Magnitsky Law as precedent for all

In recent days Russia has seen many resonant events and on Friday November 16 the US Congress passes the Magnitsky Law. All of these events, including reformatting the Council under the president of Russia on Human Rights require in-depth analysis. The Day asked a leading researcher of the Moscow Carnegie Center Lilia SHEVTSOVA to comment on these events.

As is known, on November 16 the US will adopt the Magnitsky Law. Some experts consider that the abolishment of the Jackson-Vanik amendment may give confidence to Putin and his team in their future impunity. And US’s backpedaling from the positions of human rights’ protection in the whole world is advantageous for the Kremlin, because the Damocles Sword of economic sanctions, hanging over the regime which thinks of coming back to authoritarianism, will soon be sheathed within the framework of some other resetting or discharge. What do you think about this?

“The author of this article is wrong here. America started backpedaling from the value dimension much earlier. Basically, it was doing so during Bush’s presidency, and it was during Obama’s presidency that the process acquired a structured shape. Obama’s policy of resetting is a policy of making deals with the Kremlin in exchange for the refusal to assess what is going on in Russia from the viewpoint of values. In this sense America started to backpedal long ago. Practically all US presidents have been basing their policy on tactical agreements since the collapse of the Soviet Union. However, a different kind of thing is going on now.”

What kind of thing?

“The House of Representatives will meet soon, most likely on Friday, and there is ample ground to believe that the Magnitsky Law will be adopted and sent for approval to the Senate and there is ample ground to think that the Senate will approve this bill. And the fact of adopting this law in the form it is presented for consideration in the Congress. This law is aimed harshly against the export of corruption from Russia. In particular, the adopted resolution envisages to create a secret list which will be approved by the American president and include the surnames of the people involved in corruption in Russia and repressive activity, including those given on the initiative of Russian opposition and civil society. And adopting this resolution will launch a domino effect. No matter how unwilling the State Department is, if the Americans accept this resolution and Magnitsky List, which will be constantly broadened, this will give an impetus to European governments and political forces at least to change the previous vector of connivance concerning the Kremlin. Already now the parliaments of some countries, including the Netherlands and Britain, will consider the question of adopting their own Magnitsky Law, too. And the adoption of the law with all consequences that follow from this resolution, freezing of the accounts and closing them on the territory of European countries, as well as freezing of their assets in the EU countries means that the law will have effect all over the territory of the European society. This is a very strong blow to Russian corrupted elite. If the Magnitsky Law is adopted, it will launch a crusade of the West against the export of corruption from Russia, which is nothing but welcome.”

Won’t Obama show any flexibility concerning the Kremlin? Won’t he obstruct the adoption of this law?

“The president is trying not to spoil the relations with Russia. There are certain aspects where Washington is uneager to irritate Moscow, like Afghan transit and Iran. But in America there is a consensus between two parties, Democratic and Republican, concerning the Magnitsky Law. There is a consensus within the Congress. Therefore it is impossible to give this law a backward motion. Steps may be taken to limit its effect. But I think Obama, during his second term of presidency, will not be enchanted with the Kremlin enough to try to show an intended mildness, exposing himself to harsh criticism from Washington media and his rivals, the Republicans.”

Will this law give a precedent to adopt a similar law concerning Ukraine and prompt a similar attitude to Ukrainian power, which does not respect human rights?

“As far as I know, a part of the Congress tried to adopt the Magnitsky Law with global effect, so that all countries could fall under the law, from Ukraine and Belarus to the countries of Central Asia and Saudi Arabia. At the moment the Russian version of the law enjoys more support. But you must understand that the adoption of such a law gives a pattern to create all kinds of mechanisms to fight corruption concerning corrupted and authoritarian regimes in other countries. A precedent and mechanism are created to be practiced. A question arises, if this kind of mechanism will be well-practiced concerning Russian corrupted elite, why not practice the same mechanism concerning the Ukrainian one? All the more so, the steps in this direction have already been taken, specifically US Senate Resolution on Tymoshenko.”

***

Many experts call the resignation of the Defense Minister Anatolii Serdiukov the launch of the operation “successor.” Has Vladimir Putin really began thinking about whom to hand the reins over or is it something different?

“I don’t have any proof and I don’t see any convincing arguments which would suggest that Vladimir Putin is going to go away, that Putin is going to look for an alternative field, and that Putin is going to repeat the fate of Boris Yeltsin and strike a deal with his successor. I see no evidence of that. However, I see evidence of quite the opposite, evidence of that Putin moved on to a new, in fact, repression tactics, changing the nature of his regime in the direction of a much more rigid authoritarianism in order to maintain his positions. I do not see any political power in society, which could challenge him. I do not see any political power within the ruling class, which could, for example, compete with him for power. That is why resignation of Serdiukov for me is rather a sign that the regime is already at the stage of decay. But this is the stage, which does not pose a threat to leadership positions. Putin is unable to contain the struggle and conflict between competing clans and is forced to sacrifice some things in order to strengthen his position. Serdiukov and his resignation, and the whole story around him, which poured out on Russian central TV channels are the evidence of that Putin, in order to strengthen his positions, cancelled the principle of loyalty, which until recently cemented the political elite. But this fact alone does not mean that Putin’s position is weak, that he intends to step down from power and that he is aware of the need to do so.”

What is your opinion about the role of the Council on Human Rights attached to the president, the staff of which has significantly refreshed, and one of its members famous TV journalist Leonid Parfenov during a meeting of the Council in the presence of Vladimir Putin blamed the government for the total control of the federal TV channels?

“Indeed, we now see a new composition of this Council, which includes the new members. Moreover, the Council has grown to an unimaginable size, in fact, it turned into a mini-parliament attached to the president. We can see several institutions of similar type. These are the parliament itself, Federation Council, the Public Chamber, and the Council attached to the president. This means that there are a lot of beaters in the central government that imitate work of institutions, but, in fact, are only a substitute for the actually existing institutions and are the forms of imitation of political activity in Russia. The latest composition of the Council on Human Rights is a very important fact in the present political history.”

Why so?

“Creation of such Council in the current situation, when the country is experiencing more intense political struggle, when society is unsatisfied, when the wave of protests, that are not yet threatening Putin’s regime, is growing, but still, in fact, the government has begun a civil war with the part of Russian population, which does not appreciate it. And in this situation those, who have become the members of the new Council, namely a famous political opposition leader Irina Khakamada, political commentator of the opposition newspaper Novaya gazeta, head of the Golos organization that was responsible for the elections, which caused so much discomfort in the government, journalists, who are the real leaders of television fashion, like Parfenov. The very fact of their membership in the new Council attached to the president means, first, the end of the first wave of protests because these people preferred to get closer to the president and become a part of this tank. Secondly, it means that a part of the political intellectual elite in Russia, which was represented by those people, elite that had critical attitude towards Putin, is ready to make a pact on his terms and principles and accept his rules of the game. Putin himself during the long meeting allowed others to speak, but not on major issues, they never questioned the legitimacy of his government. At the same time he made them realize that he accepts various half-critical statements, such as those expressed by Parfenov, provided, however, that Russian civil society and political circles will accept his rules of the game. Putin is aware that they accepted his rules because they became members of the imitation council, which does not mean anything, which does not play any role, and which does not mean the change of the political regime. The council itself with its quite respectable members, who belong to the Russian dissident political elite, is, in fact, the evidence of very serious degradation of Russian society and, above all, Russian intelligence.”

Meanwhile, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev in an interview to Finnish journalists said that he does not worry about the future of democracy in our country, moreover, he is convinced that our country is moving in the right direction.

“What else can be expected from a man who has been playing for his whole life the role of an imitator, and who has imitated power, presidency, and modernization for four years? What else can he say? Of course, he cannot say Russia is in crisis and that a much more repressive regime has been shaped in Russia. Medvedev continues to play the role of an imitator, which is now producing quite a miserable impression. And with these statements he already looks like some kind of a political clown.”