|

|
 |
|
Opinion-editorials decyphered - 27 September 2005
The Khodorkovski case and some Cold War habits
Decyphering
The appeal processes of deposed oligarchs Mijaíl Khodorkovski (ex president and general manager of Yukos) and Platon Lebedev (ex president and general manager of Menatep) began on September 14 in Russia and have been the targets of procedural struggles. Their defense attorneys have accused the Russian justice of speeding up the processes so that lawyers have no time to work on the files. On the other hand, district attorneys have accused the defense attorneys of obstructing the course of justice. However, what has been at risk here is the day of the verdict. Mijail Khodorkovski has launched his nomination for Moscow’s partial legislative elections despite being in jail. The Russian justice had sentenced him at a lower court, along with Platon Lebedev, to nine years in prison for fraud and tax evasion. But the Russian Law allows convicts to be nominated if the appeal has not been presented. The elections Mijaíl Khodorkovski was nominated to will be held on December 4. But the candidacy will only be valid if the sentence is not given before the deadline for candidacy registrations in October.
Mijaíl Khodorkovski’s lawyers, therefore, are doing their best to gain time. His principal lawyer, Guenrikh Padva, has been hospitalized and the defense has asked for an extension. The court, then, told the defendant to find another lawyer but he has rejected this demand. Before this, the defense had already stated its client could only meet with his lawyers after the quarantine. The administration of the Russian penitentiary affirmed he had been exposed to a serious infection spread by another inmate.
Both parties’ procedural maneuvers have pushed justice into the background. However, the ex oligarch’s defense is not fighting here. Canadian lawyer Robert R. Amsterdam, member of Khodorkovski’s defense team, told German journal Der Spiegel in an interview that the Russian justice is nothing but an institution at the service of the Russian power whose integrity should not be considered. He also admitted his client was completely sure he’d lose the appeal and try to gain time. In view of the image of the justice in Russia, the lawyer focuses no longer on judicial matters but on political ones. For him, his client is the only opposition to President Putin. He presents Russian opposition parties as clients of the Kremlin whose job is to sell Putin’s idea of pluralism to a Vladimir Putin’s closed system. He also announced that his client will carry out a surprising action against the government very soon but nobody says anything. The thing is: if the judicial order is unfair and the Russian democratic system is an illusion, what field could be chosen by the deposed oligarch to destabilize the Kremlin?
Whatever the case is, for Western Atlantists the issue is quite clear: whichever his faults may be, Khodorkhovski is the victim of an unfair judicial treatment and his process shows how authoritarian Moscow’s power is.
A reporter in Russia, author of many articles in the Anglo-Saxon press, editorialist Masha Gessen of the Bolshoi Gorod, has denounced the maneuvers of the power against Khodorkovski in the Moscow Times, a Russian journal in English. By talking about a survey made by the Levada Center in which Khodorkovski’s victory is anticipated, she regrets the publication of such results. For her, the Kremlin would do its best to prevent Khodorkovski’s presentation. But the situation is even more disturbing for, according to her, these are the last elections for the Duma in which people will have a ballot for a single candidate. Paradoxically, she believes that in an upcoming vote for several candidates there would be a democratic decline.
The presentation of these changes in voting as a direct way to authoritarianism is very common in the Atlantist media that attack Vladimir Putin’s political figure. However, such an argument is only applied to the Russian case because the system of voting based on a list is used in many democracies and its implementation in Iraq has been presented as a big step forwards by those who oppose its implementation in Russia.
French lawyer Patrick Klugman, a member of the Consultative Council of Jewish Organizations (CCJO) and SOS Racism, denounces in Le Monde the oligarch’s process by presenting it as an example of the current political situation in Russia and attacks the Russian justice. Even when he recognizes Khodorkovski’s crimes, he says Khodorkovski did not have a fair trial. We asks the international community to mobilize in favour of the multimillionaire and adopts a rhetoric similar to that of the supporters of the Soviet dissidents. It may be shocking that ithe very spokesman of issues related to anti-Semitism of the SOS Racism is giving his opinions because, above all, in his attacks with regard to the Khodorkovski case we see no references to an anti-Semitic attitude. However, the oligarch’s defense has tried to present quite often the judicial problems of his client as a sign of a Russian atavistic anti-Semitism. He doesn’t say anything about the issue, but Klugman’s functions, recalled by the French journal, lead people to think about this thesis without presenting them as explicit accusations, which are difficult to support.
This comparison between the current Russia and the USSR is also present in the forum that the editor in chief of the Carnegie Moscow Center, Masha Lipman, published in the Washington Post. Even when she still affirms that Vladimir Putin is very popular, she affirms he’s doing all his best to destroy the opposition that might emerge in the heart of the civil society. She denounces the creation of an assembly in charge of representing the NGOs before the government. As an evidence of the corruption of this institution she points out the nomination of a person that signed a petition against... Mijaíl Khodorkovski.
As we can see, it’s very difficult to eliminate the heritage of the Cold War in the western media. The totalitarian USSR and Vladimir Putin’s Russia could not be compared. And no comparison should be made either between the dissidents sent to gulag and an oligarch sentenced for tax evasion after having plundered his country.
The Khodorkovski case is not the first example of what we have said. When a European leader meets with his Russian counterpart, the western press wonders if they’ll talk about human rights. But, when the meeting is between American and European leaders, the Western press wonders if they’re going to strengthen the ties between both sides of the Atlantic. Even when the Cold War is officially over, it’s still alive in the people’s minds.
The viewpoint of the Arab press is completely different. In these countries, Russia is not seen as the descendant of the USSR or the threatening ogre, but as the successor of the Soviet ally against the American-Israeli imperialism. Therefore, in view of the reorganization of the Middle East orchestrated by Washington, the Russian aid is expected.
In January 2005, journalist Walid Abou Morshed of the Asharqalawsat, , explained this in a perfect way. According to him, the current weakness of the Arab world before the Bush Administration is the consequence of Russia’s weakness. He urged Moscow to pay more attention to the region and welcomed the delivery of Russian missiles to Syria.
Voltaire Network
|
 |
|

27 September 2005
From
Lille (France)
Tools

Print
Send
All the versions of this article:

français
Español
русский
Countries
Russia
Themes
New Cold War: the Anti-Russian Strategy
Mafia and organised crime
Authors and Sources of Op-Eds Decyphered
|
 |
“We are completely sure we will lose the appeal”
Author
Robert R. Amsterdam

 |
 |
Robert R. Amsterdam is a member of the Toronto-based Legal Adviser’s Office Amsterdam & Peroff. He denounced in April the “complicity of Gerhard Schroeder”, who was indirectly involved “in a robbery made by the Russian State″. He also stated that “the FSB was an anti-Semitic machine”.
|
Source
Der Spiegel (Germany)
Reference “Wir werden die Berufung hundertprozentig verlieren″, by Robert R. Amsterdam, Der Spiegel, September 14, 2005. Text adapted from an interview.
Summary Michael Khodorkovski shares a cell with other 15 prisoners. It is a difficult situation, especially after the week-long hunger strike, which recently finished. His life is not endangered but it is about something serious, especially because after the hunger strike he no longer received foodstuff from his family. Food quality in prison is as terrible as the conditions of its buildings.
The conditions in which prisoners are held is worthy of the Third World. Most of the prisoners smoke and he does not. Smoke remains in the cell. As a lawyer I am committed and I cannot tell them anything about the financial situation of Khodorkovski; the fees required by the process are very high and the government tries to ruin that.
After the sentence we filed the appeal. That is why he has the possibility of standing for the legislative elections, because he has not been sentenced. If he is sentenced on appeal, then it would be impossible. Therefore, he will try to put himself forward as a candidate but the Kremlin will try to prevent him from doing that, which is conflicting to the law. The appeal process will start on September 14 and will last 3 or 4 days. We are convinced we are going to lose. He will be then sentenced and no longer be a candidate.
We are not ready. We have not had enough time to prepare ourselves. Given the importance of the investigation, we should have had months to prepare ourselves. However, we only have a few weeks in our favour. No one can read the file thoroughly. This is valid for the court and the lawyers.
There is also a supreme authority, but we are not sure whether our request will be accepted, but anyway, this will not affect his electoral projects. The sentence will be enforced immediately this week. When we announced his candidacy, we did not think things were going to turn out like this. We were not expecting the date to be September 14. We did not withdraw the candidacy. Even when Khodorkovski were unable to participate, he would represent a strong opposition, contrary to multiple and false small opposition parties in Russia that have been created by the Kremlin to pretend a real opposition.
We have other plans of which I cannot say anything, otherwise those who oppose our project will be informed. They will be as surprised as yourselves. All I can say is that we are determined to appeal. We also want to appear before the Human Rights Supreme Court of Strasbourg. Michael Khodorkovski will not give up and you will hear of him again soon.

“Moving the Goalposts for Khodorkovski”
Author
Masha Gessen

 |
 |
Correspondent in Russia for The New Republic, New Statesman, US News & World Report and Granta, Masha Gessen is deputy editor in chief for the Russian weekly Bolshoi Gorod.
|
Source
Moscow Times (Russia)
Reference “Moving the Goalposts for Khodorkovski″, by Masha Gessen, Moscow Times, September 15, 2005.
Summary I felt disappointed about the publication of the survey results conducted in the district of Moscow University. The said poll indicated that 28% of the voters had stated they were willing to vote for Michael Khodorkovski. This situation was supposed to make me happy about the candidate and this constituency. This is the case, but I regret the results were published. In fact, the government will strengthen its efforts from now on to prevent Michael Khodorkovski from standing for candidacy.
On September 2, the Electoral Central Committee decided to hold the elections on December 4. Since Michael Khodorkovski was waiting for the appeal of his trial and given the fact that a convicted person could stand for elections as long as his appeal has not been processed, it was obvious that he could do that. Actually, an appeal process usually takes several months, but once the election date was fixed, the Russian justice advanced the trial date, thus breaking the law. This maneuver was aimed at preventing Michael Khodorkovski to stand for elections.
This election is much more important since it will be the last time that people vote for a candidate for the Duma. After that, it will be just a count based on the list. In this last election, we are witnessing the struggle of the enormous state machinery to prevent a candidate from winning.

“Defending Michael Khodorkovski”
Author
Patrick Klugman
Source
Le Monde (France)
Reference “En défense de Mikhail Khodorkovski″ by Patrick Klugman, Le Monde, September 13, 2005.
Summary On September 14, Michael Kodorkovski appealed his 9-year sentence in prison. It was not a surprise that the Russian press, controlled by the government, expressed its satisfaction for such a sentence to satisfy an irritated opinion. It is a pity that in France and Europe the matter has been silenced. It is true that it would have been easier to defend a personality less wealthy and honest than Michael Khodorkovski, but if democracy in Russia is to be safeguarded, this man has to be defended. There cannot be a distinction between “good” and “bad people”, and create a selective outrage.
It is true that he acquired his company as a result of a shocking liquidation of the properties of the Russian state, financed the first War of Chechnya and fraudulently evaded his creditors to escape from the 1998 crisis. However, he has to be defended because he was sentenced in an unfair trial, without legal justification and motivated by political reasons. All the international observers mentioned the abuses in this case: withdrawal of defense witnesses, others were sent to prison, raids in defense cabinets. There was never any evidence regarding his membership in a criminal organization, neither fraudulent fiscal setups undertaken mostly by companies close to power without paying much attention to it. He also has to be defended because we are witnesses of the major state plundering, which has enabled the government to regain control of the main national oil production. Finally, Khodorkovski has to be defended because he is a political prisoner whose real “crime” was to finance political groups against Vladimir Putin.
While Michael Khodorkovski has a dark side, we should not forget his glorious face. He could have been a multimillionaire in the exile, but he chose to be a political prisoner who, from his prison cell writes about the problems of liberalism in Russia. Today there is a new reality in Russia. There, supporting Khodorkovski means opposing Putin. It may always be considered that he is not Mandela, that his cell is not a gulag at all, and Putin, in the escalation of accepted criticisms, is after George W. Bush, but that does not hide the fact that his arrest is unfair. Putin’s Russia is a state that rigs the electoral votes in Ukraine and wages an unjust war in Chechnya. The same justice that sentences Khodorkovski releases Captain Eduard Ulman, who, with his men, shot down six Chechen civilians.
The cessation of the authoritarian drift in Russia depends a great deal upon Khodorkovsk’s future. Regarding this issue, it would be a paradox to remain doubtful in Paris, when from Gary Kasparov to Helena Bonner, no one has doubts in Moscow.

“Putin’s Chosen Public”
Author
Masha Lipman

 |
 |
Editorialist associated to the Washington Post and expert of the Project Syndicate, Masha Lipman is editor-in-chief of Pros and Cons – a political magazine published by the Carnegie Moscow Center.
|
Source
Washington Post (United States)
Reference ”Putin’s Chosen ’Public’”, by Masha Lipman, Washington Post, September 16, 2005.
Summary Last week Vladimir Putin could be watched on all Russian T.V. screens. Such omnipresence made him clearly appear as a man interested in re-election. This has led an increasing number of commentators to wonder whether he will stay in power after 2008, once completed his second and last term of office as President.
Some political leaders have suggested lifting the constitutional restrictions for a third term in office. However, two years and a half before the next elections in Russia, the Kremlin is still undecided about the means to preserve the political status quo. The control of Parliament and the media by the Kremlin gives Putin a lot of leeway. His rate of support in Russia is also a good guarantee. It is true that the Kremlin is concerned about the youth movements opposing it but such movements count on very little support. And with permanently increasing oil prices, the Kremlin has all the advantage. However, the Kremlin distrusts civic activism.
To counteract what seemed to be a threat, the Kremlin decided to create the “Public Chamber”. This institution is described as “the means through which the civil society and the citizens of the Russian Federation can influence the government’s decisions”. The people that will make it up will be appointed by the Kremlin. One of them is a signatory of the request of indictment against Michael Kodorkovski. Putin accepts opinions as long as they agree with his own.

“Russia, the Arabs... and the lost hope”
Author
Walid Abou Morshed

 |
 |
Walid Abou Morshed is researcher, writer and journalist in the Asharqalawsat daily.
|
Source
Asharqalawsat
Reference ”روسيا والعرب...والأمل المفقود ”, by Walid Abou Morshed, Asharqalawsat, January 27, 2005.
Summary Non-Soviet Russia’s internal problems stop it from playing a more effective role in the international arena. This in turn has enabled the U.S. to come off with its unipolar dominance. Syrian President Bachar El Assad was right when he urged Vladimir Putin to pay more attention to the Middle East, mainly because Arab-Soviet relations were at their best in the past. On the other hand, the strategic equation used to be just another one: The Arab World and the Soviet Union vs. Israel and the U.S.
The weakness of the Arab-Soviet “pole” is not due to Israel’s strength but to the lack of balance that features the roles played by each opponent, Soviets and Americans, in that strategic equation, the U.S. factor prevailing over the soviet one. That way and throughout history, the U.S. has equipped Israel with every needed element in its conflict with the Arab world.
It is evident that this disparity in the Arab-Israeli confrontation, which began in the 1960’s till the collapse of the Soviet Union, is the result of various circumstances. First of all, and most probably that of Israel’s ability to influence U.S. political decisions through an effective and well organized lobby, while the Arabs had to cope with Moscow’s hermetic regime. Likewise, Washington’s and Moscow’s strategic calculations could have well established the difference.
But, what’s the change that took place in Russia and encouraged Syria, for example, to ask for the most sophisticated Russian rockets? The fact is, given the situation in both Chechnya and the international arena, that the establishment of Arab-Soviet relations is no longer a choice but a must.

|
|
|
 |
 |
Information base about the 9/11th attacks
Information base about Gulf wars
|
 |