Subjecting criminal suspects to torture during interrogation and parading these actions is frequently seen in China, and now, after the terror attack at Crocus City Hall in Moscow, we are seeing the same thing happening in Russia. The message: State terrorism is legal.
Russian media reported that Russian security forces cut off the ears of the terror suspects during their interrogation, which included other brutal methods such as electrocuting their genitals. This was called “prevention measures” by Russian state media, who broadcast the images and videos.
Who orchestrated all of this? In the regime of Russian President Vladimir Putin it is clear that no individual or institution could take independent decisions and measures on such a sensitive issue. The deaths of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, Wagner Group head Yevgeny Prigozhin and many others show that today Russia means Putin and Putin means Russia. Putin is the sole conductor.
Putin might be trying to console the relatives of those killed in the attack and ease their anger, but he is also sending a message to his open and secret enemies and showing off his nationalist spirit. The broadcasted images showed that the state has adopted terror against terror and has descended morally to the level of state terrorism. At the same time, it rejects the theory that terrorism is inexcusable.
The difference between the state and the pirate gang when punishing the enemy is that the punishment by the state is usually carried out within the legal order and in accordance with norms. The democratic system reflects not only the will of the majority, but also the protection of minority rights. The greatness of a country is expressed not by daily events, but by not deviating from the law even when dealing with sudden and complicated incidents.
For a statesman, parading torture reflects mental instability. Putin’s mental instability was revealed when he percieved a tip-off from the US about a potential terrorist attack on Moscow as a provocation. After ISIS-K took responsibility for the attack, Putin held Ukraine responsible for the incident.
The source of Putin’s instability might be in the harshness of the Moscow attack; it could be because he failed to successfully decapitate the Ukrainian government despite throwing everything Russia has into a war for three years; it might be the result of the bombs he dropped to protect Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime for 10 years or the pride of his victory in occupying Crimea. Whatever the source, the harm and danger of this mental imbalance is evident.
This latest example of lawlessness from a dictatorial regime could easily encourage other regimes to engage in more brutal actions. Three years ago, Chinese media broadcast on television former Uyghur Regional Education Department director Sattar Sawut and former Regional Political and Legal Affairs Committee deputy secretary Shirzat Bawudun crying and asking for forgiveness for the “criminal” act of separatism. Next time, China might show the torture scenes that preceded their pleading.
One day Saudi Arabia’s Prince Bin Salman might proudly announce that his security forces assassinated and dismembered journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the consulate in Istanbul.
More importantly, this is the instability of the leader of a country with nuclear weapons. This is the imbalance of a leader who declares war, holds grudges and threatens neighbors. Therefore, this imbalance must be felt as soon as possible, it must be announced to other parties that it is felt, and most importantly, this imbalance must be stopped by drawing the necessary lessons. Otherwise, the damage of this imbalance would not remain limited to Ukraine.
Kok Bayraq is a Uighur-American observer.
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Chinese social media influencer “Yaya in Taiwan” (亞亞在台灣), whose real name is Liu Zhenya (劉振亞), made statements advocating for “reunifying Taiwan [with China] through military force.” After verifying that Liu did indeed make such statements, the National Immigration Agency revoked her dependency-based residency permit. She must now either leave the country voluntarily or be deported. Operating your own page and becoming an influencer require a certain amount of support and user traffic. You must successfully gain approval for your views and attract an audience. Although Liu must leave the country, I cannot help but wonder how many more “Yayas” are still
Earlier signs suggest that US President Donald Trump’s policy on Taiwan is set to move in a more resolute direction, as his administration begins to take a tougher approach toward America’s main challenger at the global level, China. Despite its deepening economic woes, China continues to flex its muscles, including conducting provocative military drills off Taiwan, Australia and Vietnam recently. A recent Trump-signed memorandum on America’s investment policy was more about the China threat than about anything else. Singling out the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as a foreign adversary directing investments in American companies to obtain cutting-edge technologies, it said
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
RSS