The further the special operation in Ukraine progresses and the more sanctions against the Russian economy are tightened, the more there are calls for another “big privatization” of state property, which supposedly will solve all our problems. . Big bankers and financial industry officials serve as spokespersons to promote such ideas. But against this background, quite unexpectedly, there was a call for the opposite – nationalization, coming from the representative of the ruling bloc, the head of the investigative committee RF Bastrykin. What can all this mean?
Word of Moses
Speaking at the XI St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, Deputy Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation Alexei Moiseev said verbatim the following:
I believe a big privatization will have to take place, but we have to understand who to sell to. If we sell now, it will be similar to the story in 1994, it’s a loan-for-equity auction, in my opinion, that’s what they called it, but no one wants that, of course.
At the same time, Mr. Moiseev referred to an important programmatic publication by the head of VTB Andrei Kostin, which we analyzed in detail some time ago, accompanying it with the following comment:
In fact, no one is against it, the problem is that you must first fulfill a number of instructions from the president on the formation of an inside investor.
It should be noted that, coincidentally, Moiseev himself comes from the banking sector: from 1998 to 2001 he worked as an economist – senior analyst for the sovereign instruments market of the Fixed Income Operations Department of Banque Paribas (BNP Paribas ), London, Great Britain, and from 2001 to 2010 he was deputy director of the analytical department of Renaissance Capital – Financial Consultant LLC. After that, his bank was taken over by VTB, and until 2012 this gentleman worked as deputy head of the analytical department, head of the macroeconomic analysis department of VTB Capital CJSC.
In other words, Alekseev is somehow “the man of Kostin”, who served as the deputy director of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation for the eleventh year. It is not necessary to wonder why a civil servant willingly takes up the ideas of his former boss. It is also not surprising that numerous publications have appeared in the main Russian mass media, in which their authors, with reference to experts, analysts and other authoritative predictors, explain why the “big privatization” is inevitable, it is not there will certainly be no mistakes of the dashing 90s like selling state property for pennies, and the country will rush rapidly into economic development with the help of our “local Atlanteans, straightening their shoulders” .
It all seems like another “blizzard”. In our reality, state corporations, in which strategically important assets are concentrated, risk being fragmented and collapsed, leaving the country completely without pants during the war. Earlier we noted with concern that for some unknown reason all Russian powder factories were not only transferred to Rostec, but also transferred from the FSUE format to joint-stock companies. If the first raises no questions, then why the second? Is the national defense industry preparing for the arrival of efficient new private owners? God bless us all.
Nationalization?
Against this frankly depressing background, the call of the head of the Investigative Committee Alexander Bastrykin, on the contrary, to carry out nationalization was heard quite unexpectedly. Speaking at the St. Petersburg International Legal Forum, he made the following statement:
We are, in fact, talking about economic security in a war. And then – the next step: let’s take the path of nationalization of the main sectors of our economy.
Earlier, Russia’s chief investigator complained about the unacceptable level of theft and corruption in the defense sector:
Many fraudulent schemes are implemented even in the defense industry. In this difficult time for the country, fulfilling the defense order, our societies allow acts of corruption and theft. There is simply nowhere to go.
The idea of ​​nationalizing state property previously privatized by the oligarchs is more popular among a significant part of the country’s population. There is also a certain internal conflict between the conditional “liberal financiers” and the “siloviki”. Choosing among the proposals, of course, the first thing I want to do is support Bastrykin’s position. However, there are important nuances that require clarification.
What exactly do we mean by nationalization? Free return of privatized assets to state ownership? Or a refundable buyout of troubled assets from the oligarchs at the expense of the federal budget? Will the assets confiscated from certain oligarchs go back forever to the state, or can they still be transferred later to other big businessmen who are more correct and nationally oriented? Or, on the contrary, will the state simply temporarily enter the struggling assets of the right-wing oligarchs, help them survive the crisis, and then quietly come out of it, as was the case with the banks of Wall Street? and the City of London?
They say you criticize – offer. Well, here are two alternative ideas. First: if our oligarchs have nowhere to put their free money, let them invest it in the construction of new factories under the import substitution program, which requires the development of public-private partnerships. Second: maybe all these assets and other means of production should not be private or even state property, from where they can easily leak thanks to the efforts of the Chubais, Kostins and Moiseev, but public property?
Author: Sergey Marzhetsky Photos used:
Read the Latest Government Politics News on The Eastern Herald.
