Russian militia: between public and private interests

Message from the bottom of Russian Militia: 

Russian Police departments are all about rent-seeking - Russian policemen are doing their jobs NOT by serving the public interest, but by serving the private interest of the higher ranked in their bureaucracy; corruption, collecting premium bribes, protecting criminals, defying the rule of law, is their de facto job. There is no room for honest professionals like Aleksey Dymovsky.

Private police would be ideal, but probably not the most practical solution yet. A more interesting observation is that police corruption is not an unknown phenomenon to developed democracies like the US,  but there it is much, much less of a problem than it is in weaker democracies. What is the best approach to address this gap is one challenging question for Russian leaders in particular, and all market reformers in general.

More on this in international media:

I was glad to hear he got away with only being fired and not killed like most journalists reporting on corruption in this country do.

PS Note:

I don’t exclude the possibility of Dymovsky being part of some government-led masquerade. Having lived there and, at that time, having my father forced to resign his position because of corrupt pressures, plus just by looking at their GDP, I don’t need special proof of persisting corruption in this country’s institutions. But if they do plan a reform, I believe thorough investigations to assess the real effects must be carried out by local and international non-biased experts as well, on the ground, before and after implementation. How else do you think it will be possible to prove that this was more than a superficial attempt for the sake of improving Medvedev/Putin/Russian image, and that it did change de facto institutions?

Russian journalists – Enemies of the State?

Michael Specter, American journalist, talks about the series of murdered journalists since Putin became president.

13 Journalists have been killed since Vladimir Putin became president. They share a couple of chilling characteristics; one is ugly deaths, and the other one is that they were all opponents of the Kremlin.

In another more actualized article Jameson Berkow, a Canadian journalist, counts:

…21st to be killed since Putin became president in 2000, and the 44th since the fall of communism in Russia [...]

And here’s a comprehensive list of journalists killed in Russia. Tragic… think that these people lost the war for freedom – freedom from oppression, corruption, crimes, all injustices on the part of a violent state. And, if seeing how these murders still happen in the 21st century around the world doesn’t  infuriate you then sadly, if  all you feel is fear and hopelessness, you are a victim whose life and behavior have been altered as a results of years and years of living under a terror regime. But worse than all, if you don’t have these feelings, you might be “one of them” – one with power, one with no respect for human life, no respect for others’ freedom, no sense of morality, no conscience, and though you may hold vested power, nothing can justify your criminal actions.

In memory of my favorite  Russian TV anchor, murdered in 1995, Vladislav Listyev:

Gore Warming vs. Mother Nature

For the global warming skeptic/realists in you, here’s an excellent new cartoon by Glenn McCoy (copyright 2009 Universal Press Syndicate) to enjoy!

The Stalin-Putin joke, or C КГБ Вперёт!

People at STAFORD Intelligence are celebrating “the 10th anniversary of Vladimir Putin’s assumption of a leadership position at the Kremlin” this weekend. Below is an excerpt from their “intelligent analysis” of Putin’s role for Russia:

[...] Russia is a tough place to rule, and as we’ve implied, STRATFOR is mildly surprised Putin has lasted. We don’t think him incompetent, it’s just that life in Russia is dreadfully hard and the Kremlin is a crucible, and leaders often are crushed swiftly. Before Putin took Russia’s No. 2 job, former President Boris Yeltsin had gone through no fewer than 10 men — one of them twice — in the position.

But Putin boasted one characteristic that STRATFOR identified 10 long years ago that set him apart. Putin was no bureaucrat or technocrat or politico; he was a KGB agent. And as Putin himself has famously proclaimed, there is no such thing as a former intelligence officer. This allowed him to harness the modern incarnation of the institutions that made Russia not just possible but also stable — the intelligence divisions — and to fuse them into the core of the new regime. Most of the Kremlin’s current senior staff, and nearly all Putin’s inner circle, were deeply enmeshed in the Soviet security apparatus.[...]

I am celebrating the spontaneous intelligence in this new joke with a good laugh; a joke so very popular these days among people of the ex-USSR…

Stalin’s ghost appears to Putin in a dream, and Putin asks for his help running the country. Stalin says, “Round up and shoot all the democrats, and then paint the inside of the Kremlin blue.” “Why blue?” Putin asks. “Ha!” says Stalin. “I knew you wouldn’t ask me about the first part.” (Source: wikipedia)

Transnistria – a cultural hazard

I know this is an old documentary, but just to show you that it’s true – the Russian tsarist and soviet culture is alive and demanding its rights, in Transnistria.

Are these people better off? I would say not, but certainly a small fraction got super rich at the expense of all the rest. And although it is culturally attractive for the majority of locals who after 1990 just craved for some old-style soviet social stability – for their previous lives “good or bad as they were” – without ever knowing an alternative  option, for the Transnistrian’s government, this is a convenient recipe to secure an easy target population to steal from.

Yes, not fair, but with all their political and civil rights restrained by the monster that they’ve encouraged grow itself, would these people ever choose to be free and live a better life?

Hard to believe. It’s almost as asking a deaf person to walk toward the most beautiful sound…

Wind farms – more could mean less

From yesterday’s Economist.com we find out that if there is one policy area that President Obama should not worry (about not being able to keep his promise), that is the renewable energy area as America has just become the world leader in wind power! They proudly say that last year America increased its wind-power capacity so much that it led to the overthrowing of Germany – the previous leader.

How cool… This seems to be excellent news that should make every American feel proud of his country and president. However, at a closer look, how good news is this?

First, I doubt that building more “capacity”, that is planting more wind farms, is necessarily a good thing for the economy. It depends on the efficiency of this form of energy in comparison with other possible alternatives. Questions such as, “what is the production rate per unit of time of all this newly created capacity?”, “What are the benefits provided by it in comparison with the costs of installing and maintaining it?” should have been answered in this article before jumping to easy conclusion.

Is it really so important for American people to know that they are nation is world’s number one in wind energy? May be, but I doubt they would enjoy it just for the sake of being number one as opposed to achieving it as a clear result of a competitive process.

Second, how can something like this be attributed to the current president? He has been in the office for only two weeks. This seems to be just one of those “lucky” coincidences in his case.

Gas crisis and monopoly profits

On Russia-Ukraine gas crisis via Reuters:

Russia accused its former Soviet neighbor of stealing about 15 percent the gas it ships across Ukraine to European states.

“Ukraine has stolen gas not from Russia, but from consumers who have bought the product and paid for it,” Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said in televised remarks late on Tuesday.

Ukraine’s pro-West President Viktor Yushchenko blamed Moscow for the supply disruptions, saying Moscow would continue to close the gas taps to Europe or stop them altogether.

Wait a second… it looks like Putin is the good guy, doing his poor customer countries in the region a favor by pointing out Ukraine’s theft. But wait another second, he didn’t stop at that, as I would have done if for example I had noticed someone stealing from my customer the merchandise he bought from me. No, Mr. Putin goes further with his “good” deeds, he punishes the thief, cutting off gas supplies. Fair enough if only, by doing so, he could have avoided punishing the victims.

Hence, Putin’s claim of working in Gazprom customers’ best interest cannot be faithful as it is doing far more harm then good (if any), but rather something else. Hmm, what would that be? Well,  Gazprom is a monopoly on natural gas on the European continent. This makes reducing its output very profitable and, thus, makes inventing reasons to brake any previous settlements (such as bilateral agreements) a political means to achieve new profits for Gazprom.

Let them BE

I just realized that since the beginning of all this mess fight for territory in Georgia I have been trying to make up my mind… All this time, while reading about it from (clearly biased) American and Russian newspapers, my focus was to pick one side: the Russian or the Georgian version of the story instead of stating a clear personal judgment in this respect. Ok, now I think I’m done, but I’ll favor no side. All I have to say is that if people of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabakh or other separatist entities in this world want their political independence then let them be, but don’t start a war. War should not be an option in solving any conflict, but peacefull cooperation and communication. What must be of such a major importance for the people behind this scene as to engage vehemently in violence, destruction and death is still a big question on my mind…