Russian President Vladimir Putin’s pardon of the former owner of Yukos Oil Co, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and his declaration of an amnesty that has freed Greenpeace activists and two members of the punk rock group Pussy Riot are welcome gestures. However, that is all they are: gestures.
Putin was most likely motivated, above all, by a desire to ensure the success of the upcoming Winter Olympic Games in Sochi. It is also likely that Putin sought to show the world a kinder, gentler face in an effort to consolidate victory in his tug of war with the EU over Ukraine.
However, although freeing a few people who were unjustly imprisoned for long periods is significant, it should not obscure the Russian government’s ongoing major human rights violations at home and abroad. And here, little seems likely to change. Khodorkovsky’s pardon does not look like the start of a Putin thaw.
For example, within the Russian Federation, a law that entered into force just over one year ago requires nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that engage in “political activities” to register as “foreign agents” if they receive any funding from abroad. The law defines political activities as actions intended to influence government policies; therefore, they include the work of all human rights organizations operating in Russia. Because registering as foreign agents would be to identify themselves as the equivalent of spies, few organizations have done so.
Yet many NGOs in Russia can survive only with foreign support. Potential domestic donors fear that they could suffer the same fate as Khodorkovsky, who was the leading Russian supporter of human rights groups until Putin imprisoned him for more than 10 years. Some Russian human rights organizations have been raided or shut down. The law gives Russian authorities discretion to close, whenever they choose, every significant organization promoting human rights.
Internationally, Russia is the mainstay of Syrian President Bashir al-Assad’s brutal regime. Russia’s diplomatic, financial and military support has ensured that al-Assad remains in power, despite his government’s horrifying violence against Syria’s people.
Western governments are understandably reluctant to provide lethal aid for al-Assad’s opponents, given the large number of jihadists among them, and because important elements of the opposition have themselves committed severe abuses. Russia has no such inhibitions.
The al-Assad regime’s indiscriminate attacks have forcibly displaced, injured or killed millions of noncombatants. It is Russia’s role as a veto-wielding permanent member of the UN Security Council that has made it impossible to establish a tribunal to hold accountable those on all sides who commit war crimes and crimes against humanity, or to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court. By providing steadfast support to the al-Assad regime and blocking measures that would bring war criminals to justice, Putin shares with al-Assad culpability for the largest-scale atrocities in the world today.
It may seem to some that a forceful leader like Putin and a powerful state like Russia are impervious to pressure to respect human and legal rights. More than any other political leader today, Putin seems to embody the characteristics of the “sultanist” leader described by the German social scientist Max Weber one century ago. To the sultanist, the state and its functions become “purely personal instruments of the master.” A figure like Khodorkovsky is imprisoned when Putin decides he should be imprisoned. And he is released when Putin decides he should be released.
Yet Putin’s recent actions make it clear that even a sultan must periodically make certain concessions. Of course, it will not be so easy to secure policy changes on matters that are more important to Putin than the freedom of a few people who have irritated him. However, the task is not hopeless, as the run-up to the Olympics has shown. Even someone as sure of himself and his power as Putin becomes susceptible to the pressure of international public opinion as soon as he seeks its approval.
Aryeh Neier is president emeritus of the Open Society Foundations and a founder of Human Rights Watch.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry