Mikhail Khodorkovsky, once his country’s richest man, has resided in “gulag lite,” as he calls the Russian penal system under Vladimir Putin, for six years. Since the spring, on most working days he is roused at 6:45 in the morning, surrounded by guards and packed into an armored van for the drive to court. For two hours each way, the man who once supplied 2 percent of the world’s oil crouches in a steel cage measuring 47 by 31 by 20 inches. Convicted of tax evasion and fraud in 2005, Khodorkovsky now faces a fresh set of charges that add up to the supposed theft of $30 billion. In the dark of the van, Khodorkovsky tries to prepare for his trial, replaying in his mind his night reading, the daily stack of documents from his lawyers. But Russia’s most famous prisoner worries too about what would happen if a car slammed into the van. (Collisions are routine in Moscow’s clotted avenues.) “Your chances of making it out alive,” he wrote me one day this summer, “at any speed, are next to none.”
Khodorkovsky (pronounced ko-door-KOFF-skee) has spent more than 2,200 days behind bars. He cannot receive reporters. Yet the ban has brought a revival of a dissident tradition dating back to Ivan Grozny and Prince Andrey Kurbsky in the 16th century: the epistolary exchange. For several months this year, from July until October, Khodorkovsky and I were able to conduct a series of exchanges — as he has done with other correspondents, both foreign and native — filtered through the hands of lawyers (who transcribe his oral replies) and avoiding the eyes of prison officials. In court, he has maintained that he fails to understand the case against him. The new indictment runs 3,487 pages but boils down to a single accusation: that the former C.E.O. of the Yukos oil firm and his deputy, Platon Lebedev, were part of an “organized criminal group” that stole 350 million tons of oil from their company between 1998 to 2003. The tonnage exceeds Yukos’s production during the period in question. If convicted, Khodorkovsky, whose first sentence ends in 2011, could face an additional 22 years in jail.
In the decade since Putin’s rise, Russians have grown inured to celebrity criminal cases. The murders of politicians, journalists and human rights activists; apartment-house blocks bombed to ruins; the carnage of the hostage sieges in Moscow and Beslan — the acts of horror and terror have numbed the populace. The exception is the delo Khodorkovskogo — the Khodorkovsky case. No other affair has lingered as long in the minds of so many. The case marked a turning point for Russia, the divide between the turbulent Yeltsin years and the stricter rule of the Putin era. And today, in its second iteration unfolding in Moscow, much more than the fate of an oligarch hangs in the balance.
From the start of his presidency on New Year’s Day 2000, Putin was on a roll. But it was the takedown of Khodorkovsky in 2003 that upped the ante. Under Yeltsin, the chieftains of Russia’s vast financial-investment groups held sway over the vital industries (oil, metals, banking and media) and, to a large degree, held the government hostage. That changed on a frigid October night, when masked agents of the Federal Security Service boarded a plane on a Siberian tarmac and enacted one of the most famous perp walks in Russian history, an oligarch returned to the capital at gunpoint.
Khodorkovsky’s arrest stunned Russian nationalists and Western hedge-fund managers alike. Putin had forced the oligarchs to toe a new party line: profits could be blessed, but only if politics stayed off-limits. “The Yukos case marked the start, in 2003, of gosudarstvennoe reiderstvo” — “state raiding” — Khodorkovsky told me in a Russian-language reply last month. For edification, he explained ‘‘reiderstvo,” a word borrowed from Wall Street that has entered the language of Pushkin: “That is, the seizure of others’ property with the aid of state institutions (first and foremost, the organs of law enforcement).” The attacks, he argued from jail, spelled “a disaster for Russian business.” Under Putin, the state blithely acquired a string of Russia’s fattest companies — first and foremost, Khodorkovsky’s own. Despite assurances that the Kremlin would never nationalize Yukos, the state oil company Rosneft, led by Igor Sechin, a Putin confidant and former intelligence officer, soon took over Yukos’s most prodigious fields and refineries.
For Putin, the reclamation project proved a boon. Russia’s titans locked arms in a docile chorus and rushed to finance Kremlin projects. For years, as long as the price of Urals crude soared, Putin could forget about an unruly oligarch in a Siberian prison. He could even decamp from the Kremlin, usher in a handpicked successor (Dmitri Medvedev), move to the prime minister’s office and remain the power behind the throne. But the second Khodorkovsky trial has come at an inopportune time. For a decade, Putinism rested on an unsound social contract, a sacrifice of liberties for stability. Now, however, the global downturn has hit. Russia’s economy is projected to contract by 8 percent in 2009, and the number of Russians below the poverty line has grown to 17 percent. At the same time, the Putin-Medvedev diarchy — diarkhiya, pundits term it — is showing its seams, and the campaign against Khodorkovsky, a cornerstone of Putin’s rule, threatens to open fissures. In Moscow, the circle of those who question the hard line has widened beyond marginalized liberals — to oligarchs, politicians, even journalists, who once marched in lock step with the Kremlin. Their voices are unlikely to spur a groundswell of support for Khodorkovsky, much less an organized political opposition. But they do pose a discomfiting question, one that has hung over the Kremlin since the legal campaign began: Who fears a free Khodorkovsky?
THE ANSWER MAY lie in the history. At 46, Mikhail Khodorkovsky has lived several lives. As a boy, he never wanted to be a cosmonaut or a general or a soccer star. He dreamed of becoming a factory boss. That his dream came true, in such stunning fashion, leads you to wonder whether his meteoric rise was a matter of genius, luck, ruthlessness or connections. To be sure, timing, intelligence and muscle all played a part. But the son of engineers had no running start.
Boris Khodorkovsky and his wife, Marina, gave decades to Moscow’s Kalibr plant, maker of high-precision instruments. Yet by 23, their son was an ascendant graduate of one of the U.S.S.R.’s most prestigious chemistry institutes, a state loyalist who had served as the deputy chairman of the institute’s Komsomol, the Communist Youth League. As he sought to take advantage of the improbable opportunities that arose under Mikhail Gorbachev, Khodorkovsky’s Komsomol tenure, a rarity for a Jew in Moscow, would open state doors. By 26, even before the fall of the Soviet Union, he had made his first fortune — importing PCs and selling them at a sixfold profit. Soon he had founded a bank, Menatep, one of the first private brands in Soviet finance.
In 1991, as he reminded me, Khodorkovsky left his wife at home with a rifle and stood inside the besieged White House, seat of the Russian government, as Yeltsin climbed atop a tank and sped the Soviet collapse. In 1995, at 32, Khodorkovsky, leading the savviest team in Moscow, had amassed enough money and contacts to take over Yukos, a state-owned petroleum behemoth, for a $309 million down payment. The following year, he helped stave off the Communists’ revanche and re-elect Yeltsin. By 40, Khodorkovsky reigned among the oligarchs, with a portfolio that had spread from banking to agriculture to oil. As Russia entered the new century, and Yukos rose as its most prodigious oil company, its C.E.O. became a multibillionaire.
Moscow would soon grow famous for operatic oligarchs and Byzantine intrigues, but Khodorkovsky never got caught in a compromising position — never snared at an Alpine resort, a Moscow casino or on a Riviera yacht. Girls, power, even the money, seemed to hold no magic. Where others basked in pomp, he was shy and painfully soft-spoken; you never heard his squeaky voice, a semitone deeper than Mike Tyson’s, at dacha parties for the foreign press, let alone on television. He divorced young but stayed on good terms with his first wife. Inna, his second, he met at the institute. Khodorkovsky was never flashy — he wore jeans and turtlenecks; the family vacationed in Finland — but he radiated the unlikely allure of a muscular technocrat. And yet, even at the top, he seemed adrift, unsure of his role in society. Unlike older Jewish oligarchs, men like Boris Berezovsky and Vladimir Gusinsky, who were often animated by old scores to settle, Khodorkovsky did not seem to consider himself an outsider. Lacking a public persona, he came to personify, by default, the revenge of the Soviet geek.
Andrew Meier, who last wrote for the magazine about the Russian writer Edward Limonov, is writing a book about Robert M. Morgenthau and his family.
Click here to enjoy the convenience of home delivery of The Times for 50% off. Past CoverageRussia to Free Oil Magnate's Former Lawyer (April 22, 2009)New Trial For Tycoon Is a Test For Russia (March 6, 2009)Imprisoned Tycoon, a Putin Foe, Is Back in Court (March 4, 2009)MOSCOW JOURNAL; Pregnant Inmate's Plight Inspires Plea to Medvedev (November 19, 2008) Related Searches Khodorkovsky, Mikhail B Get E-Mail Alerts Yukos Get E-Mail Alerts Russia Get E-Mail Alerts Decisions and Verdicts Get E-Mail Alerts Next Article in Magazine (2 of 14) » MOST POPULAR E-Mailed Blogged Searched Well: Phys Ed: Why Exercise Makes You Less Anxious Fitness: Is the Spirit of Competition in the Soul of Yoga? A Crown Jewel of Education Struggles With Cuts The Minimalist: 101 Head Starts on the Day Regents Raise College Tuition in California by 32 Percent Guidelines Push Back Age for Cervical Cancer Tests Gail Collins: The Breast Brouhaha Back to Business: With F.H.A. Help, Easy Loans in Expensive Areas Duck! It’s the Holidays. David Brooks: What Geithner Got Right Go to Complete List » Giuliani Is Said to Have Decided Not to Run for Governor Senate Health Bill Said to Cost $849 Billion Over 10 Years Guidelines Push Back Age for Cervical Cancer Tests Why We Should Put Jihad on Trial What They Really Believe Mortgage Delinquencies Reach a Record High Only Her Stylist Knows for Sure A Daytime Network Franchise Bets on Her Future With Cable Born in U.S., a Radical Cleric Inspires Terror Against West Holder Defends Decision to Use U.S. Court for 9/11 Trial Go to Complete List » obama health care november 4, 2009 china education palin immigration thanksgiving afghanistan india Go to Complete List » Advertise on NYTimes.com Inside NYTimes.com Travel » 36 Hours in Rajasthan, India Arts and Design » Flights of Mind, Brought to Life Opinion » Op-Ed: Addicted to Mammograms
After telling people that cancer should be caught early, convincing them that we are screening too much is an uphill battle.
Business » Google Offers Peek at Operating System Opinion » Op-Ed: The Wet Side of the Moon Escapes » A Permanent Theater Festival on Puget Sound Escapes » A Place in Time, Not All Frozen Sports » N.B.A.’s Old Reliable Very Much in Vogue Movies » Abstinence Makes the Heart ... Oh, You Know Opinion » Editorial: Gift to Credit Card Companies
Laws protecting consumers from predatory actions by the credit card industry should be in effect already.
Arts and Design » A World of Macabre Misfits Opinion » Room for Debate: The Goldman Giveaway Home World U.S. N.Y. / Region Business Technology Science Health Sports Opinion Arts Style Travel Jobs Real Estate Automobiles Back to Top Copyright 2009 The New York Times Company Privacy Policy Terms of Service Search Corrections RSS First Look Help Contact Us Work for Us Site Map Tacoda_AMS_DDC_addPair("t_section","Magazine") Tacoda_AMS_DDC_addPair("site","nytimes.com") Tacoda_AMS_DDC("http://te.nytimes.com/tte/blank.gif","1.0")
Laws protecting consumers from predatory actions by the credit card industry should be in effect already.
Read Full Article »