May 24, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Civil Society, Communist regimes, Democracy Assistance, Dictatorships, Dissidents, Eurasia, freedom of association, Freedom of expression, Human rights, NGOs and Civil Society, Rule of Law, Russia 0

Russia’s new anti-Americanism at work, as oldest rights group fights ‘foreign agent’ label

 

This is an attempt to return to Soviet era, said Memorial’s Alexander Cherkasov

A Moscow court today rejected two appeals by one of Russia’s oldest human rights groups over prosecutors’ raids on its offices during a widespread Kremlin crackdown on civil society groups in March.“Memorial, which has fought to preserve the memory of Josef Stalin’s victims for a quarter of a century, has faced problems ever since Mikhail Gorbachev gave it his blessing in the Soviet Union’s dying days,” Reuters reports:

Its employees have faced harassment and bureaucratic obstacles at almost every turn. But Memorial and groups like vote-monitor Golos, which has revealed electoral fraud, say they have never faced a bigger threat to their existence than in Putin’s year-old third term.  

The group began legal proceedings in an attempt to avoid being branded a “foreign agent” under a new NGO law, but the court dismissed its case, on the basis of evidence of foreign-funding.

“It has been determined that the organization received over 52 million rubles (about $1,6 million) in 2010 from foreign citizens or people without citizenship and 40 million rubles (near $1,3 million) in 2011, including from the Ford Foundation,” a prosecutor said during the hearing of Memorial’s complaint in Moscow’s Zamoskvoretsky Court.

“This is a violation of the law,” Memorial’s defense said. “We are learning just now that we are involved in political activities, it is interesting that we have not been previously provided with such documents.”

James Bond?      

“There has never been such an assault on civil liberties in the last 20 years. This is an attempt to return to the Soviet era,” said Memorial’s head, Alexander Cherkasov (above).

“We are not going to register as a foreign agent because it would be a lie … An agent is someone like James Bond who comes down with a parachute and blows up railways.”

The Memorial Human Rights Center was established in 1991 on the basis of what it called an “appeal to society to not forget the cruel and massive human rights violations in our country’s past, but also not to ignore that human rights violations continue to occur.”

The NGO crackdown and the recent spy scandal in Moscow official anti-Americanism are both manifestations of Russia’s official new anti-Americanism which has “led some observers to muse about ‘Stalinism light’ and … the Kremlin’s self-image of a besieged fortress,” says a leading analyst.

“Once back in the Kremlin, Putin resolved to weed out all potential sources of what he regarded as foreign influence on Russian domestic politics,” writes Carnegie Moscow Center’s Dmitri Trenin. “Rather than closing down those NGOs that were leaning toward the opposition or were just openly critical, he chose to have them discredited.”

“That strategy of branding the Kremlin’s more outspoken opponents as foreign agents … depended critically on the effectiveness of the official TV-spread propaganda in creating an image of Western ‘competitors’ seeking to weaken Russia, steal its secrets, and undermine its unity from within,’ he contends.

“As much as this strategy has incensed Russia’s liberals, it has been more successful than not. Not only have all the factions in the Duma supported the NGO law, but the population at large has been mostly in agreement with the need to limit foreigners’ reach in Russia—or they have been indifferent to the entire controversy.”

The Kremlin’s crackdown on civil society reflects its broader aim of suppressing dissent, says Pavel Chikov, a member of Putin’s human rights council and head of the election monitor Golos, which exposed widespread vote-rigging during the 2011 Duma elections and the 2012 presidential election that returned Putin a new six-year term. The group was also targeted in the March raids, fined roughly $10,000 (£6,600) and faces the prospect of closure.

“The last three months have seen unprecedented efforts to isolate Russia from the west and shield authorities from criticism,” he said. “NGOs are currently spending all their energy working out how to defend themselves. Many activists are losing hope.”

One US-based analyst calls for recent events to be kept in perspective.

“Domestically, Russia is a corrupt and semi-authoritarian country where citizens lack many of the protections in the Bill of Rights and elections are not fair,” Paul Saunders, executive director of the nonpartisan Center for the National Interest, writes for The Washington Post:

That said, it is no longer the Russia where dissidents were routinely sent to psychiatric hospitals (as happened in the 1970s), shipped en masse to Siberian labor camps (the 1960s) or shot after show trials — real show trials, in which the accused confessed after torture and threats to their families (the 1930s)…… Some realities in Russia are indeed disturbing, but a sense of perspective is needed. If Moscow were really the capital of a brutally authoritarian anti-American state, things could be far worse — and profoundly damaging to U.S. national interests. But demonizing Russia doesn’t change conditions there and only undermines our ability to get what we want and need.

But any ‘demonizing’ appears to be taking place in Moscow, not Washington, Carnegie analysts Trenin writes, and it more of a reflection of Putin’s regressive politics and paranoia than of US policy or intentions.

“Another element of Russia’s anti-Americanism is linked to the construction of an official version of Russian patriotism, which Putin has undertaken to build,” he contends:

Such an approach is backward-looking and clearly disappointing, even though Russia is hardly alone in creating its official patriotism in opposition to a stronger foreign power thought to be harboring designs on it. Thus, Russia’s most recent version of anti-Americanism is essentially about Russia. More specifically, it is about Russian domestic politics.

As such, it is the authorities’ reaction to a phenomenon called the “Russian Awakening”: a gradual maturing of Russian society, some of whose members are stepping out of their private niches into the public arena.

In any case, the practical effect of Putin’s authoritarianism differs little from that of Soviet totalitarianism for Russia’s dissenting voices, observers suggest.  

“A totally new period has begun in Russia: The suppression of all independent organizations by the Kremlin,” said Lev Gudkov, head of the Levada Center pollster, which has charted Putin’s falling ratings:

Gudkov accused Putin’s allies of trying to suffocate independent research groups and civil society. He said state prosecutors had threatened to take his group to court over its refusal to register as a foreign agent, adding: “The Sword of Damocles will always hang over us.”

May 20, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Civil Society, Democracy Assistance, Dissidents, Eurasia, freedom of association, Freedom of expression, Governance, Human rights, NGOs and Civil Society, Opposition movements, Rule of Law, Russia 0

‘Operation Total Eradication’? Russia NGO crackdown threatens leading pollster

 

Cartoon: The Moscow Times

 

Russia’s NGO law branding overseas-funded groups as foreign agents is impeding the country’s civil society development, says a former Finance Minister.

“The law on NGOs as foreign agents that the Duma has passed is a clear restriction of civil society,” said Alexei Kudrin, the head of the Fund for Civil Initiatives. 

His statement coincides with reports that “Russia’s only independent polling agency may have to close after prosecutors targeted it for ‘political activity’ under a law spearheading President Vladimir Putin’s crackdown on civil society”:

Levada Center published a letter, dated last week, from prosecutors who said its polls and publications are “aimed at shaping public opinion on government policy” and demanded it cease publication until it registers as a “foreign agent” under a law passed last year.

Levada receives between 1.5 and 3 percent of its funding from foreign sources, including longtime bêtes noires of Putin’s foreign policy like the National Institute for Democracy [sic] and George Soros’ Open Society Institute, according to center director Lev Gudkov (right).

Gudkov said prosecutors had not only threatened the organisation with sanctions but had undermined its authority, the BBC’s Steve Rosenberg reports from Moscow.

“The warning puts the Yuri Levada Analytical Centre in an extremely difficult position, in effect forcing it to cease its activity as an independent sociological research organisation, carrying out systematic polls of public opinion in Russia,” the statement said.

Although many observers initially viewed the new NGO provisions as “a surgical attack against a few undesirable organizations, it has now become clear that the authorities are intent on completely eradicating all remnants of civil society,” says a prominent analyst.

“The Kremlin’s goal is to completely block foreign funding of all NGOs,” writes Vladimir Ryzhkov, a co-founder of the opposition RP-Party of People’s Freedom:  

Meanwhile, it has stepped up funding of Kremlin-friendly NGOs by allocating grants through the Public Chamber and money through regional budgets to create a wide network of NGOs that are completely dependent on the authorities for their existence. Since Russian businesses do not fund NGOs unless they have been directed or given approval to do so by the authorities, independent NGOs will disappear altogether, leaving only those that are loyal to the authorities.

Thus, Kremlin-friendly NGOs will be added to the Kremlin’s vertical-power arsenal, along with the courts, the siloviki, mainstream media and the State Duma.

A “huge special operation” involving the Kremlin, State Duma, Prosecutor General’s Office, Justice Ministry, other government agencies and the siloviki is underway “to eliminate all independent NGOs,” Ryzhkov (left) writes for The Moscow Times. 

“’Foreign agent’ is a term taken directly from the Stalinist era, when the authorities induced mass paranoia by claiming that the country was ‘surrounded by enemies’,” he says, noting that the authorities have not only targeted high-profile rights and democracy groups, like the Golos election-monitoring organization, the Memorial human rights foundation, Transparency International, which fights corruption; Agora, which provides legal assistance to wrongfully imprisoned protesters; and even the Levada Center polling group.

The law “has also been applied to harass organizations that protect children and used against groups that work in the fields of education, health care and environmental protection,” says Ryzhkov, a State Duma deputy from 1993 to 2007, and an executive member of the World Movement for Democracy:  

Civil society is beginning to realize the scale of the unfolding disaster. The Presidential Council on Human Rights has appealed to Putin to repeal the law or to urgently introduce mitigating amendments to it.

But there is little hope. The Russian state cynically speaks about the need for modernization and a strong civil society, while it works methodically to destroy its very foundation.

RTWT

Former finance minister Kudrin has previously warned that crackdowns on independent voices highlight the ascendancy of hardline elements in the Kremlin.

May 16, 2013 in Analysis, Authoritarianism, Chechnya, Civil Society, Democracy Assistance, Democracy Promotion, Dissidents, Eurasia, freedom of association, Freedom of expression, Human rights, Islamist groups, NGOs and Civil Society, Opposition movements, Protests, Rule of Law, Russia 0

Putin ‘shows who’s boss’? Russian media delight in U.S. spy case reflects hard-line shift

Photo: RFERL

State-controlled media reveled in embarrassing the U.S. over an alleged attempt to recruit a Russian intelligence agent, highlighting the summoning of U.S. Ambassador Michael McFaul (right) to the Russian Foreign Ministry to receive a formal protest.

“In the Russian elite there are influential groups who oppose America and waste no opportunity to spite the United States,” said political analyst Pavel Salin.

While both sides insist that the episode will not affect overall strategic interests, including the conflict in Syria, relations with Washington are “secondary to Vladimir Putin’s overriding goal of tightening his grip on power sufficiently to serve out his term until 2018 and then possibly seek a new six-year term,” Reuters’ Timothy Heritage writes from Moscow:

It is emblematic of a shift towards a more heavy-handed policy against opponents since Putin’s long-serving “grey cardinal”, Vladislav Surkov, was replaced in the Kremlin in late 2011 by the blunt and direct Vyacheslav Volodin. Under Volodin, a veteran political strategist who cut his teeth in the sometimes brutal election campaigns of the freewheeling 1990s as Russia emerged from seven decades of Soviet Communist rule, Putin has looked increasingly inwards.

Putin’s domestic preoccupation also reflects Kremlin concern that a forthcoming economic downturn will further undermine his sagging popularity and give a boost to the opposition.

“When Putin returned one year ago to the Kremlin for a historic third term, Russia could boast robust if unspectacular growth, a budget flush with cash from high oil prices and the world’s most profitable company,” AFP reports:

But in the space of just 12 months, growth has slipped to the extent that Russia risks entering recession, oil prices are suddenly trending downwards and the outlook has darkened for the state champion gas firm Gazprom. While Putin is not yet pushing the panic button, the Kremlin is all too aware of the importance of keeping the economic stability many Russians see as the greatest gain of his 13 year-rule at a time of protests and dynamic change in society.

With no serious political or economic reform, Putin’s first year back in the Kremlin was a “lost year,” said Nikolai Petrov, analyst at the Carnegie Centre in Moscow.

“We are going to get a long and serious crisis. And when the population feels it, there are going to be mass protests not just in Moscow and Saint Petersburg but the whole country,” he said.

The U.S. is also unlikely to let the alleged spy affair upset its continuing efforts to ‘reset’ relations with Russia, observers suggest.

“It is a reflection of the Obama administration’s eagerness to refresh the relationship,” writes analyst Donald N. Jensen, “that in a background briefing to journalists on the eve of [Secretary of State John] Kerry’s visit, a senior State Department official minimized the serious issues that derailed the now-defunct ‘reset’ by blaming tensions primarily on presidential politics in both countries last year rather than on deeper, more fundamental factors.”

Putin has a record of resorting to “vehement anti-Americanism,” notes a prominent analyst.

He has described democracy promotion in the Middle East as a new form of colonialism, writes  Nina Khrushcheva, who teaches international affairs at the New School University in New York City.

On Kerry’s recent visit to Moscow, the agenda included reaching consensus on Syria and anti-terrorist collaboration in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombing.

But, says one prominent observer, “It is very unlikely Mr. Kerry found common ground on either subject.”

“The humanitarian catastrophe in Syria is of no concern to Mr. Putin, as is clear from the Kremlin’s support for the murderous Assad regime,” while its cooperation on the threat of jihadist terror “has been remarkably selective,” said Gary Kasparov, the leader of the Russian pro-democracy group United Civil Front.

“Secretary Kerry’s visit validated every Putin instinct,” he wrote in The Wall Street Journal:

The Russian president kept the American waiting in a hall for three hours—no doubt impressing Mr. Putin’s cronies. … Kerry was allowed to meet with a small group of Russian human-rights activists whose activities have been under assault as the Putin government cracks down ever harder on free speech and all forms of opposition.

But the meeting avoided mention of the two most significant developments in Russian human rights: the Magnitsky List and the dozens of protesters arrested at a political protest in Bolotnaya Square in Moscow a year ago. Mr. Putin is creating a new generation of political prisoners, with show trials unseen since Joseph Stalin, and Mr. Kerry goes to Russia to find common ground?

Democracy and rights ‘not high on US agenda?

“Islamist terror is a genuine threat that will continue to take Russian and American lives unless it is met with a strong response,” argued Kasparov, chairman of the U.S.-based Human Rights Foundation. “But having a shared enemy does not mean having shared values.”

“That the White House will step up its efforts at democracy promotion in these circumstances seems unlikely,” says Jensen, a Resident Fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies:

Kerry reportedly assured activists that the White House was concerned about the Kremlin’s crackdown on nongovernmental organizations and said he had been up until 2AM discussing the situation with Lavrov. However, many activists were disappointed with the meeting and with Kerry’s attempt to mend fences with the Kremlin. “Russia is complicated, we all know.” Kerry said after the meeting, “but vital.” He refrained from publicly criticizing his Russian hosts and earlier had urged that the U.S. and Russia “keep our eye on our strategic interests.”

May 15, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Civil Society, Democracy Assistance, Dissidents, Eurasia, freedom of association, Freedom of expression, NGOs and Civil Society, Rule of Law, Russia 0

Russia’s ‘foreign agents’ law hits hundreds of NGOs in ‘unprecedented’ crackdown

A group offering support to Russians suffering from cystic fibrosis is one of hundreds of civil society groups to have been subject to official warnings and intrusive inspections under the Kremlin’s “foreign agents” law, a leading human rights group reports.

Despite the crackdown, not a single foreign-funded NGO engaged in political activity has registered as a “foreign agent” since the new law came into force, a Justice Ministry official told the State Duma today.

The authorities’ campaign is “unprecedented in its scale and scope,” says Human Rights Watch, which today published a list of non-governmental organizations affected by the crackdown, which include such NGOs as Assistance to Cystic Fibrosis Patients, the Muraviovka Park of Sustainable Land Use  and the Yaroslavl Regional Hunters’ and Fishermen Society, as well as groups working on democracy and human rights such as the Interregional Human Rights Association “AGORA”, the “Panorama” Center and the Center for Democracy Development and Human Rights.

The inspections were “highly extensive, disruptive, invasive, and often intimidating,” the rights group said, adding that it will continue to monitor the situation and publicize information on victimized civil society groups.

Russia’s Justice Ministry will ask a court to close Golos, the country’s only independent election monitoring NGO, if it fails to register as a “foreign agent,” Justice Minister Alexander Konovalov said today.

In late April, Golos was fined 300,000 rubles ($10,000) in the first case of an NGO penalized for failing to comply with the law.

“We are not able to fight the closure of the organization. But we will fight to open a new organization,” Liliya Shibanova told RIA Novosti.

The Human Rights Watch report follows warnings earlier this week from independent UN experts that Russia’s civil society is confronting a hostile environment.

April 29, 2013 in Analysis, Authoritarianism, backsliding, Civil Society, Corruption, Democracy Assistance, Dissidents, Eurasia, Freedom of expression, Governance, Human rights, National Endowment for Democracy, NGOs and Civil Society, Rule of Law, Russia 0

Putin as Russia’s Lee Kwan Yew? No, it’s ‘more like Soviet times’

Recent events demonstrate the failure of President Vladimir Putin’s project of developmental authoritarianism, says a leading analyst.

“Putin hoped to be the Lee Kwan Yew of Russia: someone who behind a facade of quasi-democratic institutions led a powerful state to create an economic miracle. Instead as time goes by he’s looking more like the second coming of Leonid Brezhnev, presiding over an era of repression in politics and economic stagnation,” Walter Russell Mead writes.

Roughly thirty protesters were detained in Moscow’s Red Square at the weekend – including a woman on crutches in her 70s – for taking part in an unsanctioned gathering to support those detained following the Bolotnaya Square protest, writes Robert Amsterdam:

Opposition activist Alexei Gaskarov is the latest to be detained by police in connection with the May 6 incident. Prosecutor General Yury Chaika defended the recent inspection of Russia’s non-governmental organisations, saying that the government wants to ensure their compliance with the law, rather than to prevent them from carrying out their work.

The Kostroma Center for the Support of Public Initiatives has also run afoul of the law requiring foreign-funded NGOs engaged in political activity to register as foreign agents, writes The Washington Post’s Kathy Lally:

The center’s chairman, and civic activists across Russia, says his group is neither political nor in the pay of foreign governments. The law, they say, is being used to silence advocacy groups and frighten supporters, and it reminds some of the Cold War era, especially since many of the targets have U.S. connections.

“Everyone’s shocked by what’s going on,” said Nikolai Sorokin, the historian. Some people say we shouldn’t even talk to foreigners, it’s dangerous. It’s like in Soviet times when you could go to jail for that.”

Russia’s only independent election monitor Golos was last week fined $10,000 and its director $3,300 for failing to register as a foreign agent, Lally notes:

Golos was formed 13 years ago with help from the National Democratic Institute and received various U.S. grants over the years, but stopped accepting assistance when the law went into effect in November. …………Sorokin said the center in Kostroma, a city of 268,000 about 200 miles northeast of Moscow, has had small grants from the International Republican Institute and the U.S. Embassy, which he took as an honor, a symbol of international recognition.

The roundtable dragnet also swept up the Kostroma chapter of the Soldiers Mothers, which defends draftees…..Its crime — some of the Mothers had served as election observers in December 2011, and small grants have been received from the National Endowment for Democracy.

“This is a very serious thing,” said Lev Ponomaryov (left), a longtime activist who is head of the Movement for Human Rights. “We can say this Soviet time is returning. You can be a criminal for nothing, and it won’t be two years like with Pussy Riot [the punk rock group.] It will be many, many years.”

Such is Putin’s regard for the founding father of modern Singapore “that some of his closest allies have taken up reading Lee’s books,” Reuters reported. “Lee led Singapore for more than 31 years until 1990 but remained senior minister and then minister mentor until May this year.”

Putin’s failure to become the Lee Kwan Yew of Russia is too bad, analyst Mead writes for The American Interest.

“From a US point of view a strong, confident and growing Russia with a real stake in the international system is much better than the defensive, discontented and frustrated country we are dealing with today.”

April 26, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Civil Society, Democracy Assistance, Dissidents, Eurasia, freedom of association, Freedom of expression, Human rights, NGOs and Civil Society, Rule of Law, Russia 0

Post-Boston reset? Kremlin sees US as its ‘main opponent’

Russia’s only independent election monitoring group yesterday became the first nongovernmental group to fall afoul of the “foreign agents” law.

A Moscow court fined the Association in Defense of Voters’ Rights Golos (Voice) 300,000 rubles (almost US$10,000) for failing to register as a foreign agent — the first enforcement by Russian authorities of a much-disputed law.

Golos played a leading role in monitoring the 2011 parliament and 2012 presidential elections and exposing electoral fraud during the polls.

The group would appeal the decision in a higher court, its executive director Grigory Melkonyants told The Associated Press:

Golos was fined for receiving €50,000 ($65,470) in award money from the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, which supports people persecuted because of their opinions. The organization claimed that it transferred the money back as soon as it reached its account.

Melkonyants (right) said Golos was amazed that the judge made the ruling after spending no more than 15 minutes away deliberating. “It seems that she knew in advance which decision she would come to no matter what evidence we showed in court,” he said.

The court judgment is “an alarming indicator for the future of civil society in Russia,” said Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

“Today’s ruling is a shot across the bow at Russian civil society and a terrible precedent,” said Rachel Denber, deputy Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch, who attended the hearing. “Russian authorities should withdraw the case against Golos and welcome, rather than hinder NGO work.”

In a further sign of the Kremlin’s authoritarian assertiveness, Moscow has threatened Ireland’s Parliament against adopting a version of the US Magnitsky Law, which imposed a visa ban and financial penalties on Russian officials complicit in human rights abuses.

“Russia may halt negotiations on an agreement for cross-border adoptions if an Irish parliamentary committee approves a resolution critical of rights abuses,” The New York Times reports.

The systematic abuse of human rights under Vladi­mir Putin is being “overlooked amid the focus on the Boston bombings and the suspects’ links to Russia,” argues David J. KramerContending With Putin’s Russia: A Call for American Leadership:

In the latest edition of its annual human rights report, the State Department listed numerous examples of infringement of universal human rights, including “laws that impose harsh fines for unsanctioned meetings”; the practice of identifying nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs, as “foreign agents” if they engage in “political activity” while receiving foreign funding; suspending the licenses of NGOs that have U.S. citizens as members or receive U.S. support and “pose a threat to Russian interests”; recriminalizing libel; the blocking of Web sites without a court order; and significantly expanding the definition of treason. “Skewed” elections in Putin’s favor and lack of due process in the courts were also noted.

But the Kremlin’s anti-Americanism may prove to be a major impediment to US-Russian cooperation on the Boston bombings, says a prominent analyst.

“The Russian services still see the U.S. as the ‘main opponent’ – a term often used by Vladimir Putin [the glavnyy protivnik in Russian] – that must be countered,” says the Brookings Institution’s Fiona Hill.

“The level of Russian operatives in the U.S. has not diminished with the end of the Cold War,” she notes:

The U.S. counter-intelligence services, including the FBI, still find themselves tied up in knots keeping tabs on Russian operatives in the United States. It was only three years ago that Anna Chapman and other Russian intelligence service “sleeper agents” were arrested—including a couple who lived in Boston–after a lengthy FBI investigation. All of these agents have gone back to Russia. Anna Chapman has become a prominent media figure. “Donald Heathfield,” the former Boston resident, works for Russia’s top oil company Rosneft under the name he assumed in the U.S.

That would appear to support the contention that “This is no time for business as usual,” as Kramer writes in The Washington Post:

Instead, Washington needs to emphasize the deterioration in Russia’s human rights situation by pushing back against the crackdown and focusing attention on the regime’s corrupt, authoritarian nature while using the Magnitsky Act whenever appropriate. Continued cooperation on Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan and counterterrorism is important — but not at the expense of ignoring the internal situation in Russia.

RTWT

April 24, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Bloggers, Civil Society, Corruption, Human rights, NGOs and Civil Society, Rule of Law, Russia 0

After Boston: will Russia get a ‘free pass on human rights’?

“The close cooperation between Moscow and Washington on the Boston bombing investigation raises new questions about the issue of human rights in Russia,” says analyst Amy Knight:

Will the US government now turn a blind eye to Russia’s increasingly brutal crackdown on its own democratic opposition because of overriding concerns about national security? Will the Kremlin wager that it can get away with its hardline approach now that, as a result of the Boston attacks, the Obama Administration needs its help in counter-terrorism efforts?

The trial of Russian anti-corruption blogger and opposition leader Aleksei Navalny (right) will provide a litmus test, says Knight, and also “determine the shape and nature of the regime for years to come,” according to journalist Evgenia Albats.

The Kremlin may fear that the trial will add more names to the Magnitsky List of Russian officials subject to sanctions for human rights violations, she writes in The New York Review of Books.

“But the new US-Russia security cooperation over the Boston attacks could also embolden the Kremlin, which has been pursuing a larger crackdown in recent months,” she notes:

Along with the prosecution of Navalny, who faces trumped-up criminal charges in several other cases as well, the attack on NGOs has intensified, with the Russian Prosecutor-General’s office announcing that it will investigate seven hundred such organizations that reportedly get financing from abroad. The offices of Memorial, of the election watchdog Golos and of other human rights groups have already been raided and in some cases hefty fines have been levied for minor violations. ….

It would be unfortunate, however, if Western governments ignore the growing consequences of this hard-line approach, which has discouraged foreign investment and may be weakening the regime. …

And of course official corruption continues to be a huge problem, with new scandals emerging on an almost daily basis. Transparency International, the global watchdog, estimated that the cost of corruption in Russia was $300 billion in 2012. According to the World Economic Forum report: “Russia is characterized by much higher levels of corruption than other countries with similar levels of development. While Russia is the sixth largest economy worldwide in GDP, corruption levels are higher than in countries such as Togo.”

“The Kremlin has tried to take the initiative from the opposition bloggers like Navalny, by initiating criminal cases against select officials,” writes Knight. “But corruption is so widespread in the government that any real attempt to tackle the problem could threaten the stability of the Putin regime.”

RTWT

April 17, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Civil Society, Corruption, Democracy Assistance, Dissidents, Eurasia, freedom of association, Freedom of expression, Human rights, NGOs and Civil Society, Russia 0

Putin pushes NGO law – Soldiers’ Mothers branded as ‘foreign agents’

“Until prosecutors all over Russia set to work unmasking “foreign agents,” 80-year-old Raisa’s biggest worry was whether her tiny pension would ever allow her to get the false teeth she covets. Raisa — last name Golubyatnikova — cheerfully admits she’s in league with Vladimir Lazarev, 88, who hobbles with the help of a thin red cane across the gritty snow and ice that clings so stubbornly to this city east of Moscow,” The Washington Post’s Kathy Lally reports from Murom, Russia:

The two of them belong to the local chapter of Memorial, a volunteer organization formed in Moscow in the late 1980s, devoted to preventing a return to Stalinist terror. Their means are not so covert: remembering the victims of repression and promoting democracy and the rule of law. These are suspect ambitions in President Vladimir Putin’s Russia, and a new law requires such non-governmental organizations to register as foreign agents if they get any financing from abroad.“If you get money from abroad,” said Alexander Cherkasov, a member of the Memorial board and director of its Human Rights Center, “it doesn’t mean you are following instructions.”Putin comes from the KGB world, he pointed out, where buying others is natural. “For 13 years he has repeatedly said those who pay write the music,” Cherkasov said. “We write our own music.”In a further sign of the crackdown, prosecutors in the city of Kostroma have formally branded the regional Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers NGO as a “foreign agent,” the Agora human rights group reported today:Kostroma Deputy Prosecutor Alexander Smirnov said the Committee of Soldiers’ Mothers receives funding from the United States. Prosecutors said the committee’s reporting of alleged violations during the State Duma elections in December 2011 and the presidential elections in March 2012 was political activity.

Soldiers’ Mothers Committee Chair Irina Reznikova said the organization did not engage in politics during the elections, but its members reported violations as civic-minded private individuals. Furthermore, the reporting of violations in the elections occurred before the adoption of the law on NGOs, she said, adding it appears prosecutors have applied the law retroactively, contrary to the Constitution.

The committee, established in 1991 to protect the rights of soldiers and their families, could face a fine of up to 500,000 rubles ($15,900), RIA Novosti reports.

Memorial was one of thousands of NGOs subjected to raids earlier this month. The groups has heard nothing since, but the Justice Ministry is bringing charges against Golos, Russia’s only independent election monitor, for failing to register as a foreign agent.

“Although Golos was founded with U.S. help, its leaders said they have stopped accepting money from abroad,” Lally reports.

The US Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul recently met with members of Russia’s Public Chamber to express concern over the unprecedented crackdown on civil society groups. Russian officials responded with claims that US funders of Russian NGOs were headed by spies and former military officials.

Russian prosecutors claim that some NGOs violate the Foreign Agents law, while the Foreign Ministry defended the NGO probes as lawful and criticized a US commitment to continue NGO funding as “direct instigating of certain non-governmental and public structures to violate legislation related to the work of non-governmental organizations in the Russian Federation.”

Up to 2,000 organizations were targeted with inspections and searches last month, said Pavel Chikov, head of the Agora NGO and a member of the presidential Human Rights Council.

 

 

 

 

April 12, 2013 in accountability, Authoritarianism, Corruption, Dissidents, Eurasia, Human rights, News, NGOs and Civil Society, Rule of Law, Russia 0

‘Pared down’ Magnitsky list disappoints rights activists

The US Treasury State Department today published a list of 18 Russian officials subject to financial sanctions and visa travel bans because of their alleged human rights abuses.

But the pared down list disappointed rights advocates who noted the omission of several senior officials known to be complicit in human rights violations.

The sanctions are the result of the Sergei Magnitsky Act, passed by the US Congress and named for the tax lawyer arrested in 2008 after revealing that Russian officials had orchestrated a tax refund fraud to transfer $230m of state funds to a criminal syndicate. He died in jail after being assaulted and denied medical treatment.

“Persons on this list are banned from receiving or holding visas to enter the United States,” said the State Department. ‘Their property and interests in property subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked, and transactions in such property or interests in property are prohibited.

The list includes tax officials and police officers who imprisoned Magnitsky after he accused them of corruption, including Interior Ministry investigators Pavel Karpov and Oleg Silchenko; Judge Aleksei Krivoruchko who endorsed the extension of Magnitsky’s pretrial detention; and two Chechens – Letscha Bogatirov, who is reputed to have killed the dissident Umar Israilov in Austria in 2009, and Kazbek Dukuzov, a suspect in the 2004 murder of “Forbes” editor Paul Klebnikov (right).

“Magnitsky’s former client, London-based investor William Browder, who has campaigned to bring those responsible in his death to justice, claimed that one of those tax officials, Olga Stepanova, has bought luxury real estate in Moscow, Dubai and Montenegro and wired money through her husband’s bank accounts worth $39 million,” AP reports.

The list suggested that “the US presidential administration decided not to take the path of aggravating a political crisis with Moscow,”said Alexei Pushkov, a senior Russian legislator.  

A senior State Department official denied that political or diplomatic considerations were a factor in drafting the list.

“I’ve learned not to try to take action based on what you think the Russian reaction might be. It’s better to do what’s in the law and what’s right and what reflects American interests and American values on human rights, and then you let the chips fall where they may,” the official said. “We played this one straight. We haven’t tried to game it.”

But analysts and rights activists were surprised that “senior officials from Putin’s entourage who had been expected to be included were left off, including Russia’s top police official Alexander Bastrykin,” the BBC reports:

Some 250 names had originally been put forward by US politicians. The final list includes people from Russia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan, 16 of them linked to the Magnitsky case. The others are officials deemed to have participated in recent Kremlin moves to restrict Russians’ political rights.

“The list disappointed lawmakers and human rights activists who pressed the administration to apply the new law aggressively,” The New York Times reports:

Human rights activists said that the law should be applied beyond Mr. Magnitsky’s case to cover a wide array of infamous episodes. Among those who should be on any list of human rights violators in Russia, they argued, were Ramzan Kadyrov, the leader of Chechnya, who has been accused of widespread abuses, and Aleksandr I. Bastrykin, the head of the country’s investigative committee, who was reported to have taken a journalist to a forest and threatened his life after a critical article was published.

Representative James McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat who helped pass the law, named for Mr. Magnitsky, had sent the administration a list of 280 Russians compiled by Mr. Magnitsky’s family for possible sanctions, including senior officials like Yuri Y. Chaika, the country’s general prosecutor. …..But the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control required a higher degree of evidence, because it will have to justify depriving people of financial assets if challenged in court. Some human rights activists said Congress may have to re-examine the question and rewrite the law to make sure it covers a wider range of figures.

“While the list is timid and features more significant omissions than names, I was assured by administration officials today that the investigation is ongoing and further additions will be made to the list as new evidence comes to light,” McGovern said. “The fact that a name is not on the list does not mean that person is innocent.”

The publication of the list will severely strain US-Russian relations, said President Vladimir Putin’s spokesman.

“The appearance of any lists will doubtless have a very negative effect on bilateral Russian-American relations,” Dmitry Peskov told reporters.

Human rights advocates took solace from the fact that the Magnitsky Act establishes an annual mechanism for gauging Russia’s human rights violations and applying sanctions to officials responsible for abuses.

“The key now is to keep this as an ongoing process by which more names can be added,” said David J. Kramer, the executive director of Freedom House.

 

March 28, 2013 in Authoritarianism, Democracy Assistance, Dissidents, Human rights, National Endowment for Democracy, NGOs and Civil Society, Russia 0

Russia’s NGO crackdown: Putin ‘nationalizing the elite’, ‘experimenting with new ideology’

Russian authorities are raiding non-governmental organizations to ensure compliance with a law designed to curb foreign interference in Russian politics, says Vladimir Putin.

But other analysts believe the underlying reason is that Putin is “recasting his unwritten contract with the country’s elite and experimenting with a new ideology to appeal to the Russian public.”

Putin told Russia’s rights ombudsman, Vladimir Lukin that the aim was to “check whether the groups’ activities conform with their declared goals and whether they are abiding by the Russian law that bans foreign funding of political activities,” AP reports:

Pavel Chikov (right), a member of the presidential human rights council, said Russian agencies with no connection to the new law — including the fire, labor and health departments — had joined the checks.

“The prosecutor general’s office has become a kind of repressive machine, instead of serving as institution that enforces the law,” fellow council member Sergei Krivenko said.

Krivenko, a board member of the rights group Memorial said that the searches were “unprecedented in the last 25 years.” He compared the investigations to what civil society faced under Soviet dictator Josef Stalin. Krivenko said the inspections can be compared to Soviet government campaigns that closed down religious institutions and foreign organizations across the country in the 1920s and 1930s.

“Life has never been that easy for civic-society groups in Russia, especially for those active on issues the state considers politically sensitive,” says The Economist:

Some have been singled out, such as Golos, a vote-monitoring group, which was the subject of a campaign of harassment around the time of Duma elections in December 2011. Yet it is the first time that so many NGOs, working on disparate issues and spread out across the country, have faced a large, single wave of meddlesome inspections all at once.

So why crack down now?:

Putin is recasting his unwritten contract with the country’s elite and experimenting with a new ideology to appeal to the Russian public. A public attack on NGOs is a way to try to suppress their work, pushing them to the margins of political and social life. ….At the same time, demanding so many documents on nearly every aspect of a NGO’s work is a means to “collect information and see later how it might be used,” says Andrei Soldatov, a journalist who covers the security services.

The campaign has propaganda value too. In Moscow, nearly every inspection has been joined by a camera crew from NTV, the state-owned channel that has aired a series of conspiratorial documentaries over the past year. … Last week, after accompanying prosecutors to Memorial, a renowned human-rights group, NTV broadcast a segment called “Memorial Is Hiding Its Revenue From the General Prosecutor”.

The Kremlin’s program to “nationalize the elite” is a direct response to last year’s mass protests, according to Elizabeta Suracheva, Aleksander Gabuev and Ilya Barabanov.

“The government is convinced that there are foreign governments behind these protest movements,” said one source. ……….That source added that when Putin said that Hillary Clinton might be behind the protests, he was not simply playing to the public – he really believed it.

“At that point, Putin realized that a huge number of civil servants, elected officials and businesspeople depend on the West – because of children who live there, real estate they bought in London and bank accounts in Switzerland. That’s when he got the idea to try to bring all of that back to Russia, so that the West wouldn’t have such an influence.”

“One Russian official remembers a diplomatic meeting with the United States regarding the U.S. rocket defense shield,” they write for Kommersant

One of the U.S. negotiators told Russia to stop threatening to attack European cities with their missiles, saying bluntly to the Russian delegation: “You really think we are going to believe that you are going to attack a city where your children are studying and you keep your money? We have your number.” The members of the Russian delegation thought long and hard about that comment.

While Russian NGOs differ in their responses to the new NGO laws, “the larger fear…. is that other newly passed laws that have so far remained dormant will also be reanimated,” says The Economist

In November Mr Putin signed a law on treason, lobbied for by the FSB, which covers not only Russians who pass secrets to a foreign intelligence service, but anyone who offers information or assistance to a foreign state or international group “directed against Russia’s security”. Such persons could be sent to prison for 20 years. So far, the new law remains unused.

Memorial, Agora and many other groups raided recently are supported by the National Endowment for Democracy, the Washington-based democracy assistance group.