INTRODUCTION

  I have been conducting academic research on the Soviet Union, and more recently the Russian Federation, since 1980. The majority of my work has focused on issues related to foreign investment and regional development in the Russian Federation. I have visited Russia on more than 25 occasions and have travelled widely beyond Moscow. In the last three years I have been engaged in two research projects funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). One project has examined the economic situation in the Russian Far East and the potential for increased interaction with Northeast Asia. The second project, run jointly with Professor Philip Hanson, has sought to explain patterns of regional economic change in Russia. I have also been involved in consulting work for a number of UK companies and write regularly for the business press. At present I am also a Research Associate of the Royal Institute of International Affairs Russia and Eurasia Programme. Below I have made a series of observations organised around the issues identified in the New Release of Y July 1999. I have only commented on those areas where I feel I have some competence.

LEVEL AND EFFECTIVENESS OF DIPLOMATIC REPRESENTATION

  Over the last year or so I have come into contact with FCO staff on a number of occasions, both in London and in Moscow. I also participated in a meeting at the FCO late last year that discussed UK policy towards Russia, My impression is that the FCO is well served by their current staff. The research staff are very well informed and produce solid analytical work. My limited contact with diplomats in Moscow also suggests that they are providing effective support for policy making. I am impressed that Russia's regions have been given a priority and that the Embassy seems well informed about the political situation beyond Moscow. I am less sure that there is adequate analysis of the economic situation beyond Moscow and suspect that this issue may be falling between Embassy staff and the Commercial Section.

AWARENESS OF COMMERCIAL POTENTIAL

  It is unclear to me what role, if any, the FCO plays here. Presumably it is the responsibility of the DTI and its Export Promotions operations to asses commercial potential. Over the years my contact with them has been far from satisfactory. Compared with the support provided by the US Department of Commerce and its American Business Centres, UK business is probably poorly served beyond Moscow. However, the ABCs are being rationalised and the commercial opportunities in Russia at present may not merit any more support than is presently provided.

SUPPORT FOR BRITISH BUSINESS

  My knowledge here is a result of working with a major UK company to support its investment interests in the Russian Far East and, to a lesser extent, East Siberia. I am aware that the FCO has provided strong support to the company, including a visit by the Ambassador to the Russian Far East. However, this close relationship can provoke an adverse response in the regions. For example, Russian politicians in the regions accuse UK companies of being agents of UK foreign policy. I am also aware that the UK Government lobbies the Russian Government to introduce legislation to protect the interests of foreign investors and also protests when those interests are treated unfairly. The Ambassador has also held meetings with Governors from regions where UK companies are active. Therefore, it is probably safe to say that the FCO is providing sufficient political support and that more overt action may actually harm the interests of UK companies.

ROLE AND PERFORMANCE OF THE BRITISH COUNCIL

  Here my knowledge is related to the British Council's operations on Sakhalin and from various meetings with British Council officials. My overall impression is positive. The British Council has worked closely with a UK company to establish a scheme for teaching English language teachers on Sakhalin. The Council entered a region where US and Japanese agencies were already active and was able to establish an independent British identity and programme that addresses an obvious need.

  As an academic involved in co-operative research with colleagues in Russia my experience has been less positive. Funding for academic exchanges and co-operative research, such as REAP, has become far too narrow in focus and tied to commercial and policy needs. There is worth in simply enabling academic interchange. I would like to see more general support provided to establish new contacts with Russian academics working the regions.

  Finally, I have just supervised a Russian citizen through our PhD programme. The individual first came to the UK as a Chevening student and has now returned to Russia after four years in the UK. His PhD was funded by a Scholarship from the European Commission Tacis-ACE programme, which funded postgraduate research in economics and related subjects. It is not clear whether this scheme is still running and I would like to see the British Council offer scholarships for Russian citizens to come to the UK to study for a PhD in the Social Sciences, with a particular emphasis on topics related to transition in Russia. My experience is that working with Russian researchers in Russia provides access to information and insights otherwise unavailable. It is also the case the Russian social science needs a cohort of new young specialists trained to international standards.

LINKS BETWEEN THE FCO AND UK ACADEMIA

  Finally, although this is not an issued listed in the New Release, I would like to comment on the current arrangements for interaction between academic Russia specialists and the FCO. At present this is rather ad hoc and based on a network of long-standing contacts. Having participated in policy discussions in Washington and in Brussels, I can see benefit in establishing a wider, and perhaps more formal, network. Simply inviting academics to a meeting where 50 participants sit around a table and discuss what to do about Russia is not very productive! At present Chatham House serves as a meeting place for FCO officials and academics, but these meetings are open to others. Perhaps a more regular series of meetings could be established where academics and FCO officials discuss developments in Russia. There is a lot of policy-relevant research being conducted at present, particularly on Russia's regions. As a case in point, we have had to actively seek out the FCO to discuss the findings of our project on regional economic change. A member of the Moscow Embassy staff was invited to a seminar we held in Sochi last week. We are required by ESRC to disseminate our research findings to the UK policy audience, but it appears that the FCO has no formal mechanism for engaging with the academic community. As a consequence, it is not making the most of the specialist knowledge in UK universities.

  One final observation, I have found it difficult to comment on the content of FCO policies in relation to Russia simply because I have no clear idea of what they are! That said, keeping a watching brief and making no public policy statements about Russia is probably sound diplomacy at present.

Dr Michael Bradshaw