Tag Archives: Vladimir Putin

Government, Russia, Society

The attack in Volograd raises concerns for a peaceful Winter Olympics in Sochi…

Intro: The real threat to the Sochi Games is not a Western boycott but an Islamist terror attack

The run-up to the Winter Olympics in Sochi, which start in February, has been mired in controversy for months. Increasing the minds of politicians and athletes has been on whether they should boycott the Games in protest over Russia’s increasingly harsh treatment against homosexuals and lesbians.

The devastating suicide bombing over the weekend in Volograd, in southern Russia, is an instant reminder that the real threat to the Sochi Games is not a Western boycott but an Islamist terror attack. The blast at a railway station, which has killed at least 18 people, was not the first in Volgograd. In October, Russia identified a woman bomber from Dagestan as being responsible for a bus bombing in which five people were killed. Dagestan is one of a patchwork of small, mainly Islamic, autonomous republics in the Caucasus.

Russia has reason to be concerned for Dagestan is almost as unstable now as neighbouring Chechnya was in the 1990s. Although Russia battled a separatist insurgency there, Chechnya has never been entirely pacified. To add to the charge that Sochi is more of a threat from radical Islamists, rather than matters to do with sexuality, the leader of the Chechen rebel Islamists vowed in July to stop the Games from proceeding over the bones of its ancestors, or over the bones of many dead Muslims. The language used by the Chechen rebels is disturbing for athletes simply wishing to compete in the Games for medals.

So far, though, nothing has happened in Sochi, and the militants seem to have selected Volgograd as an alternative – maybe, because it is the nearest largest urban location north of the Caucasus.

For Vladimir Putin, he will deal with the terrorist threat by tightening a formidable range of security measures already in place around the Olympic village and event locations. Mr Putin will want to honour his previous pledge when he proclaimed in advance that the Sochi Games would be ‘the safest Olympics ever’.

Politically, whether Moscow can ever restore a lasting peace in the North Caucasus is highly doubtful. Russia simply does not have the manpower to keep all the republics in lockdown at the same time. Nor is the policy of periodically replacing stubborn local leaders with more adaptable ones necessarily an effective one.

Was Tolstoy right when he wrote that Russia is paying a delayed price for those colonial 19th-century wars which have saddled Russia with lands that it can neither absorb nor relinquish? Violence now seems par the course for radical Islamists in the Caucuses, if not in Sochi, then elsewhere.

Standard
Government, Middle East, Syria, United Nations

The suffering in Syria continues unabated…

SYRIA

Amidst the raging chaos and devastation of civil war in Syria, the people of Syria are enduring some of the worst winter weather experienced in the Middle East for many years.

The full-scale of this developing disaster is hard to comprehend. The misery of conflict, now almost into its fourth year, coupled with the added problem of the despair of cold and hunger, is truly amounting to a catastrophe of biblical proportions. In the land of the Old Testament, seven million people have now fled their homes, and more than two million have left the country having been displaced through the ravages of war. Tens of thousands of Syrian refugees are crossing the border each day into neighbouring Lebanon in pursuit of safe haven and shelter.

Relief agencies operating within the country are reporting that vast swathes of people are starving and in desperate need of help. The difficult weather is making it hard of getting vital food, medical and aid supplies to the besieged areas. The compounding effects of war and the climate are severely hampering the logistics involved of delivering emergency supplies to many people now in desperate humanitarian need.

This week, the United Nations launched its biggest ever appeal for foreign aid, requesting nearly £4 billion from the international community to help the humanitarian effort, both in Syria and in neighbouring countries struggling to deal with the crisis and mass movement of people. Syrian refugees now make up 25 per cent of the population in Lebanon alone.

Since the ill-fated and doomed Western flirtation with military intervention over the Assad regime’s use of chemical weapons in Aleppo, there has been a tendency to think that nothing else can be done. Further confusion has occurred because the West has suspended logistical help to the rebels to stop equipment and supplies falling into the hands of Islamist groups linked to Al-Qaeda. As difficult as it is, though, it must be possible to help the Syrian people in some way without interceding in the conflict itself – the choice cannot simply be between bombs or bread.

Lady Amos, the UN emergency relief coordinator, has said that the Syrian people feel they have been totally abandoned. With governments in a seemingly precarious position and unable to agree a relief strategy, there is no-doubt that citizens of the Western world would want to see their governments acting by relieving the hardships being endured by so many. The UK has been generous and at the forefront of providing humanitarian assistance, both through privately pledged donations and state funding. But in alleviating genuine suffering other countries need to show a higher level of altruism and spirit of giving. What, for example, of Syria’s oil-rich fellow Arabs? Apart from Kuwait, no Arabian state has given anything like the amount they could afford.

Within Syria itself, greater international pressure should be exerted on Bashar al-Assad to allow humanitarian corridors to be established that would allow access to the hardest-hit areas. Alarmingly, a recent UN resolution to this effect was recently opposed by Russia. If Vladimir Putin’s resolutely dogged approach in support of the Assad regime does not change tack by bringing his influence to bear on Damascus, then he must stand accused of letting the regime use the starvation of innocent civilians as a weapon of war.

Standard
European Union, Politics, Russia, Society, Ukraine

Ukraine, Russia and the wider issue of morality…

TUG OF WAR

Many Ukrainians are now so desperate to join the European Union that they are prepared to protest in ways not seen before in the country. They run the risk of brutality from President Viktor Yanukovych’s security forces, for whom the concept of community policing remains alien and an anathema. Mass anti-government protests in Ukraine have brought large swathes of the country to a standstill, largely prompted by Moscow’s strong-arm and bully-boy tactics aimed at halting Kiev’s attempts to improve the country’s trading ties with the EU. This fervour stems from a particular theory of Ukrainian nationhood, where many of its electorate believe the country should be an equal partner in the European Union, rather than remaining little more than a Russian satellite.

International opinion has, at times, questioned the morality of Russian decisions, such as that in 2009 when Moscow turned off the gas supplies to Ukraine in the middle of winter to dissuade it from forging closer ties with Brussels. The arrogance of Russian ambitions towards Ukraine could hardly have been laid barer. Continued threats over the continuity and supply of gas, as Russia continues to apply its power over Ukraine, underlies more cynical Russian ambitions. Mr Putin’s plan is for Ukraine to join Belarus and Kazakhstan in a political trading bloc to be known as the Eurasian Union.

For many Ukrainians, though, that is not only a poor substitute for the EU, but also an uncomfortable reminder of Ukraine’s position as a member of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

Russia is seeking to capitalise on how Eurasian integration will likely generate increased interest from its other neighbours through the usual warm rhetoric of international diplomacy. But, in truth, the West would be right to assume a more menacing aspect to it. As Mr Putin is the dominant partner in this new Eurasian Union, it is worth examining and putting into perspective some of his recent comments and actions. For example, what of his attitude to the legitimate interests of other nations in the Arctic and his unnecessarily harsh treatment of those seeking to preserve the environment there? Russia is motivated by the rich new oil wells recently located in the Arctic and the huge benefits that exploration will bring to the Russian economy. Mr Putin’s rather indifferent attitude to human rights doesn’t bode well, either, for the Eurasian Union becoming a model template of tolerance and openness.

However, not all people in Ukraine are worried over Russia’s attempt to wrest control over its affairs. Many Ukrainians do support President Yanukovych’s decision to ditch his negotiations with the European Union and seem undisturbed about the record of human rights in their own country or in Russia.

The tragedy of Ukraine being forced to choose between traditions and that of regional power blocs is its nemesis. Geography dictates that fate, at least to some degree, is inevitable. Ethnic, economic and cultural ties do naturally tug in the opposite direction when a country is caught between two bigger powers. Yet, in all practicalities Ukraine should not have to make such a choice and would not need to if Russia would allow her to develop her links with Europe.

Conceivably, Ukraine could do that as well as being closely aligned to Russia. Ukraine should be allowed to maintain her trading and other relationships, but as part of a wider settlement between the EU on one hand and Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus on the other.

Mr Putin’s stance between his own nation and that of his close neighbours is generally perceived and accepted as a zero-sum game – the EU’s gain, for instance, must be Russia’s loss. But persisting with such a position will leave Ukraine at best in a state of uncertainty or limbo, and at worst a target for permanent bullying.

..

DURING last week’s annual state of the nation address, Vladimir Putin emphasised his belief that Russia takes a morally superior world-view to the West. It is hard to credit Mr Putin with that surprising claim considering the level of violence taking place on a daily basis in countries such as Syria and Ukraine.

Moscow’s staunch and unrelenting support for the dictatorial regime of Bashar al-Assad has been a prime reason why diplomatic efforts to stem the bloodshed have been thwarted in a raging civil war that has now claimed the lives of more than 100,000 people and displaced millions more.

Mr Putin claims that there is a clear moral compass behind his government’s domestic policies. But where is the evidence? Modern day Russia is a country where political opponents are killed or dispatched to Siberian labour camps, where gangsterism is rife, and where free speech is actively discouraged. Widespread and endemic corruption has persuaded Russian businessmen to flee the country in their droves to escape the constant threat of state-sponsored violence and extortion.

Mr Putin’s personal ambition of reviving Russia’s fortunes as a world power is a self-evident prophecy. He may well believe that, by resisting the tide of what he refers to as the West’s ‘non-traditional values’, his aspirations will be realised. In truth, so long as the Russian President remains intent on crushing political dissent at home and intimidating his enemies abroad, no one is going to be endeared to his sense of moral teaching.

Standard