|
Forbes' Paul Klebnikov: A Victim of
Political Terrorism?
Peter Lavelle
Paul Klebnikov, editor of Forbes Russia, was
killed in Moscow on Friday night. There is every
indication he was a victim of a professional contract
assassination. Russia's officialdom was quick to condemn
Klebnikov's murder, with General Prosecutor Vladimir
Ustinov personally taking charge of the investigation.
Since Friday, the Moscow rumor mill has created a
checklist of possible reasons for the slaying. The most
important question remains: was Klebnikov a victim of
political terrorism?
An
unrivaled investigative business journalist, Klebnikov
quickly amassed numerous foes among
Russia's
wealthy elite. In Russia, it remains dangerous to talk
and write about other people's money. A strong opponent
of Russia's "oligarchic" economy, Vladimir Putin has
lost one of his most articulate supporters.
It is believed that Klebnikov was gunned down near the
magazine’s Moscow office by two assailants – four of the
nine bullets fired hitting the intended target.
Klebnikov, found mortally wounded in the street by a
Forbes employee, died before receiving emergency
medical care. Before he died, it is reported that he
said he had no idea who would want to kill him.
Author
of the highly regarded bestseller, Godfather of the
Kremlin: Boris Berezovsky and the Looting of Russia,
Klebnikov was relatively new to
Moscow
as a full-time resident – but was no stranger to Russian
politics and business. Of Russian descent and at
Forbes for 15 years, his coverage of
Russia's very corrupt transition to a market economy
remains a benchmark of quality writings for journalists
and analysts.
On
April 22 – a clear mock and parody on Vladimir Lenin's
birthday – Klebnikov launched publication of Forbes
Russia, writing that
Russia
had "began a new, more civilized stage of development."
The following month, the magazine's very popular
flagship product of ranking the country's wealthiest
individuals was a media sensation. In the same issue, he
wrote, "the era of so-called bandit-capitalism is
already in the past. In the mid-90s it was a very, very
dirty process."
Forbes'
ranking of the wealthy is known worldwide, but not in
Russia. Journalists are often killed in Russia for
writing on corruption and how the wealthy generate
income. Thus, when Russian media do comment on the
wealth of the business elite, it does so with caution.
Forbes Russia did not use caution – it carefully
calculated.
With the publication of the "100 richest," many in the
ranking claimed their wealth was grossly over-estimated
and were outraged by the intense media coverage. To add
to their concerns, the Kremlin's leading auditing and
investigative agencies commented that Klebnikov's
methodology and conclusions were accurate. This
instantly made Klebnikov a very unpopular media figure
among
Russia's
"oligarchs."
Publication of "Forbes Russia" comes at a time when the
very wealthy in a very poor country are carefully
watching the legal travails of Russia's richest
individual, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and the Kremlin's
assault on the country’s largest privately-owned
company, the oil giant Yukos. With hints that the
Kremlin intends to take down other oligarchs, the last
thing the wealthy want is a higher media profile. There
was every reason to believe that Klebnikov intended to
keep doing what he was best at -- expert coverage of
illegal business activity in Russia.
Since May, Klebnikov regularly appeared on television
talks shows. He was openly critical of Russia's
transition from communism -- which created a small group
of super-rich, the oligarchs. Klebnikov also expressed
his support of Vladimir Putin and the president's
economic reform efforts. With the Kremlin's continuing
offensive against the oligarchs, Klebnikov most likely
was seen as an outsider meddling in the affairs of
others.
Meddling in other’s affairs most probably is at the root
of this tragic assassination – though not just private
business affairs. The killing of Klebnikov may also have
been very much a political affair.
Some
Western observers have claimed a Chechen connection to
the assassination. Chechen terrorists are blamed for
many things that happen in Russia, but eliminating
Klebnikov was probably not one of them. The calculus to
kill Klebnikov most likely has more to do with the
Kremlin’s intent to re-arrange property ownership of
Russia’s natural resource sectors.
It is
unfortunate that many in Western media have been quick
to indirectly blame Putin and his tightening grip on the
electronic media and assault on Yukos for Klebnikov’s
death. These events are not related, but there may be
some distant overlapping connections. These vague
connections might explain the targeting and death of
Klebnikov.
Murdering Klebnikov can be interpreted as an act of
political terrorism.
Klebnikov’s fearless investigative talents certainly may
have angered those behind the murder, but the real
target might be Putin. Removing a high-profile Western
supporter of Putin’s anti-oligarchy campaign may have
been an equally high-profile message that the moneyed
elite has resources and other means to discredit the
Kremlin’s latest political initiative. There is a
strong, though very muffled, perception among some
oligarchs that Yukos and its core shareholders, Mikhail
Khodorkovsky most importantly, are too willing to submit
to Kremlin pressure. Stated differently, “if you (the
Kremlin) want war, then let it be war.” Paul Klebnikov
may be have not only been caught in the cross-fight, but
also used as cannon fodder in this developing
confrontation.
If this
interpretation is correct, it should be expected that
the Kremlin’s war against the scandalous privatization
of Russia’s economy has awoken its political foes – more
unexpected and equally tragic high-profile events may be
in the cards.
Klebnikov came to
Russia
full of enthusiasm and optimism. He came to a
Russia
that he believed no longer had to resort to high-profile
contract killings. Klebnikov had come to believe that
lawyers and the law itself was enough protection when
writing openly and professionally about Russian
business. The people who probably killed Klebnikov were
the people who he investigated and publicly despised –
corrupt officials and the darker side of the business
world. Not realizing it, he just may have walked into
the middle of the most recent stage of the drama of “who
owns Russia.”
Will we
ever know who silenced the brilliance of Paul Klebnikov?
Given the authorities' poor record with solving
professional hits, few in Moscow expect to learn the
truth behind Klebnikov's murder -- let alone see the
culprits convicted in an open court. However, this time
around, Putin has a strong interest in learning who is
willing to kill an international media professional
befriending him and his agenda.
Russia's
print journalism has suffered a terrible loss with the
passage of Paul Klebnikov. Russia itself is poorer as
well. Klebnikov's faith that a new
Russia
is in the making has been dealt a severe setback.
Ustinov shouldn’t be heading this investigation – Putin
should be the lead investigator; he was probably the
intended target last Friday.
Peter
Lavelle is an independent Moscow-based analyst and the
author of the electronic newsletter on
Russia
"Untimely Thoughts" untimely-thoughts.com.
United Press
International published an earlier and shorter version
of this article.
|