The press finally caught up with the eXile’s demise with the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, Fox News, the International Heral Tribune, the London Telegraph, UPI, among others, all reporting the story.  All of them  basically say the same information repeated ad nauseum, i.e. the irreverent paper folded after Russian inspectors scared off its investors. Even the Committee to Protect Journalists released a News Alert.    My favorite headline comes from Danwei from Hong Kong. “Death of the Rude Russian Exile,” its report reads.  As Jeremy Goldkorn, the piece’s author, points out,

As far as your correspondent knows, no foreigner has ever tried to publish anything like The Exile in China. The closest thing I have seen is the rather inward-looking and music obsessed Eight Inches of Arsehole, a photocopied zine that was distributed in bars in Beijing and amongst the expatriate hipster musician types and people with strong thoughts about Beijing expatriate magazines.

But it was photocopied, anonymous, and had no advertising or pretense of being commercial media. And they never touched politics.

Makes you wonder why Russia, and not China, is more the scourge of all freedom lovers.

It also makes me wonder why almost all of the reports listed above never mentioned the “e” word. Not even the lefty Mother Jones made the fact that the eXile was being audited for extremism an issue, despite hailing it as the “World’s Best Alt-Weekly” (the word only appears in a quote one of Ames’ Radar Online posts.) In fact, according to one of my handy dandy LexisNexis searches, extremism only appears into two articles on the subject.  One written by Ames himself and the BBC Monitoring Service’s translation of Limonov’s article.  How strange.  Especially since if anyone wants to make a bigger political issue out of the eXile’s demise, Russia’s elastic extremism law is surely the issue.

As for Ames’ whereabouts, we might want to dust off an old Where’s Waldo? games.  According to Ames’ latest dispatch, he could be in London (or even here in LA) or undergoing a water boarding session in a back room at Sheremetyevo.

Before Ames shipped out of Russia, he got the unique pleasure to debate Nashist and Duma rep Robert Schlegel on Moscow’s Govorit Moskva, 92.0 FM.  About a month and a half ago Schlegel tried to make his legislative mark by introducing a bill to further harden Russia libel law. President Medvedev shot him down.  Schlegel, as Ames describes him, “isn’t entirely human the way you and I are, but is rather some kind of genetically engineered Boys From Brazil product, created so that he might one day serve a cruel and scary tyrant.” Indeed.  If you take a look at Radar’s accompanying photo, you will see that no Russian has looked this Aryan since Ivan Drago.

The debate went as expected.  You can read a transcipt (in Russian) here.

Perhaps the most interesting mainstream article on the “eXile Affair” (If there can be a Litvinenko Affair why not an eXile one?), was an article in the Moscow Times (reprinted in the St. Petersburg Times) by Owen Mathews.  He argues that the eXile’s demise has much more symbolic meaning.  He writes,

The story of The eXile is the story of an earlier, pre-boom Moscow, before gourmet supermarkets and sushi restaurants sprouted on every corner. The eXile was born in a place that was dark, vibrant and absolutely compelling. The money, the sin and the beautiful people — it was doomed, apocalyptic and transiently beautiful. The incandescent energy of the pretty, deluded party kids whom the paper wrote about could have lit up this blighted country for a century if channeled into anything other than self-destruction and oblivion.

Perhaps the end of the eXile is symbolic of Russia crossing the Rubicon into a full fledged Putinian utopia.

After all the thrills, hype, endless column inches and rave reviews by the pundits, Russia’s Euro 2008 adventure came to an end tonight in a soaking wet Vienna. Tired, leaden-footed and without inspiration, Russia were thumped 3-0 by an excellent Spanish team who now look odds-on favourites to lift the trophy on Sunday night. Spain almost entirely dominated the match and were deserving winners. For the Russians the tournament is over. All that remains are their goodbyes to Austria-Switzerland and the journey home. But they can hold their heads high and be immensely proud of their achievements. For the first time since the birth of the modern Russian state in 1991 a Russian team has made an impact in what is by far the world’s most popular sport. Forget ice-hockey and the Olympics; only football will get everybody onto the streets. For football is closest to the Russian heart. Tonight those hearts were broken, but when their tears dry they’ll know their team has been a credit to the country and has put Russia back on the world football map. Tonight’s game was a bridge too far for their young and inexperienced team, but their football has lit up the championship and will be long remembered after Sunday’s final.

Russia began the game with Spain with just one change from the side that beat Holland, with Vasilli Berezutskii replacing the suspended Denis Kolodin. Spain inexplicably kept faith with David Silva and left Fabregas on the bench. This fact alone must have warmed Hiddink’s heart in the pre-match. Unfortunately that decision would be reversed very quickly and Russia would pay dearly for it.

The game started badly for the Russians with the Spanish entirely dominating the opening ten minutes. However Berezutskii held his own against Torres and eventually Zyrianov, Semak and Zhirkov began to win some ball in midfield and move it around at bit. However, this turned out to be the limit of Russian endeavour. Russia looked lead footed from very early on with Arshavin and Saenko making little or no forward runs as they had done in previous games. Indeed, the only Russian forward player who kept any pace with the Spaniards was Pavlyuchenko, who would plough a lone furrow all night. For the next twenty minutes Russia exchanged tit-for-at piecemeal attacks with the Spanish, but never looked like scoring or dominating.

On 33 minutes the defining act of the game occurred. David Villa went down with an injury and was replaced with Fabregas, Spain’s mercurial midfielder who bizarrely wasn’t picked from the start. From there on in the Spanish took control of the centre of the park. It was now just a case of ‘when’ and not ‘if’ for the Spaniards.

And the when duly came on 55 minutes when Xavi played a one-two with Senna to crack home a brilliant strike past Akinfeev. Russia were now totally out of the game.  The second blow arrived on 73 minutes when Guiza finished after an excellent through-ball from the dominant Fabregas. Fabregas then set up David Silva for the 3rd goal nine minutes later. The stats rarely lie –Russia, one shot on target, Spain had eleven. For Russia it was Goodnight Vienna.

There are many reasons for Russia’s defeat, and most of them will have merit in the argument. But the simple, most obvious fact and most compelling reason is that Russia are simply not as good as the Spaniards. After all the hype–which undoubtedly had an effect, especially on Arshavin, who played very poorly–Russia came up against a very skillful and highly experienced Spanish team, who, in spite of the best efforts of their incompetent, arrogant coach, are now on the cusp of greatness and a deserved European Championship trophy. Russia were also exhausted.  I hate to say I told you so, but Saturday’s match with Holland blew every spare effort Russia had.  There was just nothing left in the tank. Newspaper speculation about player transfers certainly was no help, nor were tales of children being named after coaches and players! For the young Russian team all this was new territory and they almost certainly buckled under pressure.

So, where to now for the Sbornaya Rossii? The great thing about football is that there’s always another game and another tournament around the corner, and the qualifiers for the World Cup begin in September. Hiddink will remain in charge, and though Russia won’t win it, we’re sure of another thrill-a-minute adventure in South Africa in Summer 08. To all Russia fans broken-hearted tonight – dry your tears and smile. Russia shall return!

Do Svidaniya, Rossiya!!

Russia tries to keep up the momentum as it looks to face Spain on Thursday.  Ger Clancy, our ever loving Irishman, breaks down Russia’s run and their chances for the cup.

After more than 16 years in the doldrums, Russian football is finally going places. Not since Euro ’88 have Russian footballers seen the second round of any international major tournament. Now their inspired victory over a highly-rated Dutch team, who had swept away all before them, has landed them a Euro 2008 semi-final spot against Spain. Sure, the Russians have not been without some good fortune in their quest. Nevertheless they are certainly deserving of a semi-final place and their attacking football in the last two games has won them over on the side of many neutrals. The Russians are a win away from a finals appearance, and two from a championship win. This was a possibility unthinkable a mere two weeks ago. But it was an outcome easily divined once coach Guus Hiddink’s brought in Andrei Arshavin (even though he was suspended for the first two games).  Hiddick’s move has defined Russia’s tournament.

If you would have suggested that Russia would be a semi-final contender two weeks ago would have been greeted with doubt if not raucous laughter.  After all, Russia couldn’t have begun the tournament any worse than they did in their opening game with Spain in Salzburg. In spite of a decent start, in which they held the ball well but lacked urgency, Russia conceded a very cheap goal when Fernando Torres skinned Denis Kolodin to set up David Villa. Everything went to pieces after that. The Spaniards eventually won 4-1, with Villa netting a hat-trick, a rare thing in international football and harsh lesson for the Russians. The Slavs performance was atrocious. Poor passing, no running off the ball, no pace to their game, and suicidal defending greased Spain’s victory. The Russians, however, would learn from the defeat.

Russia’s next match against Greece was a do-or-die game for both teams. Both had lost their opening games. The Greeks went down 2-0 to Sweden in an insipid performance. Although Russia improved immensely from the first match, their play was extremely nervous and uncertain. Their fate hinged on a goalkeeping disaster at 33 minutes when Nikopolodis charged rashly from his line to deal with a hopeless through ball from Bilyatidinov. Sergei Semak beat Nikopolodis and crossed the ball for Konstantin Zyrianov to push it into an empty net. It gave Russia 1-0 lead and the precious lifeline they desperately needed. The second half petered out into possibly the worst game of the tournament. The expected Greek lacked effort and their comeback never materialized. Three precious points for the Russians now meant a win against Sweden would take them through to the last eight.

Arshavin came back just in time to duel with the Swedes.  Russia looked immensely improved to battle their medieval rivals. After a shaky start, the Russians took control of the ball and hardly lost it for almost an hour.  By half, they had an unassailable 2-0 lead against a Swedish team which simply forgot to show up. Arshavin skinned Mellburg and Nillsonn time and again on the Swedish right, immediately validating Hiddick’s move to bring him onboard. After a number of misses Russia finally took the lead on 24 minutes when Anyukov crossed to an unmarked Pavluchenko who slotted home. Russia kept Sweden on the ropes until their second goal when Zhrikov crossed for Arshavin to calmly slot home.

Russia lost a lot of control in the game from that point on, easily and often surrendering possession, but there was no need to worry. Sweden’s strikers couldn’t hit the side of a barn.  Russia could have gobbled up more goals on the break, but 2-0 satisfied their hunger. And so, for the first time ever, a Russian national football team reached the second round of a major tournament. Finally some joy for their long-suffering fans.

Much has been written about Russia’s victory over Holland. And frankly, much of it is rubbish. There is no doubt Russia outplayed them, even embarrassed them. But much of the analysis fails to take a number of important factors into account. First, Holland went up in smoke. This is not unusual and football fans are well aware of the Dutch tendency to implode when the world is at their feet. Secondly, the management on the Dutch bench was as incompetent as it was lazy. No attempt was made to change things significantly, especially on the tactical front. It was clear from the start that Sneijder, Van Der Vaart and De Jong were being cleaned out by Ignashevich and Kolodin. Although Robbin Van Persie did come on at half time, Anyukov simply disappeared. The Dutch were also clearly exhausted and the Russians obviously much fitter.

None of this is to take away from Russia’s excellent performance.  It was probably the single best performance ever by a Russian national team. From early on they took the game to Holland and eventually were rewarded early in the second half when Semak crossed for Pavlyuchenko to score. From this point on, a Dutch comeback was expected but it never happened. Laboured, tired and listless, the Dutch were consistently beaten to 50/50 balls and were reduced to sporadic shots that went hopelessly wide or over. The Russians motored on and kept the Dutch at arms length in total comfort, until disaster struck right at the end when Van Nistelrooy headed an inswinger past Akinfeev from close in. That was hard blow to the Russians, but in extra time they took up where they left off and almost completely dominated in midfield. Early in the second period of extra-time, the Dutch finally collapsed when, for the umpteenth time Arshavin skinned Andre Oijer and crossed for Torbinskii to finish sweetly. A short time later Arshavin himself killed off the Dutch with a cool finish at the far post. With that, Moscow exploded.

So, can Russia really win it all? The Russians are now at the centre of much speculation and indeed betting, and they certainly can win the tournament. They are without a doubt the darlings of the championship and loved by neutrals for their attacking football. Beating the Dutch would have won them a lot of fans around Europe too. But is all this enough? A lot of comparisons have been made, especially with Greece in 2004, but I’m sure Hiddink would prefer another role model. Greece was the most unpopular winners ever, owing to their atrocious style of play. Russia in ‘08 is more like Denmark in 1992: swashbuckling, all-attack and hugely entertaining. There is no doubt the Russians can beat Spain, and may well do so.

Still, Russia is not without its problems. Kolodin and Torbinskii are suspended and the former is likely to be replaced by Vasilli Berezutskii, an off-form player who hasn’t kicked a ball in the tournament yet. He’s facing a long night marking Fernando Torres. Spain will be battled hardened and wily after their bruising encounter with Italy, and the Russian habit of standing off forwards and allowing them to run at Ignashevich and Berezutskii will be punished, just as Denis Kolodin was against the Greeks. Russia’s weakest link by far is their goalkeeper Akinfeev, who is surely the poorest left in the tournament. Also the game with Holland may have taken a lot out of the Russians both physically and mentally.  Performances as big as that are very difficult to follow up. Hiddink however, has, as usual, come up trumps so far, so too have the players and it may not be beyond the Russians to bring the cup home….

Vperyod, Rossiya!

Russia v Spain, Euro 2008 Semi-Final, Thursday June 26th 22.45 MSK, 19.45 GMT, 14.45 EST 11.45 PST

Ryaguzov claims he didn’t know Politkovskaya’s murder was in the making.  As for Gaitukaev, he was convicted earlier this year for the attempted murder of Gennady Korban, a Ukrainian financier with the company Privat.  He will sit in a cell for 13 years.  Finally, the third Makhmudov brother, Rustam, is still wanted by the police.

As you can see from the above list of people and their connections, the Russian authorities have a web of players, but still no killer or the murder’s contractor.

Sergei Sokolov, the editor of Politkovskaya’s paper, Novaya gazeta, stated that if you read the announcement closely, you’ll notice that the investigation is only completed into the named individuals.  The overall inquiry is far from over since  the killer and contractor still remain on the loose.  This view was reiterated in an editorial on the paper’s website.

Central to Novaya’s statement is who, for what purpose, and more importantly in whose interests was information about the investigaton leaked which might have allowed the killer, who is believed to either be Rustam Makdmudov or closely connected to him, to flee Russia and the murder’s contractor to cover his footprints? Back in April, Life.ru published a photo of Rustam Makhmudov, which Novaya believes was done intentionally to warn him that the police were on the hunt.  And where might the source of the leak reside?  Why in none other than someone in the FSB.

As for the truth of how this last assertion will pan out, that remains to be seen.

Also, since nothing is free in the world of capital, Harvey is asking for donations to keep the course online.

The class consists of 13 two hour videos. The first two are available. I present “Class 1, Introduction” below. I will post “Class 2, Chapters 1-2” tomorrow. Subsequent classes will appear as Harvey makes them available.

All of this sounds plausible and I applaud Tayler for not rehashing the usual Putin as tsar, blah, blah, blah. Some have pointed out that Medvedev was a coup against the siloviki. I’m not entirely convinced.

Tayler writes:

Prevailing over Sechin’s group was Medvedev’s “liberal” clan, which includes Viktor Cherkesov, chief of the Federal Drug Control Service; Viktor Zolotov, in charge of presidential security; the oligarch Roman Abramovich; and members of the “Family,” Yeltsin’s old clique.

Except Medvedev has no clan or at least not one with these people (Abramovich a clan member? That playboy? Please child!) If Medvedev did have his own clan, he wouldn’t need Putin. Medvedev’s clan, again if he had one, would probably come from his Leningrad law school people. As of yet, none of these people have risen up the ladder. They all have the same jobs they did before.

Another problem with Medevev’s faux clan is that Viktor Cherkesov is no longer the chief of the Federal Drug Control Service. Cherkesov was booted from that post. So was FSB head Patrushev (a Sechin clan member.) And if there really was a victory over the siloviki, then why did Patrushev get promoted to head Medevdev’s Security Council and Cherkesov demoted to buying guns? Not to mention, Sechin is still a Deputy Prime Minister? Oh, I know why. Because it wasn’t.

In fact, the government under Medvedev still looks like the one under Putin. A few seats have shuffled but the Board of Directors are basically the same.

And this brings me to another issue. There are Kremlin clans. No doubt. There are factions behind them walls. They snip at each other. They intrigue and plot. There seems to be “liberal” faction, as in economic liberals, not political ones, and a conservative faction. But Putin is not a target or really a member of neither. He is the force that keeps these people from going at each others throats, assuming that this is even probable.

I happen to think that Cherkesov statement in Kommersant when the Siloviki War broke into the press is important to remember. He said, “There can be no winners in this war, there is too much at stake.” Indeed. For everyone. There is a reason why these clan wars are keep behind closed doors. It’s better that the public not know about these things. Just think of it like an updated “democratic centralism.” You can argue, but business stays in the family.

By all indications, the Kremlin Mandarins are a mutually benefiting team. Individual members or even groups have their own interests and bailiwicks of power to protect. But protection must be done according to the rules.

Plus talk about danger of Putin being prosecuted for any corruption is simply poppycock. Or wishful thinking. No one in the Kremlin elite wants to make that kind of precedent. Cause if you kick one card out, the whole house could fall.

Oh, and one other thing. Note to Tayler: Putin didn’t emasculate state structures by appointing people loyal to him. There were no state structures to emasculate. The Russian state has always been weak and more reliant on personalities. Every Russian leader knows this which is why they appoint their minions, and have been doing it since Kievan Rus.

Or as N. I. Ezhov said in 1933, “The Party leads by appointing people. Power is not power if it cannot appoint people. Strength consists in the fact that we first of all keep the appointment of people and the nomenklatura system in our hands–this is the political expression of party leadership in its organizational form.”

He might as well have said this today.

For those living at the very bottom of Russian society, that trickle down is a fine mist. With costs of food, energy, and other staples rising that mist is leaving many Russian more and more parched. All the Russians can take comfort in is that they are not alone. With food riots in Haiti, Bangladesh and Egypt, fuel costs hitting pocket books the world wide, and a commodities bubble fueling the shebang, one can only wonder what will come next. For the Russians, its a sign that being part of the globalization block party isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. Medvedev may pirouette and motion to West as the source for the despair all he wants. But the nature of the economy can no longer be thought of in terms of states or even regions. It’s all connected making the latest global economic crisis structural in nature.

With rising inflation in Russia (up 5.3% in the last three months), those living at the poverty line are forced to make it by with less. According to the Russian State Department of Statistics, Rosstat, the minimum subsistence level in Moscow is 62 Euros a month (or about 95 in sinking dollars terms) . This is supposed to cover food, clothes, housing utilities, and transportation in the capital. As of 2006, 21.6 million (15.3%) of Russians live below this threshold. Just to add some perspective, a recent figure says that there are 131,000 millionaires in Russia. That’s about sixteen impoverished Russians to every one millionaire. Sixteen live on what every one minigarch throws down for decent sushi. Can living in Moscow on 62 Euros a month be done? If so, how?

For answers we have to turn to Polit.ru journalist Liz Surnacheva, who recently pulled a Barbara Ehrenreich to see if the seemingly impossible is indeed possible. She chronicled her travails in a three part series on Open Democracy. The latter recently teamed up with Polit.ru to provide a bit more comprehensive coverage of the Russian scene for the English reader.

In part one, Surnacheva quickly finds that Rosstat’s statistical “shopping basket” and what is actually possible to do with it are two different things. Also, she finds that livin’ on the line is not just about cheap food, its more about what one has to do to first find it and then not getting screwed over when you get it. Kiosks are cheaper, though you run the risk of getting cheated. Prices at supermarkets are “catastrophic.” “From now on,” Surnacheva writes, “everything that saves time is out: nothing oven-ready, and above all, no eating out. Breakfast cereals, yoghurt, sweetened curd cheese, buns, frozen ready-meals, pel’meni and pizzas have all become forbidden foods. Kinder, Kuchen, Kirche.” One day of shopping: 628 rubles 90 kopeks. 1552 rubles 80 kopecks left.

By the time part two is published, Surnacheva is down to 920 rubles 50 kopecks. Sick of the “soup selection,” she laments that she has no choice. “I can’t afford meat, poultry or fish.” The Moscow favorite business lunch is out and days at work are spent hungry. But what is most revealing is not that she’s not managing, but why. Here is her conclusions:

1. I’m inexperienced. This is my first attempt at living on so little money. The worst time in any crisis is the beginning, when you haven’t worked out a survival strategy.

2. I’m irrational. I can’t even turn the classic female trick of making a salad and a scandal out of nothing. My grasp of energy and nutrition values is weak. 2000 calories still means half a kilo of sugar to me rather than so much cereal, milk and meat. Apparently I even use carrots inefficiently - I’ve had readers explaining to me that that the body can’t digest raw carrots without fat.

3. I haven’t got my bearings. I haven’t a clue where to get things cheap, or what to buy. In the first week I discovered that a perfectly fresh carrot that’s broken is half the price, and that apples that cost 15-20 rubles per kilo do exist - they just don’t look so great. For me, the word ‘meat’ means an expensive cut, and I haven’t yet learned what to do with cheaper cuts, bones and offal.

4. I don’t belong to the local network. Those who live on really limited means belong to a sort of informal club, whose members know where, what and how much. The moment cheap dairy products appear on a neighbouring stall or good cheap meat in the market, its members find out about this from one another. Outsiders like me only get to hear about these bargains by accident.

5. I live alone. Of course it’s a bit different for families- wholesale is cheaper. I went to this conference on regional poverty a month or so ago. The researchers noted something interesting: people always think of pensioners as the group most at risk of poverty. Actually, the group most at risk are families with children. Without going into the reasons (discrimination against single mothers, tv propaganda about programmes of social support etc) I must admit I made this assumption myself when I took on the role of lonely pensioner for this experiment. True, it would have been complicated trying to simulate being a family with lots of children - I might have had to starve the entire editorial team of Polit.ru.

Apparently living poor isn’t just about surviving, it’s about surviving artfully.

In part three, it’s day twenty and Surnacheva is down to 583 rubles, 70 kopecks. Life is consumed with a new consciousness of prices and looking for alternatives and substitutes (margarine for butter, damaged fruit and vegetables for fresh ones, and organ meats–liver, kidneys, and bones–for quality meats). Other items are put into perspective. “I could live for half a day on dictaphone batteries, and as for a ticket for the Paul Anka concert at the Kremlin, I’d last almost six months on that.”

Advice from babushkas on the street and readers begins pouring in. “Eat ground elder and dandelions. Sunbathe. Make rusks. Buy sea kale. Make friends with some Uzbeks and eat pilaf. Plant Jerusalem artichokes,” a reader suggests. Students tell her to eat “lots of kasha,” pop vitamins instead of fruits and veggies, and processed and canned meats instead of the real deal. Heroin chic devs write in urging a diet plan where eating less is more. A spoonful of cottage cheese for breakfast and soup for dinner. Surnacheva admits she could live on six days with a diet like that. But for your average person? Forget it.

By day 31 she’s down to 18 rubles. Even her colleagues at Polit.ru began feeling sorry for her. Invitations to lunch and offers of food began to pour in. The desire to be fed restaurant food even leads her to agree to a date.

In the end, Surnacheva survived one month on Rosstat’s “shopping basket.” Barely. Proving that living in poverty is as much about how you live than what you have to live with.  “I did survive,” she concludes, “but I won’t be doing it again.”

If only 20 million or so Russians had such a choice.