Death in the epicenter

“I thought that at least some film would be prepared before the anniversary of the deaths of Stas Markelov and Nastia Baburova. But on that day Russian television didn’t mention the event. Nothing at all! That day there was a meeting of over one thousand people at Petrovka, and later at Chistye Prudy, and no television channel showed what happened there, how the meeting was dispersed, or how gas and sticks were used. Later they even stated that nothing like that had happened. I was filming there. You can see fragments in the movie,” the famous Russian-Ukrainian director Valerii Ba-layan explained. The world premiere (as declared by organizers) of his film Love Me Please! will take place in Kyiv, in the framework of the 7th International Festival of Human Rights Documentaries Docudays UA. “Right now in Russia there is no prospect to show this movie and it is unlikely in the near future.”

“Love Me, Please!” is a phrase from a letter of the Russian journalist of Ukrainian origin Nastia Baburova to her parents in Se-vastopol, which she wrote a few days before her death at the hands of a skinhead. Readers of The Day are already familiar with the story of Nastia, her parents and friends, through the work of Mykola Semena, which bore a si-milar title “I ask you, please love me!” (Issue 24, February 13, 2009). The murder of Nastia and Stas, as well as dozens of other human rights activists and journalists in Russia, is another round (I apologize to the relatives of the deceased for the dry phrase) in the struggle against one of the world’s perennial problems, which not only Russia will have to deal with.

More people than expected came to the Blue Hall of the Cinema House where the premiere demonstration of the movie by Valerii Balayan took place. In the overcrowded building filled with Nastia’s supporters (human rights activists, participants of the “Antifa” movement), many personally knew the journalist Stas Markelov. Nastia’s parents, Larysa and Eduard Baburov, came specially for the demonstration. Those who didn’t share the views of the journalist came too. One can only guess what their intentions were. Perhaps they were just curious. Perhaps they wanted to have their say. And maybe use other, non-verbal arguments. But they didn’t stay to the end of the presentation and quickly left.

A few words about the movie. Before the demonstration Valerii Balayan apologized several times for the low technical quality of the movie, which was just three days “old,” and made with the “director’s family budget” and his exceptional efforts. However, the plot is so emotional that hardly any of the spectators paid attention to the technical drawbacks. The movie is built on contrast. On the one hand – relatives, close ones, and colleagues of Nastia Baburova and Stas Markelov, their human rights’ activities and meetings with their adherents; a story about the murder and funeral. On the other hand – Russian radical-right (neo-fascists), interviews with them, their propaganda materials and their… activities (beating representatives of national and sexual minorities). One feels frightened. However, it’s clear that the goal of director is not only to scare. Through his characters he says that the proliferation of neo-fascists in Russia is condoned by the government. The movie’s characters repeat: law-enforcing bodies don’t interfere with meetings of radical-right forces, while demonstrations of human rights activists, left and left-radical movements are always dispersed in coercive manner.

Relations between Russian human rights movements and the government are another explicit theme of the film. An eloquent fact: before Nastia’s move to Moscow Vladimir Putin was her idol. Because of his passion for sambo Nastia became a sambo wrestler too. However, after half a year’s work in Moscow, her attitude towards the Russian government changed drastically. “She was very naive when she came,” remembers Nastia’s friend Maryna.

The initiative of Valerii Ba-layan is still to be adequately eva-luated, considering his selfless and courageous work, as well as the importance of the problem he raises. Indeed, the film doesn’t provide answers to the questions of what to do or how to struggle against such issues. But it provokes reflections and makes one delve a little deeper.

In the 5th Channel broadcast last Friday Oxana Pachlovska talked about Russian problems. According to her, the Russian Federation is a state that keeps very big and different social and cultural formations isolated by force. Thus these groups are doomed to fight against each other. One doesn’t need to go far back into past. One example – recent blasts in the Moscow subway. Sooner or later, from within “Russian” Russia (meaning in the society) a response to the violence from “Caucasians” will emerge. Thus the phenomenon of Russian neo-fascism was born, heated by an expansionist foreign policy (which, unfortunately, doesn’t correspond to the present world) and an internal system of power-based government.

During the discussion there was an attempt (by the 2000 newspaper – how strange!) to exculpate the Russian government, by saying that neo-fascism is currently a “world fashion.” One journalist reminded people that, in the same Blue Hall of the Cinema House, the film Nasty Old People by Swedish director Hanna Skoeld was presented, about a young neo-nazi girl’s re-education by means of taking care of elderly helpless people. To this comparison Valerii Balayan neatly answered that he couldn’t imagine the heroes of his movie, bald-headed musclemen, taking care of old women. And, judging from the movie about the Russian neo-fascism, such a lifestyle hardly corresponds to their ideology. It’s more correct for them, according to one speaker, to add poison to the vodka of a homeless person.

Another attempt by the 2000 newspaper was to compare Ukrainian nationalists with Russian neo-fascists. For me the difference is obvious, as it is for, I think, many readers of The Day. Those, who don’t understand it, can compare the two websites: “Banderivets” (mentioned by the journalist of the 2000 newspaper) and the Slavic Union’s one.

However, this topic has a few important aspects. First, the fashion for neo-fascism is currently spreading. This is not only in Russia, but in wealthy Sweden or the Czech Republic. Ukraine, still as a buffer zone, is faced with a special danger. “Ukraine has a visa-free regime with Europe and Russia. Thus, Ukraine becomes a place where Russian and European neo-nazis can meet without interference. I think the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) knows about it,” pointed out Valerii Balayan.

Secondly, are Ukrainian mass media and Ukrainian society generally ready to oppose such evil? According to Eduard Baburov, among Ukrainian mass media only The Day newspaper responded to the tragedy of not only their family but of the entire country! At the end of the meeting in the Cinema House someone suggested combining efforts to get the movie of Valerii Balayan through to Ukrainian television channels, saying the society knows too little about this problem.

Third. All those present at the demonstration absolutely acknowledged that the scope of the problem of neo-nazism in Russia and Ukraine are not comparable. However, a few Russian participants of the discussion repeated that the problem of neo-fascism can’t be only Russian. “Please don’t think it’s only a Russian problem,” warned Valerii Ba-layan. Some of the Russians said that, of course, one can silently rejoice that in Ukraine there are fewer Nazis, or one can oppose the evil straight away.

Personally, I’m really glad that we have fewer nazis. Much fewer! (In Russia there are 144 fascist groups). No, I don’t deny their existence in Ukraine, and I know about the cases of murdering dark-skinned foreigners. Of course one must react and bring those criminals to court. However, something tells me that the mere nature of origin of neo-nazism in Ukraine and Russia are different. (Presently, I don’t take into account those who follow their Russian colleagues). There was an attempt to play the neo-fascist card in Ukraine after the murder of Maksym Chayka in Odesa. It didn’t work. Now the task is not to allow the politicization of this issue in the future. It’s the turn of the SSU. And the difference between the Ukrainian and Russian neo-fascism is still to be uncovered.

And now about Nastia. Her motto was the words “My homeland is all humanity.” And she lived this way. She said she wouldn’t like to live either in Moscow or in Kyiv, but in a normal quiet European state. But she fought in the very epicenter. Characters in the movie say that the murder of Baburova and Markelov shocked the country, and the Kremlin, evidently, sighed with relief. Nastia’s father points out that after this murder the process of spreading radical-right movement in Russia became unruly.

We live very close to this situation. With open doors – without demarcated borders and without an informational firewall. For some reason an episode from one of Kyiv conferences held a year ago came to my memory. The Day’s author, Russian liberal Ihor Chubays said that “Ukraine is the last straw for drowning Russia.” The words of Yurii Afanasyev in response: “Don’t listen to them. Run away from Moscow!”