discredit Mikhail Kas'ianov with allegations that he privatized his government dacha in a shady way (here's Kommersant's take on that story, in English).

State Duma Deputy Alexander Khinshtein: "I won't say who's next, so as not to scare anyone!" (translated by me)

It's possible that members of Yeltsin's family will come under fire in the near future.

Alexander Khinshtein: "Prepare for landing [trans. - in Russian this word - posadka - is similar to the word for being put in jail], Mr. Rushailo!"
[AK:] "Well, what of it, I really don't like the Family," Alexander Khinshtein confirmed in a telephone interview. "I think that the state should be an orphan. And all members of the Family should be locked up in the same cell, after dividing the men and women, of course."
[KP:] "Why did you jump so quickly from Kas'ianov to Rushailo?"
[AK:] "The one doesn't interfere with the other. Some information was received, and I put in a request for data on the property holdings of Rushailo and his family members."
[KP:] "Where do you get such information?"
[AK:] "From various places. Sometimes voters write in, sometimes it's journalists I know. Let's say you were to call me and tell me that you saw a fancy mansion somewhere, and the locals confirm that someone in power is living there. We'll get to the bottom of it."
[KP:] "And what are the potential results?"
[AK:] "It depends who you're talking about. With respect to Vladimir Rushailo, it's hard to say, for the time being. But with Kas'ianov, I think, everything's become clear already. All of the schemes he used to acquire the real estate are apparent, and all of the deals have been uncovered. Khodorkovsky said that the former Prime Minister would become president. Well, now they can propose each other as candidates to be the senior guy in their prison cell. It's too bad they let Yaponchik out. They would have made a great trio."
[KP:] "They say that Kas'ianov has some compromising information [kompromat], which might help him get out of this situation."
[AK:] "What compromising information, about who? Our President is a saint - he doesn't smoke, he doesn't drink, he does judo."
[KP:] "Who's the next person on your 'black list'?"
[AK:] "It's too soon to say, I don't want to scare anyone."

At the same time, sources in the Duma have told us that the next "target" of Alexander Khinshtein will be none other than family members (with a lower-case letter) of the first President of the Russian Federation [Yeltsin].

Leaving aside how distasteful it is for an elected official to posture in print like this about what is essentially a watered-down reprise of the 1930's purges (with anonymous tips and show trials used to get rid of former political elites who have become inconvenient to those currently in Putin's inner circle), the supportive tone of KP's reportage leaves a reader with no doubt where the publication's sympathies lie. I guess one of the attractions of tabloid journalism to its readers is that it tells them how to think. It's not surprising that Khinshtein's career, prior to attaining the exalted status of Russian Duma Deputy, was as a columnist for the tabloid Moskovskii Komsomolets, which is just as "yellow" as KP.

Pavlovsky on the third-term initiative

From today's issue of Johnson's Russia List:

BBC Monitoring
Kremlin adviser negative about third term for Putin
Source: Ekho Moskvy news agency, Moscow, in Russian
0859 gmt 10 Aug 05 [No dateline, as received]

President of the Effective Policy Foundation Gleb Pavlovskiy has dismissed the initiative by Maritime Territory legislators to amend the constitution in order to allow President Vladimir Putin to run for a third term in office.

"It's a bad idea," Pavlovskiy told Ekho Moskvy radio. The legal arguments backing the initiative do not stand up to any criticism, he said. Pavlovskiy sees the idea as "political capitulation".

"These deputies say that they don't know how to run the country without Putin in the Kremlin. It means that they are unfit for their jobs and have already failed to do their work properly," he said."

The idea to hide behind the back of one person is well known to us," he went on to say. "Instead, they should have worked with Putin's supporters and created a strong political force that could work effectively with or without Putin in office," he said.

They should ask Putin's backers whether they want it [changing the constitution] or not, Pavlovskiy said. "The debates on the third term are splitting Putin's supporters roughly in half," he said.

The parliamentary and presidential elections [in 2007-08] "must create a competitive and legitimate authority, recognized in and outside Russia, otherwise they will develop into a crisis," Pavlovskiy said.

It seems that Maritime Territory deputies "are planning a crisis well in advance and are ready to launch it ahead of the election time", he concluded.

Random amazing website

I was hunting around yesterday for the website of the Moldovan TV channel NIT, which I never found. I did, however, stumble across this rather detailed review of Moldovan TV ratings and the advertising market as of June 2005 (in Russian). Just in case anyone besides me is interested in that sort of thing.

5000-ruble notes to circulate in 2006

Wealthy New Russians will be able to throw around the bling-bling with a bit more authority next year - the Central Bank is planning to introduce 5000-ruble notes (worth about $175 at current rates) in 2006.

Official sources at the CBR explained that this step is necessary for the happy reason that Russians' salaries are growing, an explanation also picked up by RIA Novosti in their brief item on this (in English).

Echo of Moscow, as usual, has a more dire explanation (my translation):

[...] Officially, the need to circulate such a large banknote was explained as a consequence of the growth of the average salary in Russia. However, most Russians' salaries haven't yet reached 5000 rubles. This step benefits the Central Bank itself first and foremost, since it will save on money-printing costs. In addition, cash transportation expenses will be reduced. Many analysts think that the introduction of a 5000-ruble banknote is not just a technical step. This is an alarming sign, thinks Dmitry Belyaev, Deputy Director of the Scientific-Research Institute for Macroeconomic Studies and Forecasting.

Consumer prices in Russia have risen by 8% in the past six months. [...]

[Update] Lindsay's comment on the original post leads me to add a bit of speculation which I was thinking about earlier. No doubt kiosk attendants and cashiers throughout Russia are contemplating this news and cementing a solemn collective pact to never, ever make change for a 5000-ruble note.

Background on the "legally illiterate" Primor'e Deputy

Adam Imadaev does not have many Google hits in English.

But this one, from the March 2004 issue of Russian Far East News, is sort of interesting:

Primorye deputies go on hunger strike

A group of deputies from the Primorye Duma went on hunger strike in January to protest the bankruptcy of various local companies, including Bor, which operates Russia's largest deposit of boron-containing ore, Vostok-Media news agency reported. All except one deputy, Adam Imadaev, ended the hunger strike after 10 days. "Along with six kilograms of weight, in this short time I have had to lose my last remaining illusions about the future of Russian democracy," said another deputy, Valery Korolyuk. The group promised to continue their campaign despite the end of the hunger strike. They believe that Bor's bankruptcy is illegal and that the company can pay its creditors. Imadaev ended his hunger strike after nearly three weeks, having been elected chairman of a temporary deputies' commission to investigate the bankruptcies.

There's another one that's a bit more interesting. Apparently, Imadaev has also been known as Kovalev in the past.

Tax Police Cancels Deals Of Bailout Management Of EvroBank

The Primorsky Tax Police has revealed new facts of the misuse of funds at EvroBank, a local commercial bank for the mining industry which filed for bankruptcy in 1998.

Of particular interest, allegedly in order to pay off the debts of the bank, which amounted to 30 million rubles, the bailout management of the bank sold its portion of shares of the Lermontovsky Ore Mining company, 14 million shares, and the shares of some other profitable companies belonging to the bank, for a total of 43 million rubles. It seemed to be enough to pay off the debts. However, Evrobank's general license has been revoked by the Central Bank seven days after the deal.

The tax police revealed that shares and some other assets, such as the bank's office buildings in several cities of the Krai, had been sold illegally by general director, Imadaev, to the two daughter companies, DalTrasFlot and the Primorsky Krai Accounting Chamber. The terms of payment, a three-year deferment, was made without shareholders' approval, and was absolutely unprofitable for the almost bankrupt bank which was in an acute need of cash rather than bills at that time. The two daughter companies were established by the general director, Imadaev, himself in 1996.

Moreover, the police revealed that 'Imadaev' is not the general director's the only family. He went by the name 'Kovalev' at the time of the registration of his daughter companies, but officially changed his family name and his middle name in 1998. According to Imadaev, he changed his name after having realized his "national roots." Adam Kovalev-Imadaev was the president of EvroBank from September 8, 1998 to January 25, 1999.

Officials voice opposition to amendment initiative - RIA Novosti

Here's an English translation of RIA Novosti's article on the initiative to which I've devoted so much space today:

Mironov Is Opposed to the Primorsky Krai Deputy's Initiative to Amend the Constitution 16:38 10/ 08/ 2005

Moscow, 10 August - RIA "Novosti." The Russian Central Election Commission [CEC] considers "strange" the initiative of a Primorsky Krai deputy to amend the Russian Constitution in order to do away with the prohibition on occupying the position of President of Russia for more than two terms in a row; and Federation Council Speaker Sergei Mironov voiced his categorical opposition to changing the main law of the country.

"There is such an initiative. From my point of view, it looks rather strange," CEC deputy chairman Oleg Vil'iashev told journalists on Wednesday.

On Monday Primorsky Krai Deputy Adam Imadaev announced that a committee of the Primor'e Legislative Assembly had found contradictions between Article 32 of the Constitution, which refers to the right of every citizen to vote in elections and stand for election, and Article 81, according to which the same person may not hold the position of President more than twice in a row.

"I don't see any contradiction between these two norms established by the Constitution," said Vil'iashev. "It's difficult for me to say that Article 81 limits citizens' rights," he added.

"I think that when the session [of the Primor'e Legislative Assembly] gathers, it will make the right decision and will explain the situation to those instigators who have put forth this initiative," Vil'iashev said, hopefully.

Federation Council Speaker Sergei Mironov is certain that the limit of two presidential terms should remain in the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

In an interview with RIA "Novosti," Mironov called the Primorsky Krai Deputy's initiative "legally illiterate." "It's a pity that there are legally illiterate deputies in regional legislative assemblies. They've created a problem out of thin air and with no basis," he said.

Mironov emphasized that the limit on presidential terms is intended to foster the development of democracy in Russia. "Paragraph 3 of Article 81 of the Constitution sets a specific limit, which is intended to foster the development of democracy and civil society, and it creates a barrier against totalitarianism," said the Speaker of the upper house of parliament.

Incidentally, he noted, a presidential term limit is a generally accepted practice internationally.

"Once can only regret that such legally illiterate statements are widely broadcast in the media," said Mironov.

However, the chairman of the Federation Council's Committee on Judicial Affiars Stanislav Vavilov believes that the Constitution may in fact contain a contradiction by preventing the same person from serving as president for a third consecutive term.

"In principle, at first glance there is such a contradiction," said Vavilov on Wednesday in a phone interview with RIA "Novosti."

"A review of the Primorsky Krai deputies' initiative will show whether there is a contradiction in the Constitution," noted the senator.

At the same time Vavilov noted that Russian President Vladimir Putin himself had said more than once that the Consititution is sacred, and that "we are obligated to observe it."

Vavilov noted that the review of such questions is a not a quick but rather a lengthy process. "In any case, this initiative has the right to be reviewed by the State Duma," said the committee chairman.

Yurii Sharandin, Chairman of the Federation Council's Committee on Constitutional Law, categorically disagrees. He told RIA "Novosti" that he is disposed "strongly negatively" to the Primorsky Krai deputies' initiative. "Deputies should be guided at least a little bit by the law when they introduce legislative initiatives to the State Duma. Only the Constitutional Court can interpret the Constitution," said Sharandin.

"Putting forth such an initiative means that they are not very familiar with jurisprudence," said the senator. According to him, the Primorsky Krai deputies chose an "obviously clumsy explanation" for the need to amend the Constitution. "Steps like this are not well-considered and are not beneficial," in his opinion.

According to Sharandin, Russian public opinion is more and more obviously in favor of Putin remaining in power after 2008. "But public opinion is one thing, and the legal initiatives of government officials are something else entirely," said the senator.

In Sharandin's opinion, the current line of developing the government should be continued. "And there are already many ways of doing this," said the committee chairman.

According to Sharandin, these include, among others, both amending the Constitution and the possibility of redistributing powers among the various branches of government. "But at this time I personally do not see the need to do this," emphasized Sharandin.

This seems to be the official line - intended to slap down the uppity, "legally illiterate" regional deputies who are under the mistaken impression that they can actually undertake legislative initiatives, while at the same time making it clear to anyone who's watching that if the right people in Moscow decide that Putin has to stay in office after 2008, they have "many ways" of making that happen. Democracy in action.

It's interesting that in some places reference is made to the initiative of one deputy, and in other places the reference is to "deputies." I guess they can't decide how many people are to blame for this.

While this may spell the end of Adam Imadaev's 15 minutes of fame, it clearly does not rule out the possibility that some steps will be taken at a later date to make sure that Putin stays in the driver's seat after 2008. And it will certainly generate some interesting comments in the media, probably from abroad as well as from within Russia.