The Toronto Star, November 26, 2000
Activists Urging Putin To Turn Green
By Paul Webster
Elderly, poor and powerless, Russian biologist Alexei Yablokov doesn't appear much of a contender in his fight with the president of one of the world's largest countries.
But with the signatures of more than 2.5 million of his countrymen behind him, Yablokov is betting even Vladimir Putin, Russia's ultra-tough new president, will have to take notice of what is shaping up to be a major showdown over Russia's environment.
From the cramped living room of his apartment in a dilapidated Moscow highrise, Yablokov, who in the mid-'90s was former president Boris Yeltsin's environmental adviser, has spent recent months collecting signatures on a petition aimed at forcing Putin to reverse a crucial set of initiatives.
"For the Russian environmental movement, it's the biggest event in at least a dozen years," he says.
The world of political activism, Russian-style, scored a minor triumph Wednesday, when the State Duma, the
lower house of parliament, postponed a vote on three draft laws Yablokov's group has fought to overturn.
The bills, backed by the Atomic Energy Ministry (MINATOM), would overturn current federal law and allow the importation of nuclear waste for the next 10 to 15 years.
It all started last March.
Russian environmentalists obtained a copy of a strategy paper from MINATOM proposing construction of dozens of new nuclear stations. This was worrying enough for anti-nuclear campaigners like Yablokov.
But what really raised eyebrows was MINATOM's proposal to pay for the nuclear building spree by generating cash from storing and reprocessing up to 20,000 tonnes of spent nuclear fuel from reactors in as many as 14 countries in Asia and Europe.
MINATOM predicted a profit of $10 billion a year from the plan, but noted the government would have to change legislation that currently prevents nuclear waste imports.
Because reprocessing spent nuclear reactor fuel creates significant quantities of radioactive waste, including
plutonium, it has long been opposed as an environmental threat by critics who argue spent nuclear fuel should be stored in safe facilities.
By the time MINATOM's strategy became public, draft legislation aimed at lifting the nuclear import ban was
already making its way through the Russian parliament.
"It's an extremely aggressive policy," says Yablokov, "and we realized right away it had to be stopped."
But the real crisis for Russian environmentalists was still a few weeks ahead.
In mid-May, Putin, fresh in office and determined to clear a path for ambitious measures aimed at invigorating
the economy, suddenly abolished the country's two main environmental agencies.
Environmentalists were left gasping.
"This is like putting an alcoholic in charge of the vodka," quipped Viktor Danilov-Danilyan, head of the state
committee on the environment, after learning of Putin's decree to hand the committee's responsibilities to the
ministry of natural resources.
Although the government claimed the decision would simplify regulation, environmentalists were astounded.
"The ministry of natural resources was created to exploit nature," says Yablokov, "and the environment
committee was created to protect it. It's an obvious conflict of interest for the ministry to be given both jobs."
Polls suggested strong public opposition both to the nuclear reprocessing proposal and the decree abolishing
the environmental committees.
With environmental complaints to the government going unanswered, Yablokov and other activists linked to
Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Committee hatched a plan.
They decided to use a little-known 1995 law to attempt to force the government to consult the public via a
referendum. Success would be a first for Russia and the beginning of what could Putin's first major setback.
Under the referendum law, environmentalists had 90 days to collect two million signatures on a petition in at
least 60 of Russia's 89 regions.
The work had to be done by individuals without financial support from any of the groups concerned.
"We were skeptical it could be done here," says Igor Chestin, Russia director for the World Wildlife Fund.
"Communication is difficult in Russia. But there is enormous worry now about the government's intentions."
Thousands of campaigners got involved in Moscow, St. Petersburg and all the way across Russia to Vladivostok.
By mid-October, more than 3 million names were on the referendum petition, although more than 500,000 were removed from the final petition submitted to the Russian Electoral Commission.
Several previous petitions were rejected by the commission after signatures were challenged.
With months of waiting and rigorous procedural hurdles ahead, serious worries began blunting organizers' confidence soon after the signatures were submitted to the commission at the end of October.
"It looks like the Electoral Commission has been asked not to accept the signatures," Chestin now says.
"Initially, they were saying they never saw such high-quality signatures. But there was a very sharp change in the last few days. In Voronish, 400 kilometres south of Moscow, one man learned his signature was challenged. He went to the commission and authenticated his signature, but was told it still will not be counted."
Yablokov agrees the referendum drive will likely be derailed by procedural obstacles, either through challenges to signatures by the Electoral Commission, or through a legal challenge from the federal Constitutional Court, which reviews petitions after they are approved by electoral officials.
Instead of requiring Putin to present the public with a chance to vote on the nuclear waste and environmental regulation issues, the court could rule against the legal soundness of the petition.
"We worry about Putin's attitude to the environment," says Yablokov, who like most Russian environmentalists, remembers comments Putin made before entering politics suggesting foreign environmentalist groups pose a security threat to Russia.
"It's early in his term, but his actions have been disturbing. At the very least, the referendum call has generated public attention."
In the last 10 years, the human fallout due to the former Soviet Union's nuclear programs has been well-documented.
Some 61 million out of 145 million Russians live in towns with dangerous levels of contamination, according to the state environment committee, the agency disbanded by Putin.
At a recent news conference, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov hinted at opposition to a referendum by suggesting "the vote could only be an emotional decision." Referring to public concern over the MINATOM plan to import spent nuclear fuel, he said "only scientists and specialists can find the truth and the right solutions."
MINATOM spokesperson Yuri Bespalko says the public may have been misinformed by the petition it was asked to sign.
"If you ask people on the street if they oppose importing nuclear waste, of course they say yes, but we don't consider spent fuel to be waste.
"We see it as an extremely valuable energy product which can be reprocessed. This is done in Japan, China, Britain and France. I think parliament will be in favour of allowing Russia to enter the world market. It's a tremendous lever for the economy."
Yablokov rejects any suggestion of confusion about nuclear fuel.
"They try to put a clean face on a dirty game. Spent nuclear fuel is considered waste in Europe and America.
"Nobody wants this material imported here. We'll be the waste basket of the world. Reprocessing creates an enormous quantity of new radioactive waste. It's absolutely unacceptable."
The Duma is expected to hold hearings on the reprocessing issue next month, and new legislation could be passed to suit the MINATOM plan early in the new year.
"We are trying to convince the Duma to change the law," says Bespalko. "Our minister and deputy ministers are giving a lot of time to that."
In the light of MINATOM's determination and the government's seeming support, Chestin of the World Wildlife Fund echoes Yablokov's doubts about the prospects for a referendum.
But he sees the petition drive as a milestone nonetheless.
"I would say this will not disappear. We now have a totally different Green movement than we had three or four months ago," he says.
"A policy of not listening will not work."
Paul Webster is a producer with CBC-TV.
Back to the Publications page
Back to the first page on Abolishing of Russian Environmental Agencies
Back to the If Everything OK With Forests In Russia page
| 
