10 p. The Russian Demographics Dilemma; Dmitry Rogozin, part 1 of 2

Some say that Rogozin could be presidential material for 2030. He is only about 65. What would Russia be like if he had a hand in policy formation? His formidable attitudes become evident in his book.

I have written about Rogozin before, he had first person experience is the break-up of the Soviet Union, and firsthand knowledge of the Kremlin treachery under Yeltsin, especially in the Chechen wars. He has a lot to say about the Ukraine, about the southern open borders, about illegal migration, and criminality, the heroin trade, about the development of the Far East, and about the necessity of solving the demographic problem.

Librarian ran such a tireless marathon while uploading that last book, of more than 30 chapters. Let’s give him a break from his translating, and editing duties.

Here I’ll write his views about Demographics. Then later I’ll follow with another essay, an unexpected proposal for solving demographics. (This one is 6,000 words, the next one is shorter.)

The Chechen War had affected both Russians and Chechens, it had a positive impact on birth rate in one ethnic group and at the same time led to shock, despair, and demographic decline in another. Is it possible to seed and nurture the idea of national revival in a nation that lost all faith? Can a national idea become a banner of national revival when the Russian population is declining by a million a year? If Russians do not perceive themselves as a consolidated nation, would they ever be ready to reproduce? And which factor is of greater significance in improving demographic situation: is it the material component, i.e. financial incentives, or is it the ideology, i.e. national ideas and education, or is it in the spirit of respect for large healthy families?

The truth is that there is no such thing as a demographic problem in Russia. There is a demographic disaster instead, (written in 2013). The breakup of the country, moral decline and disintegration of the family as an institution, deterioration of the domestic industry and of all the aspects of public and social life — all of the above induced the gravest reaction in people. The “poor folk” responded to the uncertain times with an unprecedented fall in birth rate that reflected a lack of desire to continue family lines; with an unheard-of mortality rate exceeding that of a wartime; with the migration of population from the Northern and Eastern to the Medial and Western regions of the country, closer to metropolises and the developed economic arteries. This migration process left deserted the same strategic territories that had been developed with great hardship by many generations of Russians throughout centuries, the East and in the village life.

For this reason, the promotion of a national idea is one of the crucial tasks of the patriotic movement; this task is to form and advance the authentic and the single most important national project “National Preservation, Growth and Development in the Integrated and Consolidated State”. The project is based on the profound analytical report prepared by a group of gifted young academics. ¹

[1The State Duma — the lower chamber of the Parliament of the Russian Federation.]

It is gratifying that the ideas set forth in our report constituted the base of the new Demographic Program that was announced by President Vladimir Putin at the Federal Assembly in 2006.

The future success of the Demographic Program depends upon our willingness to target the three most important national objectives.

✓The first goal is to solve the current demographic crisis by encouraging fertility in families whilst combating the over-excessive mortality rate. It is necessary to rid the nation of the so-called “Russian cross”, which is a name for a graphical intersection of the rapidly declining line indicating birth rate, with the sharply rising line indicating mortality. The target population of such a vast and rich country as Russia should be at least 500 million.

[Population curves going steadily downward at around 9 years old, and with a big notch centered at 25. (25 to 30 were the births in 1995 to 2000.) The dark colors are where there are more females than males.]

✓Secondly, it is necessary to encourage voluntary repatriation of our compatriots from the Baltic States and the CIS and at the same to start “colonizing” and redeveloping the regions of Siberia and the Far East again.

✓The third imminent task is to sort out the basics of the immigration policy and to drive the unwanted immigration and ethnic mafias out of Russia.

Can there be anything more important than a nation’s right to life and limb? According to the forecast of the Commission on Population and Development, a subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, the population of the Russian Federation will be reduced by 9–10 million in the period from 2009 to 2020; it will shrink further from 147 million now, to 112 - 92 million by 2050. If far-reaching measures are not taken urgently, this exact outcome is inevitable.

The quality of Russia’s evolution as a civilization must be determined by her ability to double the birth rate coefficient in the next ten years. For this to be achieved, an average healthy couple in Russia should have twice as many offspring as it has today. In other words, it is desirable that people who belong to the middle class and are able to raise their children well, adopt a popular fashion of having three children in a family.

The state is capable of setting such an objective; it can encourage couples to have more children, and it must be willing to do so. In the medium-term perspective this would at least partially compensate for the current drastic shortage of human resources. In Russia today there are about 17 million women of childbearing age. Even if a half of these women come to a decision to have two more children each, 17 million of new lives would be brought into the world.

Another aspect of the sound demographic policy is to resettle people into the strategically important geographic areas and initiate a series of potentially profitable and productive economic projects there.

Our nation must not let others overtake vast riches in our North and Taiga. On the contrary, the avant-garde of the nation must be encouraged to go there, like it was done at the times that were better for the state. National prosperity is based not on the capital city and on ever-expanding metropolises and not on the makeover of the whole country into an endless “Eastern bazaar”. The future prosperity depends on building the strong backbone of small towns’ network — renewed industrial and economic centers, which are particularly significant in West Siberia, East Siberia and in the Far East.

The future of Russia lies in Siberia and the Pacific Ocean. It is our generation’s duty to stop the Russian exodus from this land of the future. This exodus exposes Siberia and our Pacific coastline to an influx of adverse and extraneous immigrants.

The objective of national reproduction must be a priority in the Russian domestic policy today. If this objective fails to be achieved, all other projects and policies aimed at improving people’s lives would become void.

Typically, as the process of elimination of “unwanted population” by methods of abortions, contraception and vasectomies is more intense, the weakening societies benefit the global oligarchy. Instead of projecting a positive and happy image of parenthood, the mass media are inclined to raise issues of increased cost of child rearing and stress on problems of education and similar aspects of parenthood in a negative way. During the last fifteen years, many obstetricians all over Russia have been trying to convince women in their care not to go through with pregnancies; they recommended abortions, intimidated women with prospects of medical complications in pregnancy that were often grossly exaggerated or altogether non-existent. For all those years an array of foreign-subsidized “non-governmental” organizations specializing in birth control was at work, many of them on a global scale. There are hundreds of such family-planning centers all over the country. They mostly favor in their activities the areas that are already endangered such as Siberia, the Far East, and the non-Black-Earth belt.

Generally, these organizations promote a worthy cause: they try to prevent the spread of AIDS and venereal diseases; they raise awareness of methods of contraception and promote maternal health. However, the achieved effect is questionable. In Russia, seven out of ten pregnancies end in a decision to abort the fetus. Cases of syphilis have increased 150–200-fold over the last thirteen years in the Far East; the number of HIV-infected people has grown 4-fold. At the same time, the sales of contraceptives have gone up 5-fold, and the number of live births dropped down by 3.7 million and continues to decrease.

Governmental agencies that specialize in tackling drug abuse can demonstrate a very similar picture. If in 2004 there were about 70,000 drug abuse-related deaths in Russia, in 2005 this figure went up to 100,000 (!), the vast majority of the drug victims being people of young age.

If a mind of a person is being continuously, (for a long period of time), infixed with a notion that it is unnecessary and even harmful to procreate, and that the resources of the planet are limited, and there are not enough of them to accommodate the growing population; then this person would fall under the magical influence of numbers and statistics and would finally accept the idea; (an individual cannot test or check it personally). The same individual, though, cannot help noticing the obvious around him or her: the increased proportion of elderly people in the population; fewer children about; the inflow of “foreigners” who take up vital space. All of these are signs that the familiar cultural and social environment is being eroded. By the time these signs become all too apparent, the process is gone too far and it is too late to change anything. That is why the degeneration of the European civilization and the lack of desire and/or ability to reproduce is not an achievement but a peril.

We as a nation have to denounce this “plague of the European white man”, and to set upon our own demographic path. If there is a rational seed in the concept of birth control and birth limitation, it does not suit Russia and her indigenous nations. To some extent these ideas might be justified in countries like China, India and Pakistan — geographic regions with high birth rates and the deficit of drinking water, but they would not be reasonable for us!

If the current ominous birth and mortality trend continues, the next decade would see the economically active population of Russia shrink by 10.6 million; thus, the shortage of workforce would present an insurmountable obstacle for Russia in gaining back the equal player status in the global market. Many centrally planned economic and industrial projects in the USSR were accomplished with young generations on call; the workforce was forwarded into certain industries; quotas of places in educational institutions were set; occupational training and professional re-training courses were offered. But no governmental directives or market mechanisms can drive the economy forward if there are not enough young people available.

The question is; can any arguments in favor of the economic growth and national security convince a married couple to have three or four children? Chances are, they cannot. Nobody would start a family for the sake of saving the country, especially if this is an abstract and irrelevant concept advocated by scientists and politicians and mocked by an army of professional scribblers, the main stream media.

The idea of saving the country should be intrinsic to an individual life and to be clear to the vast majority. If the Government adopts and implements concrete measures designed to overcome the population crunch, that in itself would build a framework for resolving economic and security issues. Only at that stage such measures, clear to all citizens, could be supported by ideology and by arguments reverting them from the child free lifestyle. Only then it would be possible to promote the idea of a large family, making it acceptable in people’s minds and even trendy.

The record demographic collapse of the early 1990s did not happened overnight. The way for it was paved in the preceding decades. It is very important to understand the roots of the current demographic crunch. Many demographic experts share the view that the reason for the current decline lies in the “mortality shock”, which was experienced by our population in 1992–1995 and is still acutely felt today. The uncertain times have put our compatriots in drastically stressful situations and reduced the lives of millions by many years. The real cost of the turmoil for the nation is greater beyond comparison, as so many new lives were never conceived at all during that era.

After the year 2000 the birth rate has risen slightly, but the mortality rate is still on the increase. We are still carrying “the Russian cross” that appeared on graphs when the excessive mortality curve crossed the curve that reflected unprecedented decline in live births. According to official data the Russian Federation loses around 800,000 — 900,000 people every year. During the last 13 years Russia’s population went down by more than eleven million. Three babies are born and four people die every minute in Russia. In China 38 babies are born and 16 people die every minute, whilst in the USA the figures are eight and four accordingly. (2013)

General statistical figures do not reflect the full scale of the demographic losses as they are concealed, to some extent by the influx of immigrants. If the Government proceeds with the intention to grant amnesty to several million foreigners who are living and working in Russia illegally, the official statistics would be able to report a demographic improvement.

In writing about the demographic crunch, I cannot help touching upon the sore subject of mass abortions. Russia’s abortion rate ranks second in the world. For instance, the number of abortions per 1,000 of women aged 15–45 is seven in Belgium, eight in Germany and 63 in the Russian Federation. These days abortion falls into the category of free medical services. All attempts of my colleagues in the Rodina (“Motherland”) parliamentary faction to put forward a proposal that the state must stop subsidizing abortions that terminate millions of unborn lives have been met by officials with fierce resistance.

An introduction of an indirect incentive for a woman to continue with a pregnancy, like a “baby stipend” or a “demographic voucher” valued at 250,000 Russian roubles, clearly is never going to work on its own. The state has to stop the criminal financing of abortions. Imprisonment must be stipulated for such crimes as an abortion performed against the will; coercing into an abortion; supply of materials for self-performed abortions. About 2 to 3,5 million of unborn babies are aborted annually; this is comparable to a war on a grand scale. These figures are scary, but even more terrifying are the proportions of the number of abortions to the number of live births — for every newborn in Russia there are two babies killed in their embryonic state. The state makes free abortions available, and this means that every Russian taxpayer is covering the cost of killing an unborn child out of his or her pocket. This is utterly immoral and, I should say, criminal.

Mass abortions must be stopped not merely by the deliberate efforts of the Government, but by collective willpower and a shift in attitude. The Government must initiate a full-scale public campaign to discourage abortions, with the use of media and the inclusion of television, prior to legislative moratorium on artificial terminations of pregnancy. It is no longer sufficient to dispute the subject; official propaganda is required now.

The true meaning of abortion is deeply repulsive, and this must be conveyed to the whole nation. It is necessary to awaken parental instincts in young people. Upon seeing an image of a fetus developing in a womb, many people will resolve never to kill a life that has already been conceived. At the same time, it is necessary to think of the ways to encourage and reward the medics who save an unborn human life from being cut short.

As yet, the negative view on abortions prevails in society, largely due to the efforts of the Russian Orthodox Church. The frequency of abortions has reduced by half in the last fifteen years. I believe that Russia will regain the traditional view on an abortion as a heavy sin; that this act will be amounted to murder and banned at any term of pregnancy with the exception of medical or moral grounds (such as a pregnancy resulting from rape).

Writer Yury Vorobyovsky gives an interesting historical reference against abortions in The Russian House magazine:

A distinguished French doctor Jerome Lejeune posed a question to a conference of obstetricians and midwives, “Dear colleagues, what would be your advice? You see a family in which the first child is born blind, the second child is deaf from birth, the third child is ill with tuberculosis. The mother has tuberculosis, too, and she is pregnant again….”

His colleagues affirmed, “Abortion, of course!

Then Dr. Lejeune said, “The outcome of that fourth pregnancy was a baby named Ludwig van Beethoven….”

Besides, the ban on artificial termination of pregnancy is a part of the full version of the Hippocratic Oath taken by every newly qualified doctor of medicine: “... I will not give to a woman an abortive remedy.” The version adapted by our Health Care Ministry omits that part. It is also desirable to make a ban on abortion a part of the Russian Fundamental Law, should the public deem such a measure justifiable.

If our liberals scream about “reactionary policy” again, maybe they should look up to their former American master, George Bush Junior, who introduced tough measures restricting pregnancy terminations. Arguably that was the only reasonable and useful deed that he had done during his term. In Russia, the issue of “life protection” is still decidedly marginal, and as to the understanding of its moral aspects, it is largely limited to followers of religion. The task of representatives of traditional religions of Russia is to progress from raising awareness of the issue in secular media and educational institutions onto a proactive public information campaign.

The nature generally allows for about 5% of all babies to be born with genetic abnormalities. Sadly, in the olden days many babies with disabilities were not making it beyond infancy or early childhood; the strong and healthy survived.

The “mass abortion healthcare” reversed this situation to the effect that the majority of healthy fetuses are aborted, whereas the weak and disabled survive due to the advance medical care. As a result of such health care, the Russian genetic fund started to deteriorate dramatically in the 1960s.

Obstetricians note an increase in pathology cases among women of childbearing age. Normal natural births account for 30% of all reproductive outcomes. More than half of all babies are born with some health deviations. Medical commissions note that about a third of young people of conscription age are not fit for army service.

What is probably worse is that the nation is not only shrinking in numbers but is degenerating “in quality”, as more and more children are physically or mentally handicapped.

In pursuit of the additional state finance initiated by President Putin in 2006, regular schools are keen to accommodate as many pupils as possible so as to improve their statistics, mostly by keeping children with learning disabilities who would otherwise benefit from attending schools that cater for their special needs. It does not take much imagination to know how years of studying beside a child with learning disabilities might affect a capable child.

The problem of neglected children goes hand in hand with the demographic crunch. Official statistics claim that there are 700,000 neglected or homeless children in Russia; unofficial studies suggest that the correct figure is close to 4 million, i.e. every ninth child. The majority of them are social orphans — children who were denounced or abandoned by their living parents. These children are an easy prey for criminals and abusers. Over a million of underage children were arrested for various crimes; 11,000 were convicted and are kept in juvenile prisons.

__________

The other side of depopulation is the excessive mortality rate. Every year 2,300,000 people die in Russia.

The country also is ahead of the world in suicide rates — 40 people out of every 100,000 take their own lives, which is thrice as much as the average global rate.

Male life expectancy has fallen rapidly and is now below 59 years of age, which is lower than, for instance, in Egypt or Bolivia. To compare, male life expectancy is 77.3 in Japan, 77 in Sweden, 75 in the United Kingdom, 74.5 in France, 74.4 in Germany and 74 in the USA. Here one has to bear in mind that life expectancy started to grow in the USSR in the 1960s due to improved medical care and has been consistent with rates in leading European countries. People at that time could envisage the prospects for themselves and for their country. They had confidence in their future — something that was ridiculed at great length by journalists and TV jesters during Perestroika.

In fact, even all these figures do not reveal a lot. The full extent of the tragedy is not even the fact that our elderly do not live long lives, but that a great proportion of the population do not make it to the old age at all; many able-bodied men die literally of heartbreaks inflicted by the lack of personal prospects and hopes. It is no secret for medical practitioners that high mortality rate among the middle-aged and the elderly is largely caused by depression and despair. The reformists created a monstrous gap in the levels of income across the population. Whole generations were driven out to the margins of the modern life with a message that they were mere losers who had failed to find their way around in the era of total wealth-building.

Mortality is also very high among the young, which is linked to some other factors such as drug abuse and chronic illnesses inflicted by use of drugs.

Astute customs officials and Militia repeat in unison: it is necessary to impose strict control over the immigration influx that supplies heroin from Tajikistan to the Russian territory. As if to rub it in, our “liberals” respond with introducing a visa free regime for Tajikistan…. Astonishingly, this measure was explained something along the lines of Russians needing to be able to travel to Tajikistan on internal passports only. But is this what we really need? Exactly what is the proportion of Russians who require easy access to Tajikistan?

Heroin must be classified as a weapon of mass destruction in the genocide of younger generations of Russians, whereas production, delivery and distribution of heroin must be viewed as a full-scale assault on our country. According to the data from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), our special services confiscate about four out of approximately 70–75 tons of illegal heroin from Afghanistan that is smuggled through into the territory of the Russian Federation, i.e. less than 6%. The same UNODC statistics paint an equally grim picture of the situation on other routes. Countries of Central Asia confiscate only about 5% of total heroin traffic volume, and Europe and Turkey — 9%.

In 2003 I happened to discuss the issue of Afghan heroin trade with the US Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage. In reply to my question why the US troops were not exterminating heroin plantations that had been steadily expanding during the years of the US occupation, the top American politician said, “But this heroin does not reach the United States!”

I think that his answer was very logical.

Recently the German press reported a scandal that rocked the top echelons of NATO. The unwilling perpetrator of the scandal was John Craddock, US Army General and former NATO Supreme Allied Commander for Europe ¹.

It turned out that Craddock had ordered the execution of drug traffickers as they were deemed to be involved in terrorist activities. In the same letter Craddock ordered to bomb drug rehab facilities in Afghanistan.

Many NATO Generals categorically objected and did not wish to follow these orders. The “liberals” affirmed that the drug traffickers were not terrorists but criminals who should be tried, not executed. Apparently, the fact that the proceeds from drug sales were used to finance Taliban was of no major concern to them. I am certain that with such an attitude NATO could never win the war in Afghanistan.

The correct attitude to the problem of the current demographic crunch does not withstand hypocrisy. The same applies to the ethnic aspect of the problem. Research shows that the losses mainly affected the peoples of the Russian flatland. All ethnic groups that inhabit the flatland have shrunk by 10–40% in total, with the exception of Kalmyks and Bashkirs. All minority groups in Siberia increased in number by 20–40%. (birth rates) As for the large-numbered ethnic groups of the Caucasus, they have increased significantly; they almost doubled in numbers. Ossetians, who are the only Christian nation of the Caucasus, and Lezgins, are the only exception to this overall trend; both of these ethnic groups grew smaller.

It may be concluded from this data that the process of depopulation today is integral to the ethnic groups who are either part of, or close to, the Russian nation. Interestingly, the same process has affected Tatars whose reproduction trend copies that of Russians and not of the Islamic nations of Russia.

The birth rate is in decline across all areas of Russia with the exception of Chechnya. In all other regions and Republics of the Federation the birth rate is on the steep downfall. In some ethnic groups, such as Russians themselves, Karelians and Mordvins, this process already gained full speed. In others, it is a delayed threat that may only be lifted by a shift in the governmental policy. The first blow struck Russia, like has happened so often in her history. The disastrous trend may be broken under one condition: if Russians and other indigenous nations begin a new life span and gain the will for revival and augmentation of the nation. As always, all other indigenous nations would support this trend if Russians would be the ones to pioneer it. The only alternative would be to invite immigrants of alien cultures, and that would undermine the right of our nation to exist.

We must encourage reproduction within the country instead of trying to improve the demographics by bringing into the country echelons of the Chinese, the Vietnamese, and the Afghanis. The sound demographic measures must take into account a real picture of birth and mortality rates in each Russian region separately. Such measures must be implemented to the full in those regions that are acknowledged to be “disadvantaged”.

The governmental support must be selective and moderate in the demographically satisfactory regions, where the birth rate is stable and the indigenous population is growing; only the native population there should be entitled to the governmental support. If a region would demonstrate the stable natural growth of the population as a result of governmental demographic policies within at least four years, then that region should be re-classified as a demographically satisfactory one.

Another valid point of view exists: urgent measures of governmental demographic support must be directed not to the regions with plummeting birthrate, but to certain ethnic groups that experience this crisis. By them we mean Russians, Karelians, Komi, Udmurts, Mari, Chuvashi, and Tatars, as well as Lezgins and Ossetians in the Caucasus. At the first glance, such a policy might trigger an adverse reaction in general public, which is very sensitive to any ideas that are perceived to contain elements of racial discrimination. The public opinion can be and must be prepared for the acceptance of these ideas. The ethnic groups mentioned above are in the same demographic position today as is the group of indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North ¹, which have been receiving the state support for a very long time. The issue is not just to maintain ethnical, cultural and folkloric identity, but also to save the ethnic groups that constitute the historical core of Russia. Governmental demographic policy can be differentiated both by geographical regions and ethnic groups.

The demographically stable Republics of the North Caucasus are in need of a different kind of support. High level of corruption, the spread of religious extremism, total disintegration of economic infrastructure and high unemployment as a result of it, are characteristic to those Republics. The governmental support in these regions must be designated to tackle those issues, and that would compensate for the fact that the demographic program would not be applicable there.

The continuous child benefits must fluctuate in accordance with the level of income in families; however, a one-off grant upon the birth of a child must be the same for all. The total value of child benefits may vary from region to region (with consideration of extra provisions by local authorities), but in the demographically disadvantaged regions and categories this value must be no less than the equivalent of 20 minimum monthly wages. A progressive scale of payments with the birth of consecutive children in families must be established.

It is widely thought that Russian families have little or no motivation to give birth to the second or the third child. In reality, this is not the case. Every tenth family would like to bring up four or more children; one third of all families want to have three children; over half of all families — two children. A wish to have an only child or to remain childless is expressed in fewer than 4% of families. The problem is not that Russians have no desire to procreate, but that for some reason or other they cannot afford to. The major issue is the lack of housing; young families often have nowhere to live, and their only option is to share homes with their parents.

A special State Housing Finance Program must be introduced in all demographically unstable regions (practically everywhere across Russia), which would be designed to provide credit finance to young families allowing them to buy their first homes. Such a program may provide for 30%, 65%, and 100% credit write-offs upon birth of the second, third, and fourth child accordingly. Socially oriented businesses should be the Government’s aides in this.

I do not agree with a view that married couples should be entitled to a financial grant solely on the basis of their decision to tie the knot. This is bound to give rise to a wave of fictitious marriages. Crooks would go through marriages and divorces repeatedly; the system would be abused, and the presidential program of affordable housing, this good initiative of the Government, would be discredited and ridiculed. The state must encourage not the mere act of matrimony but the birth of children, when a married couple evolves into a large and content family.

As noted, the majority of young Russians think that a family should have two or three offspring. That is why the incentives for young married couples with children should be introduced in the regions with declining birth rate. A young family should be entitled to loans on preferential terms, including consumer loans, after their first baby is born. Upon the birth of their second child a couple should be receiving the whole social package which would include a free place in a nursery school; compensation of expenses for parents with children of school age; free use of public transport; free medicine for children; opportunity to buy children’s clothes at discounted prices, concessions tickets, etc. Grandparents who devote much of their time to childcare are to be entitled to additional state pension benefits.

Over the last five years the number of people on nursery waiting lists has increased by four. A baby should be registered with a state nursery shortly after it is born. Russia needs about 2,000 extra preschool nurseries. The cost of running the nurseries should be partially covered by the state, and partially by one-child families. Families with two children under the age of sixteen should be entitled to free places at a nursery. Some measures in support of foster family homes are needed as well.

I would like to stress separately that the job of a full-time parent must be viewed as being an equivalent of employment in public sector. If a woman chooses to look after her children on a full-time basis, she must receive a state salary equivalent to the national average wage. A mother who has brought up four or more children should be regarded as a citizen who has carried out her duty before society, and be entitled to the first category pension.

As to neglected and homeless children, I would accentuate the need for their adoption primarily by families in the Russian Federation as well as the need to set up a system of foster care that would replace the traditional orphanages. Families wishing to adopt an orphan should not have to pay to the state, as they would need the money for the child. The amount, that otherwise would have been spent on that child in an orphanage, must be made available to adoptive family, provided that they duly carry out their parental duties. Moreover, the Government needs to provide a legal ground that would enable the children who are adopted by a foreign family to maintain their Russian citizenship.

A full-scale designated campaign promoting family values; families of two parents and several children; mutual responsibility and marital fidelity should become an area of specific attention from the Government. We need a concise program designed to establish a family cult, to sustain a socially attractive image of traditional family values, bring out motivation for child rearing, poeticize the state of expectancy and motherhood, and teach responsible fatherhood.

Propaganda and promotion of the perverse and degenerative forms of human behavior, such as debauchery, prostitution, pedophilia and homosexuality should be the cause for criminal prosecution.

Instead of approving co-habitation, broken families, and other compromising forms of family relations as acceptable, it is necessary to form the adequate attitude to them. The foreign organizations which activities are aimed at the reduction of birth rate, breakup of family values, and promotion of an abortion as a method of contraception, should be named, shamed and banned from working in Russia. Those alcoholics who systematically undermine public morals must be forced by law to undergo compulsory treatment and rehabilitation. If this requires tighter, concrete legal definition, then it needs to be made in the shortest terms.

The television, this most powerful channel of public communication, should convey healthy life style messages to viewers. This should be done in an engaging and creative way, with the focus not on the process but on tangible results. Moreover, radio and television should come to terms with a ban on direct and indirect alcohol advertising.

Much harsher measures against the heroin aggression must be adopted. I can anticipate angry rejection of my idea by my partners in Brussels, but I will outline it nevertheless: in cases of heroin trade a moratorium on death penalty should be forgone. Death penalty must be applied to persons who are guilty beyond doubt of either production, or trade and distribution of heroin. In such cases, an execution should take place within five years after a sentence is passed, in order to prevent legal abuse. The law enforcement structures must be reliably controlled by the Parliament.

We have to acknowledge that the Russian southern border is an “open house”. There all our border control points are nothing other than field gates. We must establish a proper border with Kazakhstan that would be impenetrable to criminals and illegal immigrants; incidentally, this border stretches for one fifth of the length of the equator. Our southern neighbors must be forewarned about the possibility of imposition of a visa regime for all countries of the Caucasus and the Central Asia, the area of drug smuggling routes into Russia, if these countries would not be willing or capable of putting an end to the smuggling.

On the way to demographic recovery such a disgraceful social phenomenon as prostitution must be eradicated. The Russian Militia like to moan about how hard it is to uncover and close down the brothel chains, or to identify ringleaders and suppliers of “human commodity.” This is a cynical brazen lie. Leaf through any yellowish newspaper and you will see plenty of contact numbers for various “VIP saunas” and “elite massage parlors” where in the clouds of hot steam priestesses of Love will generously share with you a bouquet of sexually transmitted diseases.

Prostitution that is killing the body and soul of the nation is currently “uncatchable” precisely because some Militia circles have appropriated control over this criminal business, taking it from actual criminals. The struggle must be commenced with the detection of “werewolves” inside the Militia, those who have turned debauchery and epidemics into a source of private income.

I am convinced that the persistent practical implementation of these measures, along with democratic monitoring and without “excesses”, will bring us closer to our main objective which I express as demographic decline; “our kin will not wear thin”.

.