Politics
Putin to return to power with damaged credibility and legitimacy
Reading Time: 7 minutesIn May 2011 we argued for a modest advance in Russian democracy, namely that both Medvedev and Putin should stand as candidates to offer a modicum of choice between, roughly speaking, modernisation versus continuity. For Putin alone to stand would be disrespectful towards the Russian people.
Putin’s faltering return
In May 2011 we argued for a modest advance in Russian democracy, namely that both Medvedev and Putin should stand as candidates to offer a modicum of choice between, roughly speaking, modernisation versus continuity. For Putin alone to stand would be disrespectful towards the Russian people. And so it comes to pass for the 4th of March. The two leaders decided that just Putin should stand, and so many people are deeply offended, expressing this through very peaceful street demonstrations led by the new middle classes (for some a ‘mink-coated revolution’), and above all through modern social network communications.
The de facto manifesto of the new opposition is being laid out in a series interviews posted on the internet between Boris Akunin, a fiction writer and democratic activist, and Aleksey Navalny, a lawyer who made his name initially as an anti-corruption fighter. Navalny is the leader, a highly articulate and charismatic speaker. Here is the authentic language of the contest. Navalny argues (http://www.opendemocracy.net/print/63649): “The ‘Let’s Screw Putin’ movement – that’s our main task, all the rest is a waste of resources – needs to reduce his rating to 30% around the country and 15-25% in the larger cities and so destroy his real support base. It’s a completely achievable aim, given even the official election results for United Russia in the big cities. We have the mechanisms to do this, and the activists as well – we have 100,000 out there, we just need to sort out our campaigning infrastructure and come up with creative and persuasive ways to get our message across.
“The main thing is that we don’t have to lie to people. We can get through to them simply by telling them the plain facts about Putin, his billionaire friends, FSB generals whose children suddenly all turned up working for state banks. The slogan ‘United Russia is the Party of Crooks and Thieves’ has stuck not thanks to some kind of technology, but because it’s the truth”.
“Those 100,000 people are both a campaign headquarters, and a perfect propaganda machine, capable of spreading necessary information to scores of millions of their fellow-citizens in a very short time. Every member of this many-thousand Machine needs to talk to ten people they know, send emails, put information on social networks. That’s all we need”.
Putin for his part was evidently knocked off balance by this movement. He booted out of the Kremlin his main ‘political technologist’, Vladislav Surkov, while refusing an invitation to a TV debate with other candidates. His spokesman said he was too busy.
Then Putin countered with a lengthy article in Izvestia on 16 January, with arguments about the merits of political stability and his own achievements in rescuing Russia from the chaos of the Yeltsin period. “In today’s world stability is an asset that can only be earned by hard work and with openness to change and readiness for imminent, deliberate and calculated reform. The recurring problem in Russia’s history is the aspiration of the elites for a leap, a revolution instead of gradual developments. Russia’s experience – as well as the experience of the entire world – shows the destructiveness of historical leaps, of overthrowing in haste without creating”. About the hazards of revolution he has a point.
He concluded his article with: “And here I would like again to say why I have agreed to run for the post of President of Russia in 2012. I do not want, and will not, belittle anyone’s achievements in establishing our new country. There were many. But the facts remain that in 1999, when I became prime minister and later President, our country was in a deep and systemic crisis. And it is a group of like-minded people – which the author of these lines was to form and lead, supported by an absolute majority of citizens and national unity around common goals – which led Russia out of the impasse of Civil War, which broke the back of terrorism, restored territorial integrity and constitutional order, which revived the economy, and ensured during ten years that Russia had one of the world’s highest economic growth rates as well as rising incomes”.
Navalny will not however be a candidate for the Presidency, since he has not had time to organise the 2 million signatures required. On the other hand Mikhail Prokhorov, Russia’s richest oligarch, seems able to do so, with many hired hands collecting signatures in shopping districts and metro stations. At first sight the youthful and imposing (2 metres tall) figure of Prokhorov might be seen as standing for modernity and change. But in reality he is just a Kremlin stooge, supplying a front for those wishing to say there is political competition, whereas he has not chance of success. In mid-January he shared a TV duel with Gennady Zyuganov, the veteran leader of the Communist Party. Prokhorov’s political debating skills were dismal, even compared to the worn out, long playing gramaphone record of Zyuganov.
Puin’s second major contribution to public debate came in a lengthy article in Nezavisamaya Gazeta on 23 January, entirely devoted to the issue of ethnicity and multiculturalism. Putin’s argument is that while unnamed European politicians (obviously Merkel and Sarkozy amongst others) have been playing the ethnic card to stay in office with ‘multiculturalism has failed’, Russia will by contrast ‘strengthen the historical state that we inherited from our ancestors, the civilisation that is blessed with an inherent ability to integrate various ethnicities and faiths’. Leaving aside the dubious receptivity of this speech in today’s Northern Caucasus, its main target seems to be the extreme ‘Russia for Russians’ nationalist factions in the country’s heartland, noticing also the uneasy cohabitation between nationalist and liberal-democratic elements among Navalny’s demonstrators.
This is all about domestic politics. The main foreign policy proposition so far was presented by Putin in an article in Izvestia on 4 October 2011, where he launched the idea of a Eurasian Union. This would renew the integration of as many as possible states of the former USSR, but would not amount according to Putin to recreating the USSR, since the mechanisms of communist command and control have obviously gone for ever. Well yes, obviously. But still the meetings of heads of state of these former Soviet republics is not a happy sight. Lukashenko and Karimov are dictators of international pariah status, with Aliev catching up on them. Yanukovich reverts increasingly to Putin-style authoritarianism, and there are no recognisable democratic leaders among the rest. Putin resumes Russia’s geo-political pressurising of Ukraine through gas pipeline geo-politics, announcing agreement with Turkey to go ahead with a hugley expensive South Stream pipeline across the Black Sea, which only makes sense as a bluff to threaten Ukraine with loss of gas transit income. He pressurises Ukraine into joining the customs union of Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan, which would mean dropping Ukraine’s free trade agreement with the EU that is awaiting signature.
A second manifestation of current Russian foreign policy is its stance over Syria. This has been symbolised by the recent visit to Russia’s Syrian naval base of its only aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov. Russian TV portrayed it as a demonstration of solidarity with the regime of Bashar al-Assad in the face of Western pressures. The Syrian defence minister visited the ship, appreciating the show of solidarity. This crude geo-political posturing may have been intended to help Putin’s re-election, but also portrays the most bizarre international image at a time when the Arab League wants to get rid of Assad. At the level of foreign policy norms, Russia is standing the UN doctrine of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) on its head, to protect not the people but repressive authoritarian regimes. As damaged limitation diplomacy, its latest move is to volunteer to between Syrian authorities and opposition, which the latter rejects.
What would Mr Navalny have to say on Russian foreign policy? Boris Akunin tackled him about this indirectly, “The main reason for [my] mistrust is your allegiance to Russian nationalism… Are you sorry that the USSR is no longer in existence?”
Navalny replies: “Everybody wants their country to be bigger, richer, stronger. That’s perfectly normal, and it’s what I want as well. …. The USSR was destroyed not by external forces, but by the Communist Party, the State Planning Committee and the Soviet political elite. … That is historical fact. Another fact is that the core and foundation of the Russian empire and the USSR was our country – Russia. And Russia remains, both economically and militarily, the dominant state of the region. Our task is to preserve and build on that. … We should not deliberately be making plans for any expansion; our task is to become strong ad rich ourselves, and then our neighbours will be part of our zone of influence; they won’t have any option.” But beyond this Navalny has shown no real interest in foreign affairs.
And what should the EU be saying about all this, bearing in mind its declared objective of democracy promotion in the world at large? EU policy towards Russia in this context is easy to define and execute perfectly. Do nothing. Just leave the Russians to make up their own minds. Putin is already trying to rally all loyal Russians to his support by decrying foreign plots. Michael McFaul, a respected democracy promotion academic before joining the Obama team in Washington, and now the new US ambassador is Moscow, already fits the plot perfectly. No need to add to it. The virus of demands for clean democracy seems to develop quite strongly all by itself, with the demonstration planned for 4 February aiming at getting 100,000 people together on the streets of Moscow. With this Putin cannot compete. His attempted counter-demonstration last week in Ekaterinburg flopped, even with busloads of people from nearby towns reportedly bribed with organised visits to IKEA and Metro shopping malls on the way back.
Still Putin’s re-election seems a safe bet, given that the other candidates are either unable to stand (Yavlinsky and Navalny), or are just ageing court jesters (Zyuganov and Zhirinovsky), or are Kremlin stooges (Prokhorov). However the credibility and legitimacy of Putin’s leadership has been damaged for his return to power; how seriously remains to be seen. The idea of his return for two terms has been erased for sure. In the meantime it is for the new momentum of ideas and people to take a real political shape, which is not yet the case, and is a task for years not weeks or months.
A new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred in the headlines of worldwide football news yesterday. The Football Club Sheriff Tiraspol claimed a win with the score 2-1 against Real Madrid on the Santiago Bernabeu Stadium in Madrid. That made Sheriff Tiraspol the leader in Group D of the Champions League, including the football club in the groups of the most important European interclub competition for the first time ever.
International media outlets called it a miracle, a shock and a historic event, while strongly emphasizing the origin of the team and the existing political conflict between the two banks of the Dniester. “Football club from a pro-Russian separatist enclave in Moldova pulls off one of the greatest upsets in Champions League history,” claimed the news portals. “Sheriff crushed Real!” they said.
Moldovans made a big fuss out of it on social media, splitting into two groups: those who praised the team and the Republic of Moldova for making history and those who declared that the football club and their merits belong to Transnistria – a problematic breakaway region that claims to be a separate country.
Both groups are right and not right at the same time, as there is a bunch of ethical, political, social and practical matters that need to be considered.
Is it Moldova?
First of all, every Moldovan either from the right or left bank of Dniester (Transnistria) is free to identify himself with this achievement or not to do so, said Vitalie Spranceana, a sociologist, blogger, journalist and urban activist. According to him, boycotting the football club for being a separatist team is wrong.
At the same time, “it’s an illusion to think that territory matters when it comes to football clubs,” Spranceana claimed. “Big teams, the ones included in the Champions League, have long lost their connection both with the countries in which they operate, and with the cities in which they appeared and to which they linked their history. […] In the age of globalized commercial football, teams, including the so-called local ones, are nothing more than global traveling commercial circuses, incidentally linked to cities, but more closely linked to all sorts of dirty, semi-dirty and cleaner cash flows.”
What is more important in this case is the consistency, not so much of citizens, as of politicians from the government who have “no right to celebrate the success of separatism,” as they represent “the national interests, not the personal or collective pleasures of certain segments of the population,” believes the political expert Dionis Cenusa. The victory of FC Sheriff encourages Transnistrian separatism, which receives validation now, he also stated.
“I don’t know how it happens that the “proud Moldovans who chose democracy”, in their enthusiasm for Sheriff Tiraspol’s victory over Real Madrid, forget the need for total and unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops from Transnistria!” declared the journalist Vitalie Ciobanu.
Nowadays, FC Sheriff Tiraspol has no other choice than to represent Moldova internationally. For many years, the team used the Moldovan Football Federation in order to be able to participate in championships, including international ones. That is because the region remains unrecognised by the international community. However, the club’s victory is presented as that of Transnistria within the region, without any reference to the Republic of Moldova, its separatist character being applied in this case especially.
Is it a victory?
In fact, FC Sheriff Tiraspol joining the Champions League is a huge image breakthrough for the Transnistrian region, as the journalist Madalin Necsutu claimed. It is the success of the Tiraspol Club oligarchic patrons. From the practical point of view, FC Sheriff Tiraspol is a sports entity that serves its own interests and the interests of its owners, being dependent on the money invested by Tiraspol (but not only) oligarchs.
Here comes the real dilemma: the Transnistrian team, which is generously funded by money received from corruption schemes and money laundering, is waging an unequal fight with the rest of the Moldovan football clubs, the journalist also declared. The Tiraspol team is about to raise 15.6 million euro for reaching the Champions League groups and the amounts increase depending on their future performance. According to Necsutu, these money will go directly on the account of the club, not to the Moldovan Football Federation, creating an even bigger gab between FC Sheriff and other football clubs from Moldova who have much more modest financial possibilities.
“I do not see anything useful for Moldovan football, not a single Moldovan player is part of FC Sheriff Tiraspol. I do not see anything beneficial for the Moldovan Football Federation or any national team.”
Is it only about football?
FC Sheriff Tiraspol, with a total estimated value of 12.8 million euros, is controlled by Victor Gusan and Ilya Kazmala, being part of Sheriff Holding – a company that controls the trade of wholesale, retail food, fuels and medicine by having monopolies on these markets in Transnistria. The holding carries out car trading activities, but also operates in the field of construction and real estate. Gusan’s people also hold all of the main leadership offices in the breakaway region, from Parliament to the Prime Minister’s seat or the Presidency.
The football club is supported by a holding alleged of smuggling, corruption, money laundering and organised crime. Moldovan media outlets published investigations about the signals regarding the Sheriff’s holding involvement in the vote mobilization and remuneration of citizens on the left bank of the Dniester who participated in the snap parliamentary elections this summer and who were eager to vote for the pro-Russian socialist-communist bloc.
Considering the above, there is a great probability that the Republic of Moldova will still be represented by a football club that is not identified as being Moldovan, being funded from obscure money, growing in power and promoting the Transnistrian conflict in the future as well.
Photo: unknown
Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Natalia Gavrilita, together with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nicu Popescu, pay an official visit to Brussels, between September 27-28, being invited by High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell Fontelles.
Today, Prime Minister had a meeting with Charles Michel, President of the European Council. The Moldovan PM thanked the senior European official for the support of the institution in strengthening democratic processes, reforming the judiciary and state institutions, economic recovery and job creation, as well as increasing citizens’ welfare. Natalia Gavrilita expressed her confidence that the current visit laid the foundations for boosting relations between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union, so that, in the next period, it would be possible to advance high-level dialogues on security, justice and energy. Officials also exchanged views on priorities for the Eastern Partnership Summit, to be held in December.
“The EU is open to continue to support the Republic of Moldova and the ambitious reform agenda it proposes. Moldova is an important and priority partner for us,” said Charles Michel.
Prime Minister Natalia Gavrilita also met with Paolo Gentiloni, European Commissioner for Economy, expressing her gratitude for the support received through the OMNIBUS macro-financial assistance program. The two officials discussed the need to advance the recovery of money from bank fraud, to strengthen sustainable mechanisms for supporting small and medium-sized enterprises in Moldova, and to standardize the customs and taxes as one of the main conditions for deepening cooperation with the EU in this field.
Additionally, Prime Minister spoke about the importance of the Eastern Partnership and the Deep Free Trade Agreement, noting that the Government’s policies are aimed at developing an economic model aligned with the European economic model, focused on digitalization, energy efficiency and the green economy.
A common press release of the Moldovan Prime Minister with High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission, Josep Borrell Fontelles, took place today, where the agenda of Moldova’s reforms and the main priorities to focus on in the coming months were presented: judiciary reform; fighting COVID-19 pandemic; promoting economic recovery and conditions for growth and job creation; strengthening state institutions and resilience of the country.
“I am here to relaunch the dialogue between my country and the European Union. Our partnership is strong, but I believe there is room for even deeper cooperation and stronger political, economic and sectoral ties. I am convinced that this partnership is the key to the prosperity of our country and I hope that we will continue to strengthen cooperation.”
The Moldovan delegation met Didier Reynders, European Commissioner for Justice. Tomorrow, there are scheduled common meetings with Oliver Varhelyi, European Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement, Adina Valean, European Commissioner for Transport and Kadri Simson, European Commissioner for Energy.
Prime Minister will also attend a public event, along with Katarina Mathernova, Deputy Director-General for Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations.
Photo: gov.md
Politics
Promo-LEX about Maia Sandu’s UN speech: The president must insist on appointing a rapporteur to monitor the situation of human rights in Transnistria
The President of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, pays an official visit to New York, USA, between September 21-22. There, she participates in the work of the United Nations General Assembly. According to a press release of the President’s Office, the official will deliver a speech at the tribune of the United Nations.
In this context, the Promo-LEX Association suggested the president to request the appointment of a special rapporteur in order to monitor the situation of human rights in the Transnistrian region. According to Promo-LEX, the responsibility for human rights violations in the Transnistrian region arises as a result of the Russian Federation’s military, economic and political control over the Tiraspol regime.
“We consider it imperative to insist on the observance of the international commitments assumed by the Russian Federation regarding the withdrawal of the armed forces and ammunition from the territory of the country,” the representatives of Promo-LEX stated. They consider the speech before the UN an opportunity “to demand the observance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the Russian Federation with reference to this territory which is in its full control.”
“It is important to remember about the numerous cases of murder, torture, ill-treatment, forced enlistment in illegal military structures, the application of pseudo-justice in the Transnistrian region, all carried out under the tacit agreement of the Russian Federation. These findings stem from dozens of rulings and decisions issued by the European Court of Human Rights, which found that Russia is responsible for human rights violations in the region.”
The association representatives expressed their hope that the president of the country would give priority to issues related to the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region and would call on relevant international actors to contribute to guaranteeing fundamental human rights and freedoms throughout Moldova.
They asked Maia Sandu to insist on the observance of the obligation to evacuate the ammunition and the military units of the Russian Federation from the territory of the Republic of Moldova, to publicly support the need for the Russian Federation to implement the ECtHR rulings on human rights violations in the Transnistrian region, and to request the appointment of an UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur to monitor the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova.
**
The Promo-LEX Association concluded that 14 out of 25 actions planned within the National Action Plan for the years 2018–2022 concerning respecting human rights in Transnistria were not carried out by the responsible authorities.
The association expressed its concern and mentioned that there are a large number of delays in the planned results. “There is a lack of communication and coordination between the designated institutions, which do not yet have a common vision of interaction for the implementation of the plan.”
Promo-LEX requested the Government of the Republic of Moldova to re-assess the reported activities and to take urgent measures, “which would exclude superficial implementation of future activities and increase the level of accountability of the authorities.”
Photo: peacekeeping.un.org
“They are not needy, but they need help”. How Moldovan volunteers try to create a safe environment for the Ukrainian refugees
Reading Time: 3 minutesAt the Government’s ground floor, the phones ring constantly, the laptop screens never reach standby. In one...
#WorldForUkraine – a map that shows the magnitude of the world’s actions against Russian aggression
Reading Time: 2 minutesThe international community and volunteers from all over te world have launched #WorldForUkraine as a platform that...
How is Moldova managing the big influx of Ukrainian refugees? The authorities’ plan, explained
Reading Time: 3 minutesFrom 24th to 28th of February, 71 359 Ukrainian citizens entered the territory of Republic of Moldova....
Russia And Ukraine At The Beginning of 2022
Reading Time: 4 minutesThis opinion piece was written by Dr. Nicholas Dima. Dr. Dima was formerly a Professor of Geography and...
The man raising children on Nistru river
Reading Time: 7 minutesOn the Nistru, near the village of Varnița, a few colored pens with blue dots in the...
The village of the first astronomer in the Republic of Moldova
Reading Time: 5 minutesFrom eight in the morning till noon, every Thursday and Sunday, people lay their merchandise on the...
The prodigal son returns and turns his grandparents’ home in a tourist attraction on Nistru river
Reading Time: 7 minutesOn the road towards the school, a well-maintained rural house catches your eye, yellow stags painted on...
FC Sheriff Tiraspol victory: can national pride go hand in hand with political separatism?
Reading Time: 4 minutesA new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred...
Study// What is the reaction of authorities to journalistic investigations?
Reading Time: 3 minutes“People expect logical consequences when they see cases of undeclared assets, conflicts of interest, protectionism or proof...
Secretary General of CoE called on Moldova’s state institutions to avoid constitutional crisis. Politicians took it the way they wanted.
Reading Time: 3 minutesAt the beginning of this month, Speaker of Parliament, Zinaida Greceanii, sent a letter to Secretary General...