On Wednesday, the Russian State Duma passed a bill to counter the Magnitsky Act in its second reading. This version of the bill contains amendments that ban American citizens from adopting Russian children and expands measures against any country – not just the United States – that violates the rights of Russian citizens. In addition, it would ban NGOs financed by the U.S. that deal with political issues or present a “threat” to Russian interests from operating in Russia. The bill needed 226 votes to pass, and received 400 for, four against, and two abstentions.

In this blog post for Ekho Moskvy, journalist Anton Orekh questions whether this bill is not itself a threat to Russian interests.

Kind Putin Will Save the Children
By Anton Orekh
December 19, 2012
Ekho Moskvy

The story of the anti-Magnitsky law and its anti-child amendment has revealed not only the true faces of these deputies, but their real purposes as well. It is not as if we ever had any illusions about this collection of mandated citizens. It is just that these scoundrels really showed the full extent of their foolishness when they started retaliating against America by harassing our orphans and the disabled. But it is precisely because of their foolishness that we keep them.

What a clever move for our top leaders. America passes a law to protect itself from our swindlers and killers. We have nothing to respond to this law with! We are going to hide our swindlers and killers to the very end, and we have nothing to present to the Americans. But we really want to. You cannot just brush yourself off and move on. And then four hundred clowns burst into the arena and scoff, throwing about all manner of drivel and demonstrating the outrage of the state. This is how we declare the awesome position of our state, its unanimous patriotism and other crap.

But if the anti-Magnitsky law really is passed as it reads now, then the rest of the world is going to think that our country has turned into a wild territory filled with crazy humanoids with balalaikas. But we are not entirely apathetic about global public opinion. We love giving foreigners a good impression. And right at the moment that this parliamentary rapture reaches its climax, it is time for completely different people to come to the fore. Ones who say something like: we share your sense of worry and dismay; we understand your emotions and indignation. But let us not react to this so harshly; let us smooth out our language. We can give the Americans and our other enemies and enviers one more chance to redeem themselves. Putin, Medvedev, Matvienko and whichever other big fish can softly temper our position. They play good cop.

And on one hand, we show our people that our deputies do supposedly care about our children and the future of our country; we show the world how the representatives of our people practically unanimously express their ire and readiness to tear to shreds these treacherous Yanks, and on the other hand, we make a conciliatory gesture. They will say: look, we are holding this national anger in check, but this is not easy to do, because national anger is great and all-encompassing.

That is the role of our deputies. When we need them to turn into silent punch card machines that stamp documents without looking at any actual laws. When we need to display them as wild monkeys, jumping high in the air. Regardless, they will to be displayed as morons who only do what their leaders tell them. And that is why they are deputies. The question is: how did they wind up in our Duma?

Translation by theotherrussia.org.

Citing an article in the newspaper Vedomosti, the radio station said that the leading party was preparing legislative amendments to this end in response to recent moves by oppositionists in the Duma.

The fate of the deputies would be put in the hands of the Duma Commission on Ethics as well as parliamentary leadership. If the amendments are passed, deputies could be deprived of their status simply for receiving a disciplinary reprimand.

According to the paper, the project is being spearheaded by United Russia Deputy Vladimir Pekhtin, who heads the ethics commission and already previously developed the basics of the amendments. He proposed that deputy mandates be taken away, in particular, for “malicious non-attendance” of legislative sessions, for refusing to disclose salaries, for personal travel abroad on their diplomatic passports, or for making public statements that discredit the parliament or have an “anti-state orientation.”

Currently, deputies can have their status revoked only after being convicted of a crime by a court of law. While the Duma is already closed for the rest of the summer, the measure may be considered as soon as sessions resume.

The idea for the amendment first came after a group of deputies from A Just Russia held a filibuster in June to try and delay the passage of a bill to severely increase fines for violating regulations on public protests. Eventually the measure was passed after the deputies staged a walk-out. Opposition politicians fear that Pekhtin’s measure would allow United Russia to carry out its own purge of the Duma. Speaking to Vedomosti, Communist Party Deputy Vadim Solovyov argued that it would contradict both the spirit and the norms of the Constitution.

Earlier, State Duma Speaker Sergei Naryshkin told ITAR-TASS in an interview that the opposition walk-outs constituted a threat to Russia’s parliamentary system.

Another opposition camp on its way from Chistoprudny Boulevard to the Barrikadnaya metro station was broken up by police this evening, unable to hold out for a single day.

The police have made arrests, basing these on the lack of proper food documentation in the oppositionists “kitchen.”

The arrest of the oppositionists began unexpectedly.

In the evening, a group of police officers without proper documentation confiscated food and cash donations that were in the camp, and detained several nearby people. In the official version, the reason for the confiscation was the lack of supporting documents [to distribute] the food. In response, the oppositionists attempted to block the police van, breaking its mirror and blocking the road, after which new police buses began to arrive and arrest more people.

Kommersant learned that the magazine has virtually disappeared from newsstands only after receiving reports from its readers. Representatives of the publication then went around to several dozen retailers and were consistently told that copies of Vlast had either been sold or were returned to distributors as unsold, despite the fact that a new copy of the magazine is not due to come out for another several days.

The issue in question, dated July 4, is largely dedicated to the upcoming resignation of largely unpopular St. Petersburg Mayor and United Russia member Valentina Matvienko, who was controversially chosen by President Dmitri Medvedev last month to become Speaker of the Federation Council. The soon-to-be-former mayor is pictured on the cover blowing a small horn with a quote that plays on the Soviet-era award “For Service to the Fatherland” – only here the word “service” is replaced by a term made up by city authorities for the gargantuan icicles that killed a record number of residents this past winter. Matvienko was widely criticized for failing to keep streets clear of snow and ensure that icicles be removed from buildings before they could harm pedestrians. The article itself discusses her successes and failures in office, her strained relationship with the president, and the possibility that her new position may simply be an honorable discharge from Russian politics.

According to Ekho Moskvy, the newspaper is not ruling out the possibility that the issue angered the city administration. On condition of anonymity, a representative of one of two companies that distribute 90 percent of all the copies of Vlast throughout St. Petersburg told Kommersant that the order to cut off distribution came directly from the St. Petersburg City Printing Committee; the company made no official statement. A representative of the second company did make an official statement that no copies had been confiscated from retail outlets.

Printing Committee head Aleksandr Korennikov told Kommersant that he was unaware of any confiscations.

Khamroev, a member of the Russian civil rights society Memorial, was attacked in Moscow on December 7.

According to Interfax, the rights advocate was visiting an acquaintance – a Russian citizen who emigrated from Kyrgyzstan – who had called Khamroev and complained that armed men had broken into his apartment.

“Bakhrom came out to the place. They didn’t let him in the apartment, they forced him to leave the entrance,” said Oleg Orlov, head of Memorial. “Then a man came out of a microbus parked nearby – we know the number – and asked Bakhrom several questions and suddenly hit him several times on the head. Bakhrom lost consciousness and was hospitalized.”

The leadership of Memorial believes that Khamroev was beaten by law enforcement officers.

Khamroev had previously been attacked in January 2007. The human rights activist was beaten by three men and suffered from a concussion.

The proposal was made late Monday to Strategy 31 co-organizer and prominent rights activist Lyudmila Alexeyeva. Speaking to Ekho Moskvy radio, Alexeyeva said she “was just at the mayor’s office,” where officials said they were willing to “widen the part” of Triumfalnaya Square that they had proposed last week for the oppositionists to rally. The expansion, said officials, would “block traffic,” but if no more than 800 people took part in the rally, it would not be broken up by police as in each past Strategy 31 rally. “They say that about 800 people plus the press will fit there,” said the rights activist. She did not rule out, however, that more people might try to participate.

“It’s very important that people who definitely want to be at the rally come on time, because when the space fills up, it could be difficult to get there,” noted Alexeyeva. She also expressed hope that the other two Strategy 31 organizers, Other Russia party leader Eduard Limonov and Left Front representative Konstantin Kosyakin, would agree with her to accept the proposal, so that the Russian opposition could finally hold a rally in defense of the constitutional right to free assembly without being broken up by police.

The mayor’s office originally agreed to sanction the rally only if no more than 200 people showed up, but then reneged on their offer when rally organizers insisted on letting 1500 people protest.

A source in the mayor’s office told the Interfax news agency that the city was not willing to take down a construction barrier and remove equipment currently taking up the majority of space in the square, as oppositionists requested last week that they do in order to allow the usual 1500 or so protesters to take part in the event.

After talks on Monday night, however, the three Strategy 31 organizers were unable to reach a consensus on whether or not to accept the city’s proposal. According to Ekho Moskvy, Limonov and Kosyakin now plan to write a another letter to the mayor’s office asking for 1500 people to be allowed to come out to the rally. Alexeyeva said she would not be signing the letter.

Limonov had earlier expressed both surprise at the proposal and skepticism in general. “For my part, I can also say that we were told that there was only space for 200 people; where all of a sudden, in the course of a day, did space for another 600 come from?” he said.

Lev Ponomarev, head of the organization For Human Rights, told Ekho Moskvy radio that a request had been sent to Interim Mayor Vladimir Resin to sanction the “Day of Anger,” part of a regular series of rallies under that name. The demonstrations are aimed at allowing Russian citizens to voice their collective grievances against corrupt government officials, civil rights abuses, unconstitutional policies, and other political and societal problems. The rallies are routinely banned and violently broken up by police.

While it is completely routine for the Russian authorities to ban opposition protests on weak or nonexistent pretexts, former Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov was known for going to the extreme and banning rallies just so he didn’t have to see them. As Ponomarev told Ekho Moskvy, it would not be right for Resin “to continue the tradition that was formed under Yury Luzhkov, in which any rally on Tverskaya Square across from his office was automatically banned.”

“There were many violations of the rights of Muscovites, illegal actions, corruption” under Luzhkov, the rights advocate went on. “One of these violations was the regular prohibition of large demonstrations outside his window. There must be changes. Resin, in temporarily fulfilling the mayor’s duties, should act according to the law.”

Organizers of the upcoming Day of Anger, scheduled for October 12 on Moscow’s Tverskaya Square, handed in an application for the event the day Luzhkov was fired. On September 30, they received notification that their application had been denied, on the basis that the rally would “bother Muscovites and guests of the city” and could possibly result in damage to a monument on the square. Oppositionists decried the move as unfounded, saying that the city was giving up the chance to improve the political climate in the capital.

Corresponding Day of Anger rallies are planned for October 12 in cities throughout Russia, including in St. Petersburg, Rostov-on-Don, Penza, Kirov, Voronezh, Ufa, Krasnoyarsk, Ivanovo, and many other cities. The last Day of Anger in Moscow was held without official sanction on September 12. Thirty out of the approximately 200 participants were detained by police.

According to Ekho Moskvy radio, a group of well-known actors, musicians, journalists, and rights activists came together to attempt to go about several hours of their normal lives – going grocery shopping, to a cafe, or to the movies – in wheelchairs.

The event began at Moscow’s Lenin Library, where the wheelchaired participants attempted simply to enter the building. This turned out not to be possible, as the library doesn’t have a ramp, and it isn’t possible for someone in a wheelchair to climb six steps.

The participants were also unable to use the metro, since the turnstile proved to be too narrow.

The ralliers proceeded to the Pushkin Museum, which was also impossible for the wheelchaired participants to enter by themselves. The museum staff said only that they have guards who are ready to lift handicapped visitors into the museum by hand if necessary

At one point, Bolshoi Gorod Editor-in-Chief Filipp Dzyadko attempted to enter a cafe in his wheelchair. This was also unsuccessful, due to the doorstep and narrow doorway.

Overall, participants of the rally said that curbs and awkward ramps posed the most danger to handicapped persons in Moscow.

The journal held a similar event in 2009 that elicited a sizable public response. According the Kasparov.ru news portal, city authorities began to make accessibility improvements in response – but, judging by this latest event, it’s clear that much more work is needed to be done. Journalist Yasha Levine undertook a similar effort in 2007 for the Exile magazine; a lengthy photo essay of his experience can be found here. He notes that despite an accessibility law introduced in 2001 by then-President Vladimir Putin, transportation remains one of the most serious problems for the handicapped in Moscow. For example, while certain models of wheelchairs can theoretically be finagled onto the metro, there is no way for the handicapped to transfer stations.

Coverage in Russian and photographs by Bolshoi Gorod of the event can be found by clicking here.

A group of youth activists attending Seliger 2010, a summer-long camp that was founded as a training ground for the pro-Kremlin youth group Nashi but is now run directly by the federal government, erected a row of 13 plastic heads on sticks. Each head has a hats bearing Nazi symbols and a picture of a different Russian public figure, including former Soviet dissident Lyudmila Alexeyeva, musician Yury Shevchuk, and jailed oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

The installation was originally thought to be organized by Nashi itself, but was later found to be the work of a smaller pro-Kremlin youth group called Stal (“Steel”). According to the group’s LiveJournal page, Stal is a “patriotic movement created for the unification of thinkers and prepared for decisive action for the sake of its country, for the sake of Russia, of youth.” They also call themselves “the weaponry of Russia.”

According to Ekho Moskvy radio, Russian Human Rights Ombudsman Vladimir Lukin is deeply enraged by the installation. He said that it would be hard to do more damage to Russia’s reputation and that the organizers should be severely punished.

Russian bloggers immediately pointed out that the installation violates a federal law banning the public demonstration of Nazi symbolism.

Members of the Public Chamber, a federal body meant to foster dialogue between civil society and the government, called for a full boycott of the camp.

“I am deeply outraged that our best human rights advocates and well-known public figures – Lyudmila Alexeyeva, Nikolai Svanidze – are compared to Nazis,” said Alla Gerber, Public Chamber member and president of the Interregional Holocaust Foundation. “The authors of this installation are irresponsible hooligans, absolutely insane people who don’t know what Nazis are.”

Nashi defended Seliger 2010 for allowing different youth movements to express different points of view, Stal’s being no exception. In a statement posted on its website on Wednesday, Nashi said that the camp’s administration “does not subject participants’ statements to censorship, does not participate in the preparation of installations, does not pay for art objects that delegations bring along.”

Lyudmila Alexeyeva told Ekho Moskvy that public figures would do best to ignore such incidents, and thus she does not plan to file suit for slander against the installation’s organizers.

“Things like this don’t offend me,” said Alexeyeva. “And really, if they originate with Nashi, then excuse me, who is there to be offended by – those who make do without any human qualities, decency, or intelligence? Let them amuse themselves in this ugly fashion. Put up a caricature of an old woman who already looks sufficiently morose. If my grandchildren did this, then I would explain to them that good children don’t do this. But here I’m not going to explain anything.”

In remarks today at the official opening of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Russian President Dmitri Medvedev spoke about his goals for Russia’s economy and how state policy would be shaped to achieve them, Interfax reports.

“Russia,” the president said, “must become an attractive country that people from all over the world will aim for in search of their dreams. In search of the best opportunities for success and self-realization, which Russia can give to everyone ready to heed this call and love Russia as their new or second home.”

“Such are the goals of our modernization – they are realistic and achievable,” Medvedev asserted. He added that favorable conditions for modernization are currently developing in the country’s economy. He also said that state fiscal policy would be shaped with this in mind.

The three-day forum, which began Thursday afternoon, brings together European leaders, representatives from international corporations, economists, and other global policy makers to discuss modernization and development in emerging economies. A range of topics, including energy and security policy, are expected to be covered.

A presidential aid had stated earlier that Medvedev’s speech “will be mainly dedicated to Russia and the way we have changed.”

The Russian president singled out inflation in his opening remarks as one of the primary issues faced by his country’s economy. He also said that the inflation rate has fallen over the course of the year and is now hovering at about 6%.

In his turn, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin pledged that inflation would not rise above 5-7% over the next three years, with the top target for next year set at 6.5%. He stressed that citizen trust in state policy was the key factor for successfully overcoming economic difficulties, and that Russians do indeed trust the ruble and their domestic banking system.

Former Economics Minister and Scientific Director of the Higher School of Economics Yevgeny Yasin said that the figures cited by the prime minister are realistic, but that inflation in Russia must necessarily fall to around 3-4%. In an interview with Ekho Moskvy, he also stipulated that the best time for prices to fall – the crisis period – had already passed.

While Russia has reported a decline in inflation each month since August 2009, some analysts say that the government’s reliance on consumer prices to calculate the rate presents a false reading of actual inflation. “Consumer prices,” says political commentator Sergei Shelin, “only make up a part of all prices. All the remaining prices are growing, and seem to know absolutely no shame.”

A panel entitled “Finance after the Crisis” was held in the same room after Medvedev’s remarks. There, according to the newspaper Vedomosti, influential global financial analysts discussed whether or not the presidents’ goals were achievable. The newspaper reported that of those present at the panel, 61% believed that the Russian financial system faces stagnation over the course of the next 2-5 years. About 5% expect another crisis, and the last third are optimistic that Russia will see a speedy rate of growth.

At another panel later in the day, Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin said that the task of cutting the budget deficit is harder for Russia than other European countries. This, he explained, has to do with the fact that the state treasury is highly dependent on the oil and gas sector. Kudrin reminded his audience that the current cut in Russia’s deficit is happening as a result of high oil prices – not because of the efforts of the government.

The finance minister also said that a rise in the retirement age would be an unavoidable result of the budget deficit, and confirmed plans for substantial increases in taxes on gasoline, alcohol, and tobacco.