This is the first editorial in this week's issue of the Sakhalin Times.

Sakhalin has witnessed an unprecedented economic boom over the last few years. Standards of living and salaries are much higher and as reported last week, almost one in three residents of the island own a car. On the surface, Sakhalin looks light years ahead of the neighbouring regions in the Russian Far East, but all is not well on this beautiful island.

Having a chance to interact with a broad spectrum of people representing all walks of life in Sakhalin, this publication’s reporters have reached a conclusion that an overwhelming number of people want out. This conclusion is not based on interactions with pensioners that want to sell their apartments and move closer to relatives on the mainland. Whether it’s musicians and artists, professionals or students, a large number of locals see little in terms of long term prospects here. A major part of this has to do with the island’s isolation and sheer distance from what is called “Central Russia.”

Some sort of time warp exists on the Tatar Straits between Sakhalin and the Russian mainland. Trends catch on later in Sakhalin and the general conservative mentality keeps the island a few years behind the rest of Russia. It’s often those Sakhaliners that have had a taste of life in the European part of the country that feel the most frustrated in Sakhalin. Residents of the Far Eastern mainland at least have the opportunity to just hop on the Trans-Siberian train and within days be in Moscow and St Petersburg.

International trends catch on much faster in Central Russia and it is for obvious reasons easier to travel from there to European, Middle Eastern and North African countries. Some may argue that Sakhaliners find it easier to travel to Japan, Korea or China but the linguistic and cultural barriers that exist between these countries often come in the way of the kind of interaction that can be mentally enriching.

The best way to tackle the escapism-mentality on the island is a planned and systematic approach to make the mainland more accessible for a majority of Sakhaliners. This would involve building a railway bridge or tunnel connecting Sakhalin to the mainland. The government should also make it easier for more private airlines to operate flights from Sakhalin, making flights to and from the island more affordable. Sakhaliners need to feel that the island is more a part of the world and less an isolated Soviet outpost. It’s only when Sakhalin becomes a more open place for the rest of Russia and the world that more locals will be inclined to stay.

This is the first editorial in this week's issue of the Sakhalin Times

The Sakhalin Administration expressed concern about the fact that birth rate is down in the region this year. The decrease in the birth-rate is despite the fact that several child-support initiatives have been introduced at the regional level in addition to the grants offered by the Kremlin. This should get the authorities to understand that a policy of small financial incentives is not going to motivate young educated middle-class couples to have more children. Educated young people are not going to have children unless they can provide a good enough life for them. Given the increasing costs of living in Sakhalin, the birth rates in the region will continue to fall.

It’s rather ironic that despite the low birth rates, the kindergartens on the island can’t accommodate enough children. Adding to this, many of the schools in the region are in a state of decay and higher education is getting more expensive every academic year. The concept of human resource development was lost in Sakhalin somewhere in the 1990s. Under these circumstances, it would take strong family values and real motivation for young people to even consider having children.

As authorities call on young Sakhaliners to have more children, there is an increase in the number of children in orphanages and children’s homes. The same authorities are opposed to foreigners adopting Russian children. There is also growing suspicion in Russia of non-governmental organisations that are indulging in children’s welfare. The whole situation paints a glum picture of children’s welfare on the island.

The government does realise the seriousness of the problem and is now trying to work with citizen’s groups on children’s welfare. A “Mother’s Conference” was held in Khabarovsk recently, where issues related to raising children were discussed. The participants debated with the government about the steps to offer support for struggling families.

The authorities would be well-served to put the money into awareness and social development programmes rather than simplistic cash benefits for parents. There is also a need for some sort of meaningful partnership between the government and grass-root organisations that are more in touch with the ground-realities. A good example of a partnership between the government and an NGO (and corporates) is the recent “Miracle Walk” that was organised by Kidsave and the Sakhalin Administration’s Department of Education. The walk was part of an awareness campaign of a successful programme that placed orphans in Sakhalin with families for summer stays.

The Sakhalin Administration must take active steps to ensure the welfare of children. The very future of the region may depend on the effectiveness of such steps.

This is the first editorial in this week's issue of the Sakhalin Times

The Russian Natural Resources Ministry’s statement that the Russian Government should renegotiate the production sharing agreements for Sakhalin’s two major oil and gas projects may have sent a shiver down many spines until the Industry and Energy Ministry publicly rejected it. Public quarrelling between two government ministries isn’t uncommon in Russia. However, it must be noted that when it comes to any major decision in the country, the final say is always with the Kremlin.

Emboldened by the windfall caused by high energy prices and the obvious fact that the demand for energy far exceeds supply, the Russian Government has framed a new energy strategy. The main goal of this strategy is to ensure that Russian firms have a majority interest in the development of all new deposits in the country. Take Sakhalin for instance, Rosneft has virtual control over the Sakhalin-3, Sakhalin-4 and Sakhalin-5 projects. Gazprom’s interest in Sakhalin II stake and reported demand for all Sakhalin-1 gas is in line with this policy.

Russia must have the right to a final say about where oil and gas from the country can be sold or exported but giving state-run companies complete control of the deposits may not necessarily be in the best interests of Russia.

Foreign involvement and management of Sakhalin’s two major oil and gas projects has brought an unprecedented level of professionalism and efficiency to the industry in Russia. The foreign companies have set incredibly high standards in employee training and development as well as offered salaries to Russian employees that are unheard of in Russian companies. There has been a complete level of openness in operations and for the first time in Russia, accountability to the public. No amount of public pressure on Russian state-run oil companies would have prompted the kind of responses that foreign companies in Sakhalin have shown in dealing with sensitive issues like the environment and indigenous people’s rights. In addition, the very concept of social responsibilities of large organisations was non-existent in Russia before the arrival of the multinational oil companies to Sakhalin. How much have any of the large Russian oil companies contributed to infrastructure development projects or charitable causes in other Russian regions?

The Russian Government is fair in demanding as much profit as possible from its vast oil and gas reserves. Restricting access for foreign companies in the development of oil and gas projects in Russia is not an effective mechanism to reach the goals of profit maximisation. In fact, absolute control by Russian state-run companies may accomplish the opposite as many of these companies are just not accountable to maintain the kind of standards of corporate governance that foreign companies are made to by shareholders and society alike.