Opponents successfully blamed the liberals for
the economic crisis of the 1990s, as shown by surveys
conducted in 2006 (Kolesnichenko 2006). Further,
because the Green movement was receiving funding
from outside Russia, it was susceptible to accusations
of anti-Russian sentiments. Many Russians seemed to
be more interested in promises of order than in demo-
cratic freedoms. Existing attitudes, of course, might
have been heavily influenced by internal propaganda,
as there are significant constraints placed on the free
press in Russia.
In this atmosphere of economic worries and de-
sires to promote industrial growth, as well as intense
industrial pressure, in May 2000, Putin abolished the
Environmental Ministry and moved its functions
into the Natural Resources Ministry. The Natural Re-
sources Ministry is charged with promoting the rapid
development of Russia’s resources to fuel economic
growth. The mission of the Natural Resources Min-
istry conflicts with environmental protection in nu-
merous ways. Legislative changes in 2004 raised both
the minimal membership required and the threshold
percentage of the electoral vote to be seated as a party
in the legislature. The new law disqualified the Green
Party from participating as a legislative party. In 2005,
the Green party transformed into a social movement,
and joined liberal factions as part of the small Yabloko
Party in time for the 2007 elections (European Green
Party 2011; Kolesnichenko 2006).
With the environmental movement marginal-
ized by recent legislative changes, big companies of-
ten rolled over local laws and rights, either by rules
change or by violation of existing rules and regula-
tions. Green party reports accuse companies of ignor-
ing government orders to stop their illegal activities.
In a system dominated by politically and economi-
sharon
(sharon)
#1