Showing posts with label Opinion - International Affairs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Opinion - International Affairs. Show all posts

Monday 26 February 2024

Russia: autocratic rule continues with the loss of Navalny

 

Alexei Navalny had a vision of a democratic Russia. That terrified Vladimir Putin to the core

Robert Horvath, La Trobe University

Alexei Navalny was a giant figure in Russian politics. No other individual rivalled the threat he posed to the Putin regime. His death in an Arctic labour camp is a blow to all those who dreamed he might emerge as the leader of a future democratic Russia.

What made Navalny so important was his decision to become an anti-corruption crusader in 2008. Using shareholder activism and his popular blog, he shone a spotlight on the corruption schemes that enabled officials to steal billions from state-run corporations.

His breakthrough came in 2011, when he proposed the strategy of voting for any party but President Vladimir Putin’s “party of crooks and thieves” in the Duma (parliament) elections. Faced with a collapse of support, the regime resorted to widespread election fraud. The result was months of pro-democracy protests.

Putin regained control through a mix of concessions and repression, but the crisis signalled Navalny’s emergence as the dominant figure in Russia’s democratic movement.

Despite being convicted on trumped-up embezzlement charges, he was allowed to run in Moscow’s mayoral elections in 2013. In a clearly unfair contest, which included police harassment and hostile media coverage, he won 27% of the vote.

Perseverance in the face of worsening attacks

The authorities learned from this mistake. Never again would Navalny be allowed to compete in elections. What the Kremlin failed to stop was his creation of a national movement around the Foundation for the Struggle Against Corruption (FBK), which he had founded in 2011 with a team of brilliant young activists.

During the ensuing decade, FBK transformed our understanding of the nature of Putin’s kleptocracy. Its open-source investigations shattered the reputations of numerous regime officials, security functionaries and regime propagandists.

One of the most important was a 2017 exposé of the network of charities that funded the palaces and yachts of then-premier Dmitry Medvedev. Viewed 46 million times on YouTube, it triggered protests across Russia.

Exposé accusing Dmitry Medvedev of corruption.

No less significant was Navalny’s contribution to the methods of pro-democracy activism. To exploit the regime’s dependence on heavily manipulated elections, he developed a strategy called “intelligent voting”. The basic idea was to encourage people to vote for the candidates who had the best chance of defeating Putin’s United Russia party. The result was a series of setbacks for United Russia in 2019 regional elections.

One measure of Navalny’s impact was the intensifying repression directed against him. As prosecutors tried to paralyse him with a series of implausible criminal cases, they also pursued his family. His younger brother Oleg served three and a half years in a labour camp on bogus charges.

This judicial persecution was compounded by the violence of the regime’s proxies. Two months after exposing Medvedev’s corruption, Navalny was nearly blinded by a Kremlin-backed gang of vigilantes, who sprayed his face with a noxious blend of chemicals.

More serious was the deployment of a death squad from Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB), which had kept Navalny under surveillance since 2017. The use of the nerve agent Novichok to poison Navalny during a trip to the Siberian city of Tomsk in August 2020 was clearly intended to end his challenge to Putin’s rule.

Instead it precipitated the “Navalny crisis”, a succession of events that shook the regime’s foundations. The story of Navalny’s survival – and confirmation that he had been poisoned with Novichok – focused international attention on the Putin regime’s criminality.

Any lingering doubts about state involvement in his poisoning were dispelled by Navalny’s collaboration with Bellingcat, an investigative journalism organisation, to identify the suspects and deceive one of them into revealing how they poisoned him.

The damage was magnified by Navalny’s decision to confront Putin’s personal corruption. In a powerful two-hour documentary film, A Palace for Putin, Navalny chronicled the obsessive greed that had transformed an obscure KGB officer into one of the world’s most notorious kleptocrats.

With over 129 million views on YouTube alone, the film shattered the dictator’s carefully constructed image as the incarnation of traditional virtues.

A Palace for Putin.

‘We will fill up the jails and police vans’

It is difficult to exaggerate the impact of the “Navalny crisis” on Putin, a dictator terrified of the prospect of popular revolution. No longer was he courted by Western leaders. US President Joe Biden began his term in office in 2021 by endorsing an interviewer’s description of Putin as a “killer”.

To contain the domestic fallout, Putin unleashed a crackdown that began with Navalny’s 2021 arrest on his return to Moscow from Germany, where had been recovering from the Novichok poisoning. On the international stage, Putin secured a summit with Biden by staging a massive deployment of military force on the Ukrainian border, a rehearsal for the following year’s invasion.

The Kremlin’s trolling factories also tried to destroy Navalny’s reputation with a smear campaign. Within weeks of Navalny’s imprisonment, Amnesty International rescinded his status as a “prisoner of conscience” on the basis of allegations about hate speech. The evidence was some ugly statements made by Navalny as an inexperienced politician in the mid-2000s, when he was trying to build an anti-Putin alliance of democrats and nationalists.

What his detractors ignored was Navalny’s own evolution into a critic of ethnonationalist prejudices. In a speech to a nationalist rally in 2011, he had challenged his listeners to empathise with people in the Muslim-majority republics of Russia’s northern Caucasus region.

This divergence from the nationalist mainstream was accentuated by Putin’s conflict with Ukraine. After the invasion of Crimea in March 2014, Navalny denounced the “imperialist annexation” as a cynical effort to distract the masses from corruption.

Eight years later, while languishing in prison, he condemned Putin’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, exhorting his compatriots to take to the streets, saying:

If, to prevent war, we need to fill up the jails and police vans, we will fill up the jails and police vans.

Later that year, he argued a post-Putin Russia needed an end to the concentration of power in the Kremlin and the creation of a parliamentary republic as “the only way to stop the endless cycle of imperial authoritarianism”.

Navalny’s tragedy is that he never had a chance to convert the moral authority he amassed during years as a dissident into political power. Like Charles de Gaulle in France and Nelson Mandela in South Africa, he might have become a redemptive leader, leading his people from war and tyranny to the promised land of a freer society.

Instead, he has left his compatriots the example of a brave, principled and thoughtful man, who sacrificed his life for the cause of democracy and peace. That is his enduring legacy. The Conversation

Robert Horvath, Senior lecturer, La Trobe University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Saturday 25 February 2017

Does the definition of nascent dictator fit Trump ?

Donald J Trump - President of the United States
Much has been said and projected with comparisons between Donald J Trump and the Great Dictators of the first half of the 20th Century (Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, Franco and to a degree, Chiang Kai-shek). The characteristics and circumstances are very different between the 21st Century United States and the countries where each of these leaders arose. In the case of Germany, Russia, Italy, Spain and China, a monarchical system had been displaced or was disappearing as a result of the Great War or internal civil war and new institutions were struggling to gain a foothold in the new nation. Substantial economic disruption had commensurately occurred as a result of this conflict which included the after effects following the end of World War I. The Great Depression also ensured the tearing of the social fabric in each country. There is no comparison with the United States in 2016 and 2017 which has none of these characteristics.

The Great Dictators were far more a product of their era than Trump. Each of them also galvanized and gave voice to the political structures which they led. The Nazi Party, the Italian Fascists, the Communist Party of Russia, the Nationalists of China  and the Nationalists of Spain were partly or totally designed by their leaders. The Republican Party in the United States is not a product of Trump and both they and he, are almost functioning independent of each other (for now).

So although Trump tries to control the media, makes promises to build walls, rattles sabres on defence, tries to alter trade negotiations, etc he does so with the other arms of Government (the Legislature and the Judiciary) fully functional. There is no Enabling Act or equivalent which cedes him power from the Legislature which was a feature of the early 20th Century in Europe.

Saturday 30 April 2016

American Politics - How Australians view a Donald J Trump US presidency

Donald J Trump
Polling research released by the Lowy Institute this month showing a bare majority of 51% of Australians support remaining close to the United States if Donald Trump is elected president should not be a surprise. In most respects Australian support for the United States has usually been affected by perceptions of the person holding the role of US President. In 2007 when George W Bush was US President, an extraordinary 69% of Australian adults indicated that he caused them to feel unfavourably towards the United States. Previous polls by the Lowy Institute have shown that, in general terms, Australians express strong support for the Australia - US Alliance in the range of 78% (2011) and 80% (2015) due to a regard for shared values and ideals. This support can and is substantially eroded by the actions of a US president in office. It is more unusual to have this effect occurring during the US primaries before an election has even been held.. The political rise of Donald Trump and the unease with which his public persona is viewed is reflected worldwide.

As of the end of April, Trump remains the front-runner for the Republican nomination with 996 delegates to the target number of 1,237 for the nomination.  He needs 241 delegates with only 571 votes still available hence he must win at least 42% of the remaining delegate vote. It is certainly a viable target to win.

Wednesday 10 July 2013

Global corruption report - corruption remains a critical problem world-wide


The 2013 Global Corruption Barometer recently released by Transparency International charts increasing public disquiet over the level of corruption in many segments and institutions of society. Over 114,000 people in 107 countries were surveyed for their views on corruption and the results by country demonstrate a strong public perception that corruption has a strong influence.
Transparency International is an global Non-Government Organisation with its Secretariat in Berlin, Germany and membership and organisational chapters throughout the world. Transparency International has been active in strengthening anti-corruption initiatives, such as the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention, UN Convention against Corruption and UN Global Compact.
For Australia the results were generally positive with some obvious exceptions:

Percentage of respondents who felt these institutions were affected by corruption in this country –
58 % political parties
58 % media
47 % business
44 % religious bodies
 
Question: How effective do you think your government's actions are in the fight against corruption ?
16 % stated effective
32 % stated neither effective nor ineffective
36 % stated they were ineffective
16 % stated they were very ineffective
 
The Report can be accessed at this link:
Global Corruption Index Report

 

Saturday 19 May 2012

Putin and Power in Russia - Masha Gessen, Sydney Writers Festival May 2012

The Man Without a Face -  the mysterious rise of Vladimir Putin, in less than a decade, from low-ranking KGB nonentity to Kremlin master has been explored in detail in this book by journalist Masha Gessen. In Sydney, as a guest of the Sydney Writers Festival, Gessen presented a carefully researched, detailed analysis of the character of Putin, the impact he has on Russia and the many questions and shady elements of the Putin era. As a Russian American living in Moscow, Gessen is able to bring a focus on the way in which Putin perceives Russia and the influences and events which have shaped his perspective. His years as a KGB officer in particular left him with a sense of betrayal when 'Moscow was silent'  and the Soviet Union ended. His propensity for absolute control stems from this experience. It is always extremely hazardous to write insightful material on Putin and his associates - the last guest of the Sydney Writers Festival in May 2006 who covered Russian politics, Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, was assassinated near her apartment in Moscow only five months later - a fact not lost on those attending the session with Gessen at the Sydney Theatre. Gessen's masterful and 'brave' book, as described by 'The Guardian' newspaper in the United Kingdom, will not have endeared her to the Putin Regime (while available worldwide, the book is not sold in the Russian language and only a single bookseller in Moscow has copies in English). With Putin under pressure in Russia, his efforts to silence critics may also be curtailed.

Saturday 6 August 2011

United States - calculating the cost











Just how far will the US debt level rise ? The US Congress has approved a new debt ceiling but judging from the debt clock, the reality is stark already.

Friday 19 June 2009

Iran - A desire for change


The recent Iranian presidential elections have drawn attention to an increasing desire from much of the population for a change in direction from that country's top leadership. The election held on June 13, 2009, saw Mir Hussein Moussavi defeated by incumbent President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (pictured at left) in a disputed result. Mr. Moussavi was allegedly defeated by 63 percent to 34 percent of the popular vote. The New York Times reported this week that Mr. Moussavi, thousands of demonstrators who represent a cross section of Iranian society and part of the clerical establishment have called the official results a fraud. Mr. Moussavi, is a former prime minister with a reputation for honesty and competence and is very much an insider in Iranian ruling circles.

His personal history includes being a leading figure in the Revolution which overthrew the former Shah of Iran and he was close to Ayatollah Khomeini. His credentials therefore are beyond question in Iran which makes his stand all the more poignant. Notably during the final weeks of the electioneering, Mr. Moussavi's campaign had gained enormous energy with huge rallies in the streets of Tehran both day and night which have now been followed by enormous rallies and public support (pictured right) following the election defeat.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in comparison has become an unpopular figure and is often perceived as the face of radicalism and repression in a country where people would much prefer not to been seen as a pariah in international circles. Iran has a very youthful population and modern technology has opened up communication opportunities which the Iranian Government has had difficulty in shutting down or censoring.
An added complication has been that the supreme leader in Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has been uncompromising over the nation’s disputed Presidential elections and has publicly supported the result. In a hard-line statement and sermons, he has declared the elections to be valid. Further he has warned of violence if demonstrators continue, as they have pledged, to flood the streets in defiance of the government.

Friday 29 May 2009

Up in the Air - North Korea


One again, the regime of Kim Jong Il has tested the international community's tolerance with long range missile launch tests. As the Bloomberg news summarised " North Korea tested its second nuclear device on May 25, defying international condemnation that built up after a ballistic-missile launch in April. Two days ago, Kim Jong Il’s regime threatened an armed strike against South Korea for agreeing to participate in a U.S.-led program to stop and search ships suspected of carrying weapons of mass destruction".

North Korea is the world's most isolated, totalitarian state and operates at the edge of brinkmanship to attempt to gain some yet not well understood advantage. The World strongly relies on neighbouring states such as the People's Republic of China to try and intercede with the North Korean leadership yet often China finds that it has no greater influence than anyone else in dealing with the paranoid regime.
North Korea under its current leadership is unlikely to adopt any change in direction and each step forward in developing improved relations is often superceded by two steps back. Impoverished, dependent on aid from other countries, paranoid and with unaffordable military spending North Korea sits in stark contrast to its more prosperous neighbour in the South. The only real chance for improvement sits with the departure of its current leader Kim Jong-Il and a transition leadership which is willing to accept that no-one in the international community is interested in invading their country. Far more is the opposite as the region craves stability and peaceful co-existence.

Wednesday 4 February 2009

As the US political leadership wrangles over the stimulus package, President Obama has commented that if he doesn't fix things in three years, he will be a one term president. Its a possible but unlikely scenario at this stage.

Sunday 1 February 2009

The World as its stands in early 2009

Summing up the current World situation is rather confronting - environmental degradation/climate change; financial markets across all major economies contracting; serious conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan; continuing instability in the Middle East; failed states in North Eastern Africa and the Pacific Rim and a plethora of related problems of similar magnitude.


The question remains whether the political leadership of major states together with the key business and economic leadership figures are able to add to make further progress with these problems this year; or whether there will continue to be considerable rhetoric but not equally matched by concerted equal action.