A great translator is worth more than 2kg of pig meat

One way to learn another language, beyond the cliched advice of sleeping with a translator (and I don’t knock this suggestion!), is to write a story that is important to you and then have a team of professional translators – with deep idiomatic knowledge of your mother tongue – interpret it into their language in a dual column document, so you can go through the text, line by line, word by word, and begin to feel and see your thoughts and emotions in their words.

I had the good fortune to work with a team from The Russian Translation Company (RPK), when preparing my memoir, How Not to Become a Spy, for publication in Russia. Ten years later, we all remember the fun and learning we had together. Below is a blog from my friends at RPK.

“A Worthy Excuse”

By Anna Dik

The Russian Translation Company

Anna Dik, Ekaterina Khomyakova and Ksenia Kostrova, RPK (They deserve an award for surviving six months of “cooperation” with Justin)

Several years ago, we were given the wonderful opportunity to translate Justin Lifflander’s story How Not to Become a Spy into Russian. The book is autobiographical, funny, and instructive, telling the story of a young American living in the Soviet Union. What makes it particularly compelling is that it was quite literally written from the personal experience of the author. As such, it presents a view of the dying days of the Soviet Union from the inside… and a little from the outside, too. And it comes close to our ideals – that it is better to be friends than to quarrel. We had a great time translating the book. Justin turned out to be a sweet guy: he eagerly offered explanations, praised our creative translations, introduced us to the prototypes of his characters, and invited us to his place. And at times he was even inspired by us to rewrite parts of the original.

One of the episodes in Justin’s book recounts the story of how he met his future father-in-law. Worried about “losing face” in front of a foreigner – and one who may very well become his son-in-law – the bride’s father decided to slaughter the family piglet Borka and give the young couple a kilogram of lard and the same amount of meat as a gift. The image of his girlfriend’s dad, a hulk of a man, standing in the doorway carrying a bag with Borka’s bloody head peering out was more than a little intimidating. Justin’s girlfriend (who had a six-year-old son from her first marriage; yes, she had some life experience behind her) would later confide to him that the slaughtered creature had been her childhood playmate. 

Aleksandr Genadevich Zotov, Justin’s Father-In-Law

Ksenia and I are city girls, so we didn’t spot where Justin had messed up; we diligently translated and edited what we had read. But Katerina, who spent every summer in the countryside, keeled over with laughter.

“A middle-aged pig! They’re butchered before they finish their first year, well, maybe third. But certainly not thirtieth! And what does ‘A kilogram of lard and the same amount of meat’ mean? The absurdity of it! Pigs weigh, like, dozens of kilograms! Yeah right, dad was trying to impress his daughter’s suitor…

Borka had a privileged childhood, until….

We tried to explain to the Justin, as delicately as we could, why our colleague Katerina was in bent over in laughter. He offered the following justification:

“I mean, he came alone. It must have been heavy for him!”

These words only caused another bout of hysterical laughter: 

“The poor broad-shouldered bugger! Dragged two whole kilograms of meat! Its head must’ve weighed at least five! And why would he take a bloody head with him anyway? To test the suitor’s mettle?”

Giving one’s life for a good cause… (source Freepik)

Justin was forced to admit that his memory of the event was rather fuzzy, as they’d been drinking quite heavily that evening to mark their first meeting. And his wife (you know, Borka’s friend) confirmed that the translators were, in fact, right – she didn’t have the heart to upset her partner, as he’d retold the story so beautifully. So, under the watchful eye of our resident expert on country life, the text was put into a more plausible form: the piglet was posthumously made much younger, and the weight of the lard and meat were obscured. Perhaps in doing so we robbed someone of the chance to have a good, hearty laugh at the implausibility of it all. But at least the author’s integrity was saved. And that’s worth a great deal!    

“Here’s to you, Mr. Robbins!” …an ode to the late author

American novelist Tom Robbins died this week at the tender age of 92.

(wikipedia)

I discovered the works of this brilliant man in the early phase of middle age, when we look around and question what we have and where we are going. I felt blessed to have Tom’s voice in my ear, sharing his joyful, absurd, and yet deeply solid philosophical view on the questions I was (and still am) wrestling with.

Below I share notes from two of my favorite Robbins novels. Page number in parentheses.

Skinny Legs and All was published in 1990. It talks about the “seven veils” of society – the big issues we all deceive ourselves about and the challenges and joy we can experience by lifting those veils, or at least acknowledging them and the hypocrisy they protect. Of course, Robbins reveals these insights through glorious characters:  The newlywed artists Ellen Cherry Charles and Randolph "Boomer" and their journey across America and geopolitics. Along the way Robbins evokes tears, joy and nausea as he portrays the full spectrum of humanity: outmoded gender and cultural roles and rituals, insecurity, lust, guilt, indulgence, gluttony, occultism, war, violence, hypocrisy, greed, psychosis and love.

Tom Robbins: Skinny Legs and All

(The Dance of the Seven Veils, as performed by Salome before King Herod, in the painting byArmand Point, 1898, wikipedia)

The messiah will come when he is no longer needed. Franz Kafka

—The First Veil: conceals the repression of the Goddess; masks the sexual face of the planet, drapes the ancient foundation stone of erotic terror that props up modern man’s religion. (46) (JL: see ref: church celibacy, etc)

—“Imprecise speech is one of the major causes of mental illness in human beings.” Tom Robbins, Skinny Legs and All (63)

—Slang just makes people more stupid, that’s all, and stupidity eventually makes them crazy.

—Regarding the Middle East: Was it simply a desperate and at times violent clinging to narrow, rigid belief systems that had brought so much suffering to the region? (75)

—The Second Veil: Is it not time that inanimate objects—and plants and animals—resume their rightful place in the affairs of the world? How long can humankind continue to slight these integral pieces of the whole reality? (77)  Humanity was a function of nature. It could not, therefore, live separately from nature. It could not live in opposition to nature-a schizophrenic crime. It could not blind itself to the wonders of nature (404)

—On her small canvas she recreated a section of the Crazy Mountains, the range near Livingston that they had admired earlier that day. That is to say she recreated the mountains not as she had originally seen them, but as she eventually chose to see them, for a person has not only perceptions but a will to perceive, not only a capacity to observe the world but a capacity to alter his or her observation of it…which, in the end, is the capacity to alter the world itself. Those people who recognize that imagination is reality’s master, we call “sages,” and those who act upon it, we call “artists.”(91)

—As long as you are not afraid, nobody can run your life for you. Hell is being scared of things. Heaven is refusing to scared. (JL: see ref. 1984)

—The Third Veil: permits political expediencies (usually transitory, often stupid, regularly corrupt) to masquerade as timeless universal expressions of freedom, virtue and good sense. (119) Humanity’s problems are primarily philosophical….until they are solved, the political problems would have to be solved over and over again. “Vicious circle” describes the ephemeral effectiveness of almost all political activity. For the ethical, political activism was seductive because it seemed to offer the possibility that one could improve society, make things better, without going through the personal ordeal of rearranging one’s perceptions and transforming one’s self. For the unconscionable, political activism was seductive because it seemed to protect one’s holdings and legitimize one’s greed. Of course, as long as there were willing followers, there would be exploitive leaders. And there would be willing followers until humanity reached that philosophical plateau where it recognized that its great mission in life had nothing to do with any struggle between classes, races, nations or ideologies, but was rather a personal quest to enlarge the soul, liberate the spirit and light up the brain. (405)

(photo Jim Watson/AFP)

—Jerusalem: the most holy and spooky place in the world.

—The Fourth Veil: Religion. It is a paramount contributor to human misery. It is not merely the opium of the masses; it is the cyanide. (167) Religion is nothing but institutionalized mysticism. The catch is that mysticism does not lend itself to institutionalization. The moment we attempt to organize mysticism we destroy its essence. …not only is (religion) divisive and oppressive, it is also a denial of all that is divine in people; it is a suffocation of the soul.        Religion attempted to reduce the divine to a knowable quantity with which mortals might efficiently deal, to pigeonhole it once and for all so that we never had to reevaluate it. (407)

(NBC News)

—“Soul” is hot and heavy. “Spirit” is cool, abstract, detached. Soul is connected to the earth and its waters. Spirit is connected to the sky and its gasses. (168)

—One tended to lose one’s bearings in the presence of willful and persistent acts of craziness, and the more gentle the act, the crazier it seemed…as if rage and violence, being closer to the norm, were easier to accommodate. (195) (JL: referring to a scene in which children tease an autistic peer, Turn Around Norman)

—People tend to take everything too seriously. Especially themselves. That’s probably what makes them scared and hurt so much of the time. Life is too serious to take that seriously. (204)

(Arthur Sasse/UPI)

—Anthropologists call it territorial imperative (baboon bravado dance); politicians call it national interest. (220) (JL: why does it seem modern politicians have to wear flag pins on their lapels? Perhaps they need to be reminded who they are serving?!)

—The Fifth Veil: Money. Almost from its inception it had perplexed and befuddled those in whose lives it appeared, and although modern people were used to it…they were no closer to understanding it than they had been at the beginning. It clouds vision like a … veil. (230)  The loony legacy of money was that the arithmetic by which things were measured had become more valuable than the things themselves. (408)

—“Can a woman who does not know the contents of her handbag know the contents of her heart?” (279)

—The Sixth Veil: belief in an afterlife. Nobody knows if there is one, except the dead. And they aren’t talking. As long as a population can be induced to believe in a supernatural hereafter, it can be oppressed and controlled. People will put up with all sorts of tyranny, poverty and painful treatment if they’re convinced they’ll eventually escape to some resort in the sky. (305) A world leader who is convinced that life is merely a trial for the more valuable and authentic afterlife is less hesitant to risk starting a nuclear holocaust. To emphasize the afterlife is to deny life. To concentrate on heaven is to create hell. The 6th veil conceals not a blank clock, but a relieved expression on our own faces as we meet ourselves coming from the opposite direction, free to enjoy the present at last because we are no longer fettered by the future that is history.

(The men with the nuclear “football".” Reuters)

—Regarding the passionate romance between the younger Ellen and the older Spike:  Spike Cohen was good at comforting her. Spike Cohen was good, in general. No starry-eyed old fool, he hadn’t lost his head, begged her to marry him, been jealous of every younger man who crossed their path, or showered her with expensive gifts. Maybe he wasn’t Tarzan in bed, but he wasn’t Cheetah, either. Any lack of athletic torque or acrobatic flex was compensated for by his tenderness, sensitivity and attentiveness. (327)

(old Bogie, young Bacall)

—Regarding New York City artists: Every other person on the street was a failed consort of one muse or another. One met them everywhere. The would-be guitarist who just couldn’t find the time to practice; the would-be novelist who developed an allergy to solitude…the would-be poet who found it easier to get drunk on booze than on language. (360)

—Flushed with the ruddy concerns of their (male) gender: possession, profit and conquest. (401)

—PUDENDUM

—What about Judgement day? EVERY day is judgement day. Always has been, always will be. Anything else? Yes…the dead are laughing at us. (410)

—The Seventh Veil: that you can get someone else to do it for you….. the priest, rabbi, imam, swami, philosophical novelist…were traffic traffic cops, at best. They might direct you through a busy intersection, but they wouldn’t follow you home and park your car… Each and every single individual had to establish his or own special, personal particular, unique…hands on relationship with reality, with the universe, with the divine.  It might be complicated, it might be a pain in the ass, it might be, most of all, lonely...but it was the bottom line. It was as different for everybody as it was the same, so everybody had to take control of their own life, define their own death, and construct their own salvation. And when you finished, you didn’t call the Messiah. He’d call you. (413)

…Bonus! A few choice words from…

Jitterbug Perfume, by Tom Robbins

The story’s heroes: Alobar & Kudra (millennial time travelling lovers); Dr. Danny Boy (aka Tim Leary)

—Pointing out that their breathing, bathing, dining and screwing brought Alobar and Kudra much physical pleasure, and that an organism steeped in pleasure is an organism disposed to continue, he has said that the will to live cannot be overestimated as a stimulant to longevity.  Indeed, Dr Dannyboy goes so far as to claim that ninety percent of all deaths are suicides. Persons, say Wiggs, who lack curiosity about life, who find minimal joy in existence, are all too willing, subconsciously, to cooperate with—and attract- disease, accident, and violence. (197)

(Gustav Klimt)

—Alobar: “Whatever else his long, unprecedented life might have been, it had been fun. Fun! If others could find that appraisal shallow, frivolous, so be it. To him it seemed now to largely have been some form of play. And he vowed that in the future, he would strive to keep that sense of play more in mind, for he’d grown convinced that play—more than piety, more than charity or vigilance –was what allowed human beings to transcend evil. (322)

(Justin aka "Humanitarian Clown Zhorik" PLAYING with his fish-phone while greeting incoming international clowns at Sheremetyevo airport)

—The most intense spiritual experiences all seem to involve the suspension of time. It is the feeling of being outside of time, of being timeless, that is the source of ecstasy in meditation, chanting, hypnosis, and psychedelic drug experiences. Although it is briefer and less lucid, a timeless, egoless state (the ego exists in time, not space) is achieved in sexual orgasm, which is precisely why orgasm feels so good.

(Charles Bukowski, wikipedia)

—Even drunks, in their crude, inadequate way, are searching for the timeless time. Alcoholism is an imperfect spiritual longing.

—When you're unhappy, you get to pay a lot of attention to yourself. And you get to take yourself oh so very seriously. Your truly happy people, which is to say, your people who truly like themselves, they don't think about themselves very much. Your unhappy person resents it when you try to cheer him up, because that means he has to stop dwellin' on himself and start payin' attention to the universe. Unhappiness is the ultimate form of self-indulgence.

(Patch Adams bringing happiness to a Moscow airport)

If There Is Cyber Warfare, Why Not Cyber Diplomacy?

Springtime, 33 years ago: the US Embassy Moscow was a beehive of activity as we prepared for the visit of President Ronald Regan (see related photo essay). He met Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. They exchanged ratified copies of the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty – which eliminated an entire category of nuclear missiles. A month later, in July of 1988, the unthinkable happened. Military inspectors from both sides, many of whom were intelligence officers, began arriving in the opposing country to verify missile locations, observe elimination and take up residence at the front gate of their enemy’s most secret rocket factory, deep in the heartland.  It was a triumph of imagination and leadership.

American and Russian flags at the gate of the Votkinsk Missile Factory

 Can the two current leaders manage their domestic constituents and constraints, summon the courage and vision and formulate a treaty in which each side gets access to the global internet exchange points of the other country in order to monitor cyber-attacks?

It would be like the NSA opening a virtual branch-office next to Red Square; or Moscow’s 400-pound cyber-intel officer sitting on his bed hacking away at the personal life of every American.

As this idea germinated into an article, I applied to my friend and mentor Glenn Altschuler for his usual rigorous edit and advice on where to try to hawk my thought-piece. To my joyful surprise, Glenn agreed to co-author the article – which I knew meant he would add insightful insight and I’d get a free lesson in how to write a professional op-ed. The article is now published on the well-respected American publication, The History News Network.

Space race, arms race, vaccine race –there is no doubt both countries can overcome the technical challenges and create cyber treaty. And most people should have already given up on the illusion of privacy beyond their four walls.  Who cares whether it’s the NSA or the GRU that knows which foreign websites you look at?

But what about the political will? If the West wants to see a less aggressive Russia it has to take the country’s national interests into account: a superficial respect for Russian values and leaders; appreciating the sensitivity to border encroachment (formerly known in the West as “spheres of influence”); and the ever-hypocritical commentary on internal affairs.  The Biden-Putin dynamic is not off to a good start, but then again neither was Regan and Gorbachev’s. And least Reagan didn’t insult his counterpart and all his ancestors by likening him to Hitler, as Hilary did.

If Biden can leave Putin with the idea that he at least understands (without necessarily agreeing with) Russian interests when they meet next month, that would be a start. Meanwhile, Putin and his circle have to decide how far they are willing to push the envelope without truly damaging what they perceive to be national interests. Sanctions are one thing, but being cut off from SWIFT, cancelling Ivan Ivanovich’s visa-free vacation in Turkey or Egypt or pushing Ukraine into NATO’s arms are a different matter.

In the article I state that a digital iron curtain is descending. Some Western internet service providers and web hosting companies are, understandably, beginning to block all Russian IP addresses to protect their customers. I’m unable to track the adventures of my favorite clown-doctor at patchadams.org without a VPN. Ironically, last fall I accessed westchestergov.com to order my absentee ballot. But now that’s blocked, too. Is this just a pleasant side effect or part of a greater strategy of Kremlin isolationists to get the enemy to do their job for them? It’s for them to know and us to (probably never) find out.

Should the diplomats find the courage to create a monitorable digital truce, what will we do with all the newly unemployed cyber warriors? Some will participate in the treaty monitoring effort. Others will get jobs with Cyberdyne, refocus their energy and genius and switch to building SkyNet and the first Terminators. Meanwhile, our leaders can focus their newfound cooperation on solving real problems – climate change (Zombie fires burn in Siberia and North America), terrorism…and the threat from unchecked artificial Intelligence.    

Visual mementos of the Moscow summit between US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev May 29-June 3, 1988

The world will be watching carefully as US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin have their first meeting, set to take place in Geneva on 16 June. The context and accessories of such meetings are often as exciting as the content itself. And maybe this will be the start to a gradual improvement in relations.

As a driver-mechanic at the US Embassy in Moscow, I was fortunate to be present at a previous summit that resulted from a sea-change in the relationship between the countries. When I arrived in Moscow in October of 1987, it was only a year after the expulsions by Reagan of Soviet diplomatic staff in the US and Gorbachev’s ending of “support services” by Soviet citizens to the US Embassy and Consulate. By the time I left for Votkinsk in December 1988, the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty had been signed, ratified and implementation had begun. And Reagan had come to Moscow for his historic summit.

(all photos are mine, unless otherwise indicated)

Some American propaganda. With Reagan’s accidental on-line joke, “I’ve outlawed the Soviet Union. We begin bombing in five minutes…” tensions reached all time highs.

My best friend Solomon’s artistic rendition of what my life at the embassy would look like. Not far from the truth.

---

My embassy badge. Probably I was supposed to return this before departing, but it seems I didn’t. Its pleasant to see my youthful appearance, but more significant are the scotch tape marks on the back of the badge. As a joke, some support staff kept a kernel of popcorn taped to the back of their badge. We learned that the Sovs were bombarding us with microwaves from the bell tower of the church (which was nicknamed “Our Holy Lady of Constant Surveillance”) across from the entrance to the new embassy compound. Probably it had something to do with activating the listening devices they’d embedded in the structure of the new embassy that was under construction. We had no “Havana Syndrome” victims as far as I recall.

---

Reagan and Gorbachev signing the historic INF treaty in Washington, December 1987.

---

My “hi-tech” summit access badge.

---

A US Airforce C-5 Galaxy cargo plane arriving at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport. Hundreds of US officials arrived in Moscow to support and participate in the summit. They and their cargo began arriving several weeks before the event took place.

Two Winnebagos operated by the White House Communications Agency (aka “WHACA”) were disgorged by the C-5, and immediately surrounded by the “Men in Black”. They were responsible for making sure that the leader of the free world could stay in contact while visiting the Evil Empire. Hard to imagine that Reagan would have called in a nuclear strike on Russia while he was visiting. But anything is possible. The person in the lower right corner in the baseball cap was my boss and head of the motor pool. He would later be PNG’d by Germany for spying on them.

The Winnebagos were parked in the basement garage at the new embassy compound (where years later, when the new 100 dollar bills were put into circulation by the Department of Treasury, large amounts of cash was stored in advance to facilitate a smooth integration into the then heavily dollarized Russian banking system). The president’s motorcade also arrived. His limousine, the “Beast” was parked in our garage and serviced by its own mechanics. I got a tingle every time I walked past it.

---

Prior to the start of the summit, someone with a mischievous sense of humor (I swear it was not me!) posted this photoshop rendition of the seemingly merging leaders on a corridor wall at the embassy. It was quickly removed.

---

It seemed that the few American products distributed and, in the case of Coca-Cola, actually made in Russia were more readily available in the run-up to the summit.

The official program for the summit, issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Embossed gold lettering = respect!

---

A street banner on the motorcade route “advertising” perestroika – Gorbachev & Co’s attempt to restructure the economy. I can’t remember if it was being put up or if it was, symbolically, falling down.

---

The VIP building at Vnukovo-3, where Air Force One was to land.

---

Even then, bandits drove Mercedes (traffic police escort vehicles waiting to set up the motorcade).

---

Embassy staff and families waiting on the tarmac.

---

Reagan receiving and giving honor. On his right is Andrei Gromyko, the titular head of the Soviet State. “Grim Grom,” an icon of Soviet politics for more than 40 years, had been moved aside by Gorbachev shortly after the latter took power.

---

Reagan and Gorbachev exchanging the ratified INF treaties, while Pavel Palzhchenko, Gorbachev’s then interpreter (and to this day still with him at the Gorbachev Foundation), looks on. (Photo from “On-Site Inspections Under the INF Treaty”, US DOD)

A commemorative stamp issued by the USSR in honor of the summit.

The Angel of Hastings House

(A SHORT STORY)

"Mrs. Bookstaver called. I haven’t heard from her in ages."

My mother was looking in the mirror, adjusting her earrings before she went to work. I sat at the breakfast table, contemplating whether I should take up coffee drinking.

"Is she still alive?" I asked half seriously. "She must have been a hundred years-old already when she was my baby sitter."

"She sounded fine to me, and she wasn't a hundred. I remember her last working day was on her sixty-eighth birthday, when you were already five. That was ten years ago."

I did the math. Seventy-eight. Not quite dead.

"She's such an angel," continued mother, "She wants you to come over to Hastings House to fix some things for the old ladies. Its so sweet how she looks after them. She asked you to be there at noon."

Realizing I could get a few cartoons in before I had to set off, I grunted affirmatively.

"Remember: she is in 3G," mom said as she went out the door.

 I strapped my toolkit under the crossbar of my bicycle. My handyman business was booming. The ad mom wrote for me and placed in the local paper really helped.

At age nine I made a deal with fellow 4th grader Nils Morgan, whose dad owned the local printing plant, and purchased 10,000 of these cards. I still have a few…

"Lifflander Fixes all!

None too big,

or too small!

Reasonable rates,

at a call! "

My competition came from licensed plumbers, electricians and painters who demanded union wages and had overhead, including gasoline costs. I demanded 5$ an hour and got by on pedal power.

 My clientele varied, consisting mostly of homemakers and old folks trying to make ends meet, tired of being ripped-off. I had a trustworthy face nobody balked at my rates. Sometimes a housewife would get nervous as she watched me disassemble the dishwasher into dozens of parts and carefully spread them out on the kitchen linoleum. But I never had a case I couldn’t crack, and found sources for replacement parts. That was my gift: I could figure out how anything worked.

As I peddled up to Hastings-House, childhood memories of the garden-apartment complex began to flood my mind. The broad lawn with the view of the Hudson and the Palisade cliffs beyond. The massive underground garages and storage complex. Built in the late forties, Hastings-House had an extensive fallout shelter system, complete with stores of government issue food and water. You passed by the wire mesh walls of the locked storerooms when walking from the garage to the basement of your building. As a child, with no sense of the potential horror implied, those supplies gave a sense of security.  I was sure if we ran out of flour or sugar while baking cookies, we could simply go down to the store room and pilfer a cup. It was a nice place to grow up, and a probably a nice place to die.

Abigail Bookstaver looked exactly as I remembered her. I'd swear the black floral print dress was the same one she used to wear, but somehow it looked brand new.

"Justy!" she exclaimed as I dismounted in front of her stoop. All the old ladies called me that.  "My, how you have grown. Its so sweet of you to come. I'm sure you'd rather be out playing."

"Actually, Mrs. B," I said in my most business-like tone, "I like working and earning money."

"Well, that's most enterprising of you. Now, here is what I want you to do. First, go to 2F and visit the Baxter sisters. I am afraid they've been up to some mischief…so please check all their wiring. Then stop in and see Miss Lloyd in 5c. You know she is alone, and her sight is going. Glaucoma. Anyway, she needs some bigger light bulbs put in. Have a general check on her appliances while you’re at it."

"Swell," I said.

"Now take this twenty-dollar bill. If you need more let me know.”

"Gee, thanks," I said stuffing the bill in my pocket. "I don’t usually get paid in advance."

I raced off toward the entrance to building No. 2, wrenches and screwdrivers clanging beneath me.

The Baxter sisters also seemed ageless. They were nice spinsters, though a bit goofy.

As I reached for the doorbell button, I recalled my last Halloween at Hastings-House, a decade ago. They bickered for the right to put the candy in the bags of goblins and ghosties.  Finally, to our delight, they decided they’d both do it and we got double portions. No tricks on them.

A raspy, "Who's there?" came from the other side of the thick door.

"It’s Justin, Miss Baxter. Mrs B sent me"

"Who? Who's there?"

I realized time had taken its toll on their hearing, so I shouted once again,

"It’s me, Justin! I'm here to fix things."

The door opened and Tilly Baxter's smile greeted me. Then she turned and shouted into the depths of the apartment, "Amelia, Justy’s here to fix things! Isn’t that sweet?" Turning back to me she said, "Come in, come in. My how you've grown!"

My sweetness and growth knew no bounds. Amelia and Tilly set up court in twin armchairs in the living room, a faded photograph of them together in their youth perched on the lamp table between. I took a quick patrol of the three-room apartment. Indeed, they were a creative pair. Extension cords were stapled, nailed, taped, and dangled in just about every corner. It would seem they had at least one of every appliance you could imagine.  To top it off, their choice of location was rather eclectic. The blow dryer in living room ("We know not to use that near water"), the toaster in the bed room ("Saves effort in the morning. You can get up and have your toast right away"), and most curiously, the Osterizer in the closet, perched on a stool (giggling, they explained that was their "secret" bar). I politely declined their offer of an early Margarita. 

There were no major safety violations. I redid some of the stapling to ensure the wires weren’t penetrated. I drilled through the frame of the closet and ran the wire through the hole so it wouldn’t get caught in the door frame anymore. I decided to closely inspect the space heaters. There were three in the living room.

"The heat is off in the summer and that last rainy day old arthur really acted up," they protested, sensing my disapproval.

I nodded as if I could relate to the problem.  At first glance, their work seemed acceptable.  I followed the wiring and found that in order to make the distance to the wall receptacle, they had spliced-in a piece of doorbell wire and tacked it to the wall behind the curtains. Beyond the splice the wall was charred, the plastic having melted off the thin wire. Even the curtain was singed. Fortunately, it was a natural fiber, or it probably would have ignited.

I gently chastised them. "Ladies, this is a no-no. If you don’t mind, I'll redo it."

They looked at me like puppies not yet succeeding at their paper training. Then they brightened up and sang in unison,

"Yes, please, please do!"

I crawled behind the sofa and under the curtains to replace the burned section with a piece of heavy-gauge wire I had in my collection.  I made conversation while I worked.
"Mrs. B certainly looked well." I said as I scrapped the black plastic remains from the wall.

"Oh yes," said Tilly somewhat sadly, "She did look well.

"Awful nice of her to look after you."

"Yes," agreed Julie, "She always looked after us."

 I completed the operation, packed my tools and headed for the door, giving the old birds a hug.

Tilly began to fumble with her pocketbook. "No charge." I said gallantly, "Mrs. Bookstaver took good care of me".

"Oh yes," they said again in unison, "she sure did."

As I pedaled towards building No. 5, I contemplated my occupation. Friends thought it odd that I liked working for old ladies. But I found an unexpected commonality in the alleged chasm between youth and old age. I was on the cusp of that transition from childhood to adult, when you begin to practice caution and measured behavior. Those ladies were on the same cusp, but heading in the opposite direction. It was like going to a movie theater, and seeing a friend coming out from the previous showing. What was going to happen during the show wasn’t completely clear, but you felt reassured you hadn’t wasted your $1.50 when you saw someone you respected coming out the exit.   Yeah, I thought, I wouldn’t mind being like those Baxter sisters when I got old: a little crazy, with no shortage of ideas and a good set of tools.

Eunice Lloyd opened the door. For a nearly blind lady, she was dressed well.  A naturally petit woman, she had begun to shrink even more. When I started at Hillside Elementary, she was the superintendent for the whole district. Failing sight had forced her retirement at the age of sixty-five, just a few years ago. Her mind was as sharp as ever, though she could only vaguely make out shapes.

"It's Justy, Miss Lloyd." I said loudly, "I'm here to check things out for you."

"You don’t have to shout boy,” she said with a chuckle, "I am going blind, not deaf.  Now, that's quite a coincidence. I was just thinking about upgrading to 200-watt bulbs."

"In that case, I should change the sockets from bakelite to ceramic. I have a few with me."

I started in the foyer. She perched herself on a stool across from me, like a wrinkled ceramic owl, glaring at me through extremely thick glasses.

"Shame about the lunch bond being defeated again, " she commented.  "I had all the fogies here rallied, but those old bats at the Andrus Home and Shadow Lawn voted it down. Damn their selfishness! Don’t they realize kids need a hot lunch, even if their own offspring have already outgrown the school system."

"Yeah," I agreed, "I’m tired of P, B & J"

Suddenly, she turned her head, cocked her ear, and said "Be a dear and open the kitchen door so that Isaac can come through."

"I didn’t hear anyone," I said surprised.

"You’re not nearly blind," she answered wryly as the calico trotted towards his litter box in the living room.

I closed my eyes and tried to imagine myself with fading vision. A world of shadows and fuzzy shapes, where two hundred watts gives an indistinct outline at best. No, I thought, better to be living with your nutty spinster sister than blind and alone.

I changed four sockets. Another three were already ceramic, thanks to the age of the building. I took a look around to see what else might require attention.  In the bathroom, all appeared in order. Then I noticed a curling iron dangling from a shelf above the tub.  The end of the handle was below what would be the waterline. It was plugged in and warm.

"Miss Lloyd, what about the curling iron?"

"Can’t seem to find it." she answered matter-of-factly, "I was using it this morning, then it just disappeared."

A tuft of Isaac’s hair on the shelf explained everything.

"He must have knocked it off when he went for his morning walk. He sleeps there. You can unplug it and put it away. I usually wind up burning my hands trying to feel what's going on up top, anyway. Good thing you found that. I was about to draw my bath".

"Well," I said, as I closed up my tool box, "It's a good thing Mrs. Bookstaver's watching over you all here. Without her you'd have burned the place down or fried yourselves by now."

"Yes, Justin, we all feel the loss and hope she is looking down on us from above," said Miss Lloyd, raising her dysfunctional eyes to the heavens.

"The loss?" I asked. "What do you mean?"

"Well, she died just this past spring, dear.  Didn’t you know?"

I felt the top of my pocket where the edge of the twenty-dollar bill was sticking out and gulped.

"Ah, I guess I just still feel her presence,” I said.

Miss Lloyd nodded in agreement. “We all do.”

Courtesy of Hastings House Coop.

Thom Moore Defies Rules of Time and Space

Poster design, Nigel Gallagher, photo by Aminah Hughes.

Lyuba Moore doing a spot check of concert promotion.

1 February, 2019 (Sligo, Ireland) The late singer-songwriter Thom Moore, bard of the INF Treaty, local hero to the town of Sligo and its incredible music scene, was honored at a concert here tonight, appropriately titled “The Thom Moore Song Book.”

 Hawks Well Theater was SRO for the event, which saw 400 fans enjoying Ireland’s top musicians passionately rendering Thom’s work. The show opened with Seamie O’Dowd, Thom’s longtime friend, collaborator and the concert’s organizer, performing the beloved and often covered Carolina Rua, accompanied by Kieran Quinn on piano and Ken McDonald on percussion.

 Though the predominant hair color of audience members was grey (if they had any at all), the golden tresses of Thom’s wife Lyuba, along with his step-son Stan’s neat coiffure, offered a promising counterpoint.

Stan and Lyuba at the concert.

But the scene on stage was multigenerational. Legends like Cathy Jordan, Rick Epping, Eleanor Shanley, Midnight Well bandmate Gerry O’Beirne, Gino Lupari, Donal McLynn and Gerry Grennan were joined by a cadre of younger musicians – master stage-hand and fiddler Marie O’Byrne, with fellow string performers Jessie Solange Whitehead, Anna Houston, Niamh Crowley, and Sarah Crummy on piano. Seamie’s son Stephen and Gerry’s daughter Aoife augmented the family atmosphere.

Carolina Rua, performed by Seamie O'Dowd, Kieran Quinn, Ken Mc Donald. Turn The Corner, performed by Alison O'Donnell and Isabel Ni Chuireann.

Golden Thread, performed by Gerry O'Beirne. Cracked Bone Tune, performed by Gerry O'Beirne, with Rick Epping.

Saw You Running (Left to right) Isabel Ni Chuireann, Seamie O'Dowd, Rick Epping, John Williams, Francie Lenehan (seated behind) Gerry Grennan, Donal McLynn. Brian Mulligan, Gino Lupari, Joe Dunne and Alison O'Donnell standing behind Eoin Troy.

Thom playing with Donal McLynn at Mclynn’s pub, circa 1989.

In case the concert itself didn’t bury any doubts Thom expressed about the durability of his work, the celebration of his legacy continued post-concert at McLynn’s pub, where Thom’s first public appearance in Sligo occurred nearly four decades earlier.

In magical defiance of the laws of physics, the 20+ members of the ensemble and (it seemed) four hundred fans stuffed themselves into two rooms at McLynn’s (total square meters < fifty), occupying all nooks, crannies and floor space. The pub’s management had wisely installed a direct pipeline to the Guinness brewery in Dublin, keeping the throng supplied until it finally dispersed in the wee hours.

Musicians and fans blissfully ignorant of the laws of physics, McLynn’s back room, 03:20, 2 February 2019.

Moving to Ireland in 1971, Thom Moore had a deep-rooted relationship with Sligo, and spent much of the last three decades in the county so dear to his heart. Settling near the town together with his first wife Kathy, in the early Seventies he formed the folk-rock band Pumpkinhead with fellow Americans Sandi and Rick Epping.

Mural on the wall across from McLynn’s pub, where Thom got his start in Sligo.

Pumpkinhead split up in 1976 and Moore formed Midnight Well with Janie Cribbs, Gerry O’Beirne and Mairtín O’Connor. Moore earned considerable praise for his song writing on numbers like ‘Still Believing,’ ‘Saw You Running’ and ‘Jessie’s Friend.’

His stint as a translator on the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (itself soon to be buried), in Votkinsk, Russia – the town that gave birth to Tchaikovsky – was the genesis for the next bloom of his heart and his music.

Thom and fellow inspectors contemplating Justin’s land-locked boat, in the VPMF warehouse, 1990.

There he met Lyuba and wrote many of the songs that would appear on his later solo albums – Dreamer in Russia and Gorgeous & Bright.

Thom passed away after a long illness on St. Patrick’s Day, 17 March, 2018.

Stan and Lyuba on top of Knocknarea, where Thom’s ashes (now moistened by a few drams of Beluga vodka, poured by a loving fan from Russia) were scattered last year.

Ranevskaya Also Didn’t Want to Become a Spy

In honor of the 34th anniversary of the death of Soviet actress Faina Ranevskaya
(born 27 August 1896; died 19 July 1984)

By Justin Lifflander

It was playwright Anton Chekov who sent Faina Ranevskaya on the path to become one of Russia’s most beloved performers.

At the age of 14 she saw a performance of The Cherry Orchard, in her home town of Taganrog next to the Azov Sea in southern Russia. By 19 Faina had made the decision to escape her provincial hometown and head to Moscow to pursue an acting career. Her family, dismayed by her decision, disowned her. Undaunted, she changed her last name from Feldman to Ranevskaya and set off to pursue her dream.

Young Ranevskaya, circa 1931

She spent the next seven decades on Moscow’s stages and played supporting roles in more than a dozen hit films – mostly dramatic comedies.

A mix of Mae West, Ruth Gordon and Woody Allen, Ranevskaya became known for classic her lines on screen and stage. Her biting, sometimes bawdy witticisms in real life – something she found thoroughly funny yet painfully lonely – are no less famous.

Her life span paralleled that of the absurd experiment called the Soviet Union. Ranevskaya was an example of the fine humanity it produced, despite shortages of consumer goods, housing, and personal freedom. It was an existence marked by an overabundance of cultural Neanderthals at the top and secret-police informants at all levels.

In Natalia Bogdanova’s excellent collection of aphorisms and anecdotes, we learn how Ranevskaya worked the system to solve her housing needs. Until 1952, the actress – already twice awarded Stalin’s prize for creative achievement — lived in a shabby room in a communal apartment.    

But Faina was not risk-averse. She had the courage to reject a proposal to “cooperate” with the state security organs. The recruitment effort was managed by then chief of counter-intelligence for the USSR Lieutenant-General Oleg Mikhailovich Gribanov.

Oleg Mikhailovich, though not a tall man, had immense hypnotic powers and an impressive gift for persuasion. Among themselves his subordinates nicknamed him “Bonaparte.” Gribanov did not pitch Ranevskaya directly. He sent a young operative by the name of Korshunov – a man who would never be accused of having an intricate mind.

Captain Korshunov started the conversation with Ranevskaya from afar.  He educated her about the international class struggle, the machinations of spies on the territory of the USSR and how they try to trip-up the nation as it strides toward a bright future.  He casually reminded her that it was the duty of every Soviet citizen to willfully provide assistance to the organs of state security.

Listening attentively to the passionate monolog of the young KGB officer, Ranevskaya contemplated a smooth way to deflect the recruitment pitch, which was sure to come at the end of the operative’s fiery speech.

In her signature style, she asked Korshunov:

“Young man, why didn’t you show up earlier, when I hadn’t yet reached my seventh decade?"

“What are you saying, Faina Georgievna?” Korshunov blurted-out melodramatically. “No one would take you for a day over thirty. Believe me, you are a young woman…in comparison to the other actresses of your theater troupe.”

Lighting up yet another cigarette, Ranevskaya squinted at Korshunov and responded coolly.

“I see what you're driving at, young man.” Without skipping a beat, she declared, “I have been waiting for the moment when the security service would realize I’m worthy.  I am always ready to expose the plots of detestable imperialist low-lifes. You could say it’s been my dream since childhood. But there is a problem…

“First of all, I live in a communal apartment. And more importantly, I talk in my sleep…loudly. So, my dear colleague – and I can only think of you as a colleague — together let’s try to imagine, like good secret policemen, how this might play out….

“Suppose you give me a mission, and I, being a responsible professional, begin to contemplate how to execute it.  Then suddenly, in the middle of the night, while I’m dreaming, I begin discussing with myself the details about how to fulfill the task. I speak aloud last names, first names, code names, secret meeting places, passwords, appointment times, and so forth… And we have to keep in mind that I am surrounded by nosy neighbors who for many years have unrelentingly monitored my every move…Then what? Instead of faithfully doing my duty I will have betrayed you!”

Ranevskaya’s discourse left a deep impression on Korshunov. He immediately reported back to Gribanov.

“This lady is willing to work for us…I feel it inside. But there are objective complications related to the peculiarities of her nighttime physiology.”

“What peculiarities?” asked the baffled counter-intelligence chief.

“She talks loudly in her sleep. And besides, the overall situation is shameful. It’s unacceptable that our glorious People’s Artist occupies a room in a communal apartment.”

A month later Ranevskaya celebrated her housewarming party in the newly constructed elite Stalin-era skyscraper on Moscow’s Kotelnicheskaya Embankment.

Then Korshunov resumed his attempts to meet her. But each time it turned out that Faina was unable to keep the appointment: either she was preparing for a show’s opening, her spleen hurt, she had a cold…

Finally, a frustrated Korshunov informed the actress he was coming to her new home for a conclusive conversation. The young captain had no idea who he was dealing with. Before he could make it to her door, a citizen appeared at the KGB’s reception center. He was of an indeterminate age, though the prominent capillaries of his nose and his puffy countenance left no doubt about his primary pastime. Regardless, he was relatively sober and most determined when he insisted they accept his report about unseemly goings-on in the famous skyscraper.

The report was a collective effort by the residents of the prestigious building on the embankment where Ranevskaya had happily ensconced herself just one month prior. It was on the desk of General Gribanov within the hour. It read as follows: “The residents of the upper floor (ten signatories) kindly inform the organs of state security that immediately under them lives some kind of lady who can be heard on a nightly basis loudly talking to herself about the threat of imperialist espionage and what she is going to do about it…how sorry she will make those capitalist scum…just as soon as the organs of state security take her on as a part time employee.”

Gribanov summoned Korshunov, gave him the report and clear instructions.

“Cross Ranevskaya off your list. Forget about her and find someone else – someone who sleeps silently.”

Later, Korshunov learned from his agent in the Mossovet Theater, where Ranevskaya worked, about the true origins of that “collective” report.  In exchange for two bottles of vodka, the actress persuaded the plumber from her new building to assist in her intelligence-countering scheme. He was that very same informant with the puffy face and demonstrative nose. But it was too late. The horse had left the barn and the apartment remained Ranevskaya’s.

That she was a woman wholly without fear was proven again in a subsequent interaction with Communist Party General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev.

Ranevskaya's most famous line was, “Mulya, don’t get on my nerves!” from the 1940 film “The Foundling.” For the rest of her life it would haunt her. Fans of all ages, especially children, would great her with that phrase when she walked down the street. It annoyed her to no end.

In 1976, when Faina was already an octogenarian, Leonid Brezhnev awarded her the prestigious Lenin Prize for her contribution to the arts. As he welcomed her on stage, the leader of the USSR exclaimed, “And here comes our Mulya…don’t get on my nerves!” Faina calmly accepted the award and responded, “Leonid Ilyich, the only people who address me like that are little boys and hooligans!” An abashed Brezhnev apologized. “Forgive me, Faina Georgievna. But I just love your work.”

In conclusion, some of Ranevskaya’s more poignant quotes and comments:

On politics:

* During Khrushchev’s thaw, when information from the outside world began to seep into the USSR, someone asked Ranevskaya what she would do if they open the country’s borders and allow people to travel.

“I’d climb a tree, of course.”

“Why?”

“Because I don’t want to get crushed by the stampede…”

* A comrade sighed and declared, “Oh my, how difficult it is for honest people to make a living these days!” Ranevskaya glared at him and said, “So what’s your problem?”

* "There are people with God inside, there are people with the devil inside and there are people with only parasites inside."

* Ranevskaya liked to say that when God created the earth, he foresaw the rise of Soviet Power and decided to give every man three qualities: wisdom, honor and a sense of “Party” (meaning faith in Communist ideology).  But the devil intervened and convinced God that a mortal man could only have two of those qualities at once. As a result…

               -If a person is wise and honorable, he has nothing to do with the Party.

               -If he is wise and a Party-man, he certainly isn’t honest.

               -If he is an honest Party-man, he's a fool.

On women:

* "A real man is one who remembers a lady’s birthday, but never knows how old she is. A man who knows how old she is but can’t remember her birthday is called her husband."

* "Of course, women are smarter than men. Have you ever heard of a woman who lost her head just because a man had nice legs?" 

* Someone asked Ranevskaya, “Which women are more likely to remain faithful: brunettes or blonds?” Ranevskaya responded: “Those with gray hair…”

On life:

* "Under the most attractive peacock’s tail you still find a chicken’s ass."

* "Homosexuality, sadism, masochism -- these are not perversions. There are only two genuine perversions: hockey played on grass and ballet done on ice."

* "Life is one long leap, out of the pussy and into the grave."

Monument to Ranevskaya, in her hometown of Taganrog.

There’s a Glimmer of Hope in U.S.-Russia Relations (Op-ed for The Moscow Times)

View fullsize

The world is looking to Russia and America for a new kind of INF Treaty: Interdict North-Korean Fiasco

December 14 2017
The Moscow Times

I moved to Moscow 30 years ago because of a diplomatic staffing spat between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev. I’m still here. And we have again found ourselves at a low point in Russian-American relations, with consulates crippled and communications between Moscow and Washington almost non-existent.

But I see a glimmer of hope.

In 1987-88, as a driver at the U.S. Embassy, I chauffeured negotiators working on the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. Тhe INF treaty marks its 30th anniversary this week, even though it is now gasping for life. Read more...

Gorbachev, Massie, and a Bit of Optimism

View fullsize

Gorbachev, Justin, Palazhchenko and Ambassador Jon Huntsman
Photo: Marina Buligina, Vesmir Publishers

View fullsize

Gorbachev and Massie inspecting the Votkinsk “Trust But Verify” T-shirt.
Photo: Anatoly Kotov, Vesmir Publishers

 In a classroom at Cornell in the Spring of 1986 we discussed Gorbachev’s speech at the 27th congress of the Communist Party of the USSR, then taking place in Moscow.  I realized the style of the new General Secretary, Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev,  was going to be very different than his predecessors. And I had an inkling that the field of study in which I was getting a diploma – “Soviet Government,” aka Kremlinology – was about to become a whole lot more interesting.

 So, spending an afternoon this month with Gorbachev at his foundation in Moscow, along with other giants from the Cold War – Foreign Minister Alexander Bessmertnykh, General Vladimir Dvorkin, and historian and Ronald Reagan confidant Suzanne Massie – was a surreal culmination of a journey I began three decades earlier. The occasion was the publication in Russian of Massie’s recent memoir “Trust But Verify: Russian Lessons for Reagan.”

 The full article about the book launch you can read here.

 Before she headed back to her home in Maine for the holidays, I had breakfast with Suzanne. We commiserated over the sad state of global affairs and bonded over our love for Russia. When you’ve spent 35 years dedicated to a cause, and then meet someone  35 years your senior who has been working the same cause her whole life, hope easily rekindles.

Adventure vs. Order: 25 Years of Doing Business in Russia

The Moscow Times, Russia’s first independent daily English language newspaper, celebrates its 25th anniversary this month. This article appears in a special edition issued in honor of this event.

By Justin Lifflander

I found my customer, Misha — a mountain of a Siberian man — standing in the tail section of the plane. It was 1994 and we had just completed a successful “reference visit” to one of Hewlett-Packard’s oil industry customers in Canada. Misha was grasping a bag with dozens of mini-bottles of alcohol he had obtained from the stewardess. Now he was trying to secure a volume discount.

“Misha, we’ll be in New York in three hours,” I told him.  “I’ve got a barbecue planned at my parents’ house. There will be plenty of beer and vodka.”

“Beer? Vodka?” he repeated. I nodded.

“But, only in three hours?” he asked.  I nodded again. He completed the transaction and consumed his booty before we landed.

Alcohol was a significant element of doing business in Russia in the early 1990s. Many features of the Russian commercial landscape have changed or disappeared since then. Some are missed: well-paid expat positions, limited government reach, the ability to get to across town within 30 minutes for a meeting, and even the need for face-to-face meetings.

Good riddance to others: the dilapidated telecoms infrastructure; mounds of paperwork that actually needed to be done on paper; mythological customer budgets; the need to have a krisha (a “roof”) to protect your business from banditry.

View fullsize

We’ll all live longer without so much booze, but it accompanied adventures and relationships I cherish. Each industry had its preferred spirit. The oilmen loved their vodka. A midwinter business trip to Noyabrsk— where at minus 35 degrees Celsius hair freezes and cracks and spit solidifies before it hits the ground – would convince even a teetotaler to use personal anti-freeze. Telecoms executives mostly drank whiskey. Grain alcohol was available at their office parties – they used it to clean mechanical switches. Aerospace industry people liked cognac. I shared a bottle of 15-year-old Ararat with the IT manager of the Mission Control Center in Korolyov. We had just watched the fiery demise of the MIR space station, which had been orbiting the earth for 15 years. Bankers? Well, they seemed to drink anything.

The Arc of Adventure

It wasn’t just about alcohol. When the U.S.S.R. collapsed and the 1990s got wild, the representation office was the standard format for foreign companies. A position in such a firm gave Russian professionals benefits formerly only available to upper echelons of the Communist Party elite: a few hundred dollars in hard currency monthly, a clothing allowance, a company car and business trips abroad.  

“It was like a dream,” said one Russian businessman who has partnered with foreign firms for more than two decades. “Dealing with foreigners was very interesting. We all wanted some connection to the outside world.”

Some dreams turned into nightmares. “Some came with their 5, 10, or even 100 thousand dollars, lost it all, and left,” said a Russian entrepreneur. “Why did they lose it? Because it was a swamp here. No rules, no law enforcement. If your partner suddenly took a disliking to you, you were gone.”

Many foreign entrepreneurs mastered the relationship factor, like Peter Gerwe who arrived from California and started a media empire, or Bernie Sucher, who turned his hankering for American-style food into the Starlite Diner. Courage, a nascent regulatory system and excessive enthusiasm all facilitated success.

Along the way, Russia got a large dose of the West. Foreigners brought their arsenal of tools and treats: business processes, philanthropy, transparency, corporate culture, and — when margins were fatter— extravagant corporate spending on events and gifts.

“We exposed our business partners and government interlocutors to all these lavish things and they began to adopt them,” said the head of an American multinational who has been doing business in Russia since 1992. “Then, in Russian fashion, they went to extremes and continued these traditions long after the Sarbanes-Oxley Act inhibited us.”

View fullsize

A corporate gift from Rostelecom during its leaner days of the mid 90s’…

View fullsize

…and the Swiss made version, after margins increased in the early 2000s.

The infection was bi-directional. Western firms Russified. A generation of talented young Russians gained experience and now run most of those companies. The standard of living increased, people began to travel abroad and the euphoria for all things foreign subsided. Business became routine.

View fullsize

That dynamic, combined with the current geopolitical situation, has led to an about-face in mindset. CoCom export controls and the Cold War have been replaced by sanctions, anti-sanctions and import substitution.

“In the 1990s, we were like a river of water seeking its path, picking up sediment from wherever, going with the flow, open…,” the entrepreneur said. “Now, it’s as if our state of matter has changed: We are ice. We say if you want to be friends with us, it’s up to you to try harder, make the best offer, consider our needs.”

Bureaucratic Evolution

Meanwhile, bureaucrats have multiplied and gained competence.  However, big and small businesses have different views on the state of corruption.

“It’s out of control,” said the Russian entrepreneur. “There are more inspections and certifications. People used to say: ‘We’ll create something and then get rich!’ Now, there is little enthusiasm. We only have the appearance of change. Instead of bandits there are lawyers.”

But the head of the American multinational feels more secure. “The ‘90s were scary,” he said. “You had to have a krisha—or borrow your partner’s— to defend yourself from racketeers…Now, with the state in control, things seem much safer.”

“The bureaucrats are less corrupt, in part, because you hardly meet them anymore — obligatory reporting to ministries is mostly done online now,” the American businessman added. “On the rare occasion that I do go to them, they are often smiling, chatty…maybe they miss the human interaction, too?”

It Was Personal

Customer acquisition in the ‘90s was both fulfilling and desperate. You knew that success depended not only on the quality of your product or its return on investment, but on your relationship with the decision maker. 

In 1996, Pepsi paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to have cosmonauts aboard the space station display a giant soda can. About the same time, my colleagues and I at HP gave the Russian Mission Control Center a few amortized demo computers. In exchange, we were allowed to place our logo banner under the center’s main control screen for many years.

View fullsize

I got good advice early on. The deputy general director at a state company told me: “If you come to a meeting with a pen and note pad listing your agenda, you’re not likely to get what you want. If you come with some jokes, describe your philosophy of life, and tell stories about your family—saving the business for the end— you are bound to get what you need.”

View fullsize

The banya epitomized customer intimacy. Sitting in a room naked and sweating together, you were bound to bond — even if your note pad got soggy.  

Russia will always be a peculiar market. The high profit margins most foreign companies enjoy here ease the challenge of explaining “Russian reality” to headquarters. But the camaraderie of the banya is something that can’t be explained. It has to be experienced.

***Justin Lifflander, a former business editor at The Moscow Times who has worked in Russia for 30 years is author of “How Not to Become a Spy: A memoir of love at the end of the Cold War.”***

The Moscow Times Q&A: Matlock, Reagan's Soviet Teacher, Never Stops Learning

Maximizing depth of knowledge and providing unique insights were key elements of Matlock’s career success.

Career diplomat Jack Matlock has befriended many world leaders, but perhaps none taught him a more important lesson than U.S. President Ronald Reagan.

"Reagan was the most impressionable student I ever had," said Matlock, who served as Reagan's top Soviet adviser before moving to Moscow in 1987 to serve as ambassador for 4 years. "He always appreciated having things explained to him. He was comfortable with his lack of knowledge, unlike some leaders."

Matlock, 84, is also comfortable with the fact that he might not know something — but that does not mean he is content to leave it that way.

Matlock mastered five foreign languages during his 35-year career in the U.S. Foreign Service, 11 of which saw him posted in Moscow. Those skills helped him understand complex situations, which in turn built his reputation for clear, timely reporting and insights — including being the first to predict that the Soviets would not invade Poland during the 1981 Solidarity uprising.  At one point, he even found himself warning Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev of the impending 1991 coup attempt.

Matlock worked with Reagan and his team to implement their mission to bring down the Iron Curtain. But he knew what language to speak to accomplish the goal.

"We were sensitive about what words we used. We didn't say let's bring down the Iron Curtain. We said, 'Let's develop a better working relationship.' That was the euphemism for opening up to bring about a better flow of information," Matlock said, speaking in an interview while visiting Moscow this week to commemorate the 80th anniversary of diplomatic relations between Russia and the U.S.

After leaving the State Department, Matlock spent 22 years at the highest levels of academia, teaching international relations and diplomacy while keeping the mantra of his intellectual quest in view. His mantra can be seen in a small font in the upper right-hand corner on his website: "Can we learn from experience?"

But his students and friends know it's rhetorical. His learning shines through in his writings and commentary, including three books that he's authored about his experiences. The themes are consistent: a little less meddling in sovereign affairs, a little more attention to the details of communication, and a little less publicity during discussions of sensitive topics will all go a long way to help any two parties achieve their goals, especially Russia and the U.S. today.

Jack Faust Matlock 

Education

1950 — Duke University, North Carolina, BA, summa cum laude
1952 — Columbia University, New York; MA in Russian Studies; 
2013 — Columbia University, New York; PhD "Translating Leskov" 

Work experience

1991-2012 — Various academic positions at Columbia University, Mount Holyoke College, Hamilton College, Princeton University, 
1956-91 — State Department, including ambassador to the Soviet Union, Moscow (1987-91); ambassador to Czechoslovakia, Prague (1981-83); charge d'affaires, U.S. Embassy, Moscow (1981); deputy chief of mission, U.S. Embassy, Moscow (1974-78); vice consul and second secretary, U.S. Embassy, Moscow (1961-63); 
1953-56 — Russian language and literature instructor, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 

Favorite book: The ones I return to most often include Shakespeare's tragedies, Proust, and Nikolai Leskov's stories. 

Reading now: "Zhizn i Sudba" (Life and Fate, 1986) by Vasily Grossman and "Mating" (1992) by Norman Rush. 

Movie pick: "Casablanca" (1942) directed by Michael Curtiz; "Master i Margarita" (2005) directed by Vladimir Bortko. 

Favorite Moscow restaurant: U Pirosmani, 4 Novodevichy Proyezd. 

Weekend getaway destination: My wife Rebecca's farm in Tennessee. 

The learning never stops. Matlock earned his doctorate from Columbia University this year — an effort that he had started while still a graduate student there in 1952. He settled on an analysis of idiomatic expressions of 19th-century Russian writer Nikolai Leskov, who was known for his ability to provide a comprehensive picture of contemporary society.

Many of Leskov's fans, including Matlock, see the relevance of Leskov in how Russia functions today.

"People ask me if it makes sense to try to do business in Russia. I tell them to read Leskov's 'Choice Grain' and then decide," Matlock said.

The satirical story "Choice Grain" (Otbornoye Zerno) depicts bourgeois morality through a tale of 19th-century merchants.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: What fired your initial passion for Russia?

A: My attention was first drawn to Russia during World War II, when I followed the resistance to the Nazi invasion with great attention and admiration. When I heard Russian spoken for the first time on the radio — It was Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Vyshinsky's speech in San Francisco when the United Nations was founded — I had an aspiration to learn to understand a language that was important but seemed totally incomprehensible. But there was nobody in Greensboro, North Carolina, where I grew up, who spoke Russian.

Finally as a freshman at Duke University I read Constance Garnette's translation of Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment," not as a class assignment but just out of curiosity. It bowled me over, and I registered for a course in the Russian language the first year it was offered. I later took my graduate degrees in Russian literature at Columbia and have never regretted that choice.

Q: You famously declared that you wanted to become the ambassador to Moscow when you entered the Foreign Service. How did your colleagues and superiors react to that?

A: My colleagues were probably not surprised. One said he wanted to be the first Foreign Service officer to become secretary of state. But the course supervisor wrote something in my personnel record like: "Matlock's ambition is obviously excessive, but he seems level-headed enough to bring his aspirations in line with reality as his career progresses."

Q: Have you noticed any common personality traits between you and your peers during your meetings in Moscow with other former U.S. and Russian ambassadors?

A: Each of us has a distinctive personality, but I believe we all share a conviction that the basic interests of our countries are compatible and that both countries would benefit from cooperation rather than confrontation.

Q: How did it happen that you managed to warn Gorbachev about the impending coup attempt in August 1991?

A: Moscow Mayor Gavriil Popov called on me when Boris Yeltsin was visiting Washington in June 1991. During our conversation he wrote a note asking me to get a message to Yeltsin that a conspiracy was being organized to remove Gorbachev. As we talked of other things, I wrote on his note in Russian, "I'll send a report, but who is behind this?" Popov wrote four names: "Kryuchkov, Yazov, Pavlov and Lukyanov."

President George Bush had a meeting scheduled with Yeltsin the same day. Yeltsin had just been elected president of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, and Bush wanted to persuade him to cooperate with Gorbachev rather than oppose him.

In any event, I received an encrypted telephone call from Washington instructing me to "warn" Gorbachev, but without naming names, since we had no independent confirmation of the information.

I told Gorbachev that we had information that was more than a rumor and we could not confirm it, but President Bush found it sufficiently disturbing that he wanted to inform him. The information, I said, was that a conspiracy was being organized against him and could take place at any time.

Gorbachev thought we were relying on an erroneous intelligence report and did not want Bush to think that his position was weak — Bush was planning to visit Moscow in July — so he laughed off the information but thanked Bush for notifying him.

The next day, when Bush spoke to Gorbachev on the telephone, he mentioned Popov's name, and this was on a telephone line maintained by the KGB.

When the coup attempt did take place in August, three of the persons named were leaders of the infamous putsch, and the fourth seems to have been sympathetic.  

The final ironic twist to this incident is that Bush's slip in naming Popov on a telephone line monitored by the KGB may have contributed to the failure of the attempt to replace Gorbachev in August. Vladimir Kryuchkov, who was organizing the effort, must have learned that he had a leak and therefore stopped planning. One of the reasons for the failure of the August putsch was poor planning — everything seems to have been improvised at the last minute.

Q: What elements of the leadership styles of Reagan and Gorbachev made it possible for them to work together?

A: Reagan's acting skills gave him a strong desire and the unique ability to understand the role his opponents were playing and find a common language.

President Reagan understood that the best way to increase respect for human rights was by private diplomacy. He noted in his diary early in his presidency that we had been "too up-front" in our human rights policy and needed to refocus on private channels. He also recast our comments to avoid direct demands on the Soviet government to do something but instead sought to establish a dialogue over how we could cooperate to improve respect for human rights.

Reagan's leadership style was quite different from Gorbachev's, as were the political systems they headed. But what brought them together was the conviction that they could make a difference — that they were not bound by the policies they had inherited — combined with a passionate hatred of nuclear weapons. They wanted to put the world on a track aimed at eliminating those weapons that have no military utility and are capable of destroying humanity.

Q: What do you think of the Magnitsky Act and the Edward Snowden affair? What role could diplomacy have played to achieve desired results on both sides?

A: I believe the Magnitsky Act was a political mistake, not because the Magnitsky scandal was not a serious matter, but because it is one that only Russians can deal with effectively.

As an American, I find it outrageous that a Congress that cannot pass a budget, that threatens the nation's creditworthiness by playing political games with the debt ceiling, that has a confidence rating among our public in the single digits, would presume to teach other countries the elements of democracy.

At the same time, I would observe that the actions of the State Duma harmed Russian interests more than American ones. Russians must judge whether the emotional satisfaction of "revenge" was worth the cost.

Concerning Snowden, he violated U.S. law and the oath he took when he went to work for the National Security Agency. If he ever returns to the U.S. he will face trial, but not execution. If he had committed the same crime in China or Russia, he would most likely face execution. Anyone who thinks that communications on the internet or through cyberspace are not being intercepted by many different organizations is naХve indeed. But the greatest threat to privacy comes not from governments but from commercial organizations and hackers.

Q: How should policymakers find a balance between the benefit of "private diplomacy" and having to respond to domestic public pressures and values?

A: Of course, every government must take due account of domestic political pressures. Also, by private diplomacy I do not mean that a government should mislead the public. Private diplomacy does not mean duplicitous diplomacy. If negotiations are conducted entirely in public, then special interest groups tend to take over and prevent agreements that meet the needs of both sides. Also, if details of a negotiation are made public too soon, the media tend to treat the negotiations virtually as a sporting event. Who "won" this point or who "lost" that point. Not every starting position is actually in the interest of its proponent. It is the job of negotiators to find solutions where both sides benefit. This is exceedingly difficult if each change of position is scored as a loss.

Q: How do you see the U.S.-Russian diplomatic dynamic evolving vis-á-vis Syria?

A: It is in the interest of both the United States and Russia — and, indeed, all humanity — for the civil war in Syria to end. If the U.S. and Russia can cooperate to persuade the various parties to come to terms, that would be great. But the problem is that neither the U.S. nor Russia can force the parties to come to terms when they are determined not to.

Q: What are some new specific steps or programs that you envision that can help both sides "move past mutual grievances and deal with common threats"?

A: There are many areas where our military forces can cooperate. The NATO Partnership for Peace provides one approach that could work, and there are others. How about training forces from smaller countries for peacekeeping assignments?

Q: Do you have any ideas for cooperation programs that should be initiated by the private sector?

A: The visa agreement concluded a few months ago should make private travel and contacts easier. Individuals and groups in the private sector need to do their own thing with a minimum of governmental interference. The amount of travel and contact in both directions is actually quite encouraging.

Q: Do you have any specific suggestions on how to better curb official corruption and nourish an independent judiciary here in Russia?

A: No. This is something Russians must do for themselves. Of course other countries must be prepared to prosecute malefactors when their own laws are violated. We need more Russian-American cooperation in dealing with organized crime, which preys on both our societies, but with even greater impact on Russia's.

Q: Are there other problems that Russia is facing now where the U.S. has useful experience that could be shared?

A: Russians must determine when and where experience elsewhere is useful. After all, the United States has a very open society. Our faults are much in evidence — at times more than our virtues. But the United States may provide useful examples of how an independent judiciary benefits society and economic development. Our current Congress also provides a negative example of how ideological rigidity and extremism can cripple a legislature.

Q: Who inspires you?

A: Former Secretary of State George Shultz has been an inspiration for his political wisdom, his practical ability to navigate political barriers, and his ability to lead a large and diverse organization and to encourage employees to work as a team. I also find Mikhail Gorbachev a great inspiration, a man who delivered his country from bondage and refused to use force to keep himself in power.

Someday Russians will give him the honor he deserves if they understand his true achievement.  After all, he gave them political space to chart their own destiny. If the results are not what Russians want, they are to blame, not Mikhail Sergeyevich.

The Moscow Times: How 2 Cold War Foes Implemented the INF Treaty

View fullsize

Display of Soviet and American missiles at the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum in Washington DC.

Thirty Soviet inspectors moved to Utah in June 1988 to watch the gates of the Hercules plant, which manufactured Pershing II intermediate-range missiles.

The inspectors painstakingly inspected every exiting vehicle that was long enough to contain a banned missile.

The Americans selected the manufacturer of the Soviet SS-20 intermediate range missile, located near the Ural Mountains. The Votkinsk Machine Building Plant in Udmurtia, which at the time was closed to foreigners, became their target for continuous monitoring of treaty compliance.

The inspections, granted under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, marked the start of cooperation on nuclear arms control between the Cold War foes that has continued to this day, despite recent steps by Russia to curb the work.

"This growing trust has enabled the United States and Russia to work consistently through various international climates to secure and dismantle a vast array of WMDs, pooling our resources to make both nations safer, and indeed, to make the world safer," the U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency said in an e-mailed statement.

The INF Treaty, signed by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and U.S. President Ronald Reagan in 1987, called for the destruction of all nuclear missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers. To this end, teams of inspectors deployed to Magna, Utah, and Votkinsk, the birthplace of composer Pyotr Tchaikovsky, whose father was a manger at the precursor to the modern weapons factory.

The 13-year mission of the Americans, which would later be extended due to START, a treaty on long-range missiles, was slightly more complicated than that of their Russian counterparts in Utah.

The Votkinsk plant, which had a long history of producing missiles, made not only the banned SS-20 but also the SS-25 Topol intercontinental ballistic missile. The Topol, the jewel in the crown of the Soviet strategic rocket forces, is similar to the SS-20 in that it travels on and is launched from the back of a truck. So U.S. inspectors had to be sure the Soviets weren't sneaking a banned SS-20 inside a slightly larger SS-25, whose production was not affected by the INF treaty.

Both sides had to create new government agencies to carry out the treaty work. The Nuclear Risk Reduction Center, headed by strategic rocket forces General Vladimir Medvedev under the Soviet Defense Ministry, was created to manage the inspection process at home and abroad. In the United States, Reagan signed an order creating the On-Site Inspection Agency to do the same.

The On-Site Inspection Agency hired contractors to supply and partially staff the treaty work.

Expanded Cooperation

The success of INF Treaty implementation and the burgeoning spirit of cooperation between the superpowers led to the 1992 Nunn-Lugar Act, which created a program known as Cooperative Threat Reduction. Its goal has been to secure and dismantle weapons of mass destruction and their infrastructure in the former Soviet Union.

In the 20 years the threat reduction program has functioned, billions of dollars have been spent by the United States on everything from destruction of chemical weapons to construction of security systems at nuclear facilities. The vast majority of spending and work has taken place in Russia, under the guidance of the U.S. Energy Department and the successor to the On-Site Inspection Agency, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

The work has been carried out by defense contractors Bechtel, Parsons, URS, Raytheon and others. They in turn have in many cases subcontracted key portions of work to Russian defense industry firms.

The cooperation between U.S. and Russian defense firms has been a key legacy of the original INF effort, as U.S. firms have implemented standard government contracting policies for their work in Russia.

"At first, Russian subcontractors are amazed at the number of forms we make them fill out, and they might not believe they have a chance of winning the business," said a senior U.S. executive with a defense contractor, who asked that his name not be published because he didn't have permission to speak to the media about defense matters. " But in the end, they like working with us because they eventually learn that they are getting a fair deal, even when we have them bid against each other."

The executive believes that the cooperation has broader ramifications.

"A whole generation of military officers and defense industry people on both sides have grown up together and learned to work together and understand each other while working toward a common goal," he said.

The interaction has created long-lasting friendships.

"I retain the greatest respect for the strategic rocket forces officers with whom I worked, especially the late General Medvedev, who was a true gentleman," said George Connell, a Marine colonel who was one of the first U.S. site commanders at Votkinsk. Connell eventually went on to serve as a vice president at Raytheon, where he oversaw the firm's Cooperative Threat Reduction work from 1990 to 2004.

Matrimony was another unexpected outcome of the INF treaty. In the rush to ramp up its ability to manage the incoming American inspectors, the Soviet Defense Ministry hired a batch of young female linguistic graduates to work at the portal monitoring facility, while the U.S. sent mostly male military and contractor inspectors. At least half a dozen marriages came out of relationships formed at the Votkinsk Portal Monitoring Facility. Some gave INF the nickname "International Nuptial Foundation."

Changing Winds

Despite the friendly atmosphere and positive reviews from both sides, Moscow has signaled that the times have charged and that the INF Treaty and the Cooperative Threat Reduction initiative are no longer needed.

"The need for cooperation is significantly less, and the economic situation in Russia has fundamentally changed," Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said in response to e-mailed questions.

As early as February 2007, President Vladimir Putin said the INF Treaty no longer serves Russia's interests. General Yury Baluyevsky, then chief of the General Staff, said at the same time that Russia could pull out of INF due to NATO's plan for a missile shield in Europe.

Behind the scenes, discussions are ongoing about whether and how to continue the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which is set to expire in June. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said in October that Moscow intends to end the 1992 agreement.

But U.S. President Barack Obama this week urged Russia to work with the United States to update the program.

"Russia has said that our current agreement hasn't kept pace with the changing relationship between our countries," Obama told anti-proliferation experts at the National War College in Washington. "Let's work with Russia as an equal partner. Let's continue the work that's so important to the security of both our countries. And I'm optimistic that we can."

Not everyone is so hopeful.

"I'm not very keen to express any optimism for future cooperative work because of the apparent mindset of the current Russian government," said Connell, the former U.S. defense contractor.

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin is equally skeptical about finding a compromise with the U.S. on a variety of defense issues, including U.S. plans to set up a missile defense shield in Europe.

"Concerning the missile defense system and how, as they assure us, it is not directed against Russia, we don't believe in words. Gorbachev believed, but we don't," Rogozin said at a security conference last month, Interfax reported.

"We need a written guarantee that the missile defense system being created in Europe is targeted against [only] short- and medium-range missiles," he said.


Published in The Moscow Times.

The Moscow Times Q&A: 25 Years On, Gorbachev Recalls Nuclear Milestone

View fullsize

Reagan visiting Red Square with Gorbachev after the ratification of INF.

Mikhail Gorbachev regrets the Soviet Union's deployment of hundreds of SS-20 intermediate-range nuclear missiles at bases in Eastern Europe and Western Russia beginning in the late 1970s.

The move prompted the United States to respond by deploying hundreds of Pershing II missiles in Europe — just a five-minute flight from Moscow.

"It was like holding a gun to our head," Gorbachev said in an interview. "It increased the risk of nuclear war, even one that was the result of an accident or technical glitch."

The nuclear brinkmanship ended up laying the groundwork for a treaty that took the world by surprise and began the end of the Cold War 25 years ago this Saturday. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, signed by Gorbachev and U.S. President Ronald Reagan in Washington on Dec. 8, 1987, marked the first time the superpowers had agreed to actually eliminate nuclear weapons. All nuclear missiles with a range of 500 to 5,500 kilometers from both countries' arsenals were to be destroyed, including the SS-20s and Pershing IIs in Europe.

The treaty had an uncommonly explicit 126-page appendix. It contained descriptions, quantities and exact locations — including drawings and map coordinates — of all the storage and launch sites of 846 U.S. and 1,846 Soviet missiles, which were eventually destroyed by June 1991. The elimination process was carried out across the United States, Britain, mainland Europe and the Soviet Union under the watchful eyes of hundreds of inspectors on both sides.

But the truly unique feature of the INF Treaty was the mutual acceptance of "continuous monitoring" of missile manufacturing facilities.

"When the treaty was being readied and the discussion turned to the topic of 'perimeter control,' we insisted that it would apply to the American factory in Utah where such missiles used to be made," Gorbachev said.

Gorbachev, who credits much of his success to his ability to find a common language, reminisced with The Moscow Times by e-mail about his signing of the INF Treaty and said he remains cautiously optimistic despite tensions over Washington's determination to deploy a missile defense shield in Europe and moves by President Vladimir Putin to end post-Soviet cooperation in the destruction of nuclear weapons.

"I welcome President Obama's recent statement about his readiness to cooperate with Russia as an equal partner," said Gorbachev, now 82. "I think it is possible to find a common language and reach agreement on that foundation."

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: What were the internal processes within the Soviet Union that opened the door to the signing of the INF Treaty?

A: Having started perestroika, the Soviet leadership understood the need to move along the process of nuclear disarmament.

This reflected the position of the entire Soviet leadership. We came to the conclusion that the deployment of medium-range missiles in Europe had been a mistake because it allowed the U.S. to install Pershing II missiles within a 5-minute flight time to Moscow.

This was like holding a gun to our head. It increased the risk of nuclear war, even one that was the result of an accident or technical glitch.

Because of that, in Reykjavik, one of our proposals, which had the Politburo's approval, was to mutually liquidate these missiles.

Of course, in order to open the way to that agreement, and then to an agreement on reducing strategic nuclear weapons, it was necessary to resolve many political,  military and technical issues.

The Soviet Union's position was developed in the framework of the so-called "Group of Five," which included top officials from the Defense Ministry and defense industry.

As a result of their discussions, they reached a consensus that the treaty should be signed, and their decision was confirmed by the Politburo.

We expected the treaty would take a first step toward not only ending the nuclear arms race, but also toward substantially reducing the arsenals. This goal was achieved.

Q: How were the details about the treaty's implementation resolved?

A: A bilateral consultative commission resolved all the problems that arose during the implementation of the treaty. I don't remember that it was ever necessary to bring any issues to the personal attention of President Reagan or me.

Overall, we worked under the concept of, "If you want control, OK, but this will be done strictly on the basis of reciprocity."

Because of this, when the treaty was being readied and the discussion turned to the topic of "perimeter control," we insisted that it would apply to the American factory in Utah, where such missiles used to be made. The Americans agreed to that point, eventually.

Q: Do you see the treaty and the process that created it as a model for future agreements?

A: The process of creating the INF Treaty in and of itself was nothing unique. It involved negotiations, bringing separate positions closer together, considering the interests of both sides. But political will was really the principal element. It was exhibited by our side and the American side.

Afterward, unfortunately, the rate of nuclear arms reduction slowed. Only in 2010 did Presidents Obama and Medvedev take a significant step forward by signing the new START treaty, which not only sets reduced levels for strategic weapons, but also involves a mutual system of verification. But further progress in this direction is dependent on the overall demilitarization of international relations.

There is a lot to be alarmed about today. Nuclear arsenals are still huge — overall there are several thousand warheads. Hundreds of tactical nuclear weapons remain in Europe. The Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty has not entered into force. New nuclear powers have emerged, and we are faced with further proliferation of nuclear weapons. A new arms race has begun right before our eyes, and the threat of the militarization of space is looming.

Promises made as part of the joint statement of the 1985 Geneva summit to not seek military superiority are lost in the past. Nearly half of all global military spending is done by one power, the United States. If the situation continues, we can forget about the goal of a nuclear weapons-free world. At some point that rifle will be fired.

The leaders of our two countries must not forget that, as before, the process of nuclear disarmament and avoiding a nuclear war is the responsibility of two powers— the United States and Russia.

The Moscow Times Q&A: Media Mogul Peter Gerwe Keeps Earning and Learning

View fullsize

Gerwe’s management secret s promote from within and invest in training.

There is some training money just can't buy.

After 30 years of doing business in Russia, Californian Peter Gerwe is qualified to conduct several unique master classes: "Leveraging regional and federal authorities," "How to be a big entrepreneur but stay under the radar," and for those even less risk averse, "How to differentiate oligarchs and live to tell about it."

Gerwe, 53, now serving as head of Fortune-300 conglomerate Sistema's media empire, doesn't offer such seminars, but he easily could. He says the out-of-the-box thinking that allowed him to come here long ago, make good friends, build one of the first FM radio stations in Russia, the first private television network and other unique media properties was influenced by his early mentor and boss, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak.

"Woz was a pretty inspirational guy," Gerwe said in an interview. "His mindset was different. He was a little out there in those days — to say, 'Let's do a satellite link with the Soviet Union.' And you'd say, 'What?'"

But, after saying, "What?" Gerwe organized the first "telemost," as the link was called, so a Soviet studio audience could appear on the screens of one of the rock concerts on the U.S. West coast organized by Wozniak in 1982.

The telemost effort gained him a reputation as someone who could get things done in the Soviet Union, which led to his involvement in Western rock star tours. Gerwe's friends in Moscow saw the opportunities that Mikhail Gorbachev's liberalizations were creating and invited him to start a venture. He combined his growing experience with the sense of vision that "Woz" had imbued in him, and proposed the radical idea of starting the rock-and-roll FM radio station. A healthy does of persistence was useful, too.

"I said it will be the coolest thing in the whole city … and it shouldn't be too scary to the authorities, since in 1989 nobody was on that band," he said. "It took two years to get the licenses. Everyone said, 'No, no, no.' Then finally we got a yes."

The next venture, which started in 1996, involved building from scratch the CTC entertainment TV network, which eventually spanned nine cities with 350 affiliates and is now traded on NASDAQ with a market cap of about $2.5 billion. In the process, he managed to fend off a hostile takeover from Vladimir Gusinsky and befriend the founders of Alfa Group, whom Gerwe calls "fantastic partners," before exiting in a successful IPO.

Peter Gerwe

Education

1981 — University of Santa Clara, Communications major

Work Experience

1982-90 — Various media projects in the Soviet Union, including telemosts, and rock concerts. 
1991-2006 — Set up Radio Maximum, one of the first FM stations in Russia, and CTC, the first privately owned nationwide television network, now traded on NASDAQ. 
2006-10 — Created HELLO! Magazine, Russia's first and market-leading celebrity glossy, and Corvette Telecom, a broadband Internet company.   
2010-12 — Led buyout of News Outdoor in Russia; set up Hello TV globally
2012-Present — President/CEO Sistema Mass Media

Favorite book: The Aubrey/Maturin novels by Patrick O'Brian   
Movie pick: “Avatar” (2009) directed by James Cameron
Favorite Moscow restaurant: Na Dalny Vostok, 15 Tverskoi Bulvar, Bldg. 2
Weekend Getaway Destination: anywhere in Italy

He told The Moscow Times that in his latest role — president of Sistema Mass Media, where he manages 500 people creating digital and video content for MTS, other Sistema subsidiaries and the consumer market — he is fulfilling the goal he set for himself to transform from entrepreneur to corporate leader, all the while reveling in the learning process.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Q: What brought you here 30 years ago?

A: I was working for Steve Wozniak right after college in 1982. Apple had just gone public, and he made a ton of money. He wanted to do a West Coast equivalent of Woodstock with a U.S. Festival. We had the biggest artists: The Police, David Bowie, U2. Woz had all these wild ideas. We designed the first stage with video screens. I was head of production.

We wanted to do creative and interesting things for the audience of 100,000 to 200,000 people who were sitting there for 30 to 40 minutes between set changes. So the idea was to use the screens to entertain them: show spaceships and helicopters landing; have people talking back and forth. MTV had just launched, and we had VJ's appear. Then Steve said, "Let's do a satellite link up with Soviet television." So I got the task and we did the first "space bridge," or telemost.

Q: How did you set up such a thing back then?

A: We called a bunch of friends and contacts, found out who the "private diplomats" were, got the name of a person who did this stuff unofficially and paid him a consultant fee. We started talking to Gosteleradio, the Soviet agency responsible for television and radio. The first telemost was between a Soviet TV studio and one of our music festivals, in 1982. It was very much controlled by them, but they were intrigued by the idea — satellites, Apple computers, Wozniak. They liked the result and then put it on TV.

Their motivation? Well, it was the Ronald Reagan evil empire days; there was no communication between the countries. This represented world peace, global communications, and it was controllable. They positioned it as Soviets on the cutting edge. Pure propaganda.

This was when Vladimir Pozner came over from radio to TV. He was very articulate on stage, and it worked.

Then I started getting telexes from Gosteleradio: "Please come to Moscow. We want to do more of these things." I guess some Politburo member saw it, said it was a cool idea, and told them to do more.

I get off the plane in Moscow in a "Surf California" T-shirt and jeans. I'm still the simple Californian. There were these guys right at the plane, with my name on a sign. "We are looking for Mr. Gerwe. Is the executive on the plane? Are you his aide? We really need to find him." It took me 20 minutes to convince them who I was. You could just see the disappointment on their faces.

I got in the Chaika limousine, and we drove in the center lane. Then I found myself in a meeting with the chairman of Soviet television. I had put on a suit and was properly presentable, and we agreed on doing another five-six space bridges, which led to the space-bridge industry in the early '80s.

Q: And what was the follow on?

A: Since the music industry was involved in our two U.S. festivals, for years after that I would get phone calls to do Russian media. I helped organize the Billy Joel tour of Moscow and Leningrad.

Then in the late '80s, my Soviet friends in Gosteleradio started contacting me, saying things were changing: "We can do cooperatives, small businesses, but we need a Western partner. You've got the passport. So what should we do?"

On the Pan Am flight over, I read about a radio station in San Francisco that had just sold for $100 million — an unconceivable amount of money for me at that time. And there were no radio stations in Russia on 88 to 106 — Western FM was empty. So I said, "Let's get a frequency and build a radio station." They at first said, "No." They couldn't believe it.

We did a little market survey, to the extent that we could, and learned that there was 30 percent penetration of devices that could listen to FM. Boom boxes and so forth.

I said it would be the coolest thing in the whole city to have Western rock 'n' roll on the radio. And it shouldn't be too scary to the authorities, since in 1989 nobody was on that band. They would doubt that a large number of people could listen to it.

Q: How did you put the company together?

A: I was dealing with new up-and-comers in Gosteleradio. A lot of them are still in media today. It took two years to get the licenses. Everyone said, "no, no, no." Then finally we got a yes.

I had a little money. We started a company called Story First Communications. I put together a partnership with

Westwood One Radio Networks, an American radio programming company, and Harris Corporation for the equipment. I just called the presidents of these companies and said, "I am putting together a radio station in Moscow, and I need you to invest in the equipment. We'll give you equity. It will be your foothold." They agreed, and we started Radio Maximum.

We spent a lot of time negotiating with Moskovskiye Novosti. We viewed the newspaper as the best partner. They gave us space, people and rubles. We negotiated that there would be no news. Just music. If there would be any news, it would be about Madonna's bra size and what's going on in the pop industry. No hard news. We decided to launch on Jan. 1, 1992, and formulated a marketing strategy that we would do one week of pure Beatles music — no station ID, no call sign, no interruptions — just Beatles song after Beatles song. On Dec. 25, 1991, Christmas Day, we put on "All You Need Is Love" as the first song, then "Back in the U.S.S.R." We were sitting in the control room having Champagne. Then someone walked in and said Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin had signed documents about the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The editor of MN came in and said, "We need to make an announcement, this is historic news." And I said, "Wait a minute, we agreed no news." Well, we had a long negotiation. I did not change my mind. No news. Finally, we negotiated a terse statement. "We just want to inform you that today …" Clean and simple. We played it two or three times. It was the only news ever to appear on Radio Maximum.

Q: How did you handle sales and marketing?

A: I never had any formal business education, but I remember walking into the advertising sales guy's office and asking him what his plan was. He looked at the phone and said, "I'm waiting for it to ring." I explained to him that he needed to be calling out. Radio is about sales. Take 10, replace the bottom two, and you need a good sales manager. Westwood sent guys to help teach us how to do it.

Q: What advice would you give about picking partners?

I partnered with the Communications Ministry early on because they were technical but with no knowledge of media, which is what I had. I always had the best relations with them. We formed friendships, even if it was a little too much drinking in the early days.

We were always very good partners, straight, no games. I really liked the people I worked with. They were my friends. And the people at the Russian Satellite Communications Company, like Boris Chirkov, helped us to build CTC television. We were late with payments sometimes, but they were still cobbling together this, and making that work.

I think sometimes it's better to partner a little bit later, to build the operations and lay the groundwork first. It worked for us with CTC.

If you are talking about a bigger deal, $100 million or more, a Russian partner is critical.

Q: How did you wind up starting a television station?

A: My friends in the ministry said radio was small, let's do television. I met a guy who had been the Communications Ministry man in Leningrad, and he had the first 24-hour private TV frequency in the country. He had a cooperative. He was a step away from Moscow, so he got less attention. We bought 50 percent of the company and invested. We did "tower" deals — working with the people at the broadcasting towers. This is the most important part: with transmission equipment, frequencies, broadcast infrastructure.

We started this station, and it was doing fine. But Moscow seemed too big, so I said, "Let's do all the other million-plus cities." Our guy went right to his tower colleagues. We could have gone to the mayors' offices and tried to get through the official way, but it's so difficult to work with those guys. The tower guys had the frequencies, so we just went directly to the tower guys and made deals.

We built seven or eight stations outside Moscow, so we were off everybody's radar screen. Then we came to Moscow and bought a channel that had almost no coverage in the city. We went to Mostelecom, the local cable system, and helped them refinance, so they could wire the whole city, and upgraded them from six channels to 12 channels, including ours.

We launched CTC as a station group, and then we signed on affiliates. Private stations were starting, but they didn't have programming. So we put in our plan that we'd have 30 affiliates by the end of year one, 100 by the end of year two, and full coverage by the end of year four. Well, by the end of year one we had 350 affiliates — it took off like a rocket. So all of a sudden we had a national television network.

Q: What keeps you here?

A: This Sistema job is really interesting for me professionally because I wanted to get into a large market cap company. Until 2010, all I did was work in green field: start it, build it and sell it. I didn't want to anymore: too small, too difficult and it takes too long.

I want to take a company that's worth $100 million and turn it into a billion in three to four years. I think I can do it.

I really like Vladimir Yevtushenkov and Mikhail Shamolin. It's real important to me to like who I am working for. Yevtushenkov has great vision. I might think a few months ahead, but he thinks years ahead. He's got vision, people and energy. These guys are at the top of their world in what I want to do, which is big corporations and how to make them work.

Sistema is a good learning ground, enormous and very rigid, like Time Warner. And I have a lot of resources to move things around. I can buy and sell companies. It's more like chess moves than the roll-up-your-sleeves and heavy lifting of being an entrepreneur. You get to play in a bigger field. It's a different skill and a real learning experience for me.

Q: How do you deal with corruption?

I think it's a real issue. For me as an individual, it's both an advantage and disadvantage. It's an advantage because everyone knows it's very straight and simple with me. I get a lot of deal flow, people willing to partner. This is because people know we just don't participate in corruption. We are very honest and straightforward. People know there is no agenda behind the scenes. For me, a handshake is just as good as a contract.

Philosophically, I look at Russia as in the early days of any country opening up and changing its markets. Look at the U.S. in the early days, the robber barons, who were the same thing as oligarchs. I've got to hope that the market will eventually work itself out. The Russian model will be the Russian model. It won't be the American one or something else. It's an enormously proud and wealthy country, and it will develop as it needs to develop. Corruption will work itself out of the systemic problem that it is today. It is inhibiting the growth of the country.

I do have issues with some people's personal interest. Let's say somebody walks into the office and says we need to build a new building for this company and it needs to have a complete new technical layout. You ask, "What is wrong with the old one?" It could be that the person wants to spend $50 million on equipment so he can get $1 million back from the supplier.

You look at him and start thinking, "What is his real motivation?" And that's really unpleasant. What do you do? You break it down. "Do we really need it? What would it cost in the West?" But you have to be smart about it. You can see the patterns. If they're blatant about it, then they don't last in the company.

Q: What is your strategy for management?

You surround yourself with good people who are smarter than you, honest, hungry to learn, work, improve themselves and develop. And you build a culture that supports that. Promote from within. Invest in training. Encourage people at all levels to develop. Tell them, "This is your job or your area. How is it going to be the best?" And we don't like office politics and backstabbing. We cut it off right away. People who don't fit in the team don't stay.

The key in the companies that I've built so far is that the teams are very tight. We have very little turnover of people; we try to stay salary competitive, but I'm always pushing people to learn, always supporting development, always promoting from within the organization; so the teams are very tight. The old CTC team still gets together; the same for Radio Maximum.

The higher you get in an organization, the more you rely on your team. You can do very little at the top in terms of getting things done yourself. You can do three things well as a CEO or owner: The first is vision. You need to provide a clear vision of where you are going. Start with the end in mind. Where do we want to be in four years? How do we get there? Look back and break it down. If you don't know, then develop it with your team.

People is the second area for me. Get good people, keep them, support their development, pay them well, and demand results.

Third, for a leader, is energy. You need to rally people and get them going. If you are having fun and you like what you are doing, it's pretty easy to do.

I always try to be very clear about roles and responsibilities. Anytime there is a gray area, or there are two people in charge of one thing, that comes back as a problem. It doesn't work.

You learn to do protocols of meetings. Everyone agrees and puts their initials at the bottom. A little bit of formality is important. So I tell my people, "Don't bring me something to sign if your initials are not on it." I learned that here.

Q: Have you had any negative experiences with the business environment?

A: Around 1996 we realized we needed a Russian partner at CTC, so I started talking to some potential Russian partners, and I met Vladimir Gusinsky. He was very simple and straightforward. He said, "You did a great job. Beautiful company. Unbelievable to have accomplished that. But let us take it over."

That's when I learned what "attack" due diligence is. You just go to the leader in a sector and say, "I want to buy you." Then you send in your teams, get all their information, look at all their contracts and learn everything you want about the company. I learned this from Gusinsky.

We thought we were cool, the big guys, before we started talking about prices and term sheets and other things we should have done first. Clearly, I was uneducated.

Gusinsky wanted to buy 51 percent, and we wanted to sell 100 percent. But his value was one-tenth what we thought it should be. So we said, "Thank you very much and goodbye." And he said, "No, wait. It's not that easy. Either sell it at this price, or we'll take the company — your management and your licenses."

The next day the general manager and the top five deputies resigned. Gusinsky had already gone to them and doubled their salaries.

Then we started having problems with every frequency in every city. I got calls from governors and mayors. For the next year we were fighting for our frequencies.

There were two issues that worked to our advantage. The federal and local authorities were locked in a power struggle. To the credit of federal authorities, they were honorable and backed us up, saying, "You have the license, you have the frequencies." We did our own work with the locals. Gusinsky would go to a mayor, and we'd go to the governor. We only lost one city: Omsk.

I wound up meeting with Andrei Kosogov, the head of Alfa Capital, and Mikhail Fridman and Pytor Aven. They were fantastic partners. They sold their stake for $1.1 billion last year. This has to be their best return on investment. I loved the time I spent with them.

Q: Who inspires you?

A: In addition to Woz, I always enjoy people who are smarter than I am. At a meeting they are often the ones out in front of you, and you are trying to keep up with them, like some Russian business leaders. I keep imagining that they are like the Rockefellers. These guys don't get to where they are by being ruthless. They are fast, they think quickly, they have vision, and they take risks. I give them a lot of credit. Certainly, Russian groups fight each other. That's their business. I don't get involved. You can see problem areas and just stay away from them.