The old Latin saying qui tacet, consentit (silence implies consent) was first brought back into the contemporary Russia debate by blogger Vilhelm Konnander following the assassination of journalist Anna Politkovskaya. However, today it is more resonant and telling than ever, as we watch country after country turn their backs in willful silence on the fate of the dying Russian prisoner Vasily Alexanyan (also spelled Alexanian, Aleksanyan, and Aleksanian). (Read my blog here, here, here, here, here, and here).
Why on earth won't anybody say anything about this poor, unfortunate victim of Kremlin injustice? This is the question often put to me in recent emails and comments. Of course I have my theories which I shall outline below, but I certainly do share their outrage and disbelief.
Consider the facts: He's been unlawfully held in pre-trial detention for two years without conviction, denied urgent medical care to treat his condition (which the prosecutor illegally disclosed to the media as HIV), and he has been offered relief and medical care only in exchange for invented false testimony against Mikhail Khodorkovsky and other Yukos prisoners. Not to mention that the Russian Federation has ignored three separate orders from the European Court of Human Rights regarding his medical care.
The man is on the brink of death, yet apart from a barely publicized Amnesty International note back on Jan. 18, almost no one in Europe or North America has said any thing in his defense. Why not?
One has to recognize the success of the Russian strategy to stifle criticism on this case and others. First, we can see that the prosecutors and judges are following instructions to urgently rush forward with a trial and decision in record time, which somehow justifies their torture and slow manslaughter of Alexanyan and further taints Khodorkovsky - given that the dying prisoner refused to give up false testimony to save his own life. Encouraged by past examples, the prosecutors believe that if they obtain a rubber stamp conviction of some sort or the other, that this thin, counterfeit legality will be enough for Brussels to sleep well at night.
Don't believe it for a second. The latest news: Alexanyan has been diagnosed with terminal lymphoma cancer, while at the same moment a Russian judge has refused his transfer to another facility because "the defense had failed to provide evidence that Aleksanian is suffering from any lethal diseases." Never mind that his lawyers were denied the opportunity to submit this evidence. Welcome to the new show trial.
In explaining the silence, we have to consider the emerging trend of Moscow throwing more and more money than ever into PR representation in foreign capitals (someone should tell them that an actual policy change would be much cheaper). I know for a fact from discreet conversations with London and Washington journalists and editors that they are under tighter scrutiny from Kremlin-hired representatives who pressure media owners and advertisers over "balance" in the coverage of Russia affairs. We've also seen the Kremlin's addiction to buying fake news - the most recent was their humorous second full take-out section published in the Washington Post this week.
But of course, far more powerful than any hired agency are the unpaid lobbyists that are acting aggressively to promote Russia's interests in foreign capitals: large energy corporations who are negotiating or have recently closed a deal with Gazprom or the Russian Federation. Simply take a look at Petro-Canada, which I have been speaking about recently during my visit to Calgary and Toronto - it's practically transparent to see how the Russians extract the greatest advantage by keeping the Canadians on the precipice of an energy deal for as long as possible. Can you imagine the kind of corporate pressure that must be placed on government officials not to say anything unsavory to Moscow right now? I imagine it must feel like Italy under Prodi and Eni, the Social Democrats under E.on, the Sakozy-Total tango, and the Dutch under Gasunie, the latest to join up with the Nord Stream pipeline.
Major energy deals with Gazprom and Rosneft have proven to be extremely effective ways to impose an almost criminal silence on human rights issues.
However a recent commenter raises a good point - why would international NGOs and rights groups so removed from these business-geopolitical concerns also maintain silence over the murder-in-progress of Vasily Alexanyan? That's a tough answer. Firstly, over the past number of years, we have observed an enormous prejudice and skepticism toward the Yukos prisoners and human rights abuses, which somehow rationalized that because some of these men were successful business leaders, than it wasn't possible that they became legitimate victims of human rights abuses. It didn't fit the preferred model.
However that has definitely changed over the years. One of our top human rights lawyers on the case, Karinna Moskalenko, also in the past held her own doubts over whether this was a political prisoner case or not, until she was subjected to endless harassment of her legal team for getting involved, and came to know the extreme persecution of the authorities in this case that are now so familiar and widely known. Now she is easily one of the most outspoken critics of abuses of authority by the Russian government in the the Khodorkovsky/Yukos case - demanding that the international human rights NGOs should be all over it.
Another effective way that the Kremlin has fended off any criticisms of human rights from organizations is the classic "double standards" narrative. This contagious line of messages says "how can one put up with the arrogance of an American civil society group criticizing Russia for its treatment of prisoners when the Republican presidential candidates are eagerly arguing over who is more in favor waterboarding and doubling the size of Guantanamo?" These "double standard" myths are the critical engines of a reckless and ill-considered moral relativism - because the United States and Europe have very real problems of their own to tackle, then nothing that the Russian government does is bad, goes the logic.
One rights group just recently zeroed in on this precise rhetorical hurdle, and decided that rather than criticizing the offending government, they would target the hypocrisy of those who support and legitimize these abusive states. Only when it is made clear that the complicity in these crimes is shared among all those who refuse to condemn them will we ever make progress. Human Rights Watch, which hasn't yet made a statement about Vasily Alexanyan (we all hope they will do soon), deserves a great amount of credit for coming up with a new approach to rights defense in the massive gray area of today's international arena.
In conclusion, if qui tacet consentit indeed holds true, than there are very few out there who will be able to claim innocence. It's time to speak up people, for the sake of human dignity.





Comments (28)
Actually, I don't think it's the double-standards narrative at work so much as the "what about Enron" argument. Kremlin apologists on the Yukos case have latched on to the long list of corporate malfeasance cases in the west – Enron, Tyco, Parmalat, WorldCom/Ebbers, Conrad Black, etc. – suggesting that, while Russian law enforcement may be a bit rude and crude, the prosecution of Khodorkovsky and his confederates is the equivalent of such cases.
And then, there is a more fundamental disconnect involved. In a world full of unfairness, public sympathies tend to go to "our own" people caught up in foreign injustice, or at least to people "like us." So Belgian medicos accused in Libya get a lot of W. European attention. Zahra Kazemi's case in Iran becomes a cause in Canada, because she was a Canadian citizen.
Along with the issues you rightly raise, these are inhibiting the kinds of international outrage one might have hoped for on behalf of Alexanyan, or indeed on behalf of Khodorkovsky, Lebedev and the others. If there were a Smith or, dare I say, an Amsterdam among them, international attitudes would be very different.
What to do? Look for affinities other than nationality. Example: Every western lawyer who reads your blog regularly should be encouraged to fire off a letter to relevant professional organizations such as the International Bar Association. Seek common cause with international prisoner rights' groups. Identify advocates on behalf of HIV victims and seek their help. Find MPs and Congressmen prepared to speak up: They're out there but have never been adequately mobilized.
I do note British MP Malcolm Bruce's Early Day Motion (a parliamentary petition), initiated this week, on the Alexanyan case (http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=34999&SESSION=891). That's a start. But there needs to be more.
Posted by fh
|
February 2, 2008 11:24 AM
Posted on February 2, 2008 11:24
I am afraid the origins of most if not all human rights movements, organisations etc were more or less "left wing"let it be Marx or Cohn Bendit or some other of the kind.So every "capitalist" is guilty as such!
The free press then but as was shown above its freedom ends where the bussiness begins.
Two ways are blocked then and...tertium non datur .
Posted by els
|
February 2, 2008 1:31 PM
Posted on February 2, 2008 13:31
els - You're being cynical, provocative or both. The Human Rights Institute of the IBA, to cite one example, was hardly established by Marxists. I don't think they've said enough about Russia, but I don't think it's because of ideology.
With regard to the media, give them news about which their readers/viewers/listeners have a demonstrable interest, and they'll cover it.
I agree with Bob that Khodorkovsky, Lebedev and other Yukos principals are rich guys for whom it is difficult (but not impossible) to promote concern. But others, like Svetlana Bakhmina and her boss Alexanyan, are not billionaires. The law of the excluded middle doesn't apply here, or at least not yet. In my view, available possibilities have not been fully tried.
Posted by fh
|
February 2, 2008 11:02 PM
Posted on February 2, 2008 23:02
Could be am cynical but never provocative.The problem is far too serious to play with provoking. If cynical its because old enough to remember the beginnings of the Helsinki watch.Leftist doesnt mean marxist.Sometimes only naive like eg my good friend the retired sovietologist (from the bundist family so would feel offended being called marxist)by the way was very active in the Helsinki W. One of the founders if I remember well. I AGREE ALL MUST BE TRIED!Contra spem spero!As wrote somewhere here am the child of the ex political prisoner of the stalinism era in POland and thats why am here. Not to play games provoking etc
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 12:22 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 12:22
but we are not here to argue about HRW.
Dont like feeling helpless but helpless am.Signed the petition , would like to do more but what can do I:semi invalid 50 yrs old woman.
Still if anything -let me know.
Can read English, Russian , some Yiddish (no use i believe)masters of old POlish literature and the second in the political philosophy etc etcMarried to the physicist. No use am afraid
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 2:32 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 14:32
els, you're absolutely right. There's very little information here or on the other Yukos related sites about what concerned citizens can do, beyond signing the petition.
Bob, James? Over to you.
Posted by fh
|
February 3, 2008 6:25 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 18:25
Well...looks like just the two of us talk here so els sounds bit silly My name is Ela (elizabeth)
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 6:44 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 18:44
Hi Ela.
You are illustrating my main point for me. Which is that a global grass-roots (and grass tops) campaign is not just possible, but essential.
Posted by fh
|
February 3, 2008 6:57 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 18:57
Hi fh,
anything I can do then?
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 8:24 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 20:24
I don't know, Ela. I'm in the same spot as you -- awaiting matching orders from Bob and his colleagues. They need to tell people like us whom they'd like to mobilize, and give us some basic tools with which to do it. Is there perhaps an association of former political prisoners with which you are connected and which you could address a letter? Is there a member of the Sejm or the Senate you could contact? It's out of such seemingly modest steps that campaigns are generated.
Posted by fh
|
February 3, 2008 9:31 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 21:31
well...dear fh,
first thing is i never answer any orders .No am not in the contact with the ex political prisoners association, My father doesnt want to belong anywhere,Yes, we have the friend who is the member of Sejm and one of the leaders of PO. will talk to him the first occasion but!! mind it -most people here , even those careing about human rights etc dont think about Mr Ch as the prisoner of the "conscience".
Some sample of what the Poles think we get reading comments to Mr Amsterdam blog in the Salon24 here.If am to say what i do think is:very very little chance to make Poles interested.
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 9:50 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 21:50
Seeing Mr A blog on the Polish blog-site (never heard about him before) my first thought was _Here we have the desperate lawyer who tries everything and...the same i think today.
All our parlament plus the president can protest and what? There is the russian saying Kurica nie ptica , Pol'sza nie zagranica.Nobody would care.
Still thinking and thinking could be I have an idea. Looks very un orthodox but cant believe any 'orthodox" way will help.When Mr A tries the way he must know is useless like make the Polish opinion interested maybe crazy idea has some sense.
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 10:26 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 22:26
Agreed about "orders." Just an ill-chosen figure of speech.
Agreed too about Khodorkovsky and other principals. It will be difficult to generate popular support. In a sense, I wish he had not announced his hunger strike. Although I sympathize with his intentions and his desperation, the gesture draws attention to him, instead of to Alexanyan.
Alexanyan is among what I would term the "innocents," not least because in fact he has not be convicted of anything, but also because he was only a subortinate. They are the victims of collateral damage in this war between the Kremlin and out-of-favour business owners. I think such people deserve our particular support.
Posted by fh
|
February 3, 2008 11:09 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 23:09
Re: "Pol'sza nie zagranica."
You cared. You would be surprised how much impact the concerns of an otherwise disinterested party can have.
Posted by fh
|
February 3, 2008 11:29 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 23:29
dear fh,
Is Mr Ch situation really so tragic as we can guess seeing MrA taking rather desperate steps? Is his life in danger? Sounds silly question but all is possible after Litvinenko.
If so maybe the most untypical ways should be tried.
Is it truth that some Russian Orthodox dignitaries have an influence on Putin? I guess Mr Ch isnt R orthodox but not really important now.
Posted by els
|
February 3, 2008 11:46 PM
Posted on February 3, 2008 23:46
Serious danger. And far more so if he is convicted on the new charges against him. Almost certainly he will be moved to an even more remote "hard regime" camp where, having faded from public consciousness, anything can happen.
I'm afraid the Russian Orthodox church is all but an arm of the state, and is unlikely to be helpful.
Posted by fh
|
February 4, 2008 12:02 AM
Posted on February 4, 2008 00:02
I dont believe the RO dignitaries to have mercy on Chodorkowski Just have some idea.
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 12:04 AM
Posted on February 4, 2008 00:04
I certainly agree that Mr. A and his colleagues need to be considering less conventional approaches.
Posted by fh
|
February 4, 2008 1:13 AM
Posted on February 4, 2008 01:13
Absolutely. Old ways like letters of protest and such like were good before 1989 and some yrs after.
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 1:36 AM
Posted on February 4, 2008 01:36
Hi fh ,
are you the editor of this version of this blog?
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 11:10 AM
Posted on February 4, 2008 11:10
Ela - No, not at all. I'm just a reader, like you. I've been involved with Russia for many years, in many ways. I'm hard to shock, but I am definitely shocked by the Alexanyan story.
Posted by fh
|
February 4, 2008 12:51 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 12:51
am shocked either but generally am less "shockable".My own father left the stalinist prison weighing 35 kg, with the beginnings of the bone(spine)tuberculosis which was fully diagnosed and fully developed in 1957 ie the year I was born.So Mama and I could have the normal home when I was about 6. His mental "shape" after years in prison (2 with the death sentence) I leave for u to imagine. My Mama , sister and mine living with him -try to imagine too. The decent job he could never get etc etc In fact we suffer till now as my younger sister living since the day she was born in the enviroment not all psychically stable suffers the severe depression...what am to say?
Nobody ever cared or cares about my family. Most people believe the anti communist opposition in Poland started in 1968.
but we do care so I do care about eg Mr Ch and other like him.
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 3:02 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 15:02
have seen this http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2006/10/27/3/a-discussion-about-mikhail-khodorkovsky-with-his-attorney-robert-amsterdam and must say that I disagree with MrA The situation isnt like 25 yrs ago
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 6:20 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 18:20
Thanks for all these comments.
I'm editor of the blog, as one of you had earlier asked.
There are so many points raised here that I wouldn't know where to begin.... everything from the Orthodox church to grassroots campaigns to comparisons between Stalinist and Putinist show trials.
Glad to see there is interest in these discussions.
Posted by James
|
February 4, 2008 6:32 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 18:32
Hi James,
true -quite a fun must be reading it ie what fh and i write but pretty far from how to get out MrCh from the jail as this is the point of all this;blogs etc Isnt it?
els-Ela
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 6:57 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 18:57
Hi Ela,
Robert Amsterdam's blog is not only a place to find news and opinion on the Khodorkovsky case, but also original writing and reporting on diverse subjects related to Russia, energy, and international affairs. I would even estimate that only 10-15% of our content is directly related to the Yukos case.
Yes, in his role as Khodorkovsky's lawyer, Robert Amsterdam's stated goal is to free him his unlawful detention.
Posted by James
|
February 4, 2008 7:04 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 19:04
So I believe,dear James, so I believe.
Posted by els
|
February 4, 2008 7:45 PM
Posted on February 4, 2008 19:45
Dear Robert,
Just to let you know that the message is actually spread, I can inform you that I distributed this news to the Swedish East European community as soon as I learnt about it. This actaully provoked some discussion, so it is not all silent.
Yours,
Vilhelm
Posted by Vilhelm Konnander
|
February 6, 2008 8:14 AM
Posted on February 6, 2008 08:14