Daily Archives: June 2, 2006

And Russians Say AMERICAN Adoptions are Dangerous???

RIA Novosti reports that it’s more than 25 times as dangerous for a Russian child to be adopted by Russians than to adopted by a foreigner:

MOSCOW, May 29 (RIA Novosti) – A Moscow children’s rights expert said Monday that 1,220 Russian children adopted by Russians had died since 1991, including 12 killed by their foster parents.Galina Semya said that 116 cases of serious physical abuse had been registered in the same period, with 23 cases of serious physical abuse by foster parents.

Adoption has been in the political spotlight recently following a string of high-profile abuse cases involving Russian children adopted by foreigners that have prompted calls to tighten up regulation of adoption procedures.

“Since 1991, five children adopted by foreigners have been killed, and 16 have died in accidents,” Semya said, adding that another 119 children had been returned to Russia.

American citizen Peggy Sue Hilt, 34, was sentenced Thursday to 25 years in prison for killing her adopted two-year-old Russian daughter, originally named Viktoria Bazhenova, in a fit of fury.

Last week, Sergei Apatenko of the Education Ministry said independent adoptions of Russian children by foreign citizens would be banned in Russia by the end of this year in the wake of the incidents.

Apatenko also said foreign families had adopted 64,000 Russian children since 1999, when foreign adoptions were allowed in the country, whereas Russian families had adopted 157,000 children.

He called for adoption procedures in Russia to be simplified to reduce the number of foreign adoptions.

Russians Say Zhirinovksy Should be Next President

A recent public opinion survey from the Levada center has found that Russia’s top preference to succeed Vladimir Putin is the even more maniacal Vladimir Zhirinovsky, shown here meeting with fellow genocidal maniac Sadaam Hussein. The linked biography notes: “Zhirinovsky praised Adolf Hitler’s ideology of National-Socialism in an Izvestia article. One of his books, The Last Thrust to The South, advocates military aggression against Russia’s Southern neighbors as a way of achieving political stability in the region. He made headlines by threatening to take Alaska back from the United States, nuke Japan, and flood Germany with radioactive waste.” In the survey, the “against all ” option was the only one more popular than Zhirinovksy but, conveniently, the Kremlin is now in the process of abolishing that option from the ballot as yet one more part of establishing the Neo-Soviet Union in Russia. Recently, Zhirinovsky was banned from even entering Ukraine.

LR Milestones: 2-200-300-500-2,500

*************************************************************

La Russophobe takes this opportunity to wish herself a happy 2-month anniversary, which occurs today.

She also congratulates herself on this, her 200th post.

She also notes gratefully her 300th profile view a few days ago, and thanks readers for their continuing support and contributions.

Over the weekend La Russophobe will likely collect:

Her 500th Google hit

Her 2,500th visit to this blog

**************************************************************

The Rise of Neo-Soviet Militarism

Reuters reports that Russia intends to spend over $20 billion per year for the next nine years buying new weapons systems (mind you, that’s just a fraction of the total military budget). That’s $140 per Russian per year in a country where the average salary is $300 per month and the population is declining by 700,000 to 1 million every year. Incidentally, this kind of maniacal military spending is what bankrupted the USSR and caused it to disappear. La Russophobe dares to wonder what will replace Russia when the same thing happens again. Meanwhile, Reuters also reported that the Kremlin has called for an investigation of how the presence of foreign investment in Russia damages its security, with an eye towards “the idea of taking control of huge energy projects in Russia’s Far East from Royal Dutch Shell and ExxonMobil , raising comparisons with South American-style resource nationalism.”

Racism? Homophobia? Imperialism? Totalitarianism? Nah, that’s Just Western Jealousy

Remember the Russian pundit who said homophobia was just a Western ploy to undermine Russia’s security? The Moscow Times reports that Russians have decided that they aren’t doing anything wrong, it’s just that we in the West are jealous of their awesome power. You know, falling population, $300/month incomes, totally friendless but for a ragtag clan of maniacal dictatorship, that sort of thing. We can’t have it, so we can’t stand that Russia does:

Western leaders who have yet to come to terms with a newly enriched, and newly empowered, Russia are largely to blame for the strain in relations with Moscow.

That was the consensus of most Russian officials, public figures and political analysts — including many regarded as pro-Western — at a one-day conference Tuesday at Moscow’s Ararat Park Hyatt hotel.

“I am an avid supporter of developing relations with the West,” Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, said at the beginning of the conference. “But the West should not be telling Russia that it is headed in the wrong direction.”

Lilia Shevtsova, a political analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center, and Viktor Kuvaldin, a political analyst with the Gorbachev Foundation, said the foreign relations model adopted by the West in the 1990s needed to be revised.

“The model in which Russia imitates democracy and the West responds by imitating partnership has died out,” Shevtsova said.

Moscow’s expectations have dramatically changed, Shevtsova said.

Russians now expect the West not to meddle in their internal politics and in their relations with former Soviet republics, and they demand that the West acknowledge that Russia’s oil and gas reserves are a legitimate foreign-policy tool, she explained. Shevtsova added that West’s approach in these areas was diametrically opposed to Russia’s.

Political leaders from Washington to Brussels have voiced concern about the Kremlin’s abolition of the election of governors, increased oversight of the media and use of the energy sector to influence events in Ukraine and Georgia, among other issues.

The United States, in particular, is upset with Russia for opposing sanctions against Iran as it pursues its uranium-enrichment program.

William Burns, the U.S. ambassador to Russia, told conference participants that U.S.-Russia relations were not in great shape, but he stressed that it was in the interest of the whole world for the two countries to work together on nuclear energy and other sensitive issues.
And Marc Franco, head of the European Commission’s Russia delegation, warned the Kremlin not to spark a new Cold War with the West.

Participants were split on whether Russian leaders’ anti-Western rhetoric reflected public thinking or whether that rhetoric was a tool used by politicians to consolidate their power.
A poll released this month by the independent Levada Center showed Russians steadily losing confidence in the West: As of April, 8 percent of Russians favored closer ties with the United States, compared to 13 percent three years earlier.

Analogously, 24 percent favored stronger relations with Western Europe as of last month, while 32 percent felt that way in April 2003. The recent survey included 1,600 respondents and had a margin of error of less than 3 percent.

Shevtsova ruled out a confrontation between the West and Russia, given their interdependence. But she said that “misunderstanding and grumbling” were inevitable.

The latest “misunderstanding” came at last week’s summit in Sochi between European Union leaders and President Vladimir Putin.

The parties failed to hammer out an agreement on opening access to their natural gas pipelines and other energy infrastructure. The summit was viewed as a dress rehearsal for the Group of Eight’s July summit in St. Petersburg.

Russia’s intellectual elite have also grown weary of the Western media’s portrayal of the country as backward, said Ella Pamfilova, head of the Council for Fostering the Development of Civil Society.

They are also dismayed by the hypocrisy of U.S. leaders who castigate Russia for backsliding on democracy while praising some post-Soviet authoritarian regimes for being democratic, Pamfilova said.

She was apparently referring to recent remarks made by U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney, in Vilnius, Lithuania.

Pamfilova also warned that the United States, in criticizing Russia, might help the country elect an anti-Western president in 2008.

Conference participants also took aim at the country’s Byzantine bureaucracy and its hostility to nongovernmental organizations. Russia has been heavily criticized in the West for its recently adopted law regulating NGOs.

Steven Solnick, head of the Ford Foundation’s Moscow office, complained that in Russia the government had the right to send a letter to the his foundation demanding that it not fund a given project.

“It’s like the metro,” Solnick said. “In New York, you put your pass through and the gates open, and you can go ahead. Here, in Moscow, you put your pass in and the gates open, but right as you’re about to go through, they close.”

Russian Cuisineski? Gag me with a Spoonski!

New York City, as most people know, is one of the world’s leading restaurant meccas, if not the top bannanas Foster.

What’s more, as most people know, New York is home to a large population of Russian speakers, residing in the seaside region of Southern Brooklyn known as Brighton Beach.

It must be surprising, then, to learn that the New York Times, the city’s leading arbiter of restaurant savoir-faire, lists only eleven restaurants serving Russian cuisine, and one of them is closed. Of the ten that are open, only two have been reviewed by the Times and only three have received reviews from Times readers. Both of the restaurants reviewed by the Times received only two stars out of four, and one of them is a hybrid restaurant serving both Russian and New American cuisine, focussing on caviar on the Russian side rather than actual cuisine.

Twice as many African restaurants are listed than Russian, three times as many Korean restaurants are listed and five times more Vietnamese.

This is what some commenters from Menupages had to say about Firebird, the most significant “Russian” restaurant in the City according to the Times (not a single Times reader, the world’s most famous “foodies,” commented on the place):

  • Went with my Russian girlfriend. We were disapointed in the quality of the food. The food was very basic, certainly not worth the price. The service was nice. The high point of the evening was the honey vodka. Unfortunately, the food did not live up to our hopes and expectations.
  • One has to understand that high-end Russian food is really French in its origin. That is why acclaimed Russian restaurants like Petrosian in NYC or Maxim’s in Paris are French first and Russian only in their choices of caviar, etc… And one of the reasons why Firebird fails to impress people who know and appreciate food is because it tries to pass a more ethnic type of food for high-end cuisine. Nothing wrong with ethnic food mind you, it can be delicious and rewarding, but you better off getting it in a Russian restaurant that aspires to that type of cuisine. As for the $30 borscht, my grandma can cook one just as good, and it’s free!
  • The place is fancy but the food is very basic and nothing special. It’s not worth the money and there are better places to go for russian food.
  • There are a few very good Russian restaurants in the NYC area but this is not one them. The food is disappointing, the prices are very high and the decor is high kitsch.

In other words, yuck! Russian cuisine (if, as one commenter above notes, it even can be said to really exist, as opposed to being French or Ukrainian or Georgian) is like Russian athletics which is like Russia itself: unreformed, unrepentant and therefore an unmitigated failure.

And apparently, Russians like it that way just fine. How much longer they’ll have the luxury of doing so is anybody’s depressing guess.

Russia + Computers = ?

Here’s an interesting article by a noted computer business expert asking whether any countries other than America could create a Silicon Valley. It’s very long article. It doesn’t even mention Russia once. Apparently, not worth considering.

Sharapova the Scrooge

According to Forbes magazine, Maria Sharapova had an income last year of $18.2 million, making her the 62nd highest paid celebrity and the wealthiest female athlete in the world.

Guess how much she donated to charity. Come on, La Russophobe dares you. Go on, guess.

You know that Maria comes from humble beginnings in Siberia. You know that her country has an average wage of $300 per month and a declining population suffering from all manner of dire maladies. You know she should be insanely grateful to her adopted home, America, which has afforded her both training and merchandising.

Here’s the answer, provided by a puff piece on Maria from Australia:

When she heard news of the Beslan school massacre last year in which Chechen rebels slaughtered 344 people – most of them children – the Siberian-born Muscovite immediately fashioned black ribbons for her fellow Russians on the women’s tour and auctioned off the Porsche she received as part of her prize for winning the end-of-season WTA Championship title, raising over $US56,000 ($73,700) for the appeal. “Each of us must do what we can do,” she said. Sharapova, it has to be conceded, does more than most. After her Beslan initiative, she took part in a charity exhibition match to help victims of the Florida hurricane, and personally handed over a $US10,000 cheque to the Thai prime minister when she flew into Bangkok 48 hours after the tsunami disaster.” Every individual can have a big impact,” she says. “It is very important, if you get a chance, to help in any way you can. I am fortunate to make a good living, but you never know what can happen tomorrow.”

Let’s see now: $73,700 + $10,000 = $83,700

That’s 0.4% of her income. Of that, only $10,000 was money that actually came out of her own pocket. And not one red cent was donated to America, just played a charity game.

Hey, big spender, spend a little time with me!

Incidentally, the puff piece does not contain one single word about the quality of Maria’s TENNIS playing, due no doubt to the fact that her opening match at the French Open was a near disaster where she only barely managed to stave of defeat to an unseeded American in three closely fought sets.

PS: Now, I ask you, does that picture look completely ridiculous, or what? She says in the article that she doesn’t WANT to be a model, too “boring.” As if, Maria baby, as if.