Berezovsky the Victim of His Own Designs

It?€™s the talk of the day: Boris Berezovsky, in responding to pressure from the Kremlin, has stated in a letter that he is giving up the jewel in his crown: his shares in ORT, the nation?€™s most widely watched TV network, in favor of journalists and representatives of the creative intelligentsia.

With the exception of a few sentences, the letter Berezovsky addressed to President Vladimir Putin sounds as if it was written back in the late 1980s by none other than Andrei Sakharov. And, if not for the author?€™s signature, I would not think twice of putting my own name under the text. But I will not ?€” because it was written by a person whose four-year involvement in Kremlin politics led to the very situation Berezovsky now decries.

I wouldn?€™t even doubt the sincerity of the oligarch?€™s concerns. But I don?€™t trust his purposes.

For the only rationale behind many of Berezovsky?€™s adventures ?€” both public and private ?€” has been self-enrichment at the expense of subverting all noble desires that he presumably is fighting for now. He often was quick to cite Henry Ford?€™s famous maxim, "What is good for Ford is good for America." But Berezovsky failed to learn from Ford?€™s biography that it took the U.S. automaker years of investing his own capital, brains and private life to achieve what he did at the end of the road.

No, Berezovsky was never eager to invest. His know-how was in "management privatization" i.e. buying managers ?€” whether in the areas of cars, oil or media ?€” who controlled the cash flows of companies rather than the companies as such.

That?€™s how Berezovsky created his media empire. Actually, the word "created" here is inappropriate. Berezovsky, unlike Vladimir Gusinsky, the founder of NTV and another Kremlin opponent, has never created anything ?€” any business ?€” except sophisticated and obscure financial schemes.

Berezovsky used to call himself a businessman; now he says he?€™s a politician. But he is neither, nor is he a political lobbyist whose moneymaking capabilities were based largely on his self-promoting image as the one who ran both the Kremlin and the government.

Now, having been distanced from the Kremlin, Berezovsky is losing his main business. His attempt to claim his right and might after Vladimir Putin assumed the presidency has gone unnoticed. Berezovsky was shown that he doesn?€™t hold a monopoly on using people. So now he is left with nothing but to bargain for at least some insurance from the Kremlin, to protect himself from possibly violent measures against him. And the only personal insurance he has left are journalists loyal to him who wouldn?€™t let those measures be conducted in secret.

But Berezovsky may lose out there, too ?€” because for everyone with big money, there are those with even bigger money. And those who have served one master may choose another. Consider this: Two years ago, Mikhail Leontiev, the popular television personality, used to condemn Berezovsky on the television channel controlled by Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov. A year ago, Leontiev started criticizing Luzhkov on the TV channel owned by Berezovsky. Now Leontiev is condemning both men and defending Putin in many media sources, including the newspaper Vedomosti, which is owned by Independent Media.

Once again, Berezovsky has proved that he is good at short-term tactics but no good at strategic thinking. He is the victim of his own designs. Of course, the Kremlin is no smarter; if it were, it would do its best to recruit Berezovsky as the leader of the "constructive opposition" ?€” and hence compromise in public opinion the idea of democratic opposition for years to come.

Yevgenia Albats is an independent journalist based in Moscow.