9 Responses to “Russia tests the limits of realism”

Comments

1. A letter to the Editor

   The article by your international affairs columnist is, as usual, thoughtful and balanced, and unlikely to offend anyone. But in a discussion of Russia the article omits certain things that should not be left out of the accounting. I write as an accountant, you understand.

   Russia, under the direction of President Vladimir Putin, committed grave war crimes in Chechnya. Uncounted thousands of civilians were killed and more were made homeless. Observers waited in vain for appropriate condemnation of Russia’s conduct by international leaders. None was forthcoming, because of foreign policy realism; some would say, realpolitik. Russia has crowned its achievement in Chechnya by the imposition of a fake political settlement, in conditions of terrible continuing repression which include kidnap and disappearances organized by the “authorities” there. Foreign policy realism has had the consequence that there has been very little criticism, and the US president still evinces the friendliest of feelings whenever he meets his Russian counterpart.

   Russia has been found guilty, time and time again, of human rights abuses by the respected Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, and there can be no excuse for the leaders of western nations, who are our representatives, not knowing about them.

   Less well known, Russian agents were found guilty in a court of law of the murder, in Qatar, of an exiled Chechen leader in February 2004. The assassins were sentenced to terms of imprisonment, but subsequently their government bought their freedom.

   There are good grounds for believing that the Russian security services were complicit with the terrorists in the Moscow theatre siege, in October 2002. There remain serious unanswered questions about the role of the authorities in the Beslan school siege in September 2004. Even more crucially, there is the evidence that in 1999 the Russian security services arranged the explosions that killed more than 300 people in Moscow and other Russian cities, as a pretext for the recommencement of an atrocious war in Chechnya.

   Foreign policy realism has been around for longer than Gideon Rachman suggests. Under President Putin the Russian state has been getting away with murder for almost seven years now. Our leaders have chosen to disregard this uncomfortable fact. Is this realism, or a weak-minded refusal to look reality in the face?

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | December 5th, 2006 at 1:25 pm | Report this comment
   

2. It seems, after the programme on Radio Four on Saturday 16 December, in which Tom Mangold interviewed the former FSB agent Yuri Shvets, that this is not, after all, an unsolved murder mystery. The murder was ordered by Mr X, a high-placed official in the Kremlin described in the programme as a “powerful, dangerous and vindictive” individual. Scotland Yard know his identity. We await revelations in due course from HM Government.

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | December 17th, 2006 at 12:00 pm | Report this comment
   

3. Dear Gideon

   I hope you are enjoying sinisterly sunny Wales. In your absence international events have not ground entirely to a halt. I have some observations on a recent event, as follows:

   In Russia, Aleksandr Torshin’s parliamentary commission of enquiry into the Beslan school massacre of September 2004 has now reported on its findings, and has deemed it appropriate to whitewash the Russian government and its forces, reporting that the military performed “adequately”.

   It is a sad reflection on Russian democracy in these times, that a commission set up to enquire into a tragedy of unprecedented horror should acquit itself so dishonourably.

   Particularly offensive is the defamation of a heroic figure killed by the Russian forces operating in Chechnya, the Chechen patriot and elected president, Aslan Maskhadov. President Maskhadov is named by Torshin as one of those who plotted the Beslan school siege. This is a vile calumny. Maskhadov’s only involvement in the events was to offer to mediate, at considerable personal risk, in order to save lives. He was prevented from doing this by the precipitate action of the Russian forces who commenced a storming of the school, thereby triggering the events that caused the ensuing massive loss of life.

   The report gives no consideration to the question of how it came about that, among the hostage-takers, were several who appeared to have been recently released from custody – a circumstance that appeared to show that the authorities participated, as colluders, in the advance planning of the hostage-taking.

   Torshin’s worthless report is interesting only in demonstrating the cynicism, venality and corruption of Russian politicians.

   The Russian leadership, it must be concluded, wishes to falsify to the Russian people and to the world the historical record of what happened, and to keep forever secret the criminality of the officials who, knowing that hostage deaths would be the inevitable result, ordered the assault on the school. Nevertheless, the blood of innocents is on their hands.

   I am grateful to find, in your blog, a place where I can express my sense of outrage, knowing that hardly anyone will read it (save for some sinister characters in a cold country far away).

   Jeremy

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | December 24th, 2006 at 12:49 pm | Report this comment
   

4. People have been asking me about the specific lies told by the Torshin commission which investigated the Beslan school siege of September 2004.

   These would include the lie that the initial blast was caused by the terrorists. Actually, the initial blast was caused by a sniper’s bullet.

   Another lie was that security forces only used heavy weapons when there were no hostages in the building. Tanks fired at the school buildings while they were still full of hostages. Flamethrowers were used and set the roof on fire - the resulting collapse of the roof caused the deaths of around 160 hostages.

   Yet another lie was that 32 terrorists took part, of whom 31 were killed and one has been sentenced in court. The actual number was much larger, and many of them are still alive and at liberty.

   All this is common knowledge freely available. See for example my review of a book on the subject, at http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=7575

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | January 3rd, 2007 at 8:43 am | Report this comment
   

5. An interesting article in today’s FT magazine, Toxic politics By John Emsley, reviews the distaseful history of poisonings.

   I should like to mention that poisoning is not the only way that Russia disposes of its “enemies” who live in other countries in the twenty-first century. The murder by Russian assassins of Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev, in Qatar, was by means of a car bomb.

   In the same year, according to a recent article in the Sunday Herald (a reputable Scottish newspaper), the means chosen in a contract killing intended to murder a British judge was a shotgun. Here is a snip from the article.

   QUOTE
   One UK source closely linked to British intelligence told how he had a conversation with a Russian intelligence officer in 2004, in which the Russian spy spoke of the killing of a British citizen carried out by Russian agents. In January 2004, Lieutenant-Colonel Robert Workman was found shot dead on his doorstep in the Hertfordshire hamlet of Furneux Pelham. The killing seemed completely motiveless.

   However, the Russian intelligence source told his British contact that Robert Workman was killed in a case of mistaken identity. The real target had been a judge called Timothy Workman who lived not far from the scene of the murder.

   In late 2003, Judge Workman infuriated the Kremlin when he rejected Russia’s extradition request for Akhmed Zakayev, the Chechen leader in London. Workman said that Zakayev faced a “substantial risk” of being tortured if he was returned to Moscow to stand trial. The Kremlin accused Workman of playing “cold war politics”.

   Also in 2003, Judge Workman called a halt to Russia’s attempt to have Boris Berezovsky extradited from Britain. The billionaire oligarch had fallen out with Putin and has bitterly criticised the ruling regime. Berezovsky was also a close friend of Alexander Litvinenko.
   END QUOTE

   I wonder if there may be some truth in this serious allegation.

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | January 6th, 2007 at 9:07 am | Report this comment
   

6. In advance of the Panorama programme to be shown this evening, it already seems clear that the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, who died just two months ago, was ordered by a “powerful, dangerous and vindictive” individual in the Kremlin, whose name is known to Scotland Yard, and therefore to our Prime Minister.

   Vladimir Bukovsky, the former leading Soviet dissident, has made the following suggestions:

   “First, it should be made absolutely clear that a murder of a British citizen on British soil by agents of a foreign power constitutes an act of aggression and a violation of British sovereignty, and, as it happened, an act of a radioactive attack on a NATO country. Second, Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty should be invoked demanding a collective response by the NATO countries. Third, NATO should present Russia with an ultimatum demanding an immediate repeal of that offensive law with apologies. Failing that, Russia should be expelled from all international organizations, starting with G8, Council of Europe, WTO, etc. etc. Top Russian officials should not be allowed to step on the territory of NATO countries. Russia should be proclaimed a rogue state.”

   But what is Tony Blair likely to do, faced with compelling evidence that Alexander Litvinenko was murdered by the Kremlin’s operatives? I fear that this is a test of character that he will fail. The language of diplomacy is not now appropriate. Churchill would have known what to say. But will our Prime Minister opt for appeasement? We should know soon.

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | January 22nd, 2007 at 10:09 am | Report this comment
   

7. Dear Gideon

   Now that you have returned refreshed from Davos perhaps you will turn your attention to the debate that has been raging in your blog about Russia testing the limits of realism.

   Your readers might care to look at the picture the Russian FSB used to use for target practice. The story is in Polish,at http://www.dziennik.pl/Default.aspx?TabId=14&ShowArticleId=29343

   The fact that the FSB used a picture of the late Alexander Litvinenko for shooting practice is suggestive, perhaps?

   Yours

   Jeremy

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | January 29th, 2007 at 12:34 pm | Report this comment
   

8. Russia is still testing the limits of realism, with its insistence on sending investigators to London, impertinently to investigate the murder of Alexander Litvinenko. I find myself in complete agreement with Mr Berezovsky, who said as follows during a recent interview.

   QUOTE
   RFE/RL: What is the goal of the Russian Prosecutor-General’s Office in insisting on questioning more than 100 people in London?

   Berezovsky: Let’s start from the beginning. First of all, it is clear that the Prosecutor-General’s Office is an absolutely criminal, gangster organization that serves as an instrument of supressing people who essentially have the same mentality as Putin and others sitting in the Kremlin. This is exactly what can help you understand the purpose of their request and their inquiry.

   Let’s look at it this way. We know that Scotland Yard has completed its investigation. It is clear that the investigation was conducted in a professional and unbiased manner. Judging by information leaked to the press, I have the impression that Scotland Yard knows who committed this crime and they know very well who is behind it — that is, the [Russian] state machine. The [Russian] Prosecutor-General’s Office is well aware of it too, so their actions are a diversion tactic. They know who actually contracted and carried out this crime. They know not only as much as the investigators of Scotland Yard, but a lot more, because they have had access to information firsthand.
   END QUOTE

   The criminality of the Russian Prosecutor-General’s office is further evidenced by the continuing persecution of Mikhail Khodorkovsky on grounds of fake charges intended to prevent his release on parole later this year.

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | February 8th, 2007 at 11:16 am | Report this comment
   

9. In its never-ending efforts to test the limits of realism the Russian Federation is continuing its persecution of Yukos executives at present in its custody – although I note that the FT is not inclined to take much notice of this, which I find odd. Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s lawyer, Robert Amsterdam, writes as follows “in regards to the ongoing harassment, gag orders, acts of intimidation, false statements, and interference on behalf of the Russian authorities toward counsel in this case.”

   “Given this fundamental disregard for an individual’s right to properly defend himself, I believe the conduct of the procuracy of the Russian Federation in this case can be compared to that of an organized criminal group, one whose activities should be condemned by every prosecutorial organization that attempts to uphold the rule of law.

   “The Kremlin is clearly applying some lessons learned from the first round of attacks on Khodorkovsky and Yukos. Lesson No. 1 - when you want to want to carry out a highly unlawful show trial of a political prisoner, do so out of the public eye. For this reason the upcoming hearings will be taking place in the farthest reaches of Siberia, where the cancellation of a single flight can eliminate all observers (it is a violation of Russian law to hold the hearings in a different venue than the location of the alleged misconduct). Lesson No. 2 - when you want to invent perposterous new charges, make sure the media is barred from the proceedings. For this reason the next round of proceedings will be held inside the Chita Isolator prison facility, which will be able to deny the right of entry to anyone it chooses. Lesson No. 3 - when you want to make these ridiculous charges stick, begin an aggressive campaign of slander against the character of the defendent while at the same time prohibiting his lawyers from discussing the charges. For this reason, the procuracy has forced the Khodorkovsky defense team to sign a variety of strict non-disclosure agreements, which function as gag orders while the procuracy is free to speak to the media openly about the baseless allegations.

   “If there remains any question whatsoever about the immense importance of Mikhail Khodorkovsky to Russia and the rest of the world, consider carefully the enormous illegitimate lengths that Russian officials have gone to in order to bury the truth, hide evidence, and stifle public debate. If they had a real case to try, none of this would be necessary.

   “The arbitrary arrests of both Yuri Schmidt and Karinna Moskalenko coming into and leaving Chita, simply to do their job of defending their client, are largely symbolic of the fraud and deception that has come to characterize the Russian procuracy. As someone who has worked under this environment of intimidation and hostility toward lawyers, I strongly urge all those in the legal sector reading these words to contact every professional organization of which they are members to denounce this unacceptable conduct, and demand security and fair treatment toward all lawyers working on politically sensitive cases in Russia.”

   In an international affairs blog in one of the world’s most respected business newspapers, this is a proper matter for discussion. Can anyone suggest why the FT is not paying attention to this case?

   Posted by: Jeremy Putley | February 15th, 2007 at 9:40 am | Report this comment
   

Post a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

As a final step before posting the comment, please type the two words you see in the image beloweight numbers in the audio clip; this test is to prevent automated robots from posting comments.

Type the two words: Type the eight numbers: Unfortunately you provided the wrong reCaptcha answer. Please try again: