With nearly two dozen declared candidates competing for the 2020 Democratic Presidential primary field
Category: Government & Politics
On February 20, during his message to the Federal Assembly, Russian president Vladimir Putin devoted most of the time to internal state problems, however the international context was not disregarded. As for the internal Russian developments, we won’t deepen into the words of the Russian leader. After all, that is Russians themselves, who should deal with it. We may only notice that, notwithstanding Putin mentioned deteriorations by some indices, his report based generally on quite optimistic statistical figures. Let’s set aside the fact that the parallels for some reason were drawn with early 2000s, instead of the third presidential term (2012-2018) when oil was more expensive and sanctions have not exerted the real effect yet. Well, that is business of Russians themselves and their elite.
We are much more interested in a foreign policy part of Russian president’s message. The first to mention is a big attention to the new Russian arms. It seems that specification of new “Kinzhals” and “Neptunes”, “Zircons” and “Peresvets” sparked particular interest of the Russian leader, and was pronounced with special aspiration. However, the main message of the speech was that it is the US and not Russia who used to infringe the INF Treaty, and Russian armament is response to aggressive actions of Americans. That was covered with the most peaceful statements:
“We are not interested in confrontation and we do not mean it, especially with such global power as the United States of America… We realise that we deal with active, very talented people, however a lot of those from ruling class are excessively keen on the idea of their uniqueness and superiority over the rest of the world”.
At the same time the Russian leader snatched an opportunity to hint that rockets would be directed at the decision-making centres, that is Washington and Brussels. Actually, Putin resorted for the first time to threats against the USA. He did not lay aside the European countries in his threats as well. First of all, he meant Poland and Romania where elements of missile defence system are placed and where the US rockets may appear.
“I will speak frankly and overtly to make everything clear: Russia will be forced to create and place such types of arms which will be able to reach not only the territories which pose the threat to us, but also those which make the relevant decisions. We are going to implement it as soon as threats become real”.
Well, such rhetoric has nothing in common with the olive branch of peace. However, we should be aware that, regardless of all threats to the USA and NATO, primarily they are aimed at internal audience. Actually, most of the Russian high rank officials who listened to President’s speech and fought against sleep possess the real estate and have their families living in these states.
In his statements, the Russian leader tried to remind once again the ordinary Russians that Russia is surrounded by enemies. However, Russia is able to react and for this purpose Russians should line up for the strong leader. Well, such anti-Western rhetoric becomes less effective day by day. This message was meant by the Kremlin political strategists to raise Putin’s rating (according to the Russian sociologists, current level of credibility to the President is about 33,4%, being the lowest since 2006). Sure enough, sober-minded Russian would have to think that spending money for building school infrastructure is much more efficient than spending them for rockets. Actually, the President himself found unexpectedly at the 20th year of his ruling that 200.000 students study in unheated premises without water supply and canalization. That is in energy superpower, by the way! Still crisis phenomena in the Russian economy increase; therefore, there is no question of improvement of Russians’ welfare.
To reiterate, the probability of the Russian aggression against NATO member states is extremely low. Well, it is not impossible, but insignificant. Besides it, the most part of samples of the latest Russian arms mentioned by Putin are still at a development stage. That means the Russian government shall be realistic in such estimates of possible outcomes of confrontation with the USA, therefore such bravado seems to be rather information noise and blowing of cheeks.
Further self-isolation of Russia from the world is probable. New “Iron Curtain” gradually falls on the state. Currently Russians consider the possibility of creation of their own, autonomous Internet. Access to information from independent sources shall be blocked. Still these measures are inefficient; however, that is only the beginning. Further, the situation will only be aggravated: Russians will live gradually worse, yet they will not know that the other life is possible. Well, they will have powerful rockets. We can make already some parallels. One such state exists on our planet: it occupies a northern part of the Korean peninsula…
And the last but not least. President Putin in his speech told a witty joke as it appears to him about the US and NATO allies who are “oinking along with”. Well, it seems that it would be Russians themselves who will oink, since they are purposefully turned into a herd of pigs.
No doubt, the Olympic Games are one of the most tremendous and well-known sport events in the world. Nevertheless, the doping scandal of the Sochi 2014 Winter Olympics have damaged the reputation of these competitions. It clearly showed that sport is the tool of global policy for Russia.
The results of WADA (World Anti-Doping Agency) investigation confirmed the facts of substitution of Russian sportsmen’s doping tests. It proves that they used controlled drugs during preparations to the Olympic Games. The special report, done by Canadian professor of law Richard McLaren, contains the full scheme of doping test substitutions and the facts that sportsmen were forced to take banned drugs by their coaches and officials of Russian Olympic Committee. It was also proved that officials of Russian Olympic Committee and Ministry of Sport of Russian Federation tried to avoid the investigation of WADA and even more – there were facts of tampering evidences of doping test. Another significant issue is the activity of Russian security services, the officials of which put pressure on Russian sportsmen and their coaches to tamper the evidences of doping tests substitutions and numerous facts of its illegal usage.
Why is the topic of doping scandal-2014 still actual?
In 2014, Russia breached the basic principles of the Olympic Games – integrity and similar opportunities for all sportsmen-participants with no regard to their nationality or flag. Being the country-resident of the 2014 Winter Olympics Russia tried to boost its prestige using the sport goals, achieved in wrong way and violated the basis of international sport challenges. It caused the forfeit of Russian sportsmen awards and life ban for use of drugs for most of them.
The issue of increasing international prestige with sport achievements is also the instrument to maintain the internal stability of Russia. The USA and EU sanctions make Russian economy weaken and it directly affects the life of average Russian citizens. Now the government ordered sportsmen to get the maximum number of Olympic awards in Tokyo, 2020. Kremlin figures that the sport triumph can increase the belief in “glory of Russia”. Russian government is sure that the end justifies the means.
That is why international sport community should undertake some important measures – simply to prevent another doping tests substitutions before the 2020 Olympic Games get started.
After the evaluation of doping tests substitutions done by RUSADA (Russian Anti-Doping Agency) and the numerous facts of using dope by Russian sportsmen, the reputation of agency was completely lost. To except the possibility of further substitutions during the Tokyo 2020 Summer Olympics, WADA should take all doping tests under its control, so it ought to do all analyses and tests of Russian sportsmen.
It is worth mentioning that sportsmen in Russia are just tools of state policy and most cases of doping were connected with rough psychological pressure (including direct threats to ruin sport career of particular participant), done by coaches and officials. That is why the IOC must select the laboratory, which can check all the Olympic Games participants. If Russia rejects these requirements, it means that Russia rejects to take part in the 2020 Olympic Games.
Doping, any type of threats to make sportsmen use it and participation in the Olympic Games are just mutually exclusive events.
Not so long ago, last fall, I was surprised to read an article by the acclaimed Associated Press, claiming that radical and nationalist values are being imposed on children in Ukrainian camps.
The piece was authored by a Belarus national Yuras Karmanau, who covered the story one-sidedly and manipulatively, thereby putting the AP in an embarrassing position. This resulted in AP ultimately issuing a correction to the story as an apology.
An apology is fine, of course, but back then, in 2018, Karmanau’s article (not) surprisingly sounded to the tune of Russian propaganda, much to the pleasure of the latter. And although the Associated Press admitted the mistake, very few people in the post-Soviet space are aware of this because Russian mass media have flooded the information space with translations of the initial text. They didn’t do so with AP’s refutation piece though. So the myth created by Karmanau is still alive in the Russian Internet segment.
However, as you understand, this is only a prelude. A prelude to realizing that the same journalist’s article titled «Ukraine ex-PM accuses president of corruption» published Feb 4, where one of Ukraine’s presidential candidates Yulia Tymoshenko accused President Petro Poroshenko of corruption, is not simply a campaign thing but, once again, a play into the hands of the Kremlin propaganda.
First, Yulia Tymoshenko’s statements have long featured in plenty of journalistic investigations with a notion that this politician is more likely to lie than tell the truth.
Second, the Associated Press platform is once again used beyond its intended purpose – not as an impartial news resource but as a playground for political PR and – I’ll say this again – indulging Russian propaganda. After all, it is common knowledge that Petro Poroshenko is a leader who is extremely inconvenient for the Kremlin, so Moscow is ready to support any other runner for Ukraine’s top post other than the incumbent president. To be more exact, any of them, but it better be «theirs.»
Thirdly, it is difficult to take seriously the words of someone, whose work as prime minister was marked with a volume of funds siphoned from Ukraine doubling.
According to a research by FactCheck, when Viktor Yanukovych was prime minister in 2007, some $7.18 billion was illegally withdrawn from the country, while in 2008, when Yulia Tymoshenko took the reins, it was already $16.92 billion. In total, the amount of funds siphoned from Ukraine throughout the period of Yulia Tymoshenko’s premiership reached $33.12 billion
Fourth, and most important, is that this article not only highlighted a subjective opinion of the interested party, but also, along with the infamous story about children in Ukrainian camps being radicalized and taught to kill, worked in favor of Russian propaganda, which has become very keen on exploiting corruption-related topics in its hybrid infowar against Ukraine.
In a matter of hours, hundreds of Russian bots joined their efforts in spinning the Tymoshenko piece across social networks. The article was shared and republished, for a certain fee, in all sorts of media, forums, and information sites. I wonder whose money it was. And it’s big money, too!
These are the shares and reprints that will not go anywhere even if the Associated Press releases another correction. These are the shares and reprints that for another two months will be maintaining an information background, being revived in new references of all sorts.
It’s a shame that yet another Kremlin narrative has been sown in the minds of readers worldwide, and it is very unfortunate that the Associated Press platform has become a direct participant in the distribution of such unprofessional and manipulative content, which is very beneficial for the Kremlin, one of the parties to the Ukraine conflict.
Sergei Bolotin
Shortly before the new year 2019 the issue of tax maneuver in the oil sphere and its aftermaths for the interstate Russian-Belarusian relations became a stumbling stone.
Russia’s manipulations of oil prices are not a novation in the Russian-Belarusian relations, similar steps have been taken earlier. Without revealing details, it should be noted that a main point of this maneuver is gradual decrease (within 6 years) of the customs duty on export of oil and oil products down to a zero rate accompanied by growth of mineral extraction tax. Let’s refrain from estimating the effect of such decision of the Russian government on domestic market of oil products, yet response of Belarus, Russia’s neighboring state and the closest ally, to this oil maneuver was immediate and jerk. Well, there are several reasons to that.
We must admit that so-called “economic miracle” of Belarus, namely rather high (compared with other former Soviet Union states) standard of public social security, stable prices for food and essential commodities, is to a great extent resulted from special import conditions of the Russian oil (at the internal Russian prices). Belarusian oil refineries produce rather qualitative oil products, the sale of which in international market makes a considerable part of Belarus state budget.
Such state of affairs appeared to be acceptable for all parties up to a point, as far as Belarus presented itself as a state moving towards establishment of the Union State with Russia. Now, the tax maneuver in the oil sphere will deprive Belarus of getting profit as domestic Russian oil price will grow making it unprofitable to purchase oil in Russia for its subsequent processing at the Belarusian oil refineries.
Negotiations with Putin as for possible loss compensations came to a deadlock. It’s no wonder, since the actual purpose of Russia’s tax maneuver with oil export duties is resolving rather political than economic issues. That is fostering integration of Belarus into the Union State, which was unequivocally reiterated by the Russian president at a recent Moscow meeting with Lukashenko. Thus, Kremlin keeps using economic blackmail as one of the main tools in a geopolitical game.
Well, what is the purpose of such unexampled pressure upon Belarus? The answer is quite obvious – establishment of the Union State amid international isolation may become one of the safe ways to preserve and delegate the power, as well as an opportunity for strengthening of Russia’s geopolitical positions in the region.
However, it seems also obvious that this would not turn into the equal union of two states, but to absorption, i.e. actually soft annexation of Belarus. At this year’s first governmental meeting Lukashenko stated that to his mind the Union State is a voluntary association, which has no common with absorption and pressure, which means that such short-sighted policy may cost Russia the only ally. The position of Belarusian leader is clear: he is not ready to change state independence for any economic concessions.
Lukashenko’s attempts to come into contacts with the West, such as visit of Minister of Foreign Affairs of Belarus Vladimir Makei to London, negotiations with Poland and Lithuania on strengthening cooperation, etc. extremely irritate the Russian government. They demonstrate that the Belarusian leader would rather not giving up.
The actions taken by Kremlin with the purpose of Belarus absorption are logical continuation of Russia’s imperial policy. However, you should not ignore the fact that they pose new threats for the Baltic States and Poland. Belarus has played a role of “a buffer zone” between Russia and Europe until now and its transformation into one of Russian regions will increase probability of the new hybrid conflicts involving Russian Federation, similar to those in the Crimea and in the east of Ukraine.
For this reason, the problem of maintaining political and economic sovereignty of Belarus has vital value for its nationals; furthermore, it plays an important role in supporting peace and stability throughout all European continent. Notwithstanding serious problems faced by Belarus with respect to observance of civil rights and freedoms, its determination to defend sovereignty and freedom deserve support of the world community.
Russians have a proverb – ‘Mend your sails while the weather is fine’, this means that success of the business largely depends on preparation for it.
It seems that the Russian president is far from disregarding this conventional wisdom especially given the fact that he has a power over a huge and resourceful state in his hands and he needs to retain it in the times of aggravating crisis. Therefore, the country leaders often use mythical threat from the outside as mobilization strategy.
Despite of the record votes gained by Putin following spring 2018 elections, people’s dissatisfaction with his domestic policy grows proportionally to exaggerating of economic and social problems: fall of manufacturing, rapid tax growth, unpopular pension reform, restriction of civil liberties, abrupt fall of people’s income etc. Still there is a little cause for optimism, even despite of a tendency towards increase of oil prices, which is the main resource fundamental for the Russian economy for many years.
Kremlin realizes that only success beyond the state may distract people’s attention and boost state leader’s rating. It is proven by Russians’ response to annexation of the Crimea in 2014, when Putin’s rating skyrocketed (86%). However, Kremlin is aware that today a “small victorious war” abroad bears certain risks especially for the state, which has already got bogged down in East Ukraine and Syria facing sanctions and international isolation. Authorities decides to act quietly and, whenever possible, using non-military methods.
Present Kremlin’s rhetoric suggests the conclusion that Belarus will become the next candidate for Russia’s “foreign policy success”. For a long time, its independence from Russia has been nominal. Though both states exist within association named the ‘Union State’, Belarus depends on Russia economically, in particular, in supply of the Russian oil (at below market price), which makes one of the sources of budget income after its processing and reselling to the foreign markets. As a result, Lukashenko is bound to correlate his internal and foreign policy with Moscow. While the Belarusian President affords criticism towards the Russian authorities from time to time, he always supports Kremlin’s actions in the international field. Resonance UN votes on issues disputable for Russia may serve as a prove as far as the Belarusian delegation has always taken the part of Moscow.
Quite recently, in the middle of December, 2018, the Russian Prime Minister Medvedev demanded from the Belarusian leadership in rigid, almost categorical manner strengthening of “integration” between two states. Referring to the treaty on the ‘Union State’, the head of the Russian government declared the beginning of the process of supranational structure’s creation for implementation of the unified legislation and tax system. By the way, the treaty provides establishing a single parliament and creation of single currency and national symbols.
To tell that Minsk was taken aback by such statement – not to tell anything. The Belarusian President urgently arrived to Moscow to negotiate with Putin, but apparently, they did not yield desirable result. And four bags of the Belarusian potato presented by Lukashenko to the Russian colleague did not help. The Belarusian President counted that he will manage to ensure smooth transition of the power to “crown prince” (the illegitimate son Nikolay) …
All these are jokes, but in fact, a process of Belarus absorption has already started. Certainly, it is not a question for one day, but Putin has quite enough time for implementation of his plans. This process most likely will have been completed by 2024 and the same year the next presidential elections are taking place in Russia. Probably Putin counts that peaceful “accession” of Belarus will allow to improve his personal rating, to distract attention of electorate and under the guise of elections of the head of new ‘Union State’ to carry out safe transit of the power. Let’s say once again, the Kremlin does not consider an option of force accession of the neighboring state today, and intends to make everything silently and, as if, voluntary. Naturally, in so doing nobody will ask the opinion of the Belarusian leadership and, in particular, of the Belarusian people…
Except for obvious ignoring of all international standards and laws such absorption bears in itself serious threats for safety of the European continent. First, Russia receives some kind of military base, especially in opposition against Ukraine and the Baltic states. Secondly, it strengthens its position in the European market as exclusive supplier of energy carriers, having an opportunity to dictate its terms. Such silent annexation is dangerous, because it also stimulates the aggressor to further actions. It is worth reminding that in the thirties of the last century a well-known tactics of “pacification of an aggressor” allowed Hitler at first to seize some countries without blood and any consequences and then to launch the world war resulted in tens of millions of victims and the destroyed continent. Therefore, perhaps, it is worth changing tactics of a pacification of an aggressor to more effective measures for preventing grand plans of Kremlin’s “gatherer of the lands”, otherwise it may be …
Thousands of people have marched two times on Belgrade’s streets against the autocratic rule
Jews of Hungary are revolted with the anti-Semitic magazine’s picture aimed against a local Jewish Community.
The business magazine Figyelo images the President of the Federation of the Hungarian Jewish Community showered with cash. The Hungarian Jewish Community began to seethe. It worth mentioning that the magazine appeared shortly after the Prime Minister of Israel gave praised to his Hungarian counterpart for fight against anti-Semitism.
An article published in this pro-government magazine, which owners are close to the Prime Minister of Hungary Viktor Orbán, alleged that the President of the Hungarian Jewish Community András Heysler was involved in financial frauds.
The political adviser of Benjamin Netanyahu met the ambassador of Hungary in Israel and condemned attacks to Mr. Heysler. He also told the ambassador that Israel demands the Hungarian government to denounce any cases of anti-Semitism manifestation.
The opposition leader Tzipi Livni (Zionist Union) condemned the publication, having declared, that “the Israel government has to fulminate immediately these anti-Semitic attacks and to lead fight against anti-Semitism”.
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) also condemned the Hungarian magazine. “Jews with cash is a well-known shameful anti-Semitic cliché”, – said rabbi Andrew Baker, the Director of International Jewish Affairs at the AJC and a Personal Representative of the OSCE CiO on Combating Anti-Semitism.
The Hungarian Jewish Community splits over controversial Holocaust museum, which Viktor Orbán plans to open next year in commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the Hungarian Jews deportation to Auschwitz. More than half a million Hungarian Jews were killed during WWII.
The Hungarian government finances the museum, which will belong to the Unified Israelite Congregation of Hungary headed by the rabbi Slomo Koves from Chabad.
The project under the name House of Fates started in 2014 and immediately caused criticism on the part of organizations and individuals, including the Israeli memorial and research center “Yad Vashem” and the President of the Hungarian Jewish Community András Heysler. Critics of the project are afraid that the role of Hungarians in prosecution and deportation of Jews will be shaded in this museum, the history in general will be garbled, and thus the museum will become the political tool in hands of the right nationalist Hungarian government.
“We repeatedly asked to provide us a complete description of an exposition that we could take part in this project with all responsibility. But we have received nothing yet”, – said András Heysler in his interview to the American news agency Bloomberg last October.
Supporters of the government say Viktor Orbán has already recognized Hungarian crimes of Jews during the Holocaust and he is not going to shade these facts. In 2017, after a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu in Budapest, Mr. Orbán told: “During WWII actions of Hungary did not meet moral and political standards. It is a sin because instead of protecting Jews, we preferred to cooperate with Nazis, – Orbán continued. – I let know Mr. Netanyahu that it would not never repeat, in the future the Hungarian government would protect all the citizens”.
However, actually Mr. Orbán’s attitude to the past of his country and Hungarian Jews is much more difficult. In 2017, the Jewish community flayed to Viktor Orbán after he had given praise to Miklos Horthy (the regent of Hungary and Nazis collaborator during WWII). Mr. Orbán called Horthy and other Hungarian leaders “the conspicuous statesmen” directing the country after the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Mr. Orbán also carried out the campaign directed against the Hungarian-Jewish business magnate George Soros.
by Ofer Aderet, Noa Landau, Haaretz
https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/.premium-hungary-s-jews-rail-over-anti-semitic-magazine-cover-targeting-their-community-head-1.6702398
Theresa Mai stated in Argentina that Great Britain would insist on imposition of sanctions against Russia in connection with incident in the Strait of Kerch.
Theresa, it’s great!!! But what sanctions? It is time to discuss these your sanctions and their efficiency.
The best sanctions are to deport from Britain the Russian governors’ families, state bankers, former and current managers of “state companies”, “businessmen” — cashiers of the Russian authorities who have robbed the Russian people. All of them. Without distinction. Hundreds and thousands of them!!! A suitcase — Heathrow — Moscow. The best sanctions are to deprive them of British citizenship, to close entry into Britain, to send to Russia, having presented a bottle of perfume “Nina Ricci”. They will put on it and then — to Russia. Forever to Russia, to the people of Russia.
The best sanctions are to confiscate in Britain the property stolen by the Russian ruling class, to sell it, to create a fund and to transfer it to the Russian people when the effective democratic system is created in Russia.
Theresa, impose such sanctions with other western countries. Be resolute. Don’t pull the wool over our eyes, here in Russia.
The fault of Britain and those western countries who have accepted for decades the money stolen from the people of Russia, lived on this money, enriched themselves, is huge. Your country, Theresa, is the accomplice of a robbery of the Russian people by its greedy elite. And not only your country.
Direct the sanctions not against the people of Russia, but against its impudent governors. Stop being their accomplices.
The 2018 G-20 Buenos Aires summit came to the end. Leaders of the main world powers once again sounded global problems already known, but did not propose any rational solution, having made a joint photo they left. The main intrigue of this summit consisted in other thing – whether presidents Putin and Trump would meet. Results of the geopolitical totalizator are known to us – they did not meet and even could not communicate normally two minutes near the lavatory to what for some last years the Russian leader has already got used. The American president did not even vouchsafe the Russian counterpart with nothing significant than simple handshake.
The official reason of such cool welcome is caused by aggressive actions of the Russian militarymen in the Strait of Kerch: attack and seizure of the Ukrainian vessel a week before. The summit in Buenos Aires was similar to that held in Australia in November, 2014 in terms of the attitude towards Putin. That time Putin had to run away with shame, without having waited for its end. Let’s remind that summit happened against a background of invasion into Ukraine of active forces of the Russian army and crash of MH17 Boeing. In Buenos Aires the situation was similar, if not to take into account inappropriate jokes of the Russian president about impossibility of the NATO ships’ pass to the Ukrainian ports by the Sea of Azov. Though for recent years Putin has already said more than once about impossibility of what that after took place. It is worth remembering advantage of sanctions or prevention of raising of a retirement age in Russia. But in practice …
It is very important to specify that in realities of the Russian political elite when everything is bad in domestic policy, the negative is hidden under “achievements” in the external policy. And here a such failure! So paid propagandists of federal mass media had to be content only with calculation of number of the summit participants who stood between Putin and Trump. And they really were engaged in it! “Between them four more people, if it is interesting, stood” – that undoubtedly points to a brilliant geopolitical victory of Russia. It is a sarcasm.
There is also good news! Incidentally or intentionally, but at G-20 summit Putin was put near the crown prince of Saudi Arabia Mohammad who now is listed among “pariahs” because of his implication in murder of the oppositional journalist Jamal Khashoggi in last October in the territory of the Saudi Embassy in Turkey. They could also talk and perhaps discuss important questions, for example, what it is like to be in isolation. Thereby they pointed to Russia its real place in the modern world once again. It should be taken into account that Saudi Arabia, though is a rich country, but its real influence on world politics is insignificant, even in own region. So diplomatic progress of Putin looks even less significant.
There are many princes and other pretenders to the throne (and after Khashoggi’s case Mohammad has a small chance to receive the crown) in Saudi Arabia. That is a problem! Russia has only one president as official propaganda claims. While he is engaged in the game “Russia-superstate”, Russia will remain further among pariahs and a raw appendage for other countries.
Russia is making little effort to disguise its leadership role in the self-proclaimed people’s republics in eastern Ukraine. Putin needs the regions to blackmail Kiev.
Does anyone still remember Donetsk? Europe, it seems, has long since forgotten the place. And yet there’s still a war going on there — one that has lasted longer than Hitler’s campaign against the Soviet Union. Soldiers and civilians on both sides die there almost daily.
On Sunday, Donetsk was back in the headlines because of elections held in the self-proclaimed Peoples’ Republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. The European Union and the United States aren’t recognizing the vote because it represents a violation of the Minsk agreement. Kiev has described it as a farce, saying the elections have nothing to do with the will of the people. And Russia? Moscow is once again trying to convey the impression that it nothing to do with the ballot.
Sunday’s election does in fact deserve attention, because this time they were less a provocation than the product of political negligence. It goes back to Aug. 31, the day of the assassination of Alexander Zakharchenko, the head of state and prime minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic. When he and a handful of supporters entered a cafe that evening just around the corner from the government’s headquarters, an explosive device went off above the entrance.
International Newsletter
There is much to learn from what happened in the wake of the Donetsk assassination. First and foremost: Russia doesn’t particularly care about honesty when it comes to its dealings with the people of the eastern Ukrainian separatist republics.
After the explosion, Moscow — which always seems to view offense and the best form of defense — immediately accused Kiev of murder. The elimination of Zakharchenko, the Russian Foreign Ministry said, meant that Ukraine was transforming the hostilities in the Donbass region into a “bloody war.” The head of Russian parliament, the Duma, said he viewed the ongoing peace negotiations as having ended in failure and that the assassination “resets the meaning of the Minsk agreements to zero.” The same day, security forces in Donetsk reported they had arrested “Ukrainian saboteurs” responsible for the murder and that they would soon reveal the men behind the slaying. But that never happened. Soon, there was no longer any talk of the alleged saboteurs either. There is now broad consensus that Zakharchenko was either killed by Russian forces or by people from within his own camp.
Zakharchenko, who took power as prime minister of the Donetsk Republic in 2014 and later declared in an interview with DER SPIEGEL that he wished for a “Russian spring” in Donetsk and Crimea, was considered obstinate and difficult to control. Insiders in Moscow say that for the months before his assassination, he had been under a kind of house arrest. In an hours-long meeting with a high-ranking Western diplomat, which would prove to be his last with a foreigner, Zakharchenko said he was soon planning to step down from his post. By that point, however, he no longer had things under control.
As with Zakharchenko, a number of high-ranking separatists and commanders have either been sidelined or toppled in recent years. At the end of last year, it was the turn of Igor Plotnisky, the leader of the neighboring Luhansk People’s Republic. He wasn’t killed, but he fled to Russia. Zakharchenko and Plotnitsky are both signatories to the 2015 Minsk Agreement, alongside François Hollande, Angela Merkel, Petro Poroshenko and Vladimir Putin. They were supposed to be guarantors of peace in eastern Ukraine.
Cleaning Up
It was a role they never lived up to. Instead, they did as they pleased and relied on criminal methods to secure their power. And all of it was accepted by Moscow in order to maintain their story that local representatives of the people governed in Donetsk and Luhansk. Then came the assassination. Even Putin’s own people can’t seriously believe in the idea of a Kiev-backed conspiracy. Particularly given what has happened since: an ongoing purge of the separatist leadership in Donetsk. The deputy head of government was arrested and people close to him left the republic “for security reasons.” The minister for taxes and duties — who was considered to be one of Zakharchenko’s closest friends — also disappeared.
A special commission is now examining “illegal” expropriations said to have been initiated by the minister. Among other things, he is said to have confiscated the property of a large Donetsk merchant market with armed fighters last year, embezzling 850 million rubles in the process. Specialists with Moscow’s domestic intelligence service, the FSB, are investigating further cases of corruption, and armed separatist units have been placed under Russian control.
Taken together, the steps would seem to confirm longstanding claims made by Igor Girkin, the officer — suspected of being a member of the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service — who started the war in Donetsk in 2014. He would later become “defense minister” of the People’s Republic of Donetsk. Girkin claims that “bandits” took power in both republics, and that the Donbass region is “simply getting robbed.” Many of the recent murders may have been part of a brutal battle for influence and riches.
Girkin claims Moscow is to blame. He says Putin’s Donbass representatives sucked the region dry and brought the most important specialists to Russia, thus doing serious damage to the economy. He claims Moscow never had the intention of turning the areas into independent countries and that they were just using them as levers in the dispute with Kiev.
That seems to be the case. Contrary to all its propaganda, Russia has never really done anything for the people living in the separatist areas. The economy is struggling badly, and in the mines that are still operating, miners only earn 15,000 rubles, about 200 euros, per month, not even a third of what miners in Russia earn. Electricity and water are frequently switched off, as is the mobile phone network.
Moscow’s Direct Influence
Still, it’s not in Moscow’s interest for the regions to implode completely. Which is why the assassination of Zakharchenko is not unwelcomed to the Kremlin. Now, Moscow is pulling the strings in Donetsk directly — and it isn’t really even trying to hide its influence anymore.
On the night of Oct. 1, OSCE observers documented for the first time how a convoy of trucks carrying anti-aircraft guns crossed the border from Russia to the separatist region on a dirt road. After the assassination, important Donetsk decision-makers were also put on buses and driven to Rostov-on-Don in Russia, where representatives of the Moscow presidential administration informed them of the future course of the “People’s Republic.” Russian officials also chose Zakharchenko’s successor, Denis Pushilin, who previously served as the head of the local parliament. He was brought to Moscow specifically for this purpose.
Upon his return, he announced increases in wages and pensions — the usual means Russia uses to calm the people. Voters formally elected Pushilin on Sunday in a vote that has been described as a sham by the United States and the European Union. Popular figures who have their own ideas about the future of their “people’s republics” were kept from running under spurious pretexts.
Pushilin has been installed to ensure that order returns to the separatist territory and that it functions at least halfway like an ordinary Russian constituent republic. This isn’t because Russia cares about the welfare of the people there — it’s because eastern Ukraine remains an instrument Moscow can use to foment unrest in the remainder of the country, also because the people in the east would likely lean back toward Ukraine if conditions became worse there than in the west over the long term. Even now, 63 percent of residents of the Donetsk Peoples’ Republic support reintegrating their territory into Ukraine.
Blackmail
The east, in other words, is only a means to an end. Russia is doing little to hide that fact. What, for example, does Ukraine’s decision to break away from the Moscow Patriarchate and establish an independent Orthodox Church have to do with the Donbass? Nothing really. But the uproar in Moscow has been considerable, since it will result in Russia losing significant influence in Ukraine.
Respresentatives of the Moscow presidential administration have threatened that it would worsen negotiations over the return of the Donbass region if Kiev were to carry out the plan. But connecting the one issue with the other is tantamount to blackmail. Worse yet: This blackmail goes hand in hand with calls by Russian state television for parishioners of churches in Ukraine that have thus far been under the control of Moscow, to rise up against Kiev — essentially a call for civil war.
Moscow issued the same appeal to eastern Ukraine after the 2014 Maidan uprising. That’s also how it played out in Crimea. Moscow wasn’t interested in the people there, either. Russia only ever saw its own strategic interests. It needs Crimea as a military post against the West and the Donbass region to be able to blackmail the regime in Kiev. Can Putin succeed? It’s difficult to answer the question with a clear “no.”
by Christian Neef, Spiegel
Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny has won the case in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Navalny’s case concerned seven illegal administrative detentions in the period of 2012 – 2014, when he was arrested and found guilty of administrative offenses.
Alexey Navalny’s defence insisted on political motivation of the Russian authorities and the ECHR would recognize Article 18 violation of the European Convention on limits of restrictions on Alexey Navalny’s rights. This article is a mechanism for restricting an abuse of power, especially against political opponents. Applying this and several other articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, the European Court in Strasbourg has come to a decision on political motives of the Russian authorities behind Navalny’s persecution.
It should be noted that the ECHR very rarely acknowledges violations of Article 18. The last time it was in 2004 “in the case of Vladimir Gusinsky”.
The initial court’s decision in Navalny’s case was announced in February 2017. The Court recognized that the Russian opposition leader’s rights for liberty and security of person and fair trial (Articles 5 and 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights) had been violated six times from seven. The Court has also noted violation of Article 11 (a freedom of assembly and associations).
The Russian Ministry of Justice appealed against the initial February decision. On 15 November 2018, the ECHR Grand Chamber reached a verdict that cannot be appealed. Grand Chamber not only confirmed the previous decision, but also recognized violation of the Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning Navalny which forbids the state to impose restrictions on the rights guaranteed by other articles (in this case – on the right of a freedom of assembly and security of person). Moreover, the ECHR “recommended that (Russian) government took the measures guaranteeing the right for a freedom of peaceful assembly in Russia”. The ECHR determined that Russia should pay 50,000 euros in “moral compensation”. The remaining sum was calculated from material and legal costs. In total – 63,000 euros ($71,000).
Alexey Navalny considers this decision as a victory that is of great importance for all those people in Russia whose rights are restricted by the authorities. It is especially important now when the situation with human rights in Russia is promptly worsening. The State Duma of the Russian Federation is going to adopt a number of laws depriving Russians, and in particular youth, the rights to peaceful assembly (will consider a question of introduction of penalties for “involvement of minors” into protest actions, and even deprivation of the parental rights is possible) in the near future. The purpose of the Russian authorities – to narrow opportunities for protest and to increase “cost” of participation in it.
The ECHR decision in the case of Alexey Navalny actually recognizes that human rights violations in Russia are politically motivated. At the same time, this victory can be considered as a serious support for the Russian opposition, all those political and civil activists who assert believes, rights and freedoms in Russia with risk for their own lives.