21 May 2004 04:07
Russia "in no position" to host Olympics - view
Russia's short-listing as a candidate to host the Olympics in 2012 was the subject of Russian NTV's
"Freedom of Speech" discussion programme on 21 May.
Ice hockey legend and Duma MP Vladislav Tretyak, Vladimir Zhirinovskiy, Deputy PM Aleksandr Zhukov and Moscow's
deputy mayor, Valeriy Shantsev, were some of those who took part in it. The programme was presented by Savik
Shuster.
Most were certain - though some doubted it - that it would do Russia a world of good to host the games. The argument
of the doubters was that priority had to be given to other issues such as poverty reduction before Russia could
contemplate anything like this. Those in favour took the view that it would be worth it, both financially and as a
matter of national pride with a strong element of the principle "nothing ventured, nothing gained" in
evidence.
There was a marked divide between those who represent the population of Moscow and Russia's regions as to the
value of the undertaking, with the regions of the opinion any wealth to be generated would fail to reach the provinces.
The debate otherwise centred round issues such as the economic advantageousness of the Olympics if the games took place
in Russia, as illustrated below.
Noteworthy contributions to the debate on the subject, which Shuster described as "big politics", included
that from Konstantin Remchukov, of the Union of Right Forces, who, by way of highlighting the regional discrepancies in
the levels of development and prosperity, described Moscow as an anomaly. "Moscow is an enclave," he said,
which "has more of a connection with the outside world than with Russia". He thought Russia's chances
were not high as it had just scraped through as one of the cities short-listed.
His conclusion was that "Russia is now in no position" to host the games. "What is most important,
however, is that - from the point of view of economic policy - it has no need for the Olympics. This is a false friend.
We have other aims which Russia must deal with," he said. In particular, he thought, "it should bridge the gap
in, level out, regional development".
As Zhukov argued that the Olympics would help bring this about, Remchukov countered: "How can they help bring
this about if it'll be another case of investment out of all proportion with any other region?" So if we
compare Russia to a "one-storey" block, Shuster suggested, then Moscow, according to Remchukov, is a
"20-storey one now but will become 40 storeys high if this happens". Moscow, he said, should be
"ashamed" that it is so far ahead of the rest of Russia, which in his view made Moscow's bid
"somewhat immoral even".
Zhirinovskiy's concerns had to do with the prospect that preparations for the games could prove to be a drain on
state resources, but took the form of questions to speakers. There was to be no diatribe on the subject.
Yuriy Boldyrev's (formerly of the Audit Chamber) was another voice of dissent. He was uneasy about the risk that
treasury funds, if made available, could be misappropriated.
He said: "I'm not so much against. But I would like people to have a clear understanding of what this is
most likely to mean in the present conditions." He explained: "Huge numbers of not only athletes but also -
and mainly - fraudsters circle around this."
He referred to his experience as deputy head of the Audit Chamber, between 1995 and 2000, when various dodgy deals
consumed a "vast amount of money" on the pretext of the need to invest money from the state's coffers in
the training of Russia's Olympic athletes. Many if not all the officials involved in those affairs are still in
office today. Thus, the implications of any similar scenario now in terms of corruption, he thought, are grave.
[NTV Mir] |
RUSSIA IN FACTS
