Andrei Illarionov, a top economic advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin was stripped of much of his government responsibility Monday, after what the N.Y. Times characterized as his "sweeping criticism of the Kremlin's leadership" and his expression of "deep misgivings about the direction in which Russia was headed". (the full text of the NYT article is at the "Continue reading" link below - Ed.)
Putin is wearying of this "freedom of speech" thing, at least as it relates to the outspoken critic Illarionov, who jabs continuously at the Putin government, with the approval of a majority of Russian citizens it seems. A recent radio station poll, while unscientific, speaks volumes about the regard in which he is held by the people:
The station, even as Mr. Illarionov appeared on the air, conducted a swift call-in poll, asking listeners to answer one question: Should Mr. Illarionov stay in government and try to influence its decisions, or quit?The poll lasted four minutes. More than 9,200 people called; 86 percent said he should stay.
Illarionov may have sealed his fate by referring to Putin's state takeover of the oil giant Yukos as "the swindle of the year", and his recent criticisms of the Kremlin have been more general than specific. But he has been a persistent critic of Russia's involvement with the Kyoto Climate Accords, characterizing them as nothing less than an assault on freeedom. In fact, he seems to have a real thing about freedom. Maybe that's what has Putin's panties in such a bunch.
Illarionov first came to the attention of this blog when in July of 2004 he published a blistering assessment of both the science and the morality of the Kyoto Accords and the political machinery required to enforce them. The lack of scientific consensus on climate change causes is well known, and he touches on that, but it was this quote that had me wondering if Illarionov would be walking around a free man for long:
The next point brings us directly to the Kyoto Protocol, or more specifically, to the ideological and philosophical basis on which it is built. That ideological base can be juxtaposed and compared, as Professor Reiter has done just now, with man-hating totalitarian ideology with which we had the bad fortune to deal during the 20th century, such as National Socialism, Marxism, Eugenics, Lysenkovism and so on. All methods of distorting information existing in the world have been committed to prove the alleged validity of these theories. Misinformation, falsification, fabrication, mythology, propaganda. Because what is offered cannot be qualified in any other way than myth, nonsense and absurdity.This is not a simple war. Like any war it cannot be easy and simple. Regrettably like any war it has its losses and victims, and we must understand that. The main thing is that we have now obvious evidence that we have got over the past two days, although we had some hints before that time, and it was the approach to Russia practiced by some people attending the seminar, an approach to Russia as a kind of banana republic, an approach to a country that is not a colony yet but about to become it as soon as it ratifies the document. At least we now know how people in colony feel towards other people who are trying to make them a colony.
(emphasis mine - Ed.)
No sooner had I picked my jaw up off my chest following that strikingly candid acknowledgement of Russia's collective guilt, than Illarionov was back at it with another piece at envirotruth.org in November, in which he likens "Kyotoism" to fascism and communism as "an attack on basic human freedoms behind a smokescreen of propaganda". There's more.
Less than a month ago, Illarionov had an op-ed in The Australian that again trod on Putin's toes, questioning the "bureaucratic monster" required by the Kyoto agreement that Putin had only recently agreed to sign, under pressure from the E.U.:
Even with Russia on board, the Kyoto treaty will do little to global CO2 emissions considering that 70 per cent of the world's CO2 is emitted by countries not subject to Kyoto restrictions. Moreover, this share is growing as China, India and other non-Kyoto developed and developing countries grow faster than pro-Kyoto ones. Countries around the world must choose what is more important for them -- stagnating, at best, living standards due to Kyoto sclerotic regulations or the rising well-being of billions of people without them.The Kyoto protocol requires a supranational bureaucratic monster in charge of rationing emissions and, therefore, economic activities. The Kyoto-ist system of quota allocation, mandatory restrictions and harsh penalties will be a sort of international Gosplan, a system to rival the former Soviet Union's. This perhaps explains why it finds such ready support in some quarters. But that's why it should be a warning signal for those who value economic and political freedom.
Small wonder that Putin has decided to take this freedom-talker down a peg.
It is also worth noting that the word "Kyoto" appears nowhere in the N.Y.Times article. I don't profess to know much about why Putin acted now to strip Illarionov of power. He has weighed in on the Yukos issue and on the Ukrainian election fiasco, undoubtedly getting under Putin's skin on those scores. But much of his recent public profile seems to have been in the context of his passionate objection to Russian involvement with the Kyoto Accords. One would think that would deserve a mention in the Times coverage, no?
The New York TimesPosted by dan at January 3, 2005 11:07 PMJanuary 4, 2005
Putin Demotes Adviser Critical of the KremlinBy C. J. CHIVERS
MOSCOW, Jan. 3 - President Vladimir V. Putin on Monday abruptly reduced the responsibilities of a senior adviser who last week issued a sweeping criticism of the Kremlin's leadership and expressed deep misgivings about the direction in which Russia was headed.
In a presidential decree released without further comment, Mr. Putin relieved the adviser, Andrei N. Illarionov, of his duties as Russia's envoy to the Group of 8, comprising the world's major industrialized nations and Russia. Mr. Putin reassigned those duties to a presidential aide who is seemingly a more loyal Kremlin insider, Igor I. Shuvalov.
Mr. Illarionov, 43, has been an economics adviser to Mr. Putin since 2000, and at times a vocal critic of the Kremlin's course. Both the Kremlin and Mr. Illarionov's spokeswoman said that for the moment he would retain his principal post. But his sudden removal as envoy to the Group of 8 carried an implicit rebuke.
In a long news conference here last week and then in an interview on an independent radio station, Mr. Illarionov issued a searing and comprehensive assessment of the state of affairs in Russia, saying the country had sharply shifted direction for the worse, and risked becoming a third world state.
For more than a year the debate about Russia's course and its political chill has been lively, with much public worrying over the plans and judgment of Mr. Putin and the group of former K.G.B. officers with whom he tightly controls the nation's political life. What made Mr. Illarionov's remarks so striking was not their substance - they reflect widely held views among Western critics of the Kremlin and those few in Russia who still risk speaking publicly - but their source, from an insider.
Mr. Illarionov described the government as both arbitrary and wrong-headed, criticizing the Kremlin's crackdown on the news media, its expropriation of the main asset of Yukos, the oil giant, its centralization of political power and its foreign relations.
His assessments were unsparing. He called the seizure last month of the Yukos unit "the swindle of the year."
In the government's attack on a healthy company, and its signals about which companies were Kremlin favorites, Mr. Illarionov said, "financial flows are rerouted from the most effective companies to the least effective ones."
Moreover, Mr. Putin's decision to do away with elections for governors throughout Russia, and to appoint governors through the presidency, Mr. Illarionov said, ensured that political competition was undermined, to ill effect. "Limited competition in all spheres of life leads to one thing," he said. "To stagnation."
At times Mr. Illarionov also appeared to put himself personally at odds with Mr. Putin, for example, dismissing as absurd Kremlin defenses of the Yukos seizure. Mr. Putin has been vocal in his support of Yukos's near liquidation.
"This entire affair regrettably demonstrates that any of the official or semiofficial explanations given to the public regarding the Yukos affair do not have a leg to stand on," the economics adviser said.
Mr. Illarionov also spoke warmly of the United States bankruptcy judge in Texas who had tried to block the auction of the Yukos unit, even though only days before Christmas Mr. Putin had personally ridiculed her at his own news conference.
"We should thank the Texas court and the judge for having done everything possible to help Russia avoid falling into the abyss they have pushed us to," Mr. Illarionov said.
Finally, Mr. Illarionov congratulated Ukrainian voters and demonstrators for successfully overturning the fraudulent presidential election of Nov. 21, and forcing a new vote last month that the opposition candidate, Viktor A. Yushchenko, appears to have won. Mr. Putin had supported the government's candidate, Viktor F. Yanukovich.
In a biting portion of his remarks at the news conference, Mr. Illarionov sarcastically thanked fellow Russian politicians for so clumsily handling their support of Mr. Yanukovich, who appeared to have won an earlier round of voting accompanied by widespread accusations of electoral fraud, saying that they helped energize the opposition.
"One has to pay tribute to our colleagues, who did all they could, by making their crude, uncouth and offensive statements," he said, because as a result Ukrainians "who may not have intended to vote or least did not intend to vote for Mr. Yushchenko, did go to the polls and cast ballots and made Mr. Yushchenko's win so convincing, so obvious and so doubtless."
Mr. Yushchenko won the race by nearly eight percentage points, according to the Central Election Committee's count. His victory is not official, and awaits the outcome of a court challenge by Mr. Yanukovich.
Having staked so many positions distinctly opposite of Russia's official line, Mr. Illarionov had been expected to attract attention from the Kremlin. His future was unclear Monday night; neither his spokeswoman nor the Kremlin remarked publicly about the reasons behind the presidential decree, or his future in the government.Last week, however, the Echo of Moscow radio station demonstrated that he had some support away from the Kremlin's walls.
The station, even as Mr. Illarionov appeared on the air, conducted a swift call-in poll, asking listeners to answer one question: Should Mr. Illarionov stay in government and try to influence its decisions, or quit?
The poll lasted four minutes. More than 9,200 people called; 86 percent said he should stay.