Today Sean's Russia Blog has an article on the murder of a United Russia deputy named Grigory Nosikov, commenting that the Western media has repeatedly ignored and/or downplayed violent deaths of members of government. Were Nosikov a journalist, opposition activist, or human rights activist, Sean quips, "you would probably know his name and his life by heart by now."
I'm not sure what to make of this comment. On the one hand, it's intentionally provocative (because that's what good blogging is all about) because it suggests that the sometimes inappropriate and clumsy wielding of names like Politkovskaya is on the same level as the murder and impunity itself. The timing of this comment, coinciding with the murder of Marksharip Aushev (who was running Ingushetia.org after his predecessor was also killed - you can read an article about him by Stanislav Markelov written for this blog, before he too was killed), I think is sure to raise some eyebrows.
Secondly, Sean makes it clear that it was Nosikov's business dealings, not his politics, which allegedly prompted the violence. That strikes me as an important detail.
I'm not sure what to make of this comment. On the one hand, it's intentionally provocative (because that's what good blogging is all about) because it suggests that the sometimes inappropriate and clumsy wielding of names like Politkovskaya is on the same level as the murder and impunity itself. The timing of this comment, coinciding with the murder of Marksharip Aushev (who was running Ingushetia.org after his predecessor was also killed - you can read an article about him by Stanislav Markelov written for this blog, before he too was killed), I think is sure to raise some eyebrows.
Secondly, Sean makes it clear that it was Nosikov's business dealings, not his politics, which allegedly prompted the violence. That strikes me as an important detail.
Let's be clear that all such horrible acts of violence are equally
odious, outrageous, and deserving of justice. No one life is worth
more than another, no matter what their position - but in a one party
state, being a United Russia deputy is akin to being a "made man" in
political terms. If he had been leading a probe into the party's
corruption, we can assume that the media would likely have taken more interest. Of course this doesn't mean that the murder of a state party politician isn't unjust - it's just not political. The assassination attempts against Ramzan Kadyrov and Yunus-Bek Yevkurov definitely made international headlines, for example.
In the past I have written on the topic of growing insecurity and prolific crime within some authoritarian states, which often runs counter to the myth that these leaders made a bargain to take away liberties in exchange for some type of hard to define "stability." One point that I am keen to stress is that these bullets don't really pause in mid-air to consider one's voting habits, and the broken conditions of rule of law similarly prevent justice for just about everybody (take the Paul Klebnikov case for example - few would describe him as a government critic).
Lastly and most importantly, I don't think we can begin to pretend that the West gives a damn about anybody getting murdered in Russia - that would mean that Washington wouldn't be stumbling straight forward into the "reset" with their eyes wide shut. Believe me, there is little appetite on Capitol Hill to hear about human rights violations in Russia today. Such cognitive dissonance clashes harshly with the current fantasies of a cooperative Kremlin. As for Europe, they are happy to give out a prize here and there, but politically they couldn't be further away from action.
Sean's story does open up an interesting discussion though. He links to a story posted in Argumenty i fakty which lists some 24 city and state members of government who have been murdered since 1992. Goodness, that is a high number, and yes, I think that's a news story. So what is the trend at work behind these murders of United Russia deputies? Does the Western media really give disproportionate coverage to only opposition victims? It's an interesting debate once we sort through the knee-jerk responses of those reading from their scripts.
In the past I have written on the topic of growing insecurity and prolific crime within some authoritarian states, which often runs counter to the myth that these leaders made a bargain to take away liberties in exchange for some type of hard to define "stability." One point that I am keen to stress is that these bullets don't really pause in mid-air to consider one's voting habits, and the broken conditions of rule of law similarly prevent justice for just about everybody (take the Paul Klebnikov case for example - few would describe him as a government critic).
Lastly and most importantly, I don't think we can begin to pretend that the West gives a damn about anybody getting murdered in Russia - that would mean that Washington wouldn't be stumbling straight forward into the "reset" with their eyes wide shut. Believe me, there is little appetite on Capitol Hill to hear about human rights violations in Russia today. Such cognitive dissonance clashes harshly with the current fantasies of a cooperative Kremlin. As for Europe, they are happy to give out a prize here and there, but politically they couldn't be further away from action.
Sean's story does open up an interesting discussion though. He links to a story posted in Argumenty i fakty which lists some 24 city and state members of government who have been murdered since 1992. Goodness, that is a high number, and yes, I think that's a news story. So what is the trend at work behind these murders of United Russia deputies? Does the Western media really give disproportionate coverage to only opposition victims? It's an interesting debate once we sort through the knee-jerk responses of those reading from their scripts.
This is generally a good analysis, but things are actually a lot less complicated than you make them seem.
Sean Guillory is an ignorant, childish pig. He's an avowed Marxist. He's an jealous, angry little boy. And his words betray him.
One might just as well say: "Wow, all you people sure made a big deal out of Martin Luther King being assassinated, but here's the Grand Dragon of the Alabama KKK getting hit by a truck, and you don't even notice."
It's insipid and pathetic. Sean will simply do anything -- anything -- even write in a pathetic rag like the eXile, to get attention. He's seething with jealousy over the piece about the apartment bombings that appeared in GQ, because he himself would so love to occupy such a position, yet nobody cares about his anal-retentive gibberish. It's clear that being ignored is getting to be too much for poor Sean, so he's lashing out like a schoolboy at any target he can find. Ironically, the more he seeks attention the less he appears to deserve it.
Of course, as you point out, Sean is also simply dead wrong about basic facts. Though Politkovskaya may have got more coverage, she's still unknown. What's more, Sean's comments don't even make sense. Russia has one of the highest murder rates in the world, so the wheel will come round to United Russia too from time to time. These folks were not threatened by the likes of Ramzan Kadyrov while the Kremlin stood in stony silence.
You too, however, are wrong on point, and I'll be the first to say that the life of a Politkovskaya is with a MILLION Nosikovs.
If I were Sean Guillory, I'd be mortally ashamed of having such childish words as these to remain after me as my legacy. Indeed, since he hopes to have a career in academia, they may well come back to haunt him long before then.
It's not a case -- as Sean suggests -- that the big bad hypocritical West only weeps over oppositional victims and ignores the party-of-power victims. Who becomes a UR deputy? People who want to consolidate their power base, who want to funnel state money into their private coffers, or who want immunity from prosecution. Most of these folks are businessmen. They are killed because of their businesses, or because they get in the way of someone else's bigger business deal. A few are killed violent “accidents.” (There are a few exceptions, but not many.)
That is entirely different from the dozens of journalists and oppositional leaders who are killed because they are exposing crimes, threatening corrupt business deals, or demanding that laws are obeyed.
Sean ends the piece with this straw man: “So much for that supposed power, prestige, and protection that comes from being a member and deputy for United Russia.” Who ever suggested this? It’s a cheap way of tweaking “western misconceptions” that don’t actually exist.
The reason few people in the West care about the murder of Nosikov is because he was an insignificant and unknown person.
If a small town local councillor in America was murdered, why would anyone in Russia care about it? Whether he was a Democrat or a Republican would be completely irrelevant.
It is complete rubbish that people in the West pay attention whenever a journalist or human rights activist is murdered. Who in the West has heard of Alexei Siderov, a local newspaper editor murdered in 2003, or Ilyas Shuraev, a TV reporter killed last year?
Obviously it all depends on how well-known the victim is, the manner of the killing (Polonium poisoning might have grabbed more attention), and the likely motives.