As Novye Izvestia has already reported, during an online meeting with the first deputy chairman of the board of the Military-Industrial Commission, Sergey Kulikov, he suggested that he head Rusnano, which means the long-awaited resignation of Anatoly Chubais from this post.
Chubais was appointed general director of the state corporation Russian Corporation of Nanotechnologies, which in 2008 was transformed into Rusnano, and this is the longest employment in his career. He headed RAO UES for 10 years: from 1998 to 2008, and all previous positions - from an employee of the executive committee of the Leningrad City Council to deputy prime minister, minister of finance and head of the presidential administration - fit together in 1990-1998.
Over the course of his career, Chubais has become a kind of symbol of Russian "liberalism", and for most Russians, and especially older people, just a bogeyman, to whom the deplorable state of the Russian economy was and continue to be attributed. However, it is funny that the legendary phrase "Chubais is to blame for everything!", Which is attributed to Boris Yeltsin, was never uttered by the first president of Russia - it sounded for the first time in the famous satirical TV show "Dolls" on the NTV channel, when he was not yet state-owned.
Of course, Chubais's resignation caused a lot of responses in the media and social networks.
So the writer and publicist Lev Usyskin, considers it to be the beginning of a "soft cleanup" of the country's political field:
“Regarding the resignation of A. B. Chubais. So far, everything fits into my earlier predictions about the clearing of the site from persons who have at least some faces of their own, on the eve of the summit coup. In this case, the cleanup is soft, it was simply removed from the not too large, but still cash flow with the infrastructure. If I'm right, then in return there will be some kind of coordinating, but not managing the money position. Well, we are closely watching Gref and Girkin - changes are also possible with them (if only they themselves are not participants in the upcoming events)..."
Political scientist Ilya Grashchenkov has approximately the same opinion, considering this event a loss:
“We ate Chubais. But there were rumors that the "Family" will keep this direction for itself, delaying the transition of the corporation to VEB as much as possible. It turns out that Chubais himself was mistaken when he believed that he had managed to come to an agreement with Putin and bargain for keeping Rusnano for himself, at least until the end of 2021. The new head proposed by Putin, the first deputy representative of the Military-Industrial Commission of the Government of Russia (previously, the top manager of Rostec) S. Kulikov, will become the operator of the transfer of structures to VEB. In addition, he can become an independent auditor of all activities of Rusnano over the past 13 years, and this could significantly hit Chubais's team.
If Chubais leaves Putin's team, then for the president it will be the loss of one of the key negotiators with the Democrats in the West. In this case, Contacts with Biden will be even more complicated. If Chubais goes to the senatorial office, then a "soft exchange" is quite probable, and the question of the corporation will be suspended until it becomes clear what actions Washington is planning with respect to Moscow ... "
Journalist Kirill Shulika shares his memories of meeting Chubais and believes that it is too early to write off Chubais:
“I have known him since the times of the Union of Right Forces. This is one of the most powerful personalities I have ever met. And one of the most interesting and profound people, he is one of those who plunge into questions to the smallest detail and then it turns out that he knows them better than the specialists who came to the report.
The unpopular Chubais was elected to the first Duma, and most of his "popular" critics went to parliament only in the dining room. How many election campaigns would the would-be technologists build on criticism of Chubais, and it was Chubais, not being an election expert, who conducted one of the brightest campaigns in the world - Boris Yeltsin in 1996. This is precisely due to its quality to dive into various issues to the smallest detail and learn all my life.
It was always possible to hate Chubais, and this was used by weak and dependent politicians like Zyuganov and other mummies. Well, like, you can't demand Putin's resignation, but to say that Putin should expel Chubais was quite considered a manifestation of opposition.
You will not find people who were involved in privatization, party building, elections, energy, nanotechnology, and at the same time would still be public politicians and excellent debaters. The most powerful debates - 1999 and Chubais with Yavlinsky on NTV.
In principle, Chubais had a choice - with his data to make a public political career or to carry out unpopular reforms, he chose the latter, knowing from the consequences, it really costs a lot. Again, he is the only one who made such a choice himself. Partly still Gaidar, but he was the leader of the party and everything else.
And don't worry about Anatoly Borisovich, you will hear about him again. This is the very case when he will still be persuaded..."
Journalist Dmitry Kolezev analyzes Chubais's work at Rusnano and calls his departure from the political scene a logical continuation of Putin's policy:
“This departure, perhaps, to nowhere - it has already been announced that Putin is not planning to meet with Chubais yet, that is, Anatoly Borisovich is not expecting any major appointment. There were rumors about the "development of the Arctic", but they, apparently, turned out to be a near-Kremlin joke. And the real development of the Arctic is such a resource-intensive (and therefore corrupt) direction that Putin is unlikely to dare to entrust it to Chubais, who is far from his closest person. Now they are also talking about a permanent mission to the UN, but so far this is also at the level of rumors.
The resignation of Chubais is seen primarily as an economic and managerial sense. Rusnano acted as a state venture investor, having invested about 0.5 trillion rubles in 12 years. The money on a national scale is modest (an average of 41 billion rubles a year - about the same as two "Rashi Today"), but in conditions of a shortage of resources, this is money. And we already see how this financial flow comes under the control of Sergei Chemezov (along with the appointment of his colleague Sergei Kulikov to Rusnano). In addition, Kulikov is a specialist in military technologies, and this also corresponds to the general trend of militarization: everything in the country, including nanotechnology, should be subordinated to the cause of defense.
Here you can start talking about how successful Chubais's Rusnano was. The question is more likely for an economic analyst, but offhand facts and figures can be found both in favor and against Chubais's management. In 2019, Rusnano showed a net loss of 16.5 billion rubles, but before that it was still becoming self-sufficient and operating with profit. There were extremely unsuccessful projects ("Nitol", "Liotech"), there were relatively successful ones ("Hevel", "Metaclay", "Monocrystal"). The portfolio company "Rusnano" OCSiAl even reached a capitalization of $ 1 billion. They announced the creation of 40 thousand jobs. In addition, Rusnano has fully returned to the budget in taxes all the money spent on its creation - about 130 billion rubles.
But Chubais's resignation also has a political meaning. Last year, Vladimir Putin said that "liberalism has outlived its usefulness," speaking primarily of Europe. However, his point of view extends to the liberals inside the country, the main of whom was and remains Chubais. The dismissal of Chubais can be taken as an illustration of a trend towards a decrease in the influence of liberalism as a political and economic doctrine in Russia. Yes, besides Chubais, there are many more liberal figures (the largest is Gref), but Chubais is a symbol connecting the Putin regime with the liberal Yeltsin era. With his dismissal, this connection, if not broken, then weakens.
My personal attitude towards Chubais is rather positive, with all the reservations about "a liberal in Putin's service." And Putin, judging by what we know, tolerated Chubais rather than considered his manager. It is difficult to say why he tolerated (obligations to Yeltsin and the Family? To the United States? Tribute to the Russian "liberal clan"?). But now this reason has lost its weight. It is also interesting whether Anatoly Chubais will be able to retire on an honorable pension without the Kremlin's "severance pay" in the form of a criminal case. I think there are a lot of people who want to "deal with Red" (too smart, too independent, too brave - by the standards of their world, of course)..."
Popular blogger Nezygar is critical of Chubais 's achievements throughout his career:
“So Chubais left.
What kind of memory does Chubais leave after his nearly thirty years of not playing the last roles in the Russian public field?
1. Chubais is the leader among managers in terms of the number of conflicting results.
Chubais's style is the reproduction of delayed negative consequences.
“He always worked with short-term results; despite the fact that strategically decisions carried catastrophic and costly consequences".
The initial privatization of the 90s was initially carried out with gross violations of the law.
According to the calculations of RANEPA experts, up to 60 percent of the Russian economy is still owned by foreign companies to one degree or another.
But Chubais became a full-fledged delegate from Russia to the Atlantic get-together.
2. Chubais showed complete inconsistency as the head-practitioner of the largest industrial and scientific structures.
Chubais was not just the most expensive manager; but all his projects turned out to be overly resource-intensive.
Chubais and his team were loss managers.
Under his leadership, RAO UES, Russia's energy system, was privatized at enormous costs.
It is no secret that many representatives of Chubais's team, officials became the real owners of energy assets, and a number of them still remain hidden shareholders.
They say that Chubais himself allegedly owns stakes in a number of power systems.
3. Chubais's Rusnano project has essentially become a tool for pumping budget funds into private use.
For 13 years of existence, no significant achievement has been made, not a single high-tech invention has been launched into mass production. Except perhaps for Kagocel.
Throughout its history, Rusnano was shaken by scandals and criminal cases of corruption.
Having received a state contribution of 130 billion rubles at the start, as well as having various benefits, the company reached reporting profit only 10 years later.
Its size - 5.6 billion rubles - is ridiculous compared to those preferences and direct financial injections from the budget for a total of about 500 billion rubles.
4. The name of Chubais is associated with stories of fraud, financial schemes in the interests of individuals and financial structures.
There is a well-known story when, having insider information about the state's monetary policy, Chubais's people used it in the interests of the "investment fund" Montes Auri.
This fund speculated in securities, including on the GKO market. As a result, Chubais himself and a group of his associates (Gaidar, Zadornov, Koch, Urinson Evstafiev and others) became currency millionaires. The criminal case initiated by Prosecutor General Skuratov was frozen after his resignation.
Stories have repeatedly surfaced when Rusnano organizations were involved in the withdrawal of capital, money laundering, and embezzlement.
5. With the departure of Chubais, the liberal clan of "family" in alliance with some old oligarchs and Medvedev's group weakened.
It can be assumed that Prime Minister Mishustin insisted on Chubais's resignation and Rusnano's reboot solely with a pragmatic goal - to free the economy from an unprofitable structure that costs the state budget tens of billions of rubles annually..."
And another popular blogger, Katya Gordon, expressed in her publication exactly what most of the country's citizens think about Chubais:
“Chubais is gone. He left to live comfortably, escaping prison... and with his glorious biography and betrayal of the interests of the Motherland - he should have gone not at all to rest, in my opinion. After privatization, according to the most conservative estimates, 60 percent of the Russian economy belongs to foreign companies. Under the Gaidar-Chubais song about democracy, they brazenly and basely sold the country. For 13 years, Rusnano, having mastered multibillion-dollar budgets, did nothing... except Kagocel, pumping the state budget into the private sector. Chubais's scams under Skuratov could have ended in prison, but with the departure of the prosecutor, the case against this comrade was dropped. Chubais for me will always remain a protege, a foreign agent who destroyed and sold my country, a person who said that free education for our children it's too fat. Indirectly, people like him are to blame for the collapse of healthcare, education, and science. I believe that in order to restore historical justice, a full-fledged investigation of his activities is necessary. One day, when we throw off the Western businessmen... and become Russia, strong and sovereign, so it will be. How Avdotya Smirnova, who had been posing as an honest man all her life, could have become his wife, is not clear to me. But you can see the landmarks float when there is a lot of dough nearby..."