Posts Tagged ‘navalny’
The Myth of a U.S.-Russia Strategic Partnership
After four years of Dmitry Medvedev keeping the czar’s throne warm, Vladimir Putin is once again Russia’s president. There were no public celebrations to accompany Mr. Putin’s inauguration on May 7. Quite the opposite. Moscow’s streets had been cleared by a huge security presence; the city turned into a ghost town. This scene came the day after massive protests showed that the Russian middle class rejects Mr. Putin’s bid to become their president for life. With no independent legislature or judiciary at our disposal, Mr. Putin’s impeachment will have to take place in the streets.
Meanwhile, this modern czar is using the full power of the state to stamp out Russia’s growing democracy movement. Two young movement leaders, Alexei Navalny and Sergei Udaltsov, were arrested on May 6 and are still in jail on 15-day sentences. They’ve been charged with “violently resisting arrest,” even though several videos of the arrest show Mr. Navalny with his hands in the air shouting, “Don’t resist! Don’t resist!”
Naturally, the court has forbidden the admission of any video evidence in the case. It is possible that a criminal case will be added against them for “inciting mass violence”—Kremlin code for a political trial.
Read More →
Facebook
Twitter
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
del.icio.us
Google Bookmarks
Yahoo! Buzz
Tumblr
StumbleUpon
FriendFeed
NewsVine
Digg
Must Read: The Novaya Newspaper On VAT Theft At Tax Office #28
You will probably remember from the case of Magnitsky, the thieves in Taxation Inspection #28 (including my favourite Vladlen-I-Am-Bitter- Stepanov) who, under the cover of the Investigation Committee, Ministry of Interior and Federal Security Service, pulled from the budget 5.4 bln roubles on the pretence of profit tax refund.
Those who deal with taxation know quite well that stealing money via “abusive tax schemes” is done by means of fake VAT recovery; theft of profit tax rebate is rather uncommon.
Honest businessmen fail to recompense it for years, most often they secure judgement only through court rule.
But certain personalities get the VAT recovered lightening-fast.
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
Navalny Presses for Inquiry Into Putin Deputy
Aleksei Navalny, Russia’s most prominent anticorruption activist, added to the pressure on the Russian government to investigate allegations of what he called corrupt financial practices by a senior deputy to Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin.
The accusations against the deputy, Igor I. Shuvalov, were initially brought to the attention of Russian prosecutors months ago, but on Friday, Mr. Navalny publicly posted the documents that form the basis of the allegations on his Web site.
At issue in the case is not their authenticity – a Moscow law firm has already confirmed they are real – but whether what is described violated laws or might be considered unacceptable, even in Russia’s political system.
Mr. Navalny said he still did not expect law enforcement to act against such a senior official. He said the publication was intended to reinforce the opposition’s message that corruption is pervasive in the Russian government.
“This is not a case of somebody in Siberia stealing pipes,” Mr. Navalny said. “It occurred within the oligarchy that lives abroad and with a Western-oriented official. It will be remembered. Now, every time the fight against corruption comes up, so will Shuvalov’s name.”
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
Will Russia Graduate From The Jackson-Vanik Amendment? By Krickus
The Obama administration wants to scrap the Jackson-Vanik amendment, a Cold War relic that could compromise American economic interests after Russia enters the World Trade Organization (WTO). U.S. firms could be denied access to the Russian market and those operating in it would not be protected by WTO rules. But there are members of Congress in both parties who oppose granting Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status to Moscow without a trade-off; namely in return for scrapping the amendment, the Obama administration will endorse passage of the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act—named after the human rights lawyer who died under government custody. It is designed to punish Russian officials who engage in human rights violations, illegally seize property, and falsify elections. Among other things, they will be subjected to visa and financial sanctions.
Some supporters of this trade-off are doing so out of principle. They believe that it will offer the Russian people protections against human rights violations. This is not the view of the Obama administration. Michael McFaul, the U.S. Ambassador to Russia opposes linking wider commercial relations between Moscow and Washington to human rights. He argues that it will not advance Russia’s march towards democracy. Instead he urges congress to provide $50 million dollars to Russian NGO’s to enhance their capacity to build a civil society and notes as well that visa bans have already been issued against some Russian officials.
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
Replace Jackson-Vanik With the Magnitsky Act
A number of opposition leaders — including myself, Boris Nemtsov, Alexei Navalny and others — recently made an appeal to the U.S. Congress. We proposed that Congress repeal the outdated 1974 Jackson-Vanik amendment and replace it with a tough Magnitsky act. The proposed law would allow the United States to target sanctions against more than 60 specific Russian politicians and officials who are directly responsible for the death of citizens, for illegally seizing the property of others and for falsifying elections.
Not everyone understood our position on Jackson-Vanik correctly — as if we had somehow become soft on Russia’s poor human rights record. They couldn’t be more wrong. Our position differs substantially from that of the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama, and even more from the position taken by Kremlin hard-liners.
President-elect Vladimir Putin, in dealing with the West, would like to exclude any discussion of democracy, human rights and corruption. This would get in the way of the ruling elite’s main goals: to reap profits from the sale of the country’s natural resources and to transfer those funds into safe havens in the West.
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
Why Russia’s Opposition Supports the Magnitsky Act
Khodorkovsky & Lebedev Communications Center
Last week The New York Times published an interesting story articulating, somewhat by mistake, a profound irony at the heart of the Russia’s contentious political debate: both the opposition as well as their tormentor, Vladimir Putin, believe it’s high time to normalize trade relations with the United States. Where they differ, is on what should remain in place as a check on human rights abuses.
Currently Russia is denied Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) due to the antiquated Jackson-Vanik amendment, a Cold-War-era trade-restricting apparatus put in place to guarantee emigration rights for Soviet Jews. Russia’s opposition thinks repealing Jackson-Vanik-a top priority for President Obama-will deny Putin “a very useful tool” for his “anti-American propaganda machine…helping him to depict the United States as hostile to Russia using outdated Cold War tools to undermine Russia’s international competitiveness,” while Putin and his allies want the lower tariffs and other perks PNTR provides.
But most media coverage failed to capture the most significant position included in the opposition’s statement: they indicate their support for “smarter” sanctions such as the Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act to replace JV. In order for one antiquated law to be taken off the books, they are asking for a more modern one to take its place: legislation meant to promote human rights in Russia that is named for the anti-corruption lawyer who died in a Russian prison two years ago after being denied medical care. More importantly, the new legislation specifically targets individual bureaucrats who have been accused of human rights abuses and corruption in a high effective manner, leaving all other normal Russian citizens the full
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
Echoes of 1970s Debate Resurface Over Current Russia Trade Bill
History is sometimes cyclical.
In 1974, Congress was debating the Jackson-Vanik amendment that would restrict most-favored-nation treatment to the Soviet Union and tie trade relaxation to Soviet willingness to allow Jewish emigration to Israel. The leader of this fight was the late Senator Henry Martin Jackson of Washington, a paragon of friendship to Israel and the Jewish people.
Secretary of State Henry Kissinger led the fight against the amendment, claiming that the Soviet Union would view it as intervention into its internal affairs and that as a proud superpower, it would only stiffen its position on Jewish emigration; therefore, quiet diplomacy was the preferred tactic.
In the congressional hearings, American businesses and particularly the Business Roundtable, lobbied strongly against the amendment. It was 1973 and the US economy was reeling due to the aftereffects of a costly Vietnam War and the hike in oil prices following the Yom Kippur war.
It was important for American business to trade with the Soviet Union at a time that the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries were massively buying Western goods and technology in the hope of jumpstarting their economies. The Jackson-Vanik amendment would effectively close the door to American business and make sure that the Europeans would have the Russian market to themselves.
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
The Right Way to Sanction Russia
On Thursday, the U.S. Senate will hold a hearing to discuss the accession of Russia to the World Trade Organization and the repeal of the Jackson-Vanik amendment that impedes American trade relations with Russia. The Obama administration has portrayed it as little more than overdue Cold War housekeeping while touting the imagined economic benefits for American farmers that could result from freer trade with Russia.
But the reality on the ground in today’s authoritarian Russia is far more complex. We support the repeal, both as leaders of the pro-democracy opposition in Russia and as Russian citizens who want our nation to join the modern global economy. It is essential, however, to see the bigger picture of which Jackson-Vanik is a part.
The “election” of Vladimir Putin to the presidency is over, but the fight for democracy in Russia is just beginning. At both major opposition meetings following the fraudulent March 4 election, we publicly resolved that Mr. Putin is not the legitimate leader of Russia. The protests will not cease and we will continue to organize and prepare for a near future without Mr. Putin in the presidency. Getting rid of him and his cronies is a job for Russians, and we do not ask for foreign intervention. We do, however, ask that the U.S. and other leading nations of the Free World cease to provide democratic credentials to Mr. Putin. This is why symbols matter, and why Jackson-Vanik still matters.
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
Russia: Who is Challenging Power?
The rain was pouring down on a crowd of thousands of people who gathered at Chiysty Prudy on December 5th during an unprecedented rally in Russian history for its scope and scale. For the first time since the early 1990s, protesters challenged Putin’s power as his new rule as President could enable him to stay in power until 2024. The number of demonstrators in street rallies has grown approximately to 100,000. Mostly political activists, professionals and intellectuals expressed their dissent as a result of alleged falsifications during latest parliamentary elections, though suspected frauds were only the last trigger. Since he took power in 1999, it seems that Putin has not changed his politics: a Leviathan’s deal of order over democracy. Meanwhile, many Russians have changed.
Read More →
- Facebook
- Twitter
- Google Buzz
- LinkedIn
- del.icio.us
- Google Bookmarks
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Tumblr
- StumbleUpon
- FriendFeed
- NewsVine
- Digg
