Guest
Excerpts from an Interview with the Chief Editors of the Newspapers Komsomolskaya Pravda, Izvestia, Moskovsky Komsomolets and 4 March 22,2001. Moscow. Интервью главным редакторам газет «Комсомольская правда», «Известия», «Московский комсомолец», «Труд» 22 марта 2001 года. Москва. Now about the year 2003. It is true that due payments will peak in 2003. To compound the situation the countrys basic assets are rundown and that situation may also reach a critical point by 2003. But there will be no emergency. On the one hand, society understands the situation we are in, and that is very important. It is a problem that engages the minds not only of the President and the Government, but also of the State Duma deputies. They are aware of it and they are designing policy, including in the budgetary sphere, accordingly. That is one thing. And secondly, the economic forecasts warrant optimistic conclusions. Yes, the years ahead will be difficult, and this year in particular will be difficult. But, I repeat, we do not expect a cataclysm, and we will safely pass that peak. A. POTAPOV: This leads me to a question that is not new, but that is still, unfortunately, relevant. What do you think about the situation, which has lasted for many years, concerning the flow of money abroad? You know the figures well; last year an estimated 30 billion dollars escaped abroad. Are any options available, for example, an amnesty of capital or perhaps some decisions are in the pipeline that would protect the investor and create a normal and healthy competitive environment, which ultimately hinges on the need to reform the judiciary? What are your thoughts on this matter? VLADIMIR PUTIN: This is not a problem that belongs in the domain of criminal law. It is an economic and not a criminal problem. As for amnesty of capital, by and large, I have nothing against it. It is not a bad measure to create certain conditions for the functioning of the market, for the inflow of capital and investments, but it is not the only measure and it is definitely not sufficient by itself. Just to announce that nobody will be prosecuted for taking capital out of the country and then expect money to come running here would be absurd, I think. We have to create a good climate for investment. The worst that we can do is to bang the table with our fist and cry, Seize them and dont let them go. Then capital will certainly flee the country on a still larger scale. This is borne out by the experience of a number of countries that have passed through the same stages of development as us. It may seem odd, but the only way to keep capital from leaving is to liberalise the capital market, though of course to regulate this process up to a point. If you are a potential investor you face the question where to invest: in Russia, in China or India or in some European country. If you know that in a certain country the setup is such that if you invest 10 million dollars you will never be able to take that money out, the chances are you wont invest there. And if you are confident that the money you have invested in a countrys economy will yield a profit and you will be free to dispose of the profit under that countrys law (which you know, understand and which is sure to be in place at least long enough for your investments to pay back), then you will not be afraid to invest there and will not remove capital from there. So, there needs to be a certain economic and political stability. Why move your capital somewhere else if you are quite happy here? One usually leaves well alone. Well, we have to create such favourable investment conditions. Then there will be no flight of capital. No coercive means and methods will bring the money back. We must create a favourable climate for investment.
