Daily Archives: April 13, 2008

April 13, 2008 — Contents

SUNDAY APRIL 13 CONTENTS

(1) The Sunday Photos

(2) The Sunday Pariah

(3) The Sunday Heroine

(4) The Sunday Slaughter

(5) The Sunday Funnies

NOTE: Over on Publius Pundit we explain yet another reason why dictator Vladmir Putin is a national catastrophe for Russia! Check it out! And feel free to write a letter to the editor, PP is now publishing reader comments as blog posts.

Advertisements

The Sunday Photos



Oborona’s St. Peterburg branch reports that on March 31st, the eve of the start of spring conscription into the armed forces of the Russian Federation, unknown people placed a construction warning ribbon around the entrance to the local draft board facility, as shown above. They also leafleted the surrounding streets with notices stating that April 1st was “the beginning of hunting season . . . for people!”

The Sunday Pariah

Georgy Bovt explains, in the pages of the Moscow Times, why nobody likes Russia:

Some members of Moscow’s political establishment considered the recent NATO summit in Bucharest a partial victory since Georgia and Ukraine were not invited to join the alliance. But far from saying “no,” NATO promised that these countries would eventually become members.

But the main questions for Moscow are: Why are two members of the Commonwealth of Independent States so eager to join NATO? Why do our allies want to establish closer ties with the West? Why does the prospect of better relations with Russia hold so little appeal?

Russia currently has only two staunch allies among CIS countries. The first is Armenia — a country that is going through difficult economic times, is dependent upon Russia for its energy supplies and has chilly relations with most of its other neighbors. Russia’s other ally is Belarus, a rogue state ruled by a dictator with whom even Moscow sometimes has difficulty maintaining a dialogue.

The Kremlin has a few theories as to why the former Soviet republics find NATO membership so appealing. The most popular explanation is the conspiracy theory. This scenario has the United States continuing its Cold War struggle for global influence by displacing Russia as the dominant player in the CIS region. According to this theory, Washington wins the favor of the political elite in the republics and then foments color revolutions against Moscow to prevent it from regaining power. Conspiracy theorists believe that the United States’ main objective is to seize Russia’s limitless natural resources and take direct control of the country, or else to exercise indirect control by reducing Russia to an “appendage of the West” that submissively supplies it with raw materials.

According to this theory, the foreign policy of the United States and its allies reflects a single aim: to encroach upon Russia using every weapon in its arsenal — propaganda, economic pressure and even direct military intervention.

A competing theory holds that the political elite in the former Soviet republics are the ones pushing for NATO’s expansion. These leaders supposedly view their countries as being too small to have any voice among European nations unless they gain membership in powerful international organizations such as NATO or the European Union. Some among the Russian elite believe that Ukraine and Georgia fear losing their status as independent countries unless they join NATO or the European Union.

These different views reflect the worldviews of the various factions within Russia’s political elite. Any attempt to dissuade them from these convictions is futile. Anti-Western, and especially anti-U.S., sentiment has reached such heights that the Kremlin summarily dismisses worthy arguments without even listening.

While these theorists heap scorn on the West, they don’t bother to ask whether Russia could be a more appealing partner for its neighbors. Using the energy card as a negotiating tool against other countries clearly won’t do the trick. Neither will preaching about the virtues of a multipolar world and the vices of a U.S.-led unipolar world, and taking every possible opportunity to criticize the West while rejecting any constructive proposals it puts forward.

Russia must first offer its own society — and only later the world — an attractive model for development that other countries would want to follow. The government should formulate a set of political principles that it would be able to manifest in actual deeds, not just words. Only then can these values and principles gradually take root in Russian society.

Then, Moscow’s foreign policy would serve as a logical continuation of those principles practiced at home. Unfortunately, this strategy is not part of the Kremlin’s agenda.

The Sunday Heroine

Radio Free Europe reports:

Five years ago, she was the talk of the Russian publishing world: a sassy young reporter unafraid of spilling the beans about what really goes on behind the walls of the Kremlin. Today, Yelena Tregubova (pictured) lives in a secret location in the United Kingdom, where she fled after her writing made her many new enemies.

It’s been just a week since her asylum application was accepted, and the former “Kommersant” reporter has been told not to reveal her address — even to her family in Russia. “I feel huge relief, as you can imagine, because for a year I was living with this massive uncertainty” as U.K. authorities processed her asylum request, Tregubova says. “That’s to say I hoped against hope, but couldn’t be 100 percent sure, that it would be approved. The British government could just have decided to wash their hands of this matter, they could just have said, ‘Why would we want to get involved with this journalist and her problems? Let’s just keep on good terms with the Kremlin and forget about her asylum application.'”

Tregubova’s asylum victory comes at a critical time in British-Russian relations. Some say the relationship is at its most strained since the Cold War. Russia has refused to extradite the man wanted in Britain for the murder of Aleksandr Litvinenko — a former security service agent-turned-British citizen, who was poisoned in London in 2006. Russia, in turn, accuses Britain of harboring wanted men, including business tycoon Boris Berezovsky, a vocal critic of the Kremlin, and Chechen separatists, including Akhmed Zakayev. Both Russia and Britain have expelled diplomats. More recently, the British Council has been forced to close its doors in Russia. Last month, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) raided the Moscow offices of the British oil major BP.

‘Kremlin Digger’

For Tregubova, however, Britain has become a refuge, and her home for the foreseeable future.

“I think that while the current regime is in power — the one created by [President Vladimir] Putin, as the [former] head of the secret services — I won’t be able to return to Russia,” she says. “The door is closed for me, because I would be in mortal danger [if I went back].”

Tregubova’s troubles began after the publication in 2003 of her hugely successful “Tales Of A Kremlin Digger,” a book that dished the dirt on life in the Kremlin. There is the story of an intimate lunch with Putin, then head of the FSB, at a sushi bar in downtown Moscow. “I couldn’t tell whether he was trying to recruit me, or chat me up,” she writes.

Tregubova recounts the bungling attempts of factory bosses to impress the president on regional tours, and presidential blunders that his PR men try to cover up.

But as sales of the book skyrocketed, Tregubova lost her job, was thrown out of the Kremlin reporters pool, and started to receive death threats. An explosion went off outside her door that she says was certainly intended to kill her. Then, a year ago, she got another threat.

“I was abroad at the time, and I got information [that] I would be in mortal danger if I returned to my homeland,” she says. “Of course, I knew that there was a difference between bravery and suicide. I’m not a kamikaze.”

She confesses that “frankly, I didn’t think that when my book was published these nasty goings-on would go so far. Who would have thought that people would go to such lengths for revenge?”

Journalist Deaths

An alarming number of journalists in Russia have learned the hard way just how strong the opposition to their work can be. Since Putin came to power in 2000, more than a dozen journalists have been killed in contract killings — the most recent occurring just last month, and the most sensational being the slaying of investigative reporter Anna Politkovskaya in 2006.

Forty-seven journalists have been killed in the line of duty since 1992, according to the international Committee To Protect Journalists, while reports of beatings and intimidation are common.

Often enough, the government plays a prominent role in the pressures faced by the media.

Natalya Morar, a correspondent for the weekly “Novoye vremya” who has Moldovan citizenship, was barred last month from entering Russia for a second time. She was prevented from entering Russia in December on national-security grounds after writing articles about alleged corruption within the Kremlin.

And as of April 7, accredited journalists have been barred from open access to the Russian White House, the main government office complex in Moscow. All official press communications will be distributed by fax and e-mail and published on the government’s official website, ending the need for journalists to physically enter the building except for official events.

Tregubova says she despairs of the current state of the media in Russia.

“It’s probably not very ethical for me, sitting so far away, in a civilized European country, where human rights are guaranteed, where freedom of speech and freedom of the press are taken for granted — it wouldn’t be ethical for me to criticize those colleagues of mine still in my homeland,” Tregubova says. “But frankly, I think that what’s going on there is less like journalism than some sort of harem.”

The New ‘Samizdat’

She says even the boldest of her Kremlin-reporter friends have been reduced to writing flattering anecdotes about the president. No one dares to criticize or write anything different today, she says, because they fear the consequences.

As for television, she says, it has become a “nightmare similar to what was shown in Communist Party leader Leonid Brezhnev’s era.” Russia’s three main television channels are either state-controlled or owned by Kremlin-friendly enterprises, which means you never see news that’s critical of the government, Tregubova says.

What is interesting, she says, is that samizdat — the illicit reports published during the Soviet era that were critical of the regime — have started to reappear, but in a different format.

“In fact, the strange thing today is that the Internet is playing the role of publisher of samizdat,” Tregubova says. “I think that the future journalism textbooks will reflect this. Have a look, for example, at the grani.ru website — content-wise it is human rights-oriented per se. In fact, this is just what existed before — underground ‘chronicle of the current events’ or chronicle of what was going on during the pre-reform times in the Soviet Union.”

Recently alarms have been raised that the government — after becoming wary of modern methods of disseminating information — has stepped up efforts to monitor and control electronic communications and the Internet. In addressing a recent Internet forum, President-elect Dmitry Medvedev reportedly told the audience that the government must consider “the delicate question of the relationship between freedom of speech and responsibility.”

“I’m afraid that the Russian media must go through the very same difficult path it went through [at the collapse of the Soviet Union],” Tregubova says. “Just as when Yeltsin’s reforms began, we built journalism with our own hands, we started a new style, we tried to study western journalism — so the next generation will have to do the same thing in 10, 15 years’ time, when the current regime has gone.”

Today, Tregubova is writing another book about her experiences. It keeps her busy, she says, and stops her thinking about the things she misses about Russia: “so many things, it’s too painful to talk about them.”

But what she doesn’t miss is the way that the country is run today.

“I just think it’s very sad that the history of reform in Russia, the attempt at liberalization — it’s all over. This great historical opportunity has been lost,” Tregubova says. “Russia has gone back to being a colony for former KGB agents, who’ve changed in name only — a fuel-rich colony for a small group of oil and gas merchants who give nothing of their riches to anyone living outside the capital.”

The Sunday Slaughter

At the Tier II WTA Tour event on Amelia Island in Florida last week, the carnage continued apace for Russia’s so-called “dominant” female tennis players.

Four Russians entered the tournament’s third round, including half of its top six seeds. Only one of them, Maria Sharapova, reached the quarter finals as the rest were cut down like sheafs of wheat before the scythe — and Sharapova herself only barely survived a brutal three-set challenge from the Spaniard seeded #15.

Russia’s #6 seed Dinara Safina was beaten by a lower-seeded Ukrainian.

Russia’s #2 seed Anna Chakvetadze was decisively crushed by an unseeded Slovakian, winning only three games in the two sets she lost.

And unseeded Elena Vesnina lost in straight sets to unseeded Frenchwoman Alize Cornet.

So the only “Russian” to reach the quarters was the one (Shamapova) who learned her game in the United States and lives there full time, and she got there by the skin of her teeth, winning two of three sets both in tiebreakers.

In typical Shamapova style, upon reaching the quarters she discovered that the highest-ranked player she could face in there, or in the semis or finals, was the #8 seed (relatively unknown Agnes Szavay of Hungary). In fact, Shamapova faced the #10 seed in the quarters, needing three sets and a tiebreaker to prevail. The the semis, she then only needed to defeat the #16 seed — that’s right, it got easier as she moved towards the finals, where she was guaranteed to face an unseeded opponent for the title.

But wait! It gets better! In the semifinals, Shamapova’s opponent came down with fever and defaulted, so Shamapova marched into the finals to meet an unseeded opponent without even having to play a single point.

Champion? We think not.

The Sunday Funnies

Source: Ellustrator.

Explanation: The boat, which contains Lenin, Stalin, Putin and Medvedev, has “Galleys” written across the side. This creates a play on words since, as in English, the the Russian word for “galley”, is close to the Russian word for “gallery,” as in a lineup of pictures of famous/infamous people, like a “rogues gallery”- or a police lineup). In text that accompanies the image, one rower cries out “we’re not slaves!” and another answers “but were working like galley slaves!” This refers to an interview Vladmir Putin gave to Time magazine in December 2007 in which he famously exclaimed that he had been “working like a galley slave” in his job as President. The phrase is a set expression in Russian, normally using a word that means “work one’s butt off,” or to slave away. Ellustrator’s readers loved it, of course. Several commented that he should have included the rest of the pantheon of Soviet leaders — plus Gorbachev and Yeltsyn — in the boat.