A Night with the Paul Klebnikov Fund

Thanks for reporting on the event, Sean. I hope this small group of people pursuing better American reporting and public understanding about Russia gains critical mass. I think just establishing who to read for that ‘nuanced perspective’ helps a lot. I’ll look for Newsweek in 2009.

I wrote this in a previous post, but dare I repeat that I once met Peter Klebnikov at an Environmental Defense Fund event where we spoke about the work EDF is doing in Russia. The specific example Peter offered was with regard to the dirty coal-burning municipal power plants in so many cities of the former Soviet states. Big gains in air quality, thus livabiliy, can be easily had by just retrofitting the furnaces to burn cleaner. Some Western tech applied with Russian engineers employed. Peter works to get it done. Like my children, Peter and Paul had a Russian baba that not only taught them the language but also instilled a sense of ‘Russians’r’us.’ I just found him very inspiring – not seeking headlines, just working hard in an area where he sees potential for success and great impact. Wish his brother had had a chance to grow older and develop such wisdom.

Doom wonders if Sean has ever read Razgovor s varvarom, the book that alleged resulted in Klebnikov’s murder. It would be unpublishable in the US.

I envy you from having met Andrew Meier. I’ve got a lot of time for him, having thought his book Black Earth was excellent, and provides probably the only decent written account of Sakhalin between perestroika and the oil boom. I’d loved to have asked him some questions.

What was perhaps most encouraging was that many appeared frustrated with the typical thinking about Russia, and my sense was that there was a real craving for a more nuanced discourse.

I think you’d find this feeling anywhere amongst enthusiasts or specialists. I’ve had similar thoughts in the company of Land Rover owners, KBR employees, and soldiers.

Well done Sean and am glad to see that you seemed to have such a good time. There’s nothing like meeting people who are into the same stuff, especially 100 of them!

”Doom wonders if Sean has ever read Razgovor s varvarom, the book that alleged resulted in Klebnikov’s murder. It would be unpublishable in the US.”

Is it translated? I can hardly read the cover of Speed-Info so I havent a hope if its only po-russkii. You’ve mentioned it before, sounds like it made an impression on you.

Kudos, Sean!

Thanks for the report, Sean. I also think highly of Meier’s Black Earth. A good book.

I almost met Paul Khlebnikov in the early 90s in Moscow. A mutual friend set up a meeting. At the end Paul had to take a trip on a short notice and we had to cancel. That was before he was well known, but I remember that back then friends who knew him were saying he was talented, worked hard, and was on his way up.

“Is it translated? I can hardly read the cover of Speed-Info so I havent a hope if its only po-russkii.”

You think anybody is going to translate and publish a book that 1) makes Ichkerians look bad and 2) supposedly got its author shot? Ha.

Sean, did anybody say anything at the event about Klebnikov’s own ethical/philosophical (lower case “p” there) beliefs? I find it interesting that people seem to not mention them, or tiptoe around them — he was a White Russian nationalist, basically, a big supporter of Putin and with a very very poor opinion of both the experience of the 1990s in Russia and “Free Chechnya.”

“I certainly didn’t get the White Russian politics vibe from his family. They seem like your standard NY liberals.”

Is there a contradiction?

Well, by “White nationalist” I mean descendant of White emigrees, anti-Soviet in outlook who maintained a Russian identity while in their generations abroad. Generally religious Orthodox and interested in a strong Russia in general and a strong Russian narod in general. Generally right-wing and voted Republican during the Cold War if they lived in the States (I mean, he wrote for FORBES).

I don’t mean “raving xenophobe,”* although the eXile did insinuate that he was an anti-Semite, IIRC.

*Why are Russian nationalists always perceived as raging xenophobes?

FWIW here’s the eXile’s (Dolan’s specifically) accusatory piece: http://exiledonline.com/old-exile/108/bookreview.php

Let’s get back to your Greek logic here, Chris.

First false assumption: All Journalists that write for Forbes are to the RIGHT.
I think the argument to be rebuilt is:
It was the financial press that were in Russia at the time. He was a journalist who wanted to be in Russia. He sought work with the financial press. He landed a job with Forbes.

The English-language books that document the era (that I know of) are all written by foreign desk reporters for the financial press: Chrystia Freeland was with FT when gathering data for Sale of the Century. Matthew Brzezinski was with WSJ and came out with Casino Moscow.

The brother works with the Environmental Defense Fund – it’s not Green Peace and has been ‘outed’ as more pro-business than some would like; however, not right-leaning as far as I know.
I think BB paid for your eXile article.

“All Journalists that write for Forbes are to the RIGHT.”

It’s a pretty safe bet that they aren’t exactly revolutionary socialists.

I wasn’t trying to insult Klebnikov. Simply pointing out that he was, in fact, a Russian nationalist, which in Razgovor is quite obvious. If one takes this as a negative that is because one thinks that being a nationalist is somehow bad, which I don’t.

I have no idea if he was an anti-Semite or not, and even if he was that does not necessarily affect the force of his arguments, but you gotta admit that portrait of Berezovsky on the cover does look a lot like the Leering Jew of Volkischer Beobachter fame.

The idea of BAB paying for an article in the eXile is too funny for words, so I’ll let an emoticon suffice.

BTW Klebnikov was not just some Forbes stringer. He was the EDITOR of Forbes Russia.

First, I’m a blank on Razgovor and varvarom. I should do a wiki and check the degree to which this ignorance exposes me as a Russa-’poser’. (Hmmm, could be a new handle as russaphobe and russaphile are taken.)

‘White Russian’ actually has positive connotations…but that’s because in my Paris days I knew a 90+ year old man who described himself thus. This banks of the Volga-born man had a gun thrust in his hands at 14 and began traveling east. He didn’t stop until Shanghai where he earned some money as an Opera singer. His talent took him to Paris where he knew Paul Robeson and Chaliapin. Lived through the Nazi occupation. Voice gone in the 50s, he earned his living as a Taxi Driver. There were many similar stories among Russians of that age in Paris. Try Easter services in the big orthodox Cathedral on Avenue George V – you’ll probably still meet a few. All their offspring are ‘righties’; I cannot say that’s true. Now, I don’t know any NY White Russians; but, I’d guess the averages are about the same.

“All their offspring are ‘righties’; I cannot say that’s true.”

I didn’t say “all,” and I admit it is both a stereotype and that my only association with such people is on the Internet, but it’s what diasporas who maintain an attachment to the home country do (Plastic Paddies, Russians, Ukrainians, whatever). Their grandparents emigrated from country x at some time of personal trauma (Russian Revolution, Potato Famine, whatever) and they have grown up seeing the home country through the events of 100 years ago through the lens of their grandparents’ stories, which in the case of (many) White Russians is the Evil Jewish Commies who burnt down great-grandma’s Cossack stanitsa. It’s why people of Irish descent outside Ireland are obsessed with the Potato Famine and Perfidious Albion and give money to the IRA, Jews of Eastern European descent think that Russia is full of pogromshchiki, Ukrainians abroad think that Russians tried to commit genocide of Ukrainians in the 1920s, etc.

“First, I’m a blank on Razgovor and varvarom.”

It was Klebnikov’s book of interviews and commentaries thereon with Nukhaev, the criminal-turned-Maskhadovite-ideologue who is now supposedly dead himself and who again supposedly killed Klebnikov.

Chris, considering that you so quickly object at how people stereotype Soviet Russians as well as those who now support Putin, your stereotypical caricature of White Russians was certainly amusing.

Many of those who fought in the White Army had republican/liberal sympathies. One of the weaknesses of the Whites is that they were too diverse, they were not united by a politically disciplined party/ideology. What united them was anti-Bolshevism. Some of them were yearning for the return of a monarchy (many of those preferred a constitutional monarchy), others were fighting for the Constitutional Assembly disbanded by the party of Lenin. Bolshevik propaganda, though, painted the Whites as a solid block of reactionary rich monarchists. Somehow this image is still dominant all over the world. To confuse matters further, the so-called White Idea was articulated only in exile by the right-wing of the Whites, several years after the end of the Russian Civil War. It’s ironic that both the Bolsheviks and the right-wing of the Whites were successful in distorting and downplaying the diversity of political beliefs of those who fought on the side of the Whites.

(BTW, my paternal grandfather was a White Army officer killed in early 1920, a few months before my father was born.)

“Many of those who fought in the White Army had republican/liberal sympathies. One of the weaknesses of the Whites is that they were too diverse, they were not united by a politically disciplined party/ideology. What united them was anti-Bolshevism.”

Well, duh. There were lots of pro-Communist Ukrainians too. But that’s not how the diaspora remembers it.

“To confuse matters further, the so-called White Idea was articulated only in exile by the right-wing of the Whites, several years after the end of the Russian Civil War.’

EXACTLY! And so who is likely to identify as a White today, 90 years later?

“I wonder what is left of White identity.”

Not a whole lot, I suspect. It’s not like the Ukrainians and Balts who had their Ukie and ethnic weekend schools. I know that one complaint of the Cossack revival movement is that they were expecting help from abroad but didn’t get any.

If you’re still living the battles of your ancestors 90 years later, that’s because you have something really emotionally invested in it. I mean, do you go around saying “I’m Sean and I’m French! I will never forgive those damn Anglos what they did to my Cajun ancestors!”?

It’s a good question: who are these people? With their chanting and skinny candles, and skirts and beards and picture kissing and always standing until suddenly dropping and then just leaving. When did it start? When will it end? I was my in-laws chauffeur and conversion ‘project’ (never happened), so I’ve been jammed into crowded Orthodox cathedrals on about 1/2 of the Orth Easters over the last 15 years – in paris, chicago, san francisco, others. Hands burnt by dripping candle wax, humilated when ordered into funny peasant skirts, refused communion when I couldn’t supply a Russian name (my mother-in-law made me go up with her), almost sufficated by the incense and strong body smells, why have I never considered the politics of all these people. Some exude wealth with furs and jewelery; some look like paupers (priest’s family). Raised Catholic, I just thought they were drawn together by the love of the ceremony and being part of something old and big. I was just never curious enough, I guess.

“I wonder what kinds of 1917 diaspora identities exist in each place. Are they crafted in a memory of the Revolution, politics, or something else?”

It still exists and is primarily crafted around a sense of being anti-Bolshevik Russians. In other words, politically it’s pretty diverse. Diaspora Russians talk about four waves: the First Wave consisted of the post-Bolshevik victory exiles. The Second Wave is the one after WWII, the Third Wave is primarily the one of the 70s (primarily Jewish), and the Fourth Wave is the one of the 90s. It’s interesting that each wave has its own flavor and has huge character differences with the other waves. In a general sense each wave identifies more with their own wave (despite internal political differences). Of course, there has been plenty of mixing among the waves, but the differences are noticeable.

Perhaps one of the salient characteristic of the First Wave is that for most of them viewed their exile as a temporary thing. A matter of a few years at most. In other words, they didn’t see themselves as immigrants–most of them wanted to go back as soon as possible. It’s not surprising then that a higher percentage of First Wave descendants preserved a stronger sense of Russian identity than descendants of the Second Wave. Of course, I’m talking in generalities.

There is a book by Marc Raeff called Russia Abroad (if memory serves) that concentrates on the first twenty or thirty years of the First Wave.

The Russian Jewish Diaspora is quite distinct from the Russian Diaspora, no? In my experience their attitude towards Russia tends to range from dislike to hatred.

Damn! I just wrote a comment and it seems that it disappeared. I’m too lazy to rewrite it, Sean, but if you see it in some filter please send it through. Thanks.

(Perhaps it was the browser’s fault. I just downloaded the newest alpha release of Opera. I’m impressed by the speed…)

Bummer. It was probably an Opera quirk.

Anyway, one of the things I wrote is that I hope you do write that article based on your interviews in Israel–sounds interesting.

“Though I have noticed a stronger propensity of Russian Jews to emphasize that they are more Jewish than Russian.”

Since they’re not Russian, that would make sense!

“Whereas before considered themselves more Russian than Jewish, after immigration they suddenly buy into the Zionist idea of being part of a Jewish nation by virtue of their “blood” (however ethnically and culturally diluted it may be).”

Cultural assimilation, no?

Speaking of Diasporas and their myth-building around their homelands, there is a good example (with one obvious qualification, i.e., it’s not really a Diapora ) in the attitudes of many American Jews toward Israel. You know, how all the settlers seem to have Brooklyn accents.

From what I read in the papers, as a group the more recent arrivals from Russia (last 20 years?) are more hawkish and anti-Palestinian than Israel born Jews. Is that a true generalization, Sean?

There is an angle underplayed if not completely overlooked in this very interesting discussion and that is economic expediency. Perhaps this is because we have more academics than business people on the thread. Beginning with Chris’ original point about Klebnikov being driven by by the politics of his baba. Always there are multiple drivers, but I’d put advancing his career at the top of the list of reasons he was in Moscow. Compared to being ‘chief editor’ of anything in NY, getting the top title in Moscow at Forbes was a short hop, with that Russian speaker arbitrage oppty in his pocket. Matthew Brzezinski explains in his book that Russia was the only place he was going to get work befitting his ego. Crystia Freeland same. It was like being a war reporter; You don’t need to uncover a Suni or Shiite baba to understand Lara Logan’s motivations.

“The Russian Jewish Diaspora is quite distinct from the Russian Diaspora, no? In my experience their attitude towards Russia tends to range from dislike to hatred.”

Consider the Russian-born ivy-league (and wannabe) MBA crowd; I’d say there is a large Jewish majority there and they were doing the reverse commute back to Moscow with little hesitation in the last decade. This despite the fact that they arrived during Bush41 admin when U.S. ‘political asylum’ doors were open to any Russian’s who could claim just 25% Jewish heritage. I think when you’re talking Moscow/St. Petersburg-born Russian expats 70s/80s/90s waves, ethnicities are all tangled and $$$ trumps all. You’ll find most who claim a mix, pulling out whatever ethnicity works to ‘win the sale’. Then there’s a big ’scale’ argument to make for communities in expat magnet areas like here near the SF Bay. Up against the Indians, the Korean, the Chinese, Russians welcome all other Russians- particularly if they’re selling cars, real estate, insurance, etc. etc. You speak Russian- you’re in.

Thanks, Sean. Once you mentioned it, I remembered that it was about Avigdor Liberman’s popularity that I’ve read before. Bad news. What an irony that many now remember Sharon as being too soft on the Palestinians. I’m disheartened at the thought of a jerk like Bibi becoming a PM once again. What a difference a few generations can make. During the early days Russian Jews were among the most progressives and now they are among the most reactionary.

Speaking of which, this is pretty cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAZFKhKUY7M&mode=related&search=

“I have noticed a stronger propensity of Russian (Rossiiskii) Jews to emphasize that they are more Jewish than Russian (Rossiiskii). Meaning that once they immigrate they suddenly find their Jewishness (I suspect that before being Jewish didn’t matter much) to the point where some even become religious. Whereas before considered themselves more Russian than Jewish, after immigration they suddenly buy into the Zionist idea of being part of a Jewish nation by virtue of their “blood” (however ethnically and culturally diluted it may be).”
_____________________________________________

Oh my, so many misconceptions, where to begin?

First of all, since we are talking about ethnicity, the appropriate term is Hebrews. As I understand, ‘blood’ makes one a Hebrew, religious devotion makes one a Jew.

Now, Hebrews in Russia never honestly identified as Russians. They knew very well they were Hebrews or ‘Evrei’ (negative word) and Russians never missed a chance to remind them they were nothing but ‘Zhidy’ (ethnic slur). There were many Hebrews who called themselves Russians in passports (yes, you had to state your ethnicity in your passport), but that was mostly survival technics, and they were despised even more by other ‘Russians’ for the crime of trying to assimilate. So Hebrews in Russia were always conscious about their ethnic identity, although quite often not by their own choosing.

What many Hebrew immigrants from the USSR still identify with is the ‘Soyuz’ (Union). Most of them were good Soviet citizens and still preserve good memories of the old ‘Soyuz’. This is understandable, because they contributed at least as much as anybody to the Soviet project and their lots were improved by it (for which many other ‘Russians’ never forgave them). So whatever good happened to them was thanks to ‘Soyuz’ and no thanks to ‘Russia’, which remained a hotbed of prejuidices and discriminations.

That’s why you may often come across an old Soviet Hebrew parading his old Soviet medals on May 9 in Santa Monica or Hollywood, on the way to the local Synagogue.

The issue of immigrants re-discovering religion of long neglected ancestors belongs in its own category.

Candide, this whole “Hebrew” thing sounds very strained. In the US Jews call themselves Jews, whether they are religious or not.

“evrei” is not a negative word.

They never called them Jews in Russia…

‘Evrei’ is not offensive per se, simply Russian form of ‘Hebrew’. But in Russia it was often used as an offensive epithet.

Candide, I know in Russia you say the equivalent of Hebrew, but in your comment it was not clear that you were limiting your comment to Russia:

“since we are talking about ethnicity, the appropriate term is Hebrews. As I understand, ‘blood’ makes one a Hebrew, religious devotion makes one a Jew.”

“Zhid” is a pejorative, but “evrei” is definitely not. Of course, any perfectly fine word can be used in a negative tone or manner, including “American”, “Russian”, “Mexican”.

In any event, does anyone here know when “zhid” became an ethnic slur? Most Jews became subjects of Russia when Poland was absorbed into Russia. And the word for Jew in Polish is “zhid” (zyd). Was it a pejorative when Pushkin used it? I don’t think so, but I’m not sure.

Sort of like “moskal”, right? Now it has a derogatory meaning, but it wasn’t always so.

You are absolutely right, Kolya.

‘Zhid’ was just a regular word, akin to German ‘Jude’, when Pushkin was using it. But now it is considered extremely offensive. Obviously, it came into Russian language from Poland and/or old Polish dominions in Ukraine. Strangely, in those lands the term ‘zhid’ is still perfectly decent, as everywhere else in Eastern Europe. For example, Jewish Museum in Prague is officially called ‘Zidovske muzeum v Praze’. To use the same name in Russia would be unthinkable. Apparently this term became an ethnic slur in Russia sometime during XIX-XX centuries.

‘Evrei’ was considered acceptable and used officially, but I also heard ‘evrei’ used in deragatory sense many times. It just was not such a good thing to be ‘Evrei’ in Russia. I particularly remember one young person that for quite a long time refused to believe that his own parents were ‘evrei’, so much negative connotations were associated with this term.

I was trying to alert Sean that the term ‘Russian Jew’ while it is commonly used in the US makes absolutely no sense in Russia. Just go anywhere in Russia and inquire about ‘Russkiy evrei’, and see what reaction will that elicit.

So Americans are confused about ‘Russian Jews’, just as they are confused about distinctions between Jew and Hebrew, just as they are confused about many other things. I blame Obama and American public education and demand vouchers. Yes, vouchers!

It’s not just according to your wife, it’s true. Nobody spoke Hebrew except in liturgical contexts for like a thousand years. It was a dead language until it was consciously resurrected about 150 years ago.

So Americans are confused about ‘Russian Jews’, just as they are confused about distinctions between Jew and Hebrew, just as they are confused about many other things.

Mentally retarded comment.

Of course in Russia, a local Jewish person is simple a ‘Jew’. However, as Jewish people come from many other regions of the world, it is foolish not to recognize there are cultural differences between a German Jew, an American Jew (even a NYC vs. California Jew) … or Russian and Ukrainian Jews.

There is no confusion on the use of this term – you are simply being a more than a little short-sighted and foolish yourself.

As I understand, ‘blood’ makes one a Hebrew, religious devotion makes one a Jew..

Again, I think this is a foolish comment and largely unnecessary due to the nature of the Jewish community and faith.

There are not large numbers of converts to Judaism. People can convert, of course, but my understanding is that it isn’t so simple as in many other faiths. The Jewish community around the world is fairly tight or closed, which is historically one of the reasons prejudice and distrust have been pointed in their direction. Judaism defines itself as a nation or people as well, citing biblical references and sources.

So to make this distinction between Hebrew and Jew is largely unnecessary. Perhaps you meant to make a different distinction, such as Sabra versus Jew.

Doom wonders if Sean has ever read Razgovor s varvarom, the book that alleged resulted in Klebnikov’s murder. It would be unpublishable in the US.

Gee, CD, you really don’t seem to have a grip on what is published or done on radio or TV here in the USA. Have you been away from the country so long that you’ve forgotten – or simply been brain-washed over time?

Just to start and scratch the surface of how wrong you are – consider for example the television interviews and books written from conversations with Tim McVeigh.

How about “Will You Die With Me? My Life and the Black Panther Party” by Flores Forbes?

You can’t possibly have forgotten about the US television interviews with Shamil Basayev?

I’m all for offering critical opinions of how things are done here in the US, but let’s stick to reality. Many interviews and books about and even written by terrorists are published in the US.

“Speaking of which, this is pretty cool: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAZFKhKUY7M&mode=related&search=”

I never thought I’ll see a moment in which I actually sympathize with Zhirinovsky. Thanks for the link, Chris.

“Gee, CD, you really don’t seem to have a grip on what is published or done on radio or TV here in the USA. Have you been away from the country so long that you’ve forgotten – or simply been brain-washed over time?”

I think you’re miscontruing my point, which was 1) that there is no market for such a book and 2) more importantly any translator would be wondering “gee, I wonder if I’ll wind up dead like the author.” Which is why it hasn’t been translated and probably never will be.

“Mentally retarded comment.”

Look here, Shedd, I ain’t gonna take that kind of lip from nobody!

First, my comment was intended as a joke and not to be taken seriously. But since you are dense enough to take it seriously, here is your opportunity to learn something, so make the best of it now.

You say, “Of course in Russia, a local Jewish person is simple a ‘Jew’.”

It was repeated many times and not only by me that there is no word ‘Jew’ in Russian language, the word there is ‘Evrei’ (Hebrew). So remember that. Just like in America nobody says ‘Hebrew’, in Russia nobody says ‘Jew’. Complete reversal, if you will. Why is that important? Because we are talking about people that grew up in and were defined by Russian cultural and linguistic milieu. So American idiom becomes useless here and Russian idiom becomes paramount. And in Russian language, distinctions are very clear: there are “evrei’ (with strong emphasis on ethnicity) and there are ‘iudei’ (with strong emphasis on religion) and they are not one and the same. Part of the reason for that is that while Americans never knew non-Hebrew Jews, Russians knew plenty through their history. Heck, there is a legend that Saint Vladimir was courted by Rabbis, Imams and Catholic priest when he was choosing religion for his subjects. So there was a chance the whole Russia could go ‘Iudei’. There was also powerful Khazar kaganat the young Russian state had many dealings with (Khazars were Tartars practicing Judaism). Interestingly, the term ‘iudei’ in Russian is not perjorative and may be even used respectfully.

If all that new knowledge, freely shared, doesn’t make you want to offer me an apology, you take that apology and stick it up your ‘tokhes’, all I can say.

I knew you were kidding, Candide, when you brought up vouchers : ) Also, Obama hasn’t taken office yet – so I got that joke too.

Thanks for the kind word, tess.

“(Khazars were Tartars practicing Judaism).”

No they weren’t. They were a Turkic empire that the elite of which adopted a variety Judaism for likely geopolitical reasons.

Thanks for the correction about Khazars being Turkic people. I fail to see the point of elite role. Of course elites had a big say. One might as well put that Kievan Rus elite adopted Byzantine Christianity “for likely geopolitical reasons”.

Because there is little evidence that the Khazar Empire adopted Judaism en masse. Its, er, ruling classes did. (Unlike say Rus’ adoption of Orthodoxy in which the old religion was wiped out.)

It took hundreds of years to make Russia nominally Christian. Paganism persisted for quite a while. Christianity was obviously imposed from the top, all historical records attest to that.

Also, I don’t know how well justified is the the categorical expression “wipe out”, considering that Christian veneer is covering ancient Pagan rites (and not only in Russia but in most old Christian countries). ‘Piggy-backing’ comes to mind, actually.