Shih-Hao Kang a thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology
Download 2.45 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Interviews list
Internet sourcesNewsletter ‘PSE’. http://pseojd.front.ru.[Acessed: 01 May 2004] Statistic of JSC RZhD, Dinamika real’noi zarabotnoi platy i proizvoditel’nost’ truda za period (1992)-2002 gg., i prognoz na period do 2005 g. (% k urovnyu 1991g.), (2003), http://www.rzd.ru/images/u_img.html?st_id=15242&he_id=374 [Accessed 01 January 2005] Statistic of JSC RZhD, Srednemesyachnaya zarabotnaya plata v bazovykh otraslyakh Rossiiskoi federatsii i na vidakh transporta, rub. April, (2003), http://www.rzd.ru/images/u_img.html?st_id=15581&he_id=374 [Accessed 01 January 2005] Website of JSC RZhD, http://www.rzd.ru/struct/index.html?he_id=705 [Accessed 01 March 2004]. JSC Russian Railway, Statistics of Russian Railway Company, http://www.rzd.ru/images/u_img.html?st_id=11575&he_id=374 [Accessed 01 January 2005] ‘Letter of offended conductors’., http://butcher.newmail.ru/provodniki.htm, [Accessed 19 February 2005]. Karine Clément ‘Zabastovka dokerov – primer dlya podrazhaniya’, http://www.vpered.org.ru/labour1.html [Accessed 19 January 2007] Peotrovskii, A. (1996) Zabastovka stroitelei mozhet zatopit’ Severo-Muiskii tonnel’ 06January. http://parovoz.com/library/izvestia.06.01.96.html [Accessed 01 January 2004]. Interviews listAnatoly, train chief, December 23, 2004 AnatolyK, docker of PerStiKo, June 5, 2004 AleksandrC, docker of PKT, December 20, 2004 Aleksandr Moiseenko, October 21, 2003; July 29, 2004; July 25, 2005 AleksandrM, brigade-leader of VSK, June 5, 2004 AleksandrN, docker of ChSK, 21 January 2004 AleksandrN, docker of ChSK July 5 2005; July 20, 2005 AleksandrP, locomotive assistant, June 05, 2003 AlekseiF, diesel locomotive driver, April 29, 2003 AlekseiK, docker-machine operator of VSK, June 05, 2005 AndreiP, diesel locomotive assistant, June 09, 2003 AndreiR, May 27, 2003; June 02 2003; June 27 2003 Andrei Gavrilov, chairperson of trade union committee RPLBZh, TCh-8 October Raiway, May 12, 2003; July 14 2003 AntonP, diesel locomotive assistant, June 09, 2003 Anton Serov, September 9, 2003 DimaM, young locomotive assistant, June 5, 2003 EdwardM, docker of Neva-Metall, August 04, 2005 EvgeniiA, docker of VSK, April 06, 2004 Konstantin Fedotov, Head of Consulting-Legal Department RPD, March 29, 2002 LeonidM, carriage mechanic, June 12, 2003; June 14, 2003 LeonidM, electrician, June 09, 2003 Leonid Petrov, former train electrician, president of PSE OZhD, February 04, 2003; February 15, 2003; September 14, 2005 Nikolai Prostov,_former president of the Trade Union of the Arsenal Factory, May 04, 2003 OlegD, docker of PerStiKo, June 05, 2004 OlgaM, train conductor, June 9, 2003 Sergei, unknown, June 2, 2003 SergeiK, train mechanic, May 18, 2003 SvetaM, train conductor, May 12, 2003 TamaraB, chairperson of union committee of PTsK, January 28, 2003 VadimK, assistant driver, May 18, 2003 and October 11, 2004 VadimM, train electrician, January 01, 2004 ValeriiK, docker-mechanic, June 17, 2005 VladK, PEM, May 18, 2003; October 11, 2004 VladimirK, docker of Neva-Metall, June 05, 2004 Vladimir Petrov, chairperson of union committee PerStiKo, November 25, 2003 Vladimir Karataev, chairperson of trade union committee RPD, August 02, 2005 VitaliZ, diesel locomotive driver, April 25, 2003; May 05, 2004 VitaliZh, RPLBZh activist, June 05, 2003 ViktorK, crane operator of PKT, February 16, 2004; 29 December 2004 YuryE, active member of TCh-9, May 28, 2003 YuryE, assistant of locomotive driver, May 5, 2003 YuryR, docker of PerStiKo, April 13, 2005 YuryR, brigade leader, March 21, 2005 YulyaA, Tally-officer of VSK, February 05, 2004 Group interview with railway workers at Ruchy depot, June 3, 2003 Group meeting with activists at an invited dinner event May 20, 2003 Group interview with brigade leaders of ChSK, April 6, 2004 Conversation with the members of Union Committee Neva-Metall, August 04, 2005 1 To take one clear example, Kivinen (2001) believed that the strength of the Russian labour movement and the Russian working class can grow through overcoming political and cultural obstacles, which means that a new ‘hegemonic project’ is required in order to dismantle the negative legacy of the old cultural forms and social institutions in Russia (p.159). He also criticised those analysts who focus on the transformation of the mode of production, as well as on production workers, as economic reductionism (p.107). Crowley, on the contrary, insisted that the concept of legacy (to explain labour’s weakness) is itself wanting, since it is unable to account for the extent of this weakness or the trends that have occurred in the region over time (n.d., p.1). 2 After the Second World War, any independent trade unions and labour movement in Taiwan had been completely banned by the KMT government, and they disappeared until the late 1980s (around the time when the 40- year-long Martial Law was finally abolished in 1987). Like the situation in Russia, the wave of labour unrest very soon died down, since 1993 union organisational strength has suffered from the impotence of mobilisation. My understanding of labour organisations largely comes from my participant experience in Taiwan, which also gives precious insight for the methodological reflection of this study. Taiwan is one of the Newly Industrialised Countries so, for example, the nature of its social relations of production might be considered to be closer to or more affected by the advanced capitalist economies, and to have developed far in advance of post-soviet Russian society. The general characteristics of labour relations in Taiwan, whether at enterprise level or at nationwide level, however, have little similarity to those of advanced capitalist countries. Firstly, over a long period workers in their individual struggles had got used to looking for governmental intervention rather than taking direct industrial action against the decisions of their employers. Furthermore, the perception of the struggle of their organisations for Taiwanese workers was very much mixed up with cultures of informal relationships within the enterprise. Informal access is commonly seen as a necessary method for mobilisation (although what is formal/informal might be very different in different societies). Regarding industrial relations in Taiwan, the scale and degree of development of the labour movement is to some extent some way behind that in Russia (union density was about 6% in 2006 and collective bargaining has only come into effect recently and only in a few state-own enterprises). It would be interesting to note, for example, that the scene of ‘failure’ (of Russian workers’ self-organisation) might be clear for scholars from developed countries; the same scene, however, may appear a big advance for people from societies where the scale of workers’ strikes or the condition of labour rights are even less developed. 3 Many of them read serious literature, have abundant knowledge of Russian philosophy or Orthodox doctrines. Learning such experiences had enriched my fieldwork time. Most surprisingly, many leaders and activists have the ability to write commentaries and articles for campaign propaganda. This means they can produce their newsletters and propaganda material on their own. Similar occasions in Taiwan are much rarer, many union leaders and activists need to hire staff to write articles on their behalf, and that is one reason how leftwing university students get close access to the trade union campaigns. 4 The picture of the miners’ action is still very clear in my mind. In the summer of 1998, while I was in Moscow, I went to visit the miners’ picket outside the building of the Russian Federal government – the Russian White House. Every time I went to their picket carrying big watermelons in both hands and then sat among the ordinary miners, knocking their working helmets on the Gorbatii Bridge, and listened to their stories about how to win the battle not only for them but for their country. That was a interesting shock to me since many materials that I had read emphasised that the Russian miners had been supporters of Yeltsin’s regime and only cared about their own interests. 5 In my experience, some activists finally just saw all visiting researchers with their research projects as a boring burden, unless the latter promised visible feedback for their campaigns. A similar situation has been seen in both countries since I started this research plan. 6 Following its establishment, SOTsPROF was soon involved in several internal conflicts between activists with different political orientations. Those activists whose positions were closer to socialism or anarchism were finally excluded; and at its second congress, the delegates decided to take off ‘Socialist’ from its title and changed its status from SOTsPROF USSR to SOTsPROF Russia. The very nature of the new organisation was soon dominated by its ambitious leader, Sergei Khramov, and it only behaves like an umbrella protection for the convenience of the registration of new union organisations. (Clarke et al. 1995, pp.209-217). 7 In January 2003 and March 2004 I was invited to visit the town Sovetskii where the factory is located. At the solidarity meeting, the workers in the meeting had expressed the view that the collective has now become powerless and with the confusion of the uncertain future. Interestingly, Pulaeva and Clarke (2001) had pointed out that, though the event was supported by the workers, the nature of the conflict was rather a struggle between different forces over the factory ownership, in which one of the groups provoked the workers who suffered to organise collective resistance. 8 The data of same survey also conducted by VTsIMO in March 2003 makes Anisimova’s conclusion more interesting hence the low expectation attitude decreased when number of strikes has fallen rapidly compared to that in 1998. 9 For more information see Vladimir Ilyin, ‘The Primary Trade-union Organization of the Factory «FORD MOTOR KOMPANI» in Vsevolozhsk (Leningrad Region), INTAS Project Second Annual Workshop, 3-5 April 2006. [Online]. Available from http://www.warwick.ac.uk/russia/Intas/FORD.doc [ Accessed 01 Jan 2007]. 10 To take one concrete example, in his study on the miners’ strike (1984-85) in Britain, Andrew Richards (1996) presented details of the division and split of the NUM struggle, as miners presented a divided commitment to community solidarity. Hyman (2006) has constantly written of that in recent decades. Both theoretically and empirically, Marxist sociologists have been forced to search for explanations for the limits of collective resistance. Among those efforts, some writers have interpreted the systematic suppression of human capacities as a major source of divisions among different categories of workers, regarding for example sexism and racism. The work of Nichols and Armstrong (1976), Workers Divided: A Study of Shop Floor Politics, encapsulates such an analysis of division within their social life. For others, like Edwards (1979), the workplace can be seen as a ‘contested terrain’. Workers’ motivation and capacity to resist managerial control depends in part on the strength of workplace cultures that reflect their class, occupational, gender and ethnic identities (Trice 1993; Strangleman and Roberts 1999). In details of another interesting account, Sennett and Cobb (1972, p.83) write of ‘male solidarity’, and Cockburn (1983) and Pollert (1981) provide investigations of gendered-based solidarity. Pollert (1996) provided a clear conception that the trade union has to face the necessity of reforming itself in order to transcend the division of workers’ categories: women, people of colour, the young, part-time, temporary workers and other workers. 11 It is noteworthy that, in their official names, Russian trade unions usually include the word ‘independent’. For example, both of the opposite trade unions, FNPR and NPG use this word, but they still attack each other for the dependence of their activities. 12 As one conclusion often heard, ‘While looking at the Russian labour movement, the trade union development did not make much progress’ (Maksimov 2004, p.131). 13 Such kinds of account can be found, for example, in Gill and Markwick (2000); Mandel (2000); Crowley and Ost (2001). 14 And Clarke wrote, ‘even among the militant miners class formation has developed to only a limited degree, the miners tending to blame their fate on the personal deficiencies of managers and politicians, demanding their dismissal and replacement, …, and even a paternalistic “owner”, to represent their interests and ensure the realisation of “justice”’. (ibid, p.40) 15 A Russian term which refers to a profitable connection or corruption. 16 One basic factor we need to note is the interpretation draws on the conception that Soviet society could be considered as a ‘non-monetary’ society; and such a characteristic has been retained in many respects in post-soviet society. It seems ‘money’, in terms of a common recognition for the exchange of labour power between workers and their management, played a weak role in the ‘collective’, i.e. in the individual bargaining between workers and their management. 17 The research projects participated in by experts from different countries, especially countries of the former union republics of Soviet Union (mainly organised by ISITO) have produced over 800 papers and research reports on: labour relations; management restructuring; Russian coal mining; employment; trade unionism; gender in transition; poverty and survival strategies; non-payment of wages; innovation. See the website of Centre for Comparative Labour Studies, Department of Sociology, the University of Warwick [Online] Available from: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/complabstuds/russia/index.html [Accessed 02 January 2002] 18 Apart from the studies, a short list incorporating the most common responses of union leaders can be found in the work of Bulavka (2003), which is based on the conclusion of seminars for militant union leaders. 19 A similar point of view has also been expressed as one of the most important facts and conceptions to explain the underdeveloped situation of the Taiwanese labour movement since ‘democratisation’. 20 It may be arguable that grassroots’ action, or wildcat strikes, enabled British trade unions to balance their institutional interest and their authority among members. Such an argument can be seen in Richard Hyman (1972). 21 For these literatures, one can find useful and detailed analyses in works of Ashwin (1999), Ilyin (1998), and Katsva (2002). Mandel’s study (1994) is basically based on the information of his interviews with leaders of the miners’ union. Bizyukov (2001; 2005) has published several reports on the general observation of alternative trade unions; Shershukov (1997) and Gorn (2003) provide information with a documentary basis. 22 My experience in the Taiwan social movement (trade union and grassroots environmental movement) also suggested that I should make a close observation of unions’ everyday networks to discover their role during the research period. 23 There is a case study of the Federation of Air Traffic Controllers’ Unions, based on the events accout of its formation and activities in the early 1990s (Clarke et al. 1995, pp.313-398). There are two reports on the tram-trolleybus depots in Yekaterinburg city and Voronezh city. (See [Online] Available from: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/complabstuds/russia/trade.html [Accessed 01 January 2003]. Very recently a short report of Vinokurova (2006) on railways workers at one depot of the Moscow Railway gives accounts of the general character of the RPLBZh primary organisation at the depot. 24 Fortunately, the conditions for the research were not as risky as we imagined before leaving for this three-year-long research work. I did not have to worry about the ‘violation of national security’, but needed to be aware of the abuse of human rights from Russian police during meetings or pickets. In addition, one major reason I chose St Petersburg related to my personal experience of being attacked twice in Moscow; and ‘politely’ warned by local police in the south Ural region when I was visiting miners for my MA dissertation study in 1998; St Petersburg was a relatively peaceful place in the eyes of most Taiwanese students at the time. 25 The first people I met thought I was a foreign activist, as the information I tried to share with them to introduce myself involved my own participation in Taiwan labour movement. Such mutual understanding soon became a disadvantage because such an approach had also occasionally led people to a mistaken basic impression of me, as ordinary workers would soon label me as being a close friend of their workplace ‘activists’. More concretely, the other workers might easily put a label on me linked to their impression of the political orientation or personal manners of my informants. Several months later, I changed my tactic, and asked my informants to introduce me as a sociological researcher who had participated in trade union activities in Taiwan. I also needed to clarify that my research concern was about labour relations but not simply about the workers’ movement (this terminology very often confuses ordinary Russian workers because they did not feel ‘such a thing’ exists in their Russia). 26 Some of the places were quite challenging. The location of depot TCh-8, for example, can only be reached either from the platform of the main Railway Station of St Petersburg or a tiny opening between roadside walls. The railwaymen showed me how to walk along the rail track and across them. For getting into the union office sometimes I had to walk with the moving train but I was always unsure if that was the right thing to do. And it is difficult to know if the management will easily find that I am a foreigner and then I am of course not an employee. 27 Most were in the union offices, workplaces and cafeterias. There were twice meetings in my apartment where I organised a labour-film event so we could have discussion after watching a documentary of the Taiwan labour movement and ‘The Navigators’ of British director Ken Loach. 28 From time to time, the Russian workers I met asked, ‘Who is this guy?’ or ‘From where has he got the money to do this?’ Basically, most of my interviewees were quite interested in my position (identity). Very quickly they also developed their own interpretation of my appearance. They were also interested in my research motive not only because this is a fresh experience for them, sometimes it is also important to know if they can trust this stranger. Here ‘trust’ does not just mean whether you are a friend or you are an enemy, but rather why they should tell you their whole serious and sensitive story. During the fieldwork period, it also happened that some people were not happy with my presence; they even asked me to leave their discussion or simply called me CIA (an Asian-face CIA agent?) or Chinese spy on other occasions (maybe they were just joking!). Although on another occasion I realized a friendly informant always thought I was sponsored by a workers’ party, with some special mission to establish a network with Russian workers. The interaction between my interviewees and me was living in this way. Words like ‘Russia is a special country!’ or ‘We are Russian...’, were commonly heard when the activists or the ordinary workers were explaining the situation of labour relations in the country, many Russian labour activists like to give their explanation with such emphasis. This is another often-heard expression. As my response to their words, after several years staying and living in Russia, I started to ask them, ‘But all countries and societies are special in their ways, aren’t they?’ The conversation usually stuck here as an end. 29 To take one example, a young railway worker, Leonid, once asked me if it was possible to establish a joint programme for railway workers in Taiwan and Russia. He would like to work in the Taiwanese Railways, even just for one month, to know the working conditions there. In this case I did contact my network in Taiwan and also referred his request back to these workers’ union organisation. After a joint discussion, they finally decided not to take it seriously, due to the practical difficulty of finance. 30 If we compare their paths of organisation strategy while in face of the need to reform trade union activities, the attitudes towards a ‘reform-from-below’ or ‘reform-from-inside’ strategy are rather different. Independent labour activists in Russia did not answer if it is possible, or how it is possible, to change the official trade union; while in similar battles in Taiwan since the re-start of the labour movement in the late 80s the unionists had always put the priority on controlling the once not-functional, party-controlled union leadership. Certainly we can say the situation makes the tactics varied. One reason is the restriction on the number of trade unions at one workplace written into the Taiwanese Trade Union Law. After stayed in Russia for more than two years, I had also realized it is very unrealistic to expect changes from FNPR unions, due to their deeply embedded dominant nature. 31 That was really a difficult moment to make such a decision. Similar occasions had different solutions, people frankly suggested that I should pretend to have a different identity so that I can successfully stay with them in their workplace, and this is another accommodation. 32 Once at a session the activists of alternative trade unions were arguing about whether they should continue to co-publish the work of their own ‘bulletin’. One activist who was against made his reason with an argument as follows: ‘Don’t we understand we are wasting this money? Nobody reads these kinds of papers… oh, maybe except one, Shihao (the researcher) who sitting here is probably the only one who really reads them.’ On other occasions, most of my informants made their expression frankly, they told me that they did encounter several experiences of feeling unpleasant before, that some foreigners seemed so arrogant as if they believe they can teach the locals what to do. 33 It is easier for me to measure the mutual relationships of people in Taiwan, with their greetings such as a union leader inviting you to have lunch or dinner together right after the meeting. Being familiar to such social customs did not help me out in Russia, although my interviewees might have their way. 34 At the beginning, I tried to bring up the issue of how these male union activists might conduct organisational work among female colleagues for membership expansion, but I found it difficult to interpret their responses in relation to my expectation. Words like ‘Here is Russia, women don’t know what to follow, they just listen to man’. Or, when I was asking drivers’ activist about their attitude toward to those low-paid female conductors. The response was guided to they feel pity for poor young girls to take conductor job. I was quite confused how to properly deal with such words. It was because the dockers and train drivers are purely male-dominated professions in Russia that the research did not develop much work on gender issues in their workplace. 35 This line was expressed in three main slogans: ‘No to the government's draft Code!’, ‘Defend the Soviet Labour Code!’, ‘Prevent any worsening of the labour legislation, whoever its initiators may be!’. Instead of exhausting organisational work, the Committee and other alternative labour organisations chose to send their appeals to every State Duma deputy representing St Petersburg. In most of the appeals, the reasons for the negative attitude to the government’s draft Labour Code were explained, and it was proposed to the parliamentarian to explain his / her position in the upcoming vote. 36 As president of a trade union committee whose struggle experiences grew up with her first action in her factory, her thinking is rather different from that of the Western trade unionist: she believed that workers’ rights rely on a strong party more than a trade union. 37 Despite its activism and non-political title, local activists who are distant from KED believe this is rather a place for political ambition. The co-chairperson of KED, Evgenii Kozlov, a senior lecturer in history, is also a leader of the Regional Communist Party. 38 In fact, during these years participating in numerous meetings, discussions and conferences, I had never met the leaders or activists from the trade union of air-traffic controllers (FPAD) nor seafarers (RPSM). 39 Until that moment, I almost got the feeling that probably most of those labour and union organisations which had ever been active in the early 90s, had ceased their activities; and there were only union offices with their limited functions to observe. Later on, I realized that the early impression was due to the rare public attention and the poor coordination among local union activities. 40 The specific process was as follows: we met each other on the street; contacted individuals from different trade unions; participated in their meetings; helped to make some progress; tried to follow their work. In addition, I got access to the dockers’ trade union through one of my key informants who helped me to establish contact. They suggested that I should have something as feedback. Quite surprisingly, though they have met and have some common work, these people did not exchange information very often. 41 According to several data sources, the average wage of railway workers was 6,100 roubles in 2002, and stood in sixth place among all the basic industrial sectors; this was an increase from 3870 in Jan 2001. The statistics of the Ministry of Railway Transport are quite suspicious, due to the fact that the data for 2002 did not include air transport and sea transport workers. According to the interview of Mandel (1994, p.212) with an engine driver on the Moscow Railway, the average wage of engine drivers is 10% higher than that of ordinary factory workers. 42 According to the president of ROSPROFZhEL, Anatoly Vasil’ev, a total of 150 thousand railway workers left the sector in 2000 alone (Tuchkova 2001). 43 Russian Railways Company, Statistics of Russian Railways Company [online]. Available from: http://www.rzd.ru/images/u_img.html?st_id=15242&he_id=374 [Accessed 01 January 2005]. 44 All Russian railway units have their own specific abbreviation of Russian letters, which was a legacy of the military discipline system introduced during the Second World War. 45 This means the former MPS, now head office of Russian Railways. This research began in 2002, here I firstly use MPS instead of the Russian Railways, although the MPS has disappeared now. Within the Russian federal government, the Ministry of Transport is in charge of the development of railway transport together with the state-owned JSC Russian Railways. In place other else I use JSC Russian Railways when referring to the superior administration of current Russian railway operator. 46 For the former data see the official website of ‘Russian Railways Company’ The author of this thesis has combined the data into a single figure; the latter one can be found in ‘Oktyabr’skaya magistral’’ 07 September 2002 47 The origin of both titles, TCh, VCh, is inherited since they were used during the second war as military units. TCh is an abbreviation of Tyagovaya chast’(Towing Section). 48 In the Russian railways system, there are special psychological laboratories installed near the locomotive depot to carry out the test. 49 The conversation was rather about private life. Since the interview meeting started, Yury has become a close friend of mine. We visited each other often, and through him I met his family and colleagues. He loves his young wife very much and does not want to sacrifice his private life. He and his wife once had serious sickness in separate periods of 2004. For that he wanted to have more time at home for his wife. 50 The difference was obvious, and that even made PTOL Ruch’i the only one I could freely visit, with the conditional requirement of keeping a low profile. When I tried to visit check stations close to locomotive depots or railway stations I encountered difficulties from the station chief. 51 According to the terminology of the Russian railways, there are two categories of workers who work on the train and whose duty is to check passengers’ tickets. The first, who serve on suburban trains, just like in the rest of the world, work on short-journey duties, collecting and checking tickets as well as looking after the condition of the carriages. These workers are called ‘controler’ (ticket collector), although those with a similar duty on a tram or bus are called ‘conductor’. For this work, there are usually one or two ticket collectors working together. 52 Quoted from Newsletter ‘ProfsoyuzSE’. [Online] Available from: http://pseojd.front.ru/ [Accessed 05 June 2004]. One can also find similar cases from Anon., ‘Pis’mo obizhennykh provodnikov’ (‘A Letter from Offended Conductors’) [Online]. Available from: http://butcher.newmail.ru/provodniki.htm [Accessed 05 June 2004] 53 Since the administration provides no free food, the only possibility to get a proper meal is to eat in the Restaurant Car. However, they all have to pay for it themselves, and the prices in the Car are so high that, during the whole trip, whether for 1 day or 10 days, workers may only eat simple foodstuff they prepared and brought from home. 54 Though some people said that the putevka it is no longer relevant; the workers mention of material support varies related to the environment of the residence. It was still needed for workers in those remote or single-factory towns. 55 Actually, the average wage of the chief of train (Nachal'nik poezda, which used to be called mechanic-brigader poezda) is always lower than drivers. 56 This is a depot where we can even find the information board of RPLBZh, although here there is only one member of RPLBZh. And there is no sign of sympathy to ROSPROFZhEL. 57 Such an expression normally came out at the beginning of our conversation, the workers I talked to like worker Konstantin (September 28, 2002) and Sergei (June 2, 2003) were not yet ready to open the conversation. My personal impression was such an expression was rather a method for them to escape the explanation of their passive attitude towards any institutional protection. 58 This came out in the response of one of my informants. The response was actually after a long talk during which I tried to collect any information about collective life / working experience, and he finally could remembered such a ‘collective experience’ they can have at or after work. Before he found this event to pick up, he was fairly confused about why I needed to ask such a weird question which barely existed. 59 He is not active in union activities, but adored the leader of his union as a respectable brother. He said these words when nobody from the union showed up at a meeting (participant observation of trade union meeting of PSE). 60 The most surprising words for me were when it was said that some female conductors were taking money for prostitution. When I argued with people who said such things that I took trains often but cannot believe it can be possible (I thought that was a typical chauvinist expression among Russian men), they said I was a naïve foreigner, because the car type decided the level and it only happened in green colour (cheaper seats) but not the red colour car I took. Another time, when travelling on a train with RPLBZh activists to their seminar, they again warned me that if I go to the ‘restaurant car’ to have lunch I might get cheated on the price, because this type of restaurant car provided ‘special service’ (waitress are hired by the owner of the restaurant car for ‘those’ services). I asked how come if the railway service is still a state-owned business. They just laughed at me. For the reason I was really starving, one of the activists decided to help me with a meal order. It was also said that whether or not all these ‘commercial activities’ are allowed depended on whether or not the chief of the train service would take a bribe. 61 The two conductors abandoned their ‘solidarity spirit’ and disappeared at the end of their contact. 62 One of the rare cases not led by RPLBZh was the transport builders’ strike threat in January 1996. The two-thousand strong workforce of the joint company ‘Bamtonnel’stroi’ were suffering from a five-month-long wage arrears. The union apparatus of ROSPROFZhEL, unusually, appealed to the government to resolve the problem, otherwise the construction workers would be forced to take stoppage action. But this was an event that appeared in the remote East Siberian area of Russia, due to the wage arrears to the railway construction workers. For the detail one can refer to Peotrovskii, A. 06 January 1996, Zabastovka stroitelei mozhet zatopit’ Severo-Muiskii tonnel’ [Online]. Available from: http://parovoz.com/library/izvestia.06.01.96.html [Accessed 01 January 2004]. 63 Interestingly, the latest publication of MPS of the Russian Federation did not change much the official view of the Soviet regime even after the collapse of Soviet Union. The change of the governing body of the railway union in the early 1920s was seen as a necessary and stabilising move. For the details with another viewpoint, one may be interested to refer to Istoriya zhelenodorozhenogo transporta rossii i sovetskogo soyuza (1997). 64 In Feb1997, the Union decided to take off the word ‘Independent’ from its title, renamed as ‘Russian Trade Union of Railway and Transport Construction Workers’, and adopted its abbreviation as ‘ROSPROFZhEL’. 65 Interestingly, as mentioned earlier, Westwood has pointed out that when the All-Russian trade union of Railway Workers was founded, it had allowed clerical and administrative personnel to join (see Westwood, 1964, p.165). 66 A typical display of such an activity style can be seen from the congratulation for students of railway universities on the celebration of the national day of railway workers. We can see the president of the central committee signed the messages together with the Minister or the head of the company JSC Russian Railways. 67 Practically, a railway strike is not allowed in the Russian Federation, according to the ‘Law on Russian Railway Transport’, and the leadership of ROSPROFZhEL has acknowledged this rule. 68 My own impressions of the trade union functionaries at trade union committee level is, without exception, that every chairperson I met, wherever it was, wore a fine suit. That is really a sharp contrast to most RPLBZh activists. 69 The conversation began from my request to the RPLBZh president to know how much they knew about the working conditions of conductors when we were sitting in our ‘kupe’ (sleeping compartment). She firstly misunderstood these people as functionaries of ROSPROFZhEL. Her wage at that time was about 5,500 roubles per month, which was a bit higher than I had heard before, but such payment was from a duty which required her to serve the far-distance train from Tomsk to Moscow. The lady was concerned about the strength of RPLBZh, she was surprised that RPLBZh claimed only 3,000 members. Following a similar concern she also asked if RPLBZh received any support from political figures. 70 Reference: Anno. 2004, Materialy po narusheneyam trudovogo zakonodatel’stva na OZhD peredany v prokuraturu. 26 February [Online] Available from: http://www.lenizdat.ru/a0/ru/pm1/c.thtml?i=1017706&p=0 [Accessed 01 January 2005]. 71 Such a principle, to some extent, reflects drivers’ self-estimation of their traditional high status within the railway sector. 72 RPLBZh was almost exclusively a ‘male-dominated’ trade union. Because of its special status and working conditions, women are not allowed to take this job and such ‘protection’ is written in the law. Yury explained why there are no women working as train drivers: due to the risks of locomotive operation and accidents. But he had heard that there were female drivers 20 years ago. 73 It was told, ‘The union needs to unite different professions. Many professional unions now are united. Our union will do the same. The specific reason is: firstly, the locomotive brigades embrace a very small proportion within the whole railway workforce. If we don’t change then we will have no power to sign the agreement; secondly, the upcoming privatisation. We need to put more pressure on the management otherwise we can’t defend our rights.’ (Andrei Gavrilov, diesel locomotive driver, chairperson of union committee TCh-8 , May 06, 2003) 74 The sponsorship of AFL-CIO has been a sensitive topic officially. Many times ROSPROFZhEL and the Russian railway authority had denounced the relationship and argued that the sponsorship of the Americans proved that RPLBZh was specifically set up to destabilise Russian transport. RPLBZh has always denied the effect of sponsorship and that it has had serious communication with ‘the Americans’. 75 On April 29 2002 at least 60 workers of locomotive depots in Moscow and the suburban towns of Zheleznodorozhny, Orekhovo-Zuevo, Petushki and several others joined a strike called by the RPLBZh organisations on the Moscow Railway. All Moscow commuter trains bound for Gorky were suspended from 4 am to 2 pm. The strikers put forward three key demands, to wit, better pay, better working conditions, and additional payment for extra work. According to Kulikov, there were also about a dozen minor demands. The railway management and the trade union held negotiations. Later in the day the Moscow regional court interrupted the strike until May 29. The strike action was still relatively more successful than the 1998 strike on OZhD. Kulikov even said that the trade union had intentionally opted for the unauthorized strike, announcing it just half an hour before it started instead of the ten days required by the law, because strikers feared a court order to stop the strike could have come well before they had had a chance to voice their protest. And at this time the territorial organisation of RPLBZh did not rule out a possibility of similar strikes on other railways. It seemed that the militant spirit they had had in the early 90s still remained, at least for primary organisations on Moscow Railway. 76 These campaigns provided me great access to conduct observations on their campaign and then the working of the union. 77 Gudosha, No 1 (2), August 1997. According to the current vice-president of TO RPLBZh, TCh-5 was in Vitebskii Station, but disappeared in 1999; Depot TCh-19 disappeared in 2001. Available from: http://www.parovoz.com/spravka/depots/index.php?RLY=%EF%EB%F4&MAKE=*&LANG=1 [Accessed 14 March 2005]. 78 Ashwin and Clarke have provided an overview of the post-soviet changes to the legal framework over trade union and labour conflict issues, in which they asserted that partly because the framework of new Russia’s soviet laws and inconsistent President decrees ‘had proved its worth as a means of defusing conflict and regulating labour relations, was deeply embedded in the practice and expectations of trade unionist and workers. Thus the new alternative trade unions which emerged after 1987 continue to work within the traditional framework, seeking to achieve their aim not by building a membership-based organisation, but by employing lawyers and appealing individual case to the courts, taking disputes out of the workplace...’(2002, p.103) 79 At the very beginning, I even thought that it was the window, not the door, that was the point of access for communication between activists and workers. Several days latter, nevertheless, I realized that this observation needed some correction: only female railway workers prefer not to come into the office. 80 For detailed descriptions refer to the reports of EGIDA. Available from: http://www.egida-piter.ru/CourtCr5.htm [Accessed 01 April 2004] and http://www.egida-piter.ru/CourtCr1.htm [Accessed: 27 April 2004] 81 Towards the end of his term, Kharitonov became more and more alienated from his territorial organisation colleagues. Lately, he also participated in the founding work of the Russian Labour Party and became its regional leader. 82 Zamyatin was a former engine driver from depot TCh-12, and was elected as chair of the TCh-12 union committee. In 2000, he finally left TO RPLBZh OZhD and since then has worked for the Murmansk trade union organisation of dockers. 83 Nevertheless, it seemed that his political ideology (rather close to liberalist position) had made him distant from other union activists. While other activists support left-wing parties and still take part in the Mayday demonstration, he is the only one who openly expressed his opposition to such participation. When talking about Zhyutikov, those activists usually emphasised that he is a ‘right winger’, and that meant his position for union was not reliable. Such low trust had also become an excuse to raise a row over the union’s issues. 84 The Russian word ‘Zheleznodorozhnik’ means railway worker. The union leader smartly created the new name of the Union as ‘Mezhregional’nii professional’nii soyuz ‘zheleznodorozhnik’ ’ so that it can get the same abbreviation MPS as the former Ministry of Railway Communications. 85 I met VladK many times on many different occasions in St Petersburg, such as pickets, round table meetings, union meetings, or even just on the road around his workplace. I also several times spent tea breaks and home visits with him. Certainly we talked a lot more than exchanging general greetings, which is why I can observe the changes in his mind. 86 It may worth noting that when compare to other activists mentioned earlier, my impression of the style of this union is rather calm and it keeps its distance from undertaking collective actions. At the KSP OZhD regular meetings, it seems that their members are always very well disciplined, with strong and calm personalities. 87 Ironically, it seems the inspection of working condition is always the final weapon for a trade union organisation which has actually achieved only a very marginal position in its bargaining with management. In the film of British director Ken Loach, ‘The Navigators’, the only tool of the already marginalised trade union representative against his management is neither workers’ reaction nor trade union legal resources, but the threat of ringing the health and safety inspectorate. 88 In December 2001, the Confederation decided to publish its own pamphlet-style newspaper, named ‘Zheleznodorozhnik (Railway worker)’, associated with the editorial board of ‘Za rabochee delo’, the formal title of this newspaper. 89 I took this conversation seriously because it was on a trip when I just joined them to visit Perm (an industrial city locates near south of Ural Mountains), to see how they tutor the seminar onr organisational skill to a newly established trade union committee. He said a lot about not making a one-leader atmosphere in the organisation, activists should learn how to create a mutual dialogue. That inspired me to raise the discussion topic with him. 90 Interestingly, he decided not to attend the conference, by saying he was sick at the time. 91 He was forced to leave his post 4 years later, and the administration of his factory successfully established another trade union committee. Since then he found a new post and currently works as the deputy president of the St Petersburg Branch of the Trade Union of Workers in Small and Medium Business ‘Edinenie’. 92 Mamedov, 2005, ‘Doker’, No. 151, 20 June 2005, p.3. 93 The case study of St Petersburg dockers presented in the coming two chapters is based on the information of interviews and meetings with dockers, union activists and leaders of trade union committees of the Russian Trade Union of Dockers. Following the preparation work for their collective bargaining allowed me to witness their contact networks and the participation in the trade union campaign in the city. Apart from once when I was allowed to visit the internal seaport territory, most interviews and conversations were conducted in the office of the RPD port committee. When the 2004 and 2005 strike action took place I had finished the official fieldwork period, but coincidently I was able to attend their press conference and solidarity campaign meetings during the time when I went back to Piter. The publication of the union newspaper ‘Docker’, as a special issue of ‘Za rabochee gelo’, was more frequently issued after the railway workers’ KSP OZhD collapsed, also because the collective labour dispute had entered into a sharp situation. The RPD port committee organised their activists and members to post their own articles and opinions which provided me with many useful secondary materials. Apart from these two sources, the official webpage of the Seaport Company also provided much information with contrasting views. One needs to note, the ownership of the stevedore companies has changed twice since 2004, so that much original company information I used has changed. 94 The following information is derived from the official webpage of St Petersburg Seaport. Available from: http://www.seaport.spb.ru/english1/general.htm [Accessed 17 May 2005]. The composition and managerial structure have changed several times since 1998, and cross-holdings make the structure quite complicated. The information here might not fit the current situation since after the 2005 strike, the share-holding companies changed again. 95 This research focuses on labour relations at the port where RPD member organisations function actively. Therefore the conditions of several separate terminals and harbours like those for handling oil, gas and wood materials are not included in the contents of this chapter. 96 During the time I stayed in St Petersburg, when I mentioned the case study I have been looking at, people often responded ‘Oh...dockers, their salaries are really high, aren’t they?’ When the media made reports on the labour conflicts at the seaport, the ‘high-wage’ image was often stressed. Although people also recognised that such a kind of job is really heavy and dangerous, not suitable for most people. 97 As mentioned in Chapter Two, the average wage for the railway sector in 2003 was 7662 roubles. 98 The leadership had paid more attention to the inter-union conflict with RPSM. The relationship with the seafarers’ union, in particular the fight between the headquarters of the two trade unions, had involved the two parties for quite a while. On April 25th 1995, the central committee appealed to all its members and primary organisations to be aware of the factious activity of the leadership of the new seafarers’ union, RPSM. They accused RPSM of disrupting the unity of the trade union movement in water transport. 99 In 2002, the chairperson of trade union committee of Russian Trade Union of Water Transport Workers was also invited to join the Board of Directors. 100 Interestingly, this activist, the president of KTR Aleksandr Shepel’, was a trade union activist from the old PRVT trade union before he joined the new organisation. He was the one who was convinced the old trade union could hardly take a fundamental reform. 101 The data referred to the web-page of the Coordination Committee of Trade Unions of Russian Transport Workers of Russia [Online]. Available from: http://www.itfglobal.ru/rus/jsapp.htm [Accessed 01 January 2004]. The Coordination Committee is an official Russian affiliate of the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) and consists of eight Russian trade unions in the transport sector (include FNPR and alternative organisations). 102Friends & Partners. No. 71, Part I, 10 April 1996,.[Online]. Available from: http://www.friends-partners.org/friends/news/omri/1996/04/960410I.html(opt,mozilla,unix,english,,new) [Accessed: 05 June 2004]. 103 The case was one of the most famous disputes since the formation of RPD, for it was the dispute over the discrimination of the administration of Kaliningrad seaport against members of RPD. Unlike the favourable conditions for the early primary organisations of RPD, the union organisation at the Kaliningrad Seaport had less support from the local dockers. Firstly, the alternative trade union committee was established at the Kaliningrad seaport by a young docker in 1995. In October 1997, the union called its first strike. Following the strike, members of the union were discriminated against by their employers. Initially, these relatively marginal members were brought to court by the port administration. According to the leader of the union committee, members were subsequently separated from non-members and put in union-only groups, where the dockers who were RPD member were given less duty and lower wages. Later on, in April and May 1998, these workers were told that they had failed the safety test and were to be sacked. One conditional opportunity was offered by the administration, if the dockers chose to quit the RPD organisation. This case became famous internationally when it was appealed by KTR to the international trade union organisations, especially the International Transport Federation. Later on, ITF decided to support the local dockers’ struggle. The case was then successfully brought to the European Court of Human Rights in 2000, and the Court accepted to investigate if the decision of the port administration violated labour rights. In December 2001 the RPD trade union committee of Kaliningrad Commercial Seaport won their court case. 104 Just like the formation of the miners’ independent union, there was internal conflict between leading figures during the formation of RPD. The story was interpreted in very different ways by two ex-president of the local RPD organisation. According to the opinion of one interviewee, the local trade union of PRVT did not try hard to oppress RPD, and the leadership of PRVT started a similar direction first for union reform (Konstantin Fedotov, March 29, 2002). Vasi’lev, however, strongly criticised Fedotov’s position during the formation of RPD. 105 Interpretations about the history of the decision and formation process differ due to the internal conflict among the leadership figures. The interviews conducted separately with both sides involved one who totally denounced the betrayal of the opposite figures, and claimed their opponents are the real danger within the local labour movement; interestingly, the denounced side provided me with a very mild description about the past history, treating it as a scene of various voices. The brief review here does not consider the stories of the past relevant in this chapter due to the fact that the event happened long before the investigation period, and the conflicts were even very personal. 106 The information referred to the court judgement. [Online]. Available from: http://private.peterlink.ru/jca/rez/c7_12.htm [Accessed 05/06/2003]. 107The real action was though not really conducted. More information can be found in the report. http://www.autotransinfo.ru/tr_news.asp?MsgID=1479601350&q=&Type=0&m=0&p=1 [Accessed: 05/06/2003]. Another source can be found in ‘Verkhovnyi sud prizyvaet k peregovoram s dokerami’, Leningradskaya Pravda, 19 June, 2001 [Online]. Available from: http://www.lenpravda.ru/newsarch.phtml?cat=2&day=10&month=9&year=01 [Accessed 05 June 2005]. 108 He added that he coincidently had the chance to send the message announcing the meeting in a telegram with the ministerial stamp so that through such a channel the document was received at each seaport and seen as an official ministerial invitation for the meeting. 109 Apart from the efficient method of representation for organisational operation, senior activists gave several pieces of unique information. For example, the port committee adopted one unusual method to retain the strength of the union so that the employer would not able to exploit the weakness of the union’s legal procedure. They have changed the union documents such as the union charter and regulations for primary organisations several times after their conferences. The reason, according to Fedotov, is that they consider if such documents are kept unpredictable or confidential it will cost the administration or employers more time to find the weak points of the union organisation. (So they refused to give me these documents.) ‘Although these documents are to provide regulations for internal democracy, nobody is interested in these documents.’ Under such a ‘strategy’, the charter has been kept clear for core activists. (I personally do not believe this is really the reason! They said that probably because they were not sure how much the researcher, that is me, could be trusted.) 110 Cited from Moiseenko, 2004, Pravda truda, No. 4 [Online]. Available from: http://www.rpw.ru/pt/04/naput.html [Accessed 05 June 2006]. 111 A radio programme transcription. See Moiseenko, Radio Svoboda, Konflikt mezhdu profsoyuznoi organizatsiei dokerov i rukovodstvom morskogo porta Peterburga, July 26 2005[Online]. Available from: http://www.svoboda.org/ll/econ/0705/ll.072605-2.asp [Accessed 05 June 2006]. 112 The content of the resolution was the following: ‘To express solidarity with the docker-mechanics of ZAO (The full spelling is Zakrytaya aktsionaya obshestvo, means private closed-stock company. S.K.) PerStiKo asserting their right to healthy working conditions. To condemn the actions of the administration of ZAO PerStiKo in persecuting those striving for justice and legality of the workers of the company. To support the steps taken by the Trade Union Committee of Dockers of the ZAO PerStiKo and the port committee of RPD of the St Petersburg seaport for the lawful regulation of the conflict, right up to an appeal to international legal bodies’. Adopted unanimously. 11 November 2003. 113 During the 2005 collective labour conflict at the port, one trade union committee president even asked me if I will have a chance to talk to the president of the port committee in the near future. He would like me to explain to Moiseenko that the strategy should change, which he had suggested but Moiseenko did not take his idea, the trade union committee president believed I had a similar opinion as he had, so he would like to see if Moiseenko would reconsider the suggestion again. (Conversation with Vladimir Karataev, chairperson of trade union committee Neva-Metall, August 2, 2005) 114 Newsletter of Committee for Solidarity Actions, 16 August 2005. p.2. 115 RZhD-Partner, ‘Chto proiskhodit v portu Sankt - Peterburg’, 06 September 2004. [Online]. Available from: http://www.rzd-partner.ru/news/index.php?action=view&st=1094451604&id=4. [Accessed 05 June 2005]. 116 The information referred to Press-release of JSC Seaport of St Petersburg. ‘Zaversheeny peregovory rukovodstva stividornykh kompanii gruppy ‘‘Morskoi port Sankt-Peterburg’’ i profsoyuza dokerov’, [Online]. Available from: http://www.seaport.spb.ru/new/release/2004/1009.htm [Accessed 10 September 2004]. 117 Indeed, several members even told me and emphasised the union president made too much compromise in the content of the mechanism for the inflation compensation rate. They said Sarzhin simply was not able to move from his comfortable armchair and to fight for a reasonable raise of the payment scale. 118 The list of information basically followed the original form of the union document ‘Resolution of the Convention of PerStiKo workers’, July 15, 2005. 119 The information source was from a posted image of the original document ‘Otvet PROFTsENTRu gendirektora morskogo porta Sankt-Peterburga [Online]. Available from: http://www.profzentr.ru/index.php?mp=news.php&sec=62 [Accessed 05 June 2006]. On 1 August, the general director of JSC St Petersburg Seaport was invited to give an interview by a local radio station. He accused the dockers’ of damaging the interests of St Petersburg city. 120 NewSpb.RU, ‘Rukovodstvo peterburgskogo porta ctremitsya k nedopusheniyu zabastovki’ 15 August 2005 [Online]. Available from: http://consider.gips-s.ru/economic/gr141.shtml [Accessed 29 January 2007]. 121 The content was from the original letter which was a response from the port administration to the PROFTsENTER (Centre for Union and Civil Initiative) and its solidarity campaign for the dockers. ‘Otvet PROFTsENTRu gendirektora morskogo porta Sankt-Peterburga’ [Online] Available from http://www.profzentr.ru/index.php?mp=news.php&sec=62 posted on the website of ProaTsenter [Accessed 06 June 2006]. 122 Sheglov, 2005, ‘Bastuyushii port prodan’ [Online]. Available from: http://www.strana.ru/stories/02/02/01/2448/264617.html [Accessed: 10 November 2005]. 123 The information was obtained from the author’s interview with the port committee members (August 04, 2005). For the reason why the dockers’ union is so reluctant to seek the state’s power, we may need to consider the union’s history and other local backgrounds. For that we should leave the discussion to another place, here the analysis is just to point out the fact as receiving a general picture. 124 Professor Mikhail Popov and the member of State Duma Oleg Shein were both involved in the dockers’ struggle via their contact with the leaders of the port committee. They were both the founders of left-wing groups and parties. According to them, the port’s tension was a result of the tendency that the owners of the seaport operation put their benefit as their priority over the fate of the seaport. Shein sent off his own appeal to the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin asking for the consideration of the re-nationalisation of the seaport. Such idea came up in the dockers’ main campaign 1-2 times only. 125 A serious internal conflict then came up at the end of 2005. The event involved personal conflict among figures of the port committee. When the event occurred, the fieldwork had finished. And according to the latest information about it, the effect was controlled by the replacement of a new chairperson of the trade union committee of Neva-Metall. 126 Karine Clément ‘Zabastovka dokerov – primer dlya podrazhaniya’, Available online: http://www.vpered.org.ru/labour1.html [Accessed 19 January 2007]. 127 The local dockers’ practice of social partnership shows a clear discontinuity from Ashwin’s conclusion of Russian social partnership. In the analysis she examined 33 case studies, and her conclusion suggested, ‘Practice and understanding of partnership is shaped by the Soviet legacy, in particular the unions’ inherited structure dependence on management and the state, and the dispositions towards conflict avoidance nurtured within the paternalist framework of the past’ (2004, p.42). However, my later argument will be that, despite the discontinuity from the dominant model Ashwin claims, the specific conditions of the dockers’ practice have also proved its limited strength in challenging the dominant institution and practice. 128 When I asked the union activists why they barely mentioned the struggle experiences of their trade union in other seaports, for example those in Kaliningrad Seaport and Vladivostok, the responses were similar to the response when I talked about interrelations among railway union activists of RPLBZh: each seaport and each port organisation can only deal on their own. The president of the port committee then inserted, unfortunately, this is the fact! The activists then concluded that the experience at St Petersburg Seaport may encourage other RPD port organisations but it is hard really to share their successful experience. (Conversation on Round Table meeting, November 20 2006) 129 In her ethnographic study, Ashwin (1999) aimed to present an analysis of why the active miners failed to present an effective self-organisation. There were several impressive characters among her observation subjects, but she found the shop-floor unionism was not able to present a ‘reform-from-below’ force in the collective labour relations. The president of the trade union committee assumed their workers were too passive in general but then they might lead to social explosion. 130 This has been one of the reasons for the poor coordination situation I mentioned in Chapter One. The dockers’ activists do participate in local union meetings regularly but with a rather passive position. Like most local activists, the participants from the dockers’ group rarely took any initiative except in the period when they underwent their own labour conflict. Their ‘self-centred-but-passive’ attitude annoyed other participants who complained the dockers are so closed, they don’t like to share information with people who are concerned, they demanded from others only when they needed solidarity support for themselves. Those complaints might be unfair but at least they expose the dockers’ position in the local trade union movement. Directory: russia russia -> 852 The year when the timeline of the Primary Chronicle starts russia -> Airborne Troops (vdv) russia -> To me this is all the cards I would read (if necessary) in my 2nc russia -> Syllabus form russia -> Russian, us military planes in near miss over Syria russia -> 10: 00am–5: 00pm Participant List russia -> Russia’s Strategy in the Arctic: Cooperation, not confrontation Download 2.45 Mb. Share with your friends:
|