Russia Seen Expanding Active Measures and Media Campaign Against Latvia in 2015Staunton, January 5 – Riga faces a dramatically expanded Russian media campaign to discredit it in the eyes of Latvians and the West and an increase in the activity of Russian special services against it, according to Maris Tsepuritis, a researcher at the Riga Center for Research on the Politics of Eastern Europe. The analyst says he bases his conclusion not only on existing trends in Russia’s handling of Latvia over the past year but also on the fact that Moscow is especially interested in blackening the reputation of Riga now that it has become for the next six months the presidency of the EU Council (rus.delfi.lv/news/daily/latvia/analitik-v-latvii-zametno-usilitsya-aktivnost-rossijskih-specsluzhb.d?id=45407842). The way in which Moscow treated Lithuania during its EU presidency suggests some of the things Moscow may do to Latvia, according to Tsepuritis. Among them are cyber attacks against the country’s media networks and massive negative information campaigns to blacken Latvia’s reputation internationally. In addition, Tsepuritis said, it is likely that Russian special services will also step up their activities in Latvia not only to gain access to various kinds of information but also to carry out “various destabilizing measures” and thus test NATO’s resolve concerning the defense of its Baltic member states (regnum.ru/news/polit/1882371.html). http://windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2015/01/window-on-eurasia-russia-seen-expanding.html?m=1
|
|
|
|
Russian Media Attack Belarus: a Warning for Minsk The past few weeks have seen an unusual increase of anti-Belarusian activity in pro-government Russian media and blogs. The Kremlin has not yet used its strongest media tools. However, the manner of the attack is in some respects similar to the information warfare which preceded Russia's annexation of Crimea. In the face of the unfolding economic crisis in Russia and Belarus and the Belarusian presidential elections scheduled for 2015, this could signal a new shift in the relations between Russia and the regime of Alexander Lukashenka. Second-tier media in action. Is more to come? First, the widely-read pro-Kremlin blogger Aleksandr Shumsky has published a detailed post saying that Belarus was a natural part of Russia and suggesting that Russia should actively prevent attempts of a pro-Western revolution in Belarus. Then, the popular entertainment TV channel REN TV on December 20 aired a half-hour long film about Belarus claiming that the West is preparing a coup d’etat in Belarus, criticising both the Belarusian opposition and the regime of Lukashenka. Failing to spell the names of some Belarusian politicians and media outlets correctly, REN TV told its viewers about Western-sponsored bloody revolt being prepared in Belarus. This film came out as part of a three hours long marathon of anti-Western propaganda, along with conspiracy theories and homophobia. The influential nationalistic online publication Sputnik & Pogrom is regularly publishing articles denouncing the right of Belarusians to have an independent state, denouncing the existence of the Belarusian language and culture. Russian media portray the Belarusian democratic opposition as Nazis and accuse Lukashenka of being weak Other publications have in the past weeks been even more aggressive in criticising things like the growth of popularity of Belarusian traditional clothing or the non-Russocentric view of Belarusian history by Belarusians. Some of the articles, in a typical manner, portray the Belarusian democratic opposition as Nazis and accuse Lukashenka of being weak and opportunistic. The fact that Lukashenka has maintained good relations with Ukraine in 2014 is also a topic for hysterically critical publications on different levels. Although the media participating in this campaign do not always have a formal affiliation with the Kremlin, in today's Russia there can be no illusions as to the orchestration of such things or at least their approval by state ideologists. Anti-Belarusian propaganda has not yet reached the scale that the propaganda targeting Ukraine or the Baltic states in the past. For instance, first-tier nationwide TV channels have not yet been seriously involved in the latest round of attacks. However, this scale has certainly become the largest since a series of anti-Lukashenka films titled The Godfather aired in 2010 on the Gazprom-controlled TV channel NTV. Lukashenka as the long-time hero of Russian nationalists Russia's annexation of Crimea and the war in Eastern Ukraine, motivated by Russian nationalistic slogans, were preceded by a long-term information campaign. Numerous books, magazine articles and films aiming to discredit Ukrainian statehood, the Ukrainian language and culture, to demonise the Ukrainian independence movement, have been published over the past two decades and prepared the foundations for the tragic events of 2014. At the same time, over the past years there has almost been no similar propaganda targeting Belarus. Russian nationalistic circles have never needed to resist growing Belarusian nationalism. Lukashenka has been viewed as a hero and even as a desired ruler of Russia The authoritarian regime of Alexander Lukashenka, established with direct Russian support and enjoying serious political and financial aid from Russia over the past two decades, has always had an ideology very close to Russian (or Soviet) revanchism. In 1995, Lukashenka has de-facto restored Soviet state symbols and reintroduced Russian language as the dominating language in Belarus. The regime has cracked down the Belarusian national revival at the very same time as it has cracked down democracy and human rights. Therefore, for the past two decades Russian nationalists could have viewed their goals regarding Belarus as almost achieved, with the exception of a formal incorporation of Belarus into Russia. Lukashenka has been viewed as a hero and even as a desired ruler of Russia by many Russian conservatives and nationalists. Belarus: Kremlin’s next victim or its Trojan Horse? The activation of anti-Belarusian propaganda in Russian media can be a warning and an indicator of Kremlin’s Belarusian agenda for 2015. For, in late 2014, the danger of an actual annexation of Belarus is higher than in previous years. Russian society has greeted the incorporation of Crimea with great enthusiasm. Following this, approval ratings of President Vladimir Putin have been at an all-time high. However, towards the end of 2014 Western sanctions and falling oil prices have led Russia into an economic crisis. The approval ratings are bound to fall, which creates a temptation for the Kremlin to repeat the "small and victorious" enlargement of Russia’s territory. And for this purpose, the compact, controlled and internationally isolated Belarus could be an attractive target. Moreover, in 2015, presidential elections are scheduled to take place in Belarus. Together with a growing risk of a serious economic crisis in Belarus, this creates vulnerability and a window of opportunities for the Kremlin. In this information war Lukashenka may just be a Trojan Horse in Kremlin’s hands This also corresponds with what Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin ideologue and PR mastermind, said in his recent interview when commenting on the media attack being mounted against Lukashenka "[Putin’s system today] can’t bear any compromises and must turn an insecure ally [like Lukashenka] into an enemy". Moreover, the criticism of Lukashenka will be a good topic for the Kremlin to turn society’s attention away from the economic problems and the failure of the war in eastern Ukraine, Pavlovsky said. On the other hand, there is a less widespread opinion out there that in this latest information war Lukashenka is just a Trojan Horse in the Kremlin’s hands. Some Belarusian activists suggest that this wave of propaganda may have been initiated by Lukashenka himself using his regime's influence in the Russian media. This could help him gain support from progressive circles inside Belarus and get sympathy and support from the West ahead of the 2015 elections. As to Lukashenka's actions in the Ukrainian crisis, several Russian pro-government commentators agree that his actions are being coordinated with the Kremlin or even follow Kremlin's instructions. “His dependence on Russia is enormous, and everybody understands that”, says an expert quoted by the notorious pro-Kremlin online outlet Vzglyad. Despite all the seeming disloyalty in the situation surrounding Ukraine, Lukashenka is nevertheless continuing on with Belarus' growing involvement into Russia-led post-Soviet integration bodies, writes Viktor Militarev, a Russian right-wing writer and activist, in a column for Izvestia, the largest pro-government newspaper in Russia. Anyway, if the media attacks on Lukashenka continue and keep growing in terms of their scale and prominence, this time it might indeed be more than just another staged conflict between Russia and its capricious vassal. Aleś Čajčyc Alexander (Aleś) Čajčyc is a Moscow-based writer, consultant and member of the Rada of the Belarusian Democratic Republic http://belarusdigest.com/story/russian-media-attack-belarus-warning-minsk-21055 |
|
|
|
Виктор ШЕНДЕРОВИЧ А вот и розочка на новогоднем торте: правительство резко снизило цены на водку! Это, надо сказать, очень вовремя. В салон падающего самолета, блядовито улыбаясь, вышла стюардесса с бесплатным бухлом: "Это вам, дорогие пассажиры! От командира корабля. Ни в чем себе не отказывайте". Салон заметно оживился. Жизнь налаживается. Двум смертям не бывать, так хоть процесс доставит удовольствие! А вам еще командир не нравился, дуракам. Щас накатим и пойдем мерить рейтинг.  |
|
|
|
Vladimir Putin
Wins OCCRP’s Person of Year for 2014 Vladimir Putin has been named the 2014 Person of the Year by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an award given annually to the person who does the most to enable and promote organized criminal activity. Putin was recognized for his work in turning Russia into a major money-laundering center; for enabling organized crime in Crimea and in the Donbass region of eastern Ukraine; for his unblemished record of failing to prosecute criminal activity; and for advancing a government policy of working with and using crime groups as a component of state policy. “Putin has been a finalist every year so you might consider this a lifetime achievement award,” said Drew Sullivan, editor of OCCRP. “He has been a real innovator in working with organized crime. He has created a military-industrial-political-criminal complex that furthers Russia’s and Putin’s personal interests. I think Putin sees those interests as one and the same.” Putin, a former KGB bureaucrat, began arresting most major organized crime figures in Russia several years ago, but then quietly released them. That was the start of Russia’s state policy of working with organized crime. OCCRP believes that Putin agreed to tolerate criminality in exchange for criminals’ support in advancing what he defined as Russian interests. "Vladimir Putin and his siloviki fused a Cold War mentality with modern organized crime strategies and technology to create a new level of transnational organized crime,” said Paul Radu, executive director of OCCRP. “The Russian-backed money laundering platforms have exploited the lack of transparency in the global financial and offshore company registrations systems to create a new criminal financial infrastructure used by crime groups from as far away as Mexico and Vietnam". For example, OCCRP looked at a sophisticated money-laundering system set up with the help of Russian and Moldovan organized crime that used Russian banks (including one connected to Vladimir Putin’s cousin Igor), fake bank loans, and corrupt Moldovan judges. The system moved the money of oligarchs, crooked government officials and organized crime into Europe through a Latvian bank. Money moved through the system was used to support Putin’s political interests. In another project, OCCRP's partners aired a documentary which looked at the links between the state owned Russian Railways (which is close to Putin), a notorious banker known as the Black Banker who was shot in London, a slew of organized crime figures and hired assassins and a Russian/Moldovan businessman who also ran a pro-Russian political party in Moldova. The video was responsible in part for a decision by the Moldovan government to ban the Patria party on the eve of the elections because they received illegal financial assistance from Russia. Patria’s leader, fearing arrest, fled to Russia where Russian officials defended him publicly. Organized crime figures have served as intermediaries for weapons transfers between the Russian army and Russian-backed separatist rebels in Ukraine. Working undercover, OCCRP reporters bought weapons from organized crime figures in Moldova; the weapons originated with the Russian 14th army in the breakaway region of Moldova known as Transnistria. Putin’s government has forced the closure of media and civil society groups that have looked at its corrupt practices and ended the year in ironic fashion by finding its fiercest critic, blogger Alexey Navalny, guilty of corruption. Putin was chosen as Person of the Year by more than 125 OCCRP-affiliated investigative reporters and 20 investigative reporting organizations in countries from Europe to Central Asia. “For years Putin has created buffer states run by organized crime thugs, like Transnistria, Ossetia, Abkhazia and now Crimea and the Donbass,” Sullivan said. “While there is a long history of criminal groups working with governments around the world, both in the West and in the former Soviet Union, Putin has institutionalized these connections in ways never seen before.” Runners up to Putin this year were Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Montenegrin Prime Minister Milo Djukanovic. Previous winners include the Romanian Parliament for its role in legalizing crime in 2013 and Ilham Aliyev, the President of Azerbaijan, in 2012 for his role in taking large cuts of state business. OCCRP is a not-for-profit consortium of regional investigative centers and for profit independent media stretching from Europe to Central Asia and in Latin America. Its goal is to help the public understand how organized crime and corruption affect their lives and to improve reporting on the issues of corruption and criminality. OCCRP seeks to provide in-depth investigative stories as well as the latest news pertaining to organized crime and corruption activities around the world. It is funded by the Open Society Foundations, USAID, European governments and other major international donors. It has offices in Sarajevo, Bucharest, and Tbilisi.
http://occrp.org/person-of-the-year/2014/
|
|
|
|
Happy New Years  |
|
|
|
 This Era of Low-Cost Oil Is Different By Mohamed A. El-Erian Having seen numerous fluctuations in the energy markets over the years, many analysts and policy makers have a natural tendency to “look through” the latest drop in oil prices -- that is, to treat the impact as transient rather than as signaling long-term changes. I suspect that view would be a mistake this time around. The world is experiencing much more than a temporary dip in oil prices. Because of a change in the supply model, this is a fundamental shift that will likely have long-lasting effects. Through the years, markets have been conditioned to expect OPEC members to cut their production in response to a sharp drop in prices. Saudi Arabia played the role of the “swing producer.” As the biggest producer, it was willing and able to absorb a disproportionately large part of the output cut in order to stabilize prices and provide the basis for a rebound. It did so directly by adhering to its lowered individual output ceiling, and indirectly by turning a blind eye when other OPEC members cheated by exceeding their ceilings to generate higher earnings. In the few periods when Saudi Arabia didn't initially play this role, such as in the late 1990s, oil prices collapsed to levels that threatened the commercial viability of even the lower-cost OPEC producers. Yet in serving as the swing producer through the years, Saudi Arabia learned an important lesson: It isn’t easy to regain market share. This difficulty is greatly amplified now that significant non-traditional energy supplies, including shale, are hitting the market. That simple calculation is behind Saudi Arabia’s insistence on not reducing production this time. Without such action by the No. 1 producer, and with no one else either able or willing to be the swing producer, OPEC is no longer in a position to lower its production even though oil prices have collapsed by about 50 percent since June. This change in the production model means it is up to natural market forces to restore pricing power to the oil markets. Low prices will lead to the gradual shutdown of what are now unprofitable oil fields and alternative energy supplies, and they will discourage investment in new capacity. At the same time, they will encourage higher demand for oil. This will all happen, but it will take a while. In the meantime, as oil prices settle at significantly lower levels, economic behavior will change beyond the “one-off” impact. As costs fall for manufacturing and a wide range of other activities affected by energy costs, and as consumers spend less on gas and more on other things, many oil-importing nations will see a rise in gross domestic product. And this higher economic activity is likely to boost investment in new plants, equipment and labor, financed by corporate cash sitting on the sidelines. The likelihood of longer-lasting changes is intensified when we include the geopolitical ripple effects. In addition to creating huge domestic problems for some producers such as Russia and Venezuela, the lower prices reduce these nations’ real and perceived influence on other countries. Some believe Cuba, for example, agreed to the recent deal with the U.S. because its leaders worried they would be getting less support from Russia and Venezuela. And for countries such as Iraq and Nigeria, low oil prices can fuel more unrest and fragmentation, and increase the domestic and regional disruptive impact of extremist groups. Few expected oil prices to fall so far, especially in such a short time. The surprises won’t stop here. A prolonged period of low oil prices is also likely to result in durable economic, political and geopolitical changes that, not so long ago, would have been considered remote, if not unthinkable. http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-29/this-era-of-lowcost-oil-is-different
|
|
|
|
"VATNIK: The Putin Voodoo Magnet" has fewer than 60 hours left in the fundraiser. Santa brought us 66% of our budget and we can actually make the goal. Remember, you won't get charged unless we reach our goal. If you like the project, please stick it to the Kremlin and pledge. Just click this link. http://kck.st/1BeWYfy  |
|
|
|
Red Cross Official Says Moscow Used ‘Humanitarian’ Convoys to Ship Arms to Militants in UkraineStaunton, December 26 – Igor Trunov, the head of the Moscow city office of the Russian Red Cross, says that the Russian government used what it called “humanitarian convoys” to “most likely” ship arms to pro-Moscow fighters in Ukraine, in direct violation of international humanitarian law and practice. Trunov said December 25 that he doesn’t like to “cast stones” at the Russian government. But “there is international law,” and Moscow has violated it. Using humanitarian convoys to send arms across an international border is “an invasion” and “a violation” of the law. Given the way in which Russian officials oversaw these convoys, it was possible for them to carry whatever Moscow wanted, including arms and military personnel, the Red Cross official said. Such actions, he said, make it far more difficult to ensure the delivery of real humanitarian assistance of the kind his organization provides to people in Ukraine who need it. Trunov’s declaration follows confirmation by Russian activists that they sent armed militants into Ukraine via these convoys And his words suggest that Moscow may very well continue to do so even as it talks about its supposed support for the territorial integrity of Ukraine. http://www.interpretermag.com/red-cross-official-says-moscow-used-humanitarian-convoys-to-ship-arms-to-militants-in-ukraine/
|
|
|
|
Russian secret trial to convict opponents of Crimean annexation More details have emerged of the secrecy behind the separate and closed trial of Gennady Afanasyev whose testimony is probably the only ‘evidence’ in the ‘Crimean terrorist plot’ charges against four opponents of Russia’s annexation of the Crimea, including renowned film director Oleg Sentsov and left-wing activist Oleksandr Kolchenko. Information about his conviction and sentencing to 7 years imprisonment and a further 1.5 years restriction of liberty coincided with the court hearings into Kolchenko and Sentsov’s detention. Both hearings ended with the detention being extended until April.  As reported, it was the investigator at the hearing on Kolchenko’s detention who first revealed that Afanasyev’s case was being heard in separate proceedings, and that he had been sentenced to 7 years. The verdict had been passed four days earlier by the Moscow City Court in a trial held behind closed doors. The very fact that his case was already at ‘trial’ stage had not been revealed, meaning that the lawyers representing Sentsov and Kolchenko had no opportunity to cross examine the person whose testimony (together with that of Oleksy Chirny) forms the only basis for the charges against their clients. Kolchenko and Sentsov’s lawyers believe that Afanasyev made a deal with the investigators, giving false testimony against the others in exchange for the minimum sentence envisaged for ‘terrorism’. This corresponds to the account given by Sentsov who, together with Kolchenko, has repeatedly asserted that he was subjected to torture and pressure while in detention in Simferopol. The 38-year-old film director and solo parent says that the investigators tried to get him to make false assertions about EuroMaidan which he actively supported and the new Kyiv administration. He was told that if he did not, he would face even more serious charges. He refused and is now charged with being the ‘mastermind’ of a Right Sector ‘plot’. Questionable secrecy over dubious charges There was secrecy over the arrests and initial detention of all four men, with access even to lawyers being initially denied. The first public statement from Russia’s FSB came on May 30, after the men had been taken to Moscow. The alleged terrorist acts in that statement do not correspond with those which Afanasyev has been convicted of. This, and the fact that there is no hard evidence, only confessions, to back the claim that Sentsov ‘masterminded’ the alleged ‘plot’, make it especially suspicious that the other defendants’ lawyers were not informed of the proceedings and allowed to attend. It is unclear whether there was an actual trial as such, and who was present at the pronouncement of sentence on Dec 17. The human rights website Mediazona first reported the result on Dec 25, but had almost certainly only been present at the hearing on Kolchenko’s detention. Their report repeated the FSB May 30 statement claiming that Afanasyev was part of a group led by Oleg Sentsov which in April 2014, acting on the instructions of the Ukrainian Right Sector, created a ‘diversionary-terrorist group’ in Simferopol. According to this version, Afanasyev, Chirny and Kolchenko, as well as “other unidentified individuals” had, on Sentsov’s instructions, carried out arson attacks on buildings of the Russian Community of the Crimea on April 14 and the local branch of the United Russia party on April 18. In both cases it was earlier reported that a Molotov cocktail had been thrown, with the Russian Community having a door slightly burned, and United Russia – a window damaged. The prosecution also asserts that, again following Sentsov’s instructions, Chirny and Afanasyev obtained homemade explosive devices which were supposed to be used for two terrorist acts on May 9 – blowing up the monument to Lenin at the railway square in Simferopol and the Eternal Flame memorial. It claims that the explosions did not happen since both men were arrested first. While Afanasyev does appear to have been detained before Sentsov who was arrested late on May 10, the first mention of Oleksy Chirny came considerably later in May. Chirny is the least known of any of the four men, but significantly the only one whose social network page indicated a moderate degree of support for the far-right national ‘Right Sector’. The first mention of ‘Right Sector’ came in the FSB statement on May 30. That version claimed that the main aim of what they termed a ‘Right Sector diversionary terrorist group’ was to carry out ‘diversionary-terrorist’ acts in Simferopol; Yalta and Sevastopol, and in the last of these to destroy a number of buildings, railway bridges and power lines. The FSB claim to have carried out searches and found: “explosive devices, firearms; ammunition; canisters with inflammatory substances; construction helmets (similar ones were used during the disturbances on ‘Maidan’; respirators; gas masks; aerosol paint cans; nationalist symbols, etc.” Once again, if these ‘were found’, it must have been at the homes of the two men who have given ‘confessions’, since nothing of the kind was found at either Sentsov or Kolchenko’s homes. All the more reason for the latter’s lawyers to have been present at Afanasyev’s trial and allowed to ask questions.  Oleg Sentsov, Oleksandr Kolchenko - FSB repression Miscast or secret players All four defendants in this case were known to have opposed Russia’s annexation of the Crimea. Aside from mention of Right Sector on Chirny’s social network page, there was nothing to link any of the men with that nationalist party. It is perhaps worth noting that five days before the FSB statement, the Right Sector presidential candidate received an abysmally low result (0.9%) in the May 25 presidential elections. This was so out of sync with the Kremlin’s demonization of Right Sector as supposed main player in a ‘Kyiv junta’ that the pro-Kremlin Pyervy Kanal resorted to a fake ‘Right Sector victory’. Civic activists in the Crimea knew Afanasyev as a photographer (who had first studied law at the Tavriya National University) and opponent of Russia’s invasion and annexation. They treat claims of any Right Sector involvement with scepticism. Allegations of Sentsov and Kolchenko’s links with Right Sector have been denied by both men. The miscasting seems obvious in both cases. Oleg Sentsov is raising two young children, one with autism, by himself making the suggestion that the FSB could have found the alleged items in his home preposterous. There is no material or witness evidence to a link with Right Sector either. Oleksandr Kolchenko, who recently turned 25 in detention, is a left-wing anarchist who has been in conflict with nationalists in the past, and is seriously miscast as a Right Sector ‘terrorist’. Stalin-style denunciations The charges carry a maximum sentence of 20 years, and Kolchenko’s lawyer Svetlana Sidorkina believes that this means that Afanasyev did indeed receive a minimum sentence. She says that his sentence is likely to be used as grounds for seeking the conviction of the others, and probably much stiffer sentences for the two men who maintain their innocence. She is adamant that the prosecution has acted in breach of Russian legislation in the trial of Afanasyev. “Our defendants did not have the chance to put questions to Afanasyev. The testimony which he has given directly concerns both Kolchenko and Sentsov, and we have effectively been denied fully-fledged defence of any clients. The Afanasyev case was considered without studying the document and evidence with this placing in doubt the rulings passed”, she insists. Missing defendant The above-mentioned FSB statement coincided with a Pyervy Kanal news report repeating the prosecution line and showing ‘confessions’ by both Afanasyev and Chirny. Given the fact that only Afanasyev has been sentenced, it is worth noting a worrying report from the Open Dialogue Foundation which has been closely following the case. In August Open Dialogue activists reported that Chirny was in a pre-suicidal state which they believed to have been brought about by drugs he was ‘treated’ with in the Serbsky Institute. That institute earned notoriety during the 1970s and later for its use of punitive psychiatry. Petro Okhotin from the NGO explained that the FSB investigators were doing their utmost to separate Sentsov and Kolchenko and Afanasyev and Chirny. They had experienced enormous difficulty in even tracking down Chirny. When their delegation arrived at the Serbsky Institute, they were told that he had been moved to the Lefortovo prison. Then a day later they learned that he was in the Butyrka pre-trial detention centre in a severe pre-suicidal state. Okhotin warned that Chirny might be facing torture and / or being fed tranquillizers to get him to give testimony against the other defendants. Since Afanasyev was sentenced alone, it is possible that Chirny has since retracted his testimony. He had earlier been reported to have written a letter asking for the Ukrainian consul to visit him. Chirny is the only one of the four who had managed to formally declare his rejection of Russian citizenship before being arrested, and the Russian authorities have not attempted, as they have with the others, to claim that the others had ‘automatically’ become Russian nationals. Both Kolchenko and Sentsov have vehemently objected to this and are adamant that they remain Ukrainian citizens. Oleg Sentsov and Oleksandr Kolchenko are facing 20-year sentences in a case where the words ‘if convicted’ seem especially inappropriate. Both men have been declared political prisoners by the authoritative Memorial Human Rights Centre, and demands have already been issued by Amnesty International for their return to the Crimea. The lack of any evidence aside from questionable ‘confessions’ and the secrecy behind Afanasyev’s trial make international attention and pressure on the Russian authorities imperative. дивись також: • Opponent of Russian occupation of Crimea gets 7 years • Russia continues to force its citizenship on Crimean political prisoners • Crimean political prisoner forced to defend Ukrainian citizenship in court • Add your Greeting to Oleksandr Kolchenko, Ukrainian Citizen and Kremlin Prisoner • G20 Putin Pack: Russia’s Crimean Political Prisoners • Ukrainian Citizens and Russia’s Political Prisoners • Crimean ‘terrorist plot’ defendant upholds right to Ukrainian citizenship • Crimean political prisoners registered as “Russian terrorists” • Russian investigators deny Sentsov was beaten • Russia’s Crimean Political Prisoners to remain in detention http://khpg.org/index.php?id=1419727403
|
|
|
|
Putin Reopens Possibility for Preemptive Attack on the West, Zhilin Says Staunton, December 21 – Aleksandr Zhilin, head of the Moscow Center for the Study of Applied Problems and a leading Russian military commentator, says that Vladimir Putin has now changed the country’s military doctrine in such a way that it will now allow for consideration of a pre-emptive military attack on the West in response to a range of Western threats. In a comment for the Regnum news agency, Zhilin says that as Putin made clear at his meetings with the defense ministry collegium, “Russia does not intend to attack anyone.” But “nevertheless,” he continues, Moscow’s “military strategy is changing” in ways that lay the groundwork for an even more aggressive stance than now. At earlier meetings with the top officials of the Russian defense ministry, Putin “began with the statement that we have no strategic enemies and therefore we do not see military threats to the country.” In the one just concluded, “he did not say this.” And Zhilin says that in his view, Putin “perfectly precisely” declared that Russia does have “a strategic enemy” – the US. American efforts at building an ABM system and the increased activity of NATO “in Europe and above all in Eastern Europe” are cause for concern, Putin told the session, and consequently, in Zhilin’s telling, Russia must maintain or improve its ability to “destroy or at least inflict an unbearable strike on its opponent on another continent.” The Russian president told the military commanders that “it is necessary to force ‘the development of all components of the strategic nuclear forces …[because] these forces are the most important factor of maintaining a global balance and in fact preclude the possibility of massive aggression against Russia.” But even more important as an indication of Moscow’s intentions, Zhilin argues, the meeting shows that “Russia retains for itself the right in the case of a real threat of a nuclear attack by an opponent to launch a preventive one. Under Yeltsin, that point was cut out of our military doctrine” at American insistence, but now it is back. In Putin’s own words, “Russia as always will consistently defend its interests and sovereignty and will seek to strengthen international stability and support equal security for all states and peoples.” And that means, Zhilin says, that “in the case of danger for Russia in financial, technological or raw material markets, our response can be military.” “In other words,” the Moscow military commentator says, US President Barack Obama as a result of his foolish anti-Russian policy is significantly reducing the military security of his own country. The Americans are becoming hostages of the shortsightedness of the White House.” Zhilin’s words may exaggerate how much Putin has changed Russia’s military doctrine, especially with regard to the possibility of responding militarily to economic challenges. But they are important as an indicator of how at least some in the Russian defense establishment see things and thus an indication of how much more dangerous Putin has made the world. http://www.interpretermag.com/putin-reopens-possibility-for-preemptive-attack-on-the-west-zhilin-says/
|
|
|
|
^  |
|
|
|
Attackers burn office of Chechen rights group Joint Mobile Group members say their office was torched after they criticised Kremlin-backed leader Ramzan Kadyrov embers of a human rights groups active in Chechnya say their office has been torched after they criticised the Kremlin-backed Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov for calling for collective punishment against families of Muslim rebels. The damage is serious. That was caused not by the fire but by vandalism. Dmitry Utukin, rights group "The damage (to the offices) is serious. All the equipment has been smashed. That was caused not by the fire but by vandalism," activist Dmitry Utukin of the Joint Mobile Group told AFP news agency on Sunday. The attack on the rights group's office in Grozny on Saturday, followed arson attacks reported against eight homes linked to rebels' families in the wake of a surprise raid on the Chechen capital on December 4. On Sunday, paramilitary police also searched the apartment where two members of the rights group were staying, Utukin said. "It's not very clear what is happening because their phones have been confiscated," Utukin said. "Our lawyer is going there." The group's other staff members "are in a safe place", Utukin said. It is the latest chapter in years of harassment and murder of human rights activists and journalists investigating torture, kidnapping and war crimes in Chechnya, where Russia has been fighting nationalist and armed rebels for 20 years. Kadyrov's threat Following the December 4 attack, Kadyrov, the authoritarian head of Chechnya's government, announced that relatives of any rebels should be exiled and their homes destroyed. After Kadyrov's statement on his popular Instagram account, at least eight houses belonging to people related to the rebels were burnt down, according to a statement by Memorial, another rights group, this week. Now violence has spread to human rights activists. Igor Kalyapin, head of the Moscow-based Committee Against Torture, wrote on Facebook that before the fire at the Joint Mobile Group's offices on Saturday, two men had tried to break in. Activists had also been followed by armed men, he said. Tatiana Lokshina, the Russia programme director at Human Rights Watch, wrote on Facebook that the "Chechen leadership apparently decided to expel the Joint Mobile Group of human rights defenders from Chechnya -- along with relatives of insurgents." Kalyapin has appealed to the Russian prosecutor-general to investigate Kadyrov's statement. Kadyrov responded on Instagram last week that Kalyapin and other activists are defending "bandits" and suggested that Kalyapin was being used by "Western special services" to pay the rebels. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/12/attackers-burn-office-chechen-rights-group-2014121414349619337.html
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
