WikiLeaks (42 page)

Labour’s Financial Woes

5. (C/NF) The lack of energy that hung like a pall over the keynote speech was evident elsewhere, either because of low attendance or the party’s financial woes. Labour members groused that conference organizers had chosen a bad weekend – Welsh members stayed away to attend the March 1 St. David’s Day festivities back home (St. David is the patron saint of Wales and his feast day is a Welsh nationalist obligation). And the
March 2 observance of Mother’s Day in Britain put many prospective attendees in the position of choosing between the Labour Party and their “mums.” Judging by the turnout, Mum won in many cases. Labour Party workers, who have been living on a shoestring for the past several years, were scarce on the ground. Those who were present were not particularly motivated: asked for a copy of the Prime Minister’s speech, one party worker referred Poloff to the website version which, several hours later, had not yet been updated to reflect extensive changes in delivery. Some Labour members, noting the party’s financial straits, asked why so much money had been spent on the Labour deputy leader race in 2007, noting that the money raised by the candidates would have been better spent to support the party’s local campaigns this year.

Female Recruitment

6. (C) Organized around three key themes, the Conference focused on recruiting female candidates, improving communications with minority communities, and enhancing Labour’s performance on local government. The three areas were selected with a view to preparing for local elections but there seemed to be a disconnect between the state of those efforts and the imminence of the May elections. Regarding women’s empowerment, MP Barbara Follett provided advice on presenting oneself effectively as a woman candidate to an audience of about 25 women that included only one prospective, not active, candidate. (Embassy comment: While Labour rightly congratulates itself on having more female MPs that the Tories, the recruitment/empowerment process at the conference appeared to be still in its early stages. End comment.) Local Labour organizations and the trades unions, according to other speakers on women’s issues, are where women have to rise through the ranks without much help from the central party apparatus.

Reaching out to Muslim Voters

7. (C) Ten people (including Poloff) showed up at an event aimed at improving Labour outreach to Muslim communities. (Embassy comment: Given Labour’s loss of Muslim support following the Iraq War, the low turnout by party activists at this event was inexplicable. End comment.) Manchester Councilor and former Lord Mayor Afzal Khan provided recommendations to Labour candidates looking for votes in Muslim communities, including: use “As Salam Aleikum” as a greeting; don’t get hung up on shaking hands with females; call into Muslim radio programs; send cards for Muslim religious holidays; and wait outside mosques on Friday to hand out leaflets. Labour MEP Gary Titley from Bolton also provided the earnest advice to avoid assuming that all Muslims hold identical views and to maintain links with community-based organizations. One British Muslim from Nottingham rose to describe what he felt was suppression of a large Muslim contingent in his local Labour party; Khan told him there was a democratic process and the Muslims in Nottingham should use it.

8. (SBU) Secretary for Communities and Local Government Hazel Blears led the way on Labour’s achievements in local government. Birmingham’s revitalized town center, including the conference center that was the venue for the event, were held up as Labour achievements, as was London Mayor Ken Livingstone’s record in “revitalizing London.” In break out groups, however, there was one ominous session on “effective opposition.” Labour members complained that for Labour councilors – who are on the front lines, so to speak, against Tory and LibDem-dominated councils – there is little or no support from the party in either substantive policy terms or personal assistance.

Miliband’s Star Power

9. (C/NF) In an otherwise low key conference, the frisson of excitement whenever Foreign Secretary David Miliband appeared was palpable. The European Parliament Labour Party lunch-time event on the Lisbon Treaty that featured Miliband as speaker drew a packed hall. He followed that appearance by a session with over a hundred Labour Students who clearly idolized him. Stumbling into what was belatedly revealed as a “private session,” Poloff heard Miliband outline his criteria for a “successful country” of the future: openness, empowerment of the whole population, and global linkages. There is increasingly less of a distinction between foreign and domestic policies, he told the students, and the challenge is to mobilize people to change. The lessons of the 80s and 90s are that “rainbow coalitions don’t work;” in order to mobilize “dynamic forces,” political leaders must develop a unifying narrative or ideology. In this respect, Labour must decide if it is the party of the working class or the party of the middle class. Answering questions on foreign policy, Miliband supported UN reform and noted the “real issue” at the UN is the UN’s failure to deliver on its “responsibility to protect,” because most threats to civilians come from their own governments and not foreign invasions. He defended UK participation in China’s Olympic games as an opportunity to shine a light on “the real China, warts and all.” He emphasized that Iran represented dangers not just in nuclear weapons development and support for terrorism but also through its own domestic human rights practices; for example, he noted that Iran has the highest per capita rate of capital punishment in the world.

Comment

10. (C/NF) Labour members have been increasingly asking themselves the same question raised by the student from Cardiff:
what makes Labour “radical” after nearly 11 years in government? For a party that still contains a large element who feel more comfortable in opposition,
such self-questioning contributes to a feeling of post-Blair rudderlessness. Even though Blair ended up unpopular, he was the sun around which the party orbited, and his speeches, no matter the content, sparked an emotional response. Brown’s earnest and praiseworthy vision excites no opposition and yet it seems to excite no great enthusiasm either.
With two months to go before local elections, a financially-constrained Labour hardly seemed on the verge of mobilizing for a campaign that will not only determine Labour’s fortunes on the local level, but may also affect Gordon Brown’s own tenure as leader. The poorly attended conference lacked the buzz that a strong parliamentary party representation would have provided and, Miliband’s star power notwithstanding, there was no catwalk of prospective challengers to Brown. But the irony of Labour’s holding up Ken Livingstone as a model of Labour achievement, only eight years after his expulsion from the party for running for London mayor as an independent, was not lost on the UK media.

TUTTLE

MOSCOW MAYOR OVERSEES
CORRUPT SYSTEM, SAYS US

Friday, 12 February 2010, 15:39

SECRET SECTION 01 OF 03 MOSCOW 000317

SIPDIS

EO 12958 DECL: 02/11/2020

TAGS PGOV, PREL, PHUM, PINR, ECON, KDEM, KCOR, RS”>RS

SUBJECT: THE LUZKHOV DILEMMA

Classified By: Ambassador John R. Beyrle. Reason: 1.4 (b), (d).

1. (C) Summary: Moscow Mayor Yuriy Luzhkov remains a loyal member of United Russia, with a reputation for ensuring that the city has the resources it needs to function smoothly. Questions increasingly arise regarding Luzhkov’s connections to the criminal world and the impact of these ties on governance. Luzhkov remains in a solid position due to his value as a consistent deliverer of votes for the ruling party. Unfortunately, the shadowy world of corrupt business practices under Luzhkov continues in Moscow, with corrupt officials requiring bribes from businesses attempting to operate in the city. End Summary.

Overview: The Kremlin’s Luzhkov Dilemma

2. (C) Moscow Mayor Yuriy Luzhkov is the embodiment of political dilemma for the Kremlin. A loyal, founding member of United Russia and a trusted deliverer of votes and influence for the ruling party and its leader, Prime Minister Putin, Luzhkov’s connections to Moscow’s business community – the big and legitimate as well as the marginal and corrupt – has enabled him to call for support when he needs it, to deliver votes for United Russia, or to ensure that the city has the resources it needs to function smoothly. Luzhkov’s national reputation as the man who governs the ungovernable, who cleans the streets, keeps the Metro running and maintains order in Europe’s largest metropolis of almost
11 million people, earns him a certain amount of slack from government and party leaders. He oversaw what even United Russia insiders acknowledge was a dirty, compromised election for the Moscow City Duma in October, and yet received only a slap on the wrist from President Medvedev.

3. (C) Muscovites are increasingly questioning the standard operating procedures of their chief executive, a man who, as of 2007, they no longer directly elect. Luzhkov’s connections to the criminal world and the impact that these ties have had on governance and development in Moscow are increasingly a matter of public discussion. Although Luzhkov was successful in winning court-ordered damages from opposition leader Boris Nemtsov for his recent publication “Luzhkov: An Accounting,” Nemtsov and his Solidarity-movement allies were heartened by the fact that the judge did not award damages on the basis of the corruption accusations themselves, but rather on a libel technicality.

4. (C) Few believe that Luzhkov will voluntarily relinquish his post prior to 2012, when the Moscow City Duma must submit a list of mayoral candidates to Medvedev for his selection. United Russia will probably call on Luzhkov’s political machine and his genuine public support to deliver votes for them in the 2011 State Duma elections, as well as the 2012 Presidential contest. With no apparent successor in line, and with no ambitions beyond remaining mayor, Luzhkov is in a solid position. The evidence of his involvement – or at least association – with corruption remains significant. This cable presents that side of Luzhkov – one that bears not only on Luzhkov and his handling of local politics, but on Putin and Medvedev as they move toward the 2012 elections.

Background on Moscow’s Criminal World

5. (C) The Moscow city government’s direct links to criminality
have led some to call it “dysfunctional,” and to assert that the government operates more as a kleptocracy than a government. Criminal elements enjoy a “krysha” (a term from the criminal/mafia world literally meaning “roof” or protection) that runs through the police, the Federal Security Service (FSB), Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD), and the prosecutor’s office, as well as throughout the Moscow city government bureaucracy. Analysts identify a three-tiered structure in Moscow’s criminal world. Luzhkov is at the top. The FSB, MVD, and militia are at the second level. Finally, ordinary criminals and corrupt inspectors are at the lowest level. This is an inefficient system in which criminal groups fill a void in some areas because the city is not providing some services.

6. (C) XXXXXXXXXXXX told us that Moscow’s ethnic criminal groups do business and give paybacks. It is the federal headquarters of the parties, not the criminal groups, who decide who will participate in politics. XXXXXXXXXXXX argued that the political parties are the ones with the political clout; therefore, they have some power over these criminal groups.

MOSCOW 00000317 002 OF 003

Crime groups work with municipal bureaucrats, but at a low level. For example, the Armenians and Georgians were formerly heavily involved in the gambling business before city officials closed the gambling facilities. These ethnic groups needed protection from law enforcement crackdowns, so they sought cooperation with the municipal bureaucrats. In such scenarios, crime groups paid the Moscow police for protection.

Luzhkov’s Links to Criminal Figures

7. (S) XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

8. (S) According to XXXXXXXXXXXX, Luzhkov used criminal money to support his rise to power and has been involved with bribes and deals regarding lucrative construction contracts throughout Moscow. XXXXXXXXXXXX told us that Luzhkov’s friends and associates (including recently deceased crime boss Vyacheslav Ivankov and reputedly corrupt Duma Deputy XXXXXXXXXXXX) are “bandits.” XXXXXXXXXXXX. XXXXXXXXXXXX said that the Moscow government has links to many different criminal groups and it regularly takes cash bribes from businesses. The people under Luzhkov maintain these criminal connections. Recently, ultranationalist LDPR opposition party leader Vladimir Zhirinovskiy strongly criticized Luzhkov and called for him to step down, claiming that Luzhkov’s government was the “most criminal” in Russian history. This remarkable denunciation, carried on state TV flagship Channel One, was widely seen as an indirect Kremlin rebuke of Luzhkov.

9. (S) XXXXXXXXXXXX told us everyone knows that Russia’s laws do not work. The Moscow system is based on officials making money. The government bureaucrats, FSB, MVD, police, and prosecutor’s offices all accept bribes. XXXXXXXXXXXX stated that everything depends on the Kremlin and he thought that Luzhkov, as well as many mayors and governors, pay off key insiders in the Kremlin. XXXXXXXXXXXX argued that the vertical works because people are paying bribes all the way to the top. He told us that people often witness officials going into the Kremlin with large suitcases and bodyguards, and he speculated that the suitcases are full of money. The governors collect money based on bribes, almost resembling a tax system, throughout their regions. XXXXXXXXXXXX described how there are parallel structures in the regions in which people are able to pay their leaders. For instance, the FSB, MVD, and militia all have distinct money collection systems. Further, XXXXXXXXXXXX told us that deputies generally have to buy their seats in the government. They need money to get to the top, but once they are there, their
positions become quite lucrative money making opportunities. Bureaucrats in Moscow are notorious for doing all kinds of illegal business to get extra money.