Daily Archives: December 12, 2006

The Kremlin’s Litvinenko Disinformation Campaign EXPOSED


The Norwegian Newspaper Aftenposten reports that a major source of Russophile smears against Alexander Litvinenko in the British press suddenly turns out to have Russia connections that could lead to Vladmir Putin:

The prominent English Sunday newspaper The Observer published an article where Julia Svetlichnaya [pictured above with her attorney at a London press conference] accused Litvinenko of possessing secret documents that he intended to use to blackmail prominent Russian politicians and businessmen.

Svetlichnaya, 33, told The Observer that she had made contact with Litvinenko in connection with a book she was allegedly writing about the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

Svetlichnaya characterized Litvinenko as a paranoid and pathetic figure fighting a private war with the Kremlin, trying to relieve his penniless existence via blackmail, and said he invited her to take part in his plots.

Aftenposten has seen an email from a British human rights activist and Professor of Russian, and member of Litvinenko’s network, who claims to have information that Svetlichnaya was acting on instructions from “a special bureau” – a reference to the secret service FSB – to study in London in order to have easier access to exiled Chechen leader Akhmed Zakayev.

Russian Investors
The Observer followed her lead and described her as a student at the University of Westminster in London, but there is no mention made in the articles of her background as information chief for a Russian investment firm.

On Monday Aftenposten discovered her name on a web site for the Russian investment company “Russian Investors”. Hidden on a page listing the company’s “philanthropic” activities in equestrianism, she stands listed by name and with a company email address.

Aftenposten’s London correspondent phoned the investment company’s managing director Alexei Yashechkin to learn more about Svetlichnaya and her relationship to the company.

The conversation with Yashechkin was hesitant and occasionally self-contradictory. The director both denied and admitted that Svetlichnaya had connections to the company.

He also said it must be a case of a “another girl with the same name”, without any mention that the call had anything to do with the Svetlichnaya in the news who claimed to be a student. After many much stammering and several pauses the obviously nervous director finally ended the conversation and hung up.

Skeptics
The British professor of Russian, who insisted on remaining nameless on this matter, accuses Svetlichnaya of being part of a “massive disinformation campaign” about the Litvinenko affair.

Human rights activist Maria Fuglevaag Warsinski called the accusations of secrecy and blackmail into question, citing Litvinenko’s efforts to publicize information he gained.

“He wanted to spread this information to as many as possible and was pleased by the help he got to disseminate this to human rights activists and advocates of democracy,” Warsinski said.

Svetlitsjnaja Scorned

Svetlitsjnaja has identified herself as a student in London who had contact with Litvinenko before he died. She told British newspapers that Litvinenko, who was a harsh critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had aimed to extort money from Russian politicians and businessmen.

Aftenposten, however, found Svetlitsjnaja listed as information chief on the web site for a company called “Russian Investors.” The ownership of Russian Investors is unclear, but it’s been linked to the Russian state in British media. Its chairman Aleksej Golubovitsj, a former strategic planner for the Russian oil firm Yukos that was taken over by the state, was arrested in May by Interpol and Italian police in Pisa.

When Aftenposten correspondent Hilde Harbo called Russian Investors to inquire about Svetlitsjnaja’s connections to the company, her questions went unanswered and Svetlitsjnaja’s name was quickly removed from the web site.

Svetlitsjnaja also refused to respond to repeated queries from Aftenposten, but she reappeared late last week at a press conference in London. When Harbo attempted to ask questions about her role at Russian Investors, she was cut off and verbally attacked. A man appearing with Svetlitsjnaja, identified as a fellow student, James Heartfield, called Harbo a “liar” and attempted to block further questioning.

Some Russian experts have suggested that Svetlitsjnaja may have been set up by Russian officials to discredit Litvinenko. She admitted she had no taped interviews or documentation to prove that Litvinenko was engaged in extortion, and said she failed to alert police about Litvinenko’s alleged extortion plans because she was too busy with research work.

The Kremlin’s Litvinenko Disinformation Campaign EXPOSED


The Norwegian Newspaper Aftenposten reports that a major source of Russophile smears against Alexander Litvinenko in the British press suddenly turns out to have Russia connections that could lead to Vladmir Putin:

The prominent English Sunday newspaper The Observer published an article where Julia Svetlichnaya [pictured above with her attorney at a London press conference] accused Litvinenko of possessing secret documents that he intended to use to blackmail prominent Russian politicians and businessmen.

Svetlichnaya, 33, told The Observer that she had made contact with Litvinenko in connection with a book she was allegedly writing about the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

Svetlichnaya characterized Litvinenko as a paranoid and pathetic figure fighting a private war with the Kremlin, trying to relieve his penniless existence via blackmail, and said he invited her to take part in his plots.

Aftenposten has seen an email from a British human rights activist and Professor of Russian, and member of Litvinenko’s network, who claims to have information that Svetlichnaya was acting on instructions from “a special bureau” – a reference to the secret service FSB – to study in London in order to have easier access to exiled Chechen leader Akhmed Zakayev.

Russian Investors
The Observer followed her lead and described her as a student at the University of Westminster in London, but there is no mention made in the articles of her background as information chief for a Russian investment firm.

On Monday Aftenposten discovered her name on a web site for the Russian investment company “Russian Investors”. Hidden on a page listing the company’s “philanthropic” activities in equestrianism, she stands listed by name and with a company email address.

Aftenposten’s London correspondent phoned the investment company’s managing director Alexei Yashechkin to learn more about Svetlichnaya and her relationship to the company.

The conversation with Yashechkin was hesitant and occasionally self-contradictory. The director both denied and admitted that Svetlichnaya had connections to the company.

He also said it must be a case of a “another girl with the same name”, without any mention that the call had anything to do with the Svetlichnaya in the news who claimed to be a student. After many much stammering and several pauses the obviously nervous director finally ended the conversation and hung up.

Skeptics
The British professor of Russian, who insisted on remaining nameless on this matter, accuses Svetlichnaya of being part of a “massive disinformation campaign” about the Litvinenko affair.

Human rights activist Maria Fuglevaag Warsinski called the accusations of secrecy and blackmail into question, citing Litvinenko’s efforts to publicize information he gained.

“He wanted to spread this information to as many as possible and was pleased by the help he got to disseminate this to human rights activists and advocates of democracy,” Warsinski said.

Svetlitsjnaja Scorned

Svetlitsjnaja has identified herself as a student in London who had contact with Litvinenko before he died. She told British newspapers that Litvinenko, who was a harsh critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had aimed to extort money from Russian politicians and businessmen.

Aftenposten, however, found Svetlitsjnaja listed as information chief on the web site for a company called “Russian Investors.” The ownership of Russian Investors is unclear, but it’s been linked to the Russian state in British media. Its chairman Aleksej Golubovitsj, a former strategic planner for the Russian oil firm Yukos that was taken over by the state, was arrested in May by Interpol and Italian police in Pisa.

When Aftenposten correspondent Hilde Harbo called Russian Investors to inquire about Svetlitsjnaja’s connections to the company, her questions went unanswered and Svetlitsjnaja’s name was quickly removed from the web site.

Svetlitsjnaja also refused to respond to repeated queries from Aftenposten, but she reappeared late last week at a press conference in London. When Harbo attempted to ask questions about her role at Russian Investors, she was cut off and verbally attacked. A man appearing with Svetlitsjnaja, identified as a fellow student, James Heartfield, called Harbo a “liar” and attempted to block further questioning.

Some Russian experts have suggested that Svetlitsjnaja may have been set up by Russian officials to discredit Litvinenko. She admitted she had no taped interviews or documentation to prove that Litvinenko was engaged in extortion, and said she failed to alert police about Litvinenko’s alleged extortion plans because she was too busy with research work.

The Kremlin’s Litvinenko Disinformation Campaign EXPOSED


The Norwegian Newspaper Aftenposten reports that a major source of Russophile smears against Alexander Litvinenko in the British press suddenly turns out to have Russia connections that could lead to Vladmir Putin:

The prominent English Sunday newspaper The Observer published an article where Julia Svetlichnaya [pictured above with her attorney at a London press conference] accused Litvinenko of possessing secret documents that he intended to use to blackmail prominent Russian politicians and businessmen.

Svetlichnaya, 33, told The Observer that she had made contact with Litvinenko in connection with a book she was allegedly writing about the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

Svetlichnaya characterized Litvinenko as a paranoid and pathetic figure fighting a private war with the Kremlin, trying to relieve his penniless existence via blackmail, and said he invited her to take part in his plots.

Aftenposten has seen an email from a British human rights activist and Professor of Russian, and member of Litvinenko’s network, who claims to have information that Svetlichnaya was acting on instructions from “a special bureau” – a reference to the secret service FSB – to study in London in order to have easier access to exiled Chechen leader Akhmed Zakayev.

Russian Investors
The Observer followed her lead and described her as a student at the University of Westminster in London, but there is no mention made in the articles of her background as information chief for a Russian investment firm.

On Monday Aftenposten discovered her name on a web site for the Russian investment company “Russian Investors”. Hidden on a page listing the company’s “philanthropic” activities in equestrianism, she stands listed by name and with a company email address.

Aftenposten’s London correspondent phoned the investment company’s managing director Alexei Yashechkin to learn more about Svetlichnaya and her relationship to the company.

The conversation with Yashechkin was hesitant and occasionally self-contradictory. The director both denied and admitted that Svetlichnaya had connections to the company.

He also said it must be a case of a “another girl with the same name”, without any mention that the call had anything to do with the Svetlichnaya in the news who claimed to be a student. After many much stammering and several pauses the obviously nervous director finally ended the conversation and hung up.

Skeptics
The British professor of Russian, who insisted on remaining nameless on this matter, accuses Svetlichnaya of being part of a “massive disinformation campaign” about the Litvinenko affair.

Human rights activist Maria Fuglevaag Warsinski called the accusations of secrecy and blackmail into question, citing Litvinenko’s efforts to publicize information he gained.

“He wanted to spread this information to as many as possible and was pleased by the help he got to disseminate this to human rights activists and advocates of democracy,” Warsinski said.

Svetlitsjnaja Scorned

Svetlitsjnaja has identified herself as a student in London who had contact with Litvinenko before he died. She told British newspapers that Litvinenko, who was a harsh critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had aimed to extort money from Russian politicians and businessmen.

Aftenposten, however, found Svetlitsjnaja listed as information chief on the web site for a company called “Russian Investors.” The ownership of Russian Investors is unclear, but it’s been linked to the Russian state in British media. Its chairman Aleksej Golubovitsj, a former strategic planner for the Russian oil firm Yukos that was taken over by the state, was arrested in May by Interpol and Italian police in Pisa.

When Aftenposten correspondent Hilde Harbo called Russian Investors to inquire about Svetlitsjnaja’s connections to the company, her questions went unanswered and Svetlitsjnaja’s name was quickly removed from the web site.

Svetlitsjnaja also refused to respond to repeated queries from Aftenposten, but she reappeared late last week at a press conference in London. When Harbo attempted to ask questions about her role at Russian Investors, she was cut off and verbally attacked. A man appearing with Svetlitsjnaja, identified as a fellow student, James Heartfield, called Harbo a “liar” and attempted to block further questioning.

Some Russian experts have suggested that Svetlitsjnaja may have been set up by Russian officials to discredit Litvinenko. She admitted she had no taped interviews or documentation to prove that Litvinenko was engaged in extortion, and said she failed to alert police about Litvinenko’s alleged extortion plans because she was too busy with research work.

The Kremlin’s Litvinenko Disinformation Campaign EXPOSED


The Norwegian Newspaper Aftenposten reports that a major source of Russophile smears against Alexander Litvinenko in the British press suddenly turns out to have Russia connections that could lead to Vladmir Putin:

The prominent English Sunday newspaper The Observer published an article where Julia Svetlichnaya [pictured above with her attorney at a London press conference] accused Litvinenko of possessing secret documents that he intended to use to blackmail prominent Russian politicians and businessmen.

Svetlichnaya, 33, told The Observer that she had made contact with Litvinenko in connection with a book she was allegedly writing about the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

Svetlichnaya characterized Litvinenko as a paranoid and pathetic figure fighting a private war with the Kremlin, trying to relieve his penniless existence via blackmail, and said he invited her to take part in his plots.

Aftenposten has seen an email from a British human rights activist and Professor of Russian, and member of Litvinenko’s network, who claims to have information that Svetlichnaya was acting on instructions from “a special bureau” – a reference to the secret service FSB – to study in London in order to have easier access to exiled Chechen leader Akhmed Zakayev.

Russian Investors
The Observer followed her lead and described her as a student at the University of Westminster in London, but there is no mention made in the articles of her background as information chief for a Russian investment firm.

On Monday Aftenposten discovered her name on a web site for the Russian investment company “Russian Investors”. Hidden on a page listing the company’s “philanthropic” activities in equestrianism, she stands listed by name and with a company email address.

Aftenposten’s London correspondent phoned the investment company’s managing director Alexei Yashechkin to learn more about Svetlichnaya and her relationship to the company.

The conversation with Yashechkin was hesitant and occasionally self-contradictory. The director both denied and admitted that Svetlichnaya had connections to the company.

He also said it must be a case of a “another girl with the same name”, without any mention that the call had anything to do with the Svetlichnaya in the news who claimed to be a student. After many much stammering and several pauses the obviously nervous director finally ended the conversation and hung up.

Skeptics
The British professor of Russian, who insisted on remaining nameless on this matter, accuses Svetlichnaya of being part of a “massive disinformation campaign” about the Litvinenko affair.

Human rights activist Maria Fuglevaag Warsinski called the accusations of secrecy and blackmail into question, citing Litvinenko’s efforts to publicize information he gained.

“He wanted to spread this information to as many as possible and was pleased by the help he got to disseminate this to human rights activists and advocates of democracy,” Warsinski said.

Svetlitsjnaja Scorned

Svetlitsjnaja has identified herself as a student in London who had contact with Litvinenko before he died. She told British newspapers that Litvinenko, who was a harsh critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had aimed to extort money from Russian politicians and businessmen.

Aftenposten, however, found Svetlitsjnaja listed as information chief on the web site for a company called “Russian Investors.” The ownership of Russian Investors is unclear, but it’s been linked to the Russian state in British media. Its chairman Aleksej Golubovitsj, a former strategic planner for the Russian oil firm Yukos that was taken over by the state, was arrested in May by Interpol and Italian police in Pisa.

When Aftenposten correspondent Hilde Harbo called Russian Investors to inquire about Svetlitsjnaja’s connections to the company, her questions went unanswered and Svetlitsjnaja’s name was quickly removed from the web site.

Svetlitsjnaja also refused to respond to repeated queries from Aftenposten, but she reappeared late last week at a press conference in London. When Harbo attempted to ask questions about her role at Russian Investors, she was cut off and verbally attacked. A man appearing with Svetlitsjnaja, identified as a fellow student, James Heartfield, called Harbo a “liar” and attempted to block further questioning.

Some Russian experts have suggested that Svetlitsjnaja may have been set up by Russian officials to discredit Litvinenko. She admitted she had no taped interviews or documentation to prove that Litvinenko was engaged in extortion, and said she failed to alert police about Litvinenko’s alleged extortion plans because she was too busy with research work.

The Kremlin’s Litvinenko Disinformation Campaign EXPOSED


The Norwegian Newspaper Aftenposten reports that a major source of Russophile smears against Alexander Litvinenko in the British press suddenly turns out to have Russia connections that could lead to Vladmir Putin:

The prominent English Sunday newspaper The Observer published an article where Julia Svetlichnaya [pictured above with her attorney at a London press conference] accused Litvinenko of possessing secret documents that he intended to use to blackmail prominent Russian politicians and businessmen.

Svetlichnaya, 33, told The Observer that she had made contact with Litvinenko in connection with a book she was allegedly writing about the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

Svetlichnaya characterized Litvinenko as a paranoid and pathetic figure fighting a private war with the Kremlin, trying to relieve his penniless existence via blackmail, and said he invited her to take part in his plots.

Aftenposten has seen an email from a British human rights activist and Professor of Russian, and member of Litvinenko’s network, who claims to have information that Svetlichnaya was acting on instructions from “a special bureau” – a reference to the secret service FSB – to study in London in order to have easier access to exiled Chechen leader Akhmed Zakayev.

Russian Investors
The Observer followed her lead and described her as a student at the University of Westminster in London, but there is no mention made in the articles of her background as information chief for a Russian investment firm.

On Monday Aftenposten discovered her name on a web site for the Russian investment company “Russian Investors”. Hidden on a page listing the company’s “philanthropic” activities in equestrianism, she stands listed by name and with a company email address.

Aftenposten’s London correspondent phoned the investment company’s managing director Alexei Yashechkin to learn more about Svetlichnaya and her relationship to the company.

The conversation with Yashechkin was hesitant and occasionally self-contradictory. The director both denied and admitted that Svetlichnaya had connections to the company.

He also said it must be a case of a “another girl with the same name”, without any mention that the call had anything to do with the Svetlichnaya in the news who claimed to be a student. After many much stammering and several pauses the obviously nervous director finally ended the conversation and hung up.

Skeptics
The British professor of Russian, who insisted on remaining nameless on this matter, accuses Svetlichnaya of being part of a “massive disinformation campaign” about the Litvinenko affair.

Human rights activist Maria Fuglevaag Warsinski called the accusations of secrecy and blackmail into question, citing Litvinenko’s efforts to publicize information he gained.

“He wanted to spread this information to as many as possible and was pleased by the help he got to disseminate this to human rights activists and advocates of democracy,” Warsinski said.

Svetlitsjnaja Scorned

Svetlitsjnaja has identified herself as a student in London who had contact with Litvinenko before he died. She told British newspapers that Litvinenko, who was a harsh critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, had aimed to extort money from Russian politicians and businessmen.

Aftenposten, however, found Svetlitsjnaja listed as information chief on the web site for a company called “Russian Investors.” The ownership of Russian Investors is unclear, but it’s been linked to the Russian state in British media. Its chairman Aleksej Golubovitsj, a former strategic planner for the Russian oil firm Yukos that was taken over by the state, was arrested in May by Interpol and Italian police in Pisa.

When Aftenposten correspondent Hilde Harbo called Russian Investors to inquire about Svetlitsjnaja’s connections to the company, her questions went unanswered and Svetlitsjnaja’s name was quickly removed from the web site.

Svetlitsjnaja also refused to respond to repeated queries from Aftenposten, but she reappeared late last week at a press conference in London. When Harbo attempted to ask questions about her role at Russian Investors, she was cut off and verbally attacked. A man appearing with Svetlitsjnaja, identified as a fellow student, James Heartfield, called Harbo a “liar” and attempted to block further questioning.

Some Russian experts have suggested that Svetlitsjnaja may have been set up by Russian officials to discredit Litvinenko. She admitted she had no taped interviews or documentation to prove that Litvinenko was engaged in extortion, and said she failed to alert police about Litvinenko’s alleged extortion plans because she was too busy with research work.

The Mighty Telegraph Strikes at the "Rotten Heart" of Russia

Pulling no punches, the Telegraph lets Russia have both barrels over its obstruction of the Litvinenko investigation with a massive article detailing the recent litany of ourages we have seen from Russia, ending with the radioactive toxification of London and various innocent bystanders:

THE ROTTEN HEART OF RUSSIA

Scotland Yard detectives have now had a week of official stonewalling. The British ambassador is being threatened by Right-wing thugs. Frustration and intimidation (and increasingly extortion) have become the norm for anyone doing business in Russia

The terse communiqué should have come as no great surprise to the nine Scotland Yard detectives who flew into Moscow’s Domodedovo airport last Monday. As their plane touched down, just after 5pm, a white Chrysler people-carrier was waiting to drive them to the offices of the Prosecutor General in Bolshaya Dmitrovka Street. When they arrived, an hour later, Yuri Chaika, Russia’s chief prosecutor, had his written statement already prepared for them.

His instructions to the team, which was led by a detective chief superintendent and was in Russia to interview potential witnesses in the investigation into the murder of the former Russian spy, Alexander Litvinenko, were succinct and to the point. The interviews, he told them, would be carried out chiefly by his officers, with the British detectives as witnesses; no suspects would be extradited to the UK, and all Russian citizens suspected of involvement in the poisoning of Litvinenko would be tried in Russia.

It was probably what the team had expected to hear. Since Tuesday, when they held their first interview with Dmitry Kovtun, the Russian businessman who met Mr Litvinenko in London on the day it is presumed he was poisoned, it has become increasingly clear that their investigations are being hampered and frustrated by the Russians. As one local journalist who has trailed the officers since their arrival in Moscow points out: “The officials and police officers here will give every appearance of helping. But they will be stonewalling. Each ‘no, that is not possible’ will be delivered with the utmost courtesy. But each ‘no’ will mean exactly that: ‘No, never, not in a million years.’ “

For the business community, well accustomed to the tactics of the Russians, all this will be wearyingly familiar. In Russia nothing happens at speed. And little happens at all unless someone’s palm has been well greased. It is a country where the police, politicians, even judges, are available to be bought. Since the fall of communism, the country may have discovered democracy, but it has yet to grasp the concept of the rule of law. As a result, there is a random, almost anarchic, quality to everyday existence. Laws are there to be imposed — or broken — on the whims of whoever happens to be in control of any given situation. Russia is rotten to its heart.

Even the British ambassador in Moscow is not exempt from the fear and intimidation that are a constant part of attempting to do business in the country. Yesterday, the Foreign Office was forced to make an official complaint to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs over the treatment of the ambassador, Tony Brenton. For four months he has been the target of intimidation by Nashi, a Right-wing youth movement linked to the Kremlin. The group has trailed and heckled the envoy, picketing the embassy and triggering a violent incident outside his residence in September. So serious has been the harassment that there are now fears for the ambassador’s safety.

The Scotland Yard detectives, however, will not have experienced such overt bullying. Their experience will have been of Russia’s most prevalent weapon: frustration. Kitted out in thick overcoats and padded anoraks despite Moscow’s unseasonably mild weather, they have had to endure lengthy delays, cooped up in their people-carrier outside Chaika’s office, while a stream of lesser officials have ferried messages back and forth, constantly changing earlier decisions, destinations and instructions.

The result has been that, so far, the only interviews the Scotland Yard officers have been able to carry out have been with Kovtun, who is now, himself, ill from suspected poisoning by polonium 210, the radioactive and highly toxic metal that caused Mr Litvinenko’s slow and agonising death in a London hospital on November 23.

Once they have dealt with the stonewalling, the Yard team will have to deal with another, more difficult problem of working in Russia: divining the truth from the multiplicity of lies and deceptions. “The most likely scenario is that the British detectives will be dragged up and down blind alleys, bewildered and infuriated by cooked-up protocol and officialdom and then, suddenly, the Russians will present them with a fall guy on whom they will have planted some sort of seemingly conclusive evidence,” says one British businessman who has specialised in finance and consultancy in Russia for 20 years. “That person will become the sacrificial lamb.

“Putin has no real understanding of democracy. He thinks judges can be told what to do, and he can’t understand why Tony Blair and the British government can’t muzzle their press. Neither does he comprehend capitalism: he still thinks commerce is all about bribes and the strong bullying the weak.”

Mr Putin is not alone in believing that. Many Russian businessmen think the same thing. When the law is there to be bought, it is the strongest, the richest, the best connected, who have the upper hand.

Tim Osborne, a British lawyer and the managing director of GML, an investment vehicle, knows about Russian business methods only too well. He is, he says, proof that falling out with the Kremlin can be a risky business. GML was the largest shareholder (with a £13 billion stake) in Yukos. The former Russian oil giant was forced into bankruptcy by the Kremlin’s demand for £20 billion in back taxes, and its chief executive Mikhail Khodorkovsky, jailed.

Now Mr Osborne, 55, has been threatened with prosecution for allegedly illegally taking control of £5.3 billion worth of the company’s assets. No one, other than the Kremlin, takes the charges seriously. “It’s nothing short of bully-boy tactics,” he says. “Let’s face it, I’m not in Litvinenko’s class, I don’t expect to be poisoned. But am I careful? You bet I am. I have to be very, very careful where I travel. There are countries I won’t set foot in.

“It’s a disgrace that they can fight a lawyer just doing his job by bringing totally unfounded charges and attempting to wreck my career,” he says. “But then in Russia there is no rule of law. There is no independent judiciary. It is run by politicians. They rewrite history and make up the laws to fit the circumstances.”

Mr Osborne has good reason to be careful. He took over his role at GML after its original managing director, the multi-millionaire Stephen Curtis, was killed in an air accident. That, at least, was the ruling of the British coroner. But many believe Mr Curtis and his pilot Max Radford, who died when their helicopter crashed in 2004, were the victims of a Putin plot.

During the inquest it was revealed that Mr Curtis, a strong critic of Mr Putin, who is said to have headed a smear campaign against the president, had received a series of death threats and had told a relative a fortnight before his death: “If anything happens in the next two weeks, then it won’t be an accident.”

Mr Radford’s parents never accepted the accidental-death verdict and, since Mr Litvinenko’s murder, are believed to be pressing police to re-open investigations into the crash.

The creed of the Kremlin — to get anything done, one must either pay or intimidate — has become a way of life for all Russia. Bribery is back big time. Last month, one of Britain’s largest retail groups held a round of meetings with potential local suppliers in Russia. “The talks were like every other I’ve conducted,” said the executive concerned. “Everything was above board, thrashed out in normal business fashion. Then we had some drinks to finish our discussions on a convivial note. Suddenly, the Russian I was dealing with said: ‘My wife is very cold.’ It seemed incongruous. Frankly, I didn’t know what sort of response he was after. Then he said: ‘She needs a new fur coat.’ And he winked. I made my excuses and left. We never signed that particular deal.”

For others, their experiences of business Russian style have been more unsavoury. The chief executive of one large construction company, who travelled to St Petersburg in the hope of securing permission to build a large block of luxury flats, was asked for £20,000 up-front to ”assist in ensuring the necessary licences were issued”. When he took exception, he was told further meetings would be necessary and to remain in the country for a few days.

Eager to clinch his deal, he assumed that the matter would not be mentioned again. ”That night, there was a knock at my hotel room door,” he says. “When I opened it, this character was standing there, dressed in black and wearing dark glasses. He pushed me into the room, grabbed me by the throat and told me to pay up or there would be no flats. Then he disappeared. I left the next day and, no, I don’t intend to do business in Russia again.”

The effect of such tactics has been a blow to the country’s economy. Last month, the Organisation for Economic Development and Co-operation, the Paris-based think-tank, said in its economic survey of Russia that, while measuring corruption in the country may be difficult, it was clearly a major impediment to foreign investment. “There is,” it said, “a widespread consensus that [corruption] has been growing in recent years.” And the joint survey of the World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development has also recorded an increase in the number of “unofficial payments” for licences and state procurement contracts. “Bribery has become a regular feature of doing business in Russia,” it says.

It is also extremely dangerous. Murder, too, is a fact of Russian business life. Last month, a senior BP engineer was shot in a sauna and Zelimkhan Magomedov, the president of the National Oil Institute Fund, was gunned down in the street. Such has been the volume of contract killings among the business community that several multinationals have begun hiring security firms to protect their senior staff. General Electric, for example, recently provided its executives with 24-hour protection from MiG, a security firm whose clients include American Express, McDonald’s and Ernst & Young. For £160 a month, clients are given a number to dial at any time if they are in danger. The company says it will dispatch a squad armed with 9mm pistols within one minute. In a country where the police are just as likely to be the problem rather than the solution, such firms are invaluable, clients say.

This weekend, as the British detectives pass their time in the somewhat palatial surroundings of the British Embassy, sitting upon its red, heart-shaped sofas, gazing through the windows at the Moscow River, they will doubtless be reflecting on the frustrations, trials and tribulations of investigations Russian style. They may be there some time.

The Neo-Soviet Crackdown on Religion Continues Apace

The Moscow Times reports more evidence of Russia’s systemmatic persecution of the non-Orthodox religious community in Russia, and more evidence that those of us who warned about the impact of the new NGO statute were correct:

Churchgoers who drop money in the collection plate might want to consider the consequences of their generosity, lest their places of worship be shut down in April amid a blizzard of bureaucracy. Under new rules that Protestants fear will threaten religious freedom, churches must start counting how much of their tithe and offerings come from Russians and foreigners. The new rules also require churches to account for every service and any other event, including the time and date it took place, how many people attended and the “makeup” of the participants, such as whether they were mostly students, small-business people or some other group, according to documents that churches and other nongovernmental organizations have to submit to the Federal Registration Service. The rules are part of the contentious new law on NGOs that forced all foreign groups to reregister with the service by October. For religious organizations, the law means they must submit the new accounting forms to the service by April 15 or face closure. “If there is a collection box in the corner, how are we supposed to know who donated what?” Konstantin Bendas, a spokesman for the Russian Church of Christians of Evangelical Faith, said Friday. Furthermore, he said, keeping a tally of every service promises to be a bureaucratic nightmare. “This may be fine for an NGO that has three or five events per year, but a religious organization has events every day with services in the morning, afternoon and evening,” he said. “So for every Russian Orthodox service, you would have to indicate who came to worship, who sang and who read the liturgy. It all leads to pointless bureaucracy.” Bendas’ union of evangelical faith is among five Protestant groups that signed a Dec. 1 appeal to First Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev to exclude churches from the accounting rules in the NGO law. The other signatories include the Baptists and the Seventh-day Adventists. Medvedev chairs the government commission on religious organizations.

The appeal says the accounting rules violate the law on freedom of conscience and religion, and that the required paperwork makes it nearly impossible for religious organizations to remain in compliance. Vladimir Ryakhovsky, one of the country’s top lawyers for religion issues, concurred that it would be “physically impossible” for religious organizations to comply with the new rules and predicted “big problems” for many organizations come April. “The biggest problem will be that organizations the powers-that-be want to strangle out of existence will be targeted for their lack of compliance,” Ryakhovsky said. Gennady Alibekov, a spokesman for the Federal Registration Service, said his agency had no comment on the new rules. “Our job is merely to carry out the laws that have been passed,” he said.

The NGO law, which came into effect in April, has drawn sharp criticism from Western governments, human rights groups and NGOs. Critics maintained the measure would cripple Russia‘s fledgling civil society, adding that it was reflective of the country’s growing trend toward authoritarian government. Several organizations have been denied registration under the law, though they have had the option of resubmitting their applications after making appropriate corrections. Government officials could not be reached for comment Friday. But Andrei Sebentsov, a spokesman for the government commission on religious organizations, told Kommersant that the letter to Medvedev would not help much. “This is not an issue that Dmitry Anatolyevich can resolve,” Sebentsov said. “The decree was issued together with the NGO law, and there is no reason to revise something in the document now.” Sebentsov said the new rules did not violate the law on freedom of conscience and religion. Protestants are not the only religious organizations concerned about the rules. Rabbi Zinovy Kogan, chairman of the Congress of Jewish Religious Organizations, said that for the most part, synagogues in Russia were run by individual rabbis who could be overwhelmed by new bureaucratic responsibilities.

“We all report to the tax authorities, and that is normal,” Kogan said. “But the rabbi usually does everything, from accounting to conducting services, and all the time usually keeping a regular job. He can barely keep up with the responsibilities he has already.” A spokesman for the Russian Orthodox Church said Friday that no one was available to comment. A lawyer for the church, Ksenia Chernega, told Kommersant that the Moscow Patriarchate was drawing up an appeal to the government similar to the one sent by the Protestant churches to Medvedev. She said the requirement to account for goods and services sold by the church could be difficult to meet. “The church, for example, has never tracked the number of candles it distributes, because a candle is an offering to God,” Chernega said, adding that occasional services, such as baptisms, weddings and funerals, are similarly undocumented.

Ukrainian People Repudiate Yanukovich

Recent poll data shows that Ukrainians overwhelmingly think that their country’s new direction following the appointment of pro-Russian Prime Minister Victor Yanukovich is the wrong one:

Seventy-five percent of Ukrainians consider the political situation in Ukraine unstable. This is indicated by the results of the poll, which the Research & Branding Group presented at a press conference at the press center of the Ukrainian News information agency. Respondents in the poll were asked to assess the political situation in the country. Six percent said they considered it generally stable, 19% said they were undecided. Asked to assess the economic situation in the country, none of the respondents in the poll considered the economic situation to be very good, 50% considered it to be bad, 26% considered it to be average, 17% considered to be very bad, 2% considered it to be good, while 5% said they were undecided. Moreover, 47% of the respondents in the poll believe that everything in Ukraine has been generally moving in the wrong direction since the March 2006 parliamentary elections, 17% said it has been moving in the right direction, 36% said they were undecided. The Research & Branding Group polled 2,215 people in all regions of Ukraine during the November 5-15 period. The statistical margin of sampling error does not exceed 1.1%. As Ukrainian News earlier reported, 69% of the respondents in a poll that the R&B Group conducted in October said they considered the political situation in Ukraine to be generally bad and unstable.

LR on PP

Check out LR’s most recent piece on Publius Pundit, comparing Venezuela and Russia in terms of the UN’s recent develpment study and classifying these two countries as the “acid test” for Russian democracy. Feel free to add your thoughts on this important topic. Why do countries with failing, anti-democratic regimes nonethelss keep voting the same losers into power, thus destroying their own future? All ideas count on this vital issue.