Politics
Metro bombings expose the weaknesses of Medvedev’s presidency and Putin’s system
Reading Time: 4 minutesThe two terrorist attacks on the Moscow metro last Monday were certainly a shock to Muscovites, who had to re-live the nightmare of 2002-2004, when suicide bombings were a permanent feature of their lives. The double suicide attack in Kizlyar, Dagestan last Wednesday, while not necessarily part of the same campaign, proved that the escalation of violence in the North Caucasus, which most Russians had been inclined to ignore
By Pavel K. Baev
Medvedev struggles to demonstrate leadership in combating terrorism
The two terrorist attacks on the Moscow metro last Monday were certainly a shock to Muscovites, who had to re-live the nightmare of 2002-2004, when suicide bombings were a permanent feature of their lives. The double suicide attack in Kizlyar, Dagestan last Wednesday, while not necessarily part of the same campaign, proved that the escalation of violence in the North Caucasus, which most Russians had been inclined to ignore, could not be contained within the region (Vedomosti, April 1). President, Dmitry Medvedev, recognizes that it is imperative to take charge of a renewed struggle against terrorism, and this “re-securitization” of the political agenda could change the character of his still fledgling leadership.
Medvedev responded very swiftly and publicly to this turn of events, attending the Lubyanka station to lay flowers at the site of the first attack, and making a sudden visit to Dagestan; he opted not to deliver a special address to the nation, but issued several strongly-worded statements. Prime Minister, Vladimir Putin, also commented on events, but Medvedev has clearly taken the lead in addressing the recurrent grave threat (Rossiyskaya Gazeta, April 1). He has not dropped even the slightest hint that the victory in suppressing insurrection in Chechnya, about which Putin boasted during the 2007 Munich security conference, has turned out to be completely false. Meanwhile, he has attempted to shape his response differently from Putin’s traditional line. For once, Medvedev has refrained from emphasizing external ties and sources of terrorism, which Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, mentioned while meeting with his G8 colleagues (RIA Novosti, March 30). He said nothing about the “Georgian connection,” which was alleged by Nikolai Patrushev, the Secretary of the Security Council (Vremya Novostei, April 1).
Medvedev finds it necessary to talk tougher than Putin, promising to exterminate terrorists and to destroy “every last one of them,” rather than bringing them to justice. He also seeks to expand the list of “permissible” methods in fighting terrorism, arguing that they “must be both more effective and more rigorous, one might even say harsh.” The main target of these merciless methods are accomplices, and Medvedev insists that “even those who do no more than cook soup and wash clothes” should be treated as members of terrorist groups that have “committed a clear and specific criminal act.”
What makes this brutal rhetoric less convincing is the extraordinary vagueness in defining the adversary and explaining the causes that drive the new wave of terrorism. Terms like “separatists” or “rebels” are banned from the official vocabulary, and it is also prohibited to mention “shahids” or “Wahhabism” or even “Islamic radicalism” (www.gazeta.ru, April 2). Medvedev wants to introduce an “appropriate terminology,” but uses only meaningless expressions such as “scum” or “animals.” This poverty of discourse arouses irritation against the media, which insists on spelling problems out. Consequently, Boris Gryzlov, the Speaker of the State Duma, alleged that Vedomosti and Moskovsky Komsomolets were “inked with actions of terrorists.” Both newspapers responded in no uncertain terms and Gryzlov, despite his parliamentary immunity, could face slander charges (Vedomosti, Moskovsky Komsomolets, April 2).
Medvedev also attempts to distance himself from such squabbles, insisting that it is “absolutely normal” that “the media criticize the law enforcement and security services and the authorities in general.” Equally, his own style of engagement with the media has become visibly less open and flexible. He no longer grants lengthy interviews to TV channels or visits newspapers like Novaya Gazeta; his blog remains open, but the entries are just fragments from various formal statements and opening remarks, while the comments are suspiciously uncritical. That is hardly a sign of him “growing in the job,” but rather a symptom of retreating into a “comfort zone” inside the circle of Kremlin sycophants, who never raise difficult questions.
Medvedev has not yet shut himself away completely from the sub-surface concerns within society, and he tries to impede the xenophobic reaction to terrorism by insisting that “people who live here in the Caucasus are the citizens of our nation, not ‘immigrants’ from the North Caucasus.” Even before the Moscow explosions, some 70 percent of Russians saw the situation in the North Caucasus as tense or explosive, and only 22 percent expected improvement (www.levada.ru, March 30). The new attacks signify a major failure of Putin’s strategy in the region, which combined two key elements: brutal suppression of resistance, and generous distribution of federal funds among local elites. Medvedev cannot invent any alternative, nor fail to see that neither effort is sustainable: the law enforcement structures have become too corrupt to provide efficient suppression, and the depleted federal budget cannot afford new increases in allocating uncontrollable funds (Ezhednevny Zhurnal, April 2).
There is a clear risk that the security threats emanating from the North Caucasus could once again determine and shape the trajectory of Russia’s development (Nezavisimaya Gazeta, April 2). The reaction to the new wave of terrorism in society is inevitably blended with the discontent caused by the recession that appears set to continue, despite the upbeat government forecasts. One particularly troublesome side of this interplay is the terrorist attacks have revealed a peculiar side of the extra-deep social inequality in Russia: the elites, who do not use the metro and live in walled “villages,” are safe and see no need to change their arrogant lifestyle (www.gazeta.ru, March 30).
This selective insecurity makes the propaganda appeals for social unity against terrorism hollow and false, while the passive isolation of society from the state evolves into potential antagonism. Medvedev’s attempts to assert his leadership by presiding over a broad mobilization against an urgent threat are frustrated by the lack of interest within the corrupt elites, and the absence of trust in the divided and disoriented society. The necessary shift of priority to security matters obviously does not help the “modernization” agenda, which implies a departure from bureaucratic omnipotence, but neither could it impel a return to a state-centric model. The social contract that combines petro-prosperity with quasi-democracy has expired, but Russia –much like its state-controlled TV, which for several hours remained silent about the bombings on the metro– is still trying to ignore the breakdown of Putinism.
A new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred in the headlines of worldwide football news yesterday. The Football Club Sheriff Tiraspol claimed a win with the score 2-1 against Real Madrid on the Santiago Bernabeu Stadium in Madrid. That made Sheriff Tiraspol the leader in Group D of the Champions League, including the football club in the groups of the most important European interclub competition for the first time ever.
International media outlets called it a miracle, a shock and a historic event, while strongly emphasizing the origin of the team and the existing political conflict between the two banks of the Dniester. “Football club from a pro-Russian separatist enclave in Moldova pulls off one of the greatest upsets in Champions League history,” claimed the news portals. “Sheriff crushed Real!” they said.
Moldovans made a big fuss out of it on social media, splitting into two groups: those who praised the team and the Republic of Moldova for making history and those who declared that the football club and their merits belong to Transnistria – a problematic breakaway region that claims to be a separate country.
Both groups are right and not right at the same time, as there is a bunch of ethical, political, social and practical matters that need to be considered.
Is it Moldova?
First of all, every Moldovan either from the right or left bank of Dniester (Transnistria) is free to identify himself with this achievement or not to do so, said Vitalie Spranceana, a sociologist, blogger, journalist and urban activist. According to him, boycotting the football club for being a separatist team is wrong.
At the same time, “it’s an illusion to think that territory matters when it comes to football clubs,” Spranceana claimed. “Big teams, the ones included in the Champions League, have long lost their connection both with the countries in which they operate, and with the cities in which they appeared and to which they linked their history. […] In the age of globalized commercial football, teams, including the so-called local ones, are nothing more than global traveling commercial circuses, incidentally linked to cities, but more closely linked to all sorts of dirty, semi-dirty and cleaner cash flows.”
What is more important in this case is the consistency, not so much of citizens, as of politicians from the government who have “no right to celebrate the success of separatism,” as they represent “the national interests, not the personal or collective pleasures of certain segments of the population,” believes the political expert Dionis Cenusa. The victory of FC Sheriff encourages Transnistrian separatism, which receives validation now, he also stated.
“I don’t know how it happens that the “proud Moldovans who chose democracy”, in their enthusiasm for Sheriff Tiraspol’s victory over Real Madrid, forget the need for total and unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops from Transnistria!” declared the journalist Vitalie Ciobanu.
Nowadays, FC Sheriff Tiraspol has no other choice than to represent Moldova internationally. For many years, the team used the Moldovan Football Federation in order to be able to participate in championships, including international ones. That is because the region remains unrecognised by the international community. However, the club’s victory is presented as that of Transnistria within the region, without any reference to the Republic of Moldova, its separatist character being applied in this case especially.
Is it a victory?
In fact, FC Sheriff Tiraspol joining the Champions League is a huge image breakthrough for the Transnistrian region, as the journalist Madalin Necsutu claimed. It is the success of the Tiraspol Club oligarchic patrons. From the practical point of view, FC Sheriff Tiraspol is a sports entity that serves its own interests and the interests of its owners, being dependent on the money invested by Tiraspol (but not only) oligarchs.
Here comes the real dilemma: the Transnistrian team, which is generously funded by money received from corruption schemes and money laundering, is waging an unequal fight with the rest of the Moldovan football clubs, the journalist also declared. The Tiraspol team is about to raise 15.6 million euro for reaching the Champions League groups and the amounts increase depending on their future performance. According to Necsutu, these money will go directly on the account of the club, not to the Moldovan Football Federation, creating an even bigger gab between FC Sheriff and other football clubs from Moldova who have much more modest financial possibilities.
“I do not see anything useful for Moldovan football, not a single Moldovan player is part of FC Sheriff Tiraspol. I do not see anything beneficial for the Moldovan Football Federation or any national team.”
Is it only about football?
FC Sheriff Tiraspol, with a total estimated value of 12.8 million euros, is controlled by Victor Gusan and Ilya Kazmala, being part of Sheriff Holding – a company that controls the trade of wholesale, retail food, fuels and medicine by having monopolies on these markets in Transnistria. The holding carries out car trading activities, but also operates in the field of construction and real estate. Gusan’s people also hold all of the main leadership offices in the breakaway region, from Parliament to the Prime Minister’s seat or the Presidency.
The football club is supported by a holding alleged of smuggling, corruption, money laundering and organised crime. Moldovan media outlets published investigations about the signals regarding the Sheriff’s holding involvement in the vote mobilization and remuneration of citizens on the left bank of the Dniester who participated in the snap parliamentary elections this summer and who were eager to vote for the pro-Russian socialist-communist bloc.
Considering the above, there is a great probability that the Republic of Moldova will still be represented by a football club that is not identified as being Moldovan, being funded from obscure money, growing in power and promoting the Transnistrian conflict in the future as well.
Photo: unknown
Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Natalia Gavrilita, together with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nicu Popescu, pay an official visit to Brussels, between September 27-28, being invited by High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell Fontelles.
Today, Prime Minister had a meeting with Charles Michel, President of the European Council. The Moldovan PM thanked the senior European official for the support of the institution in strengthening democratic processes, reforming the judiciary and state institutions, economic recovery and job creation, as well as increasing citizens’ welfare. Natalia Gavrilita expressed her confidence that the current visit laid the foundations for boosting relations between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union, so that, in the next period, it would be possible to advance high-level dialogues on security, justice and energy. Officials also exchanged views on priorities for the Eastern Partnership Summit, to be held in December.
“The EU is open to continue to support the Republic of Moldova and the ambitious reform agenda it proposes. Moldova is an important and priority partner for us,” said Charles Michel.
Prime Minister Natalia Gavrilita also met with Paolo Gentiloni, European Commissioner for Economy, expressing her gratitude for the support received through the OMNIBUS macro-financial assistance program. The two officials discussed the need to advance the recovery of money from bank fraud, to strengthen sustainable mechanisms for supporting small and medium-sized enterprises in Moldova, and to standardize the customs and taxes as one of the main conditions for deepening cooperation with the EU in this field.
Additionally, Prime Minister spoke about the importance of the Eastern Partnership and the Deep Free Trade Agreement, noting that the Government’s policies are aimed at developing an economic model aligned with the European economic model, focused on digitalization, energy efficiency and the green economy.
A common press release of the Moldovan Prime Minister with High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission, Josep Borrell Fontelles, took place today, where the agenda of Moldova’s reforms and the main priorities to focus on in the coming months were presented: judiciary reform; fighting COVID-19 pandemic; promoting economic recovery and conditions for growth and job creation; strengthening state institutions and resilience of the country.
“I am here to relaunch the dialogue between my country and the European Union. Our partnership is strong, but I believe there is room for even deeper cooperation and stronger political, economic and sectoral ties. I am convinced that this partnership is the key to the prosperity of our country and I hope that we will continue to strengthen cooperation.”
The Moldovan delegation met Didier Reynders, European Commissioner for Justice. Tomorrow, there are scheduled common meetings with Oliver Varhelyi, European Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement, Adina Valean, European Commissioner for Transport and Kadri Simson, European Commissioner for Energy.
Prime Minister will also attend a public event, along with Katarina Mathernova, Deputy Director-General for Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations.
Photo: gov.md
Politics
Promo-LEX about Maia Sandu’s UN speech: The president must insist on appointing a rapporteur to monitor the situation of human rights in Transnistria
The President of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, pays an official visit to New York, USA, between September 21-22. There, she participates in the work of the United Nations General Assembly. According to a press release of the President’s Office, the official will deliver a speech at the tribune of the United Nations.
In this context, the Promo-LEX Association suggested the president to request the appointment of a special rapporteur in order to monitor the situation of human rights in the Transnistrian region. According to Promo-LEX, the responsibility for human rights violations in the Transnistrian region arises as a result of the Russian Federation’s military, economic and political control over the Tiraspol regime.
“We consider it imperative to insist on the observance of the international commitments assumed by the Russian Federation regarding the withdrawal of the armed forces and ammunition from the territory of the country,” the representatives of Promo-LEX stated. They consider the speech before the UN an opportunity “to demand the observance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the Russian Federation with reference to this territory which is in its full control.”
“It is important to remember about the numerous cases of murder, torture, ill-treatment, forced enlistment in illegal military structures, the application of pseudo-justice in the Transnistrian region, all carried out under the tacit agreement of the Russian Federation. These findings stem from dozens of rulings and decisions issued by the European Court of Human Rights, which found that Russia is responsible for human rights violations in the region.”
The association representatives expressed their hope that the president of the country would give priority to issues related to the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region and would call on relevant international actors to contribute to guaranteeing fundamental human rights and freedoms throughout Moldova.
They asked Maia Sandu to insist on the observance of the obligation to evacuate the ammunition and the military units of the Russian Federation from the territory of the Republic of Moldova, to publicly support the need for the Russian Federation to implement the ECtHR rulings on human rights violations in the Transnistrian region, and to request the appointment of an UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur to monitor the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova.
**
The Promo-LEX Association concluded that 14 out of 25 actions planned within the National Action Plan for the years 2018–2022 concerning respecting human rights in Transnistria were not carried out by the responsible authorities.
The association expressed its concern and mentioned that there are a large number of delays in the planned results. “There is a lack of communication and coordination between the designated institutions, which do not yet have a common vision of interaction for the implementation of the plan.”
Promo-LEX requested the Government of the Republic of Moldova to re-assess the reported activities and to take urgent measures, “which would exclude superficial implementation of future activities and increase the level of accountability of the authorities.”
Photo: peacekeeping.un.org
“They are not needy, but they need help”. How Moldovan volunteers try to create a safe environment for the Ukrainian refugees
Reading Time: 3 minutesAt the Government’s ground floor, the phones ring constantly, the laptop screens never reach standby. In one...
#WorldForUkraine – a map that shows the magnitude of the world’s actions against Russian aggression
Reading Time: 2 minutesThe international community and volunteers from all over te world have launched #WorldForUkraine as a platform that...
How is Moldova managing the big influx of Ukrainian refugees? The authorities’ plan, explained
Reading Time: 3 minutesFrom 24th to 28th of February, 71 359 Ukrainian citizens entered the territory of Republic of Moldova....
Russia And Ukraine At The Beginning of 2022
Reading Time: 4 minutesThis opinion piece was written by Dr. Nicholas Dima. Dr. Dima was formerly a Professor of Geography and...
The man raising children on Nistru river
Reading Time: 7 minutesOn the Nistru, near the village of Varnița, a few colored pens with blue dots in the...
The village of the first astronomer in the Republic of Moldova
Reading Time: 5 minutesFrom eight in the morning till noon, every Thursday and Sunday, people lay their merchandise on the...
The prodigal son returns and turns his grandparents’ home in a tourist attraction on Nistru river
Reading Time: 7 minutesOn the road towards the school, a well-maintained rural house catches your eye, yellow stags painted on...
FC Sheriff Tiraspol victory: can national pride go hand in hand with political separatism?
Reading Time: 4 minutesA new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred...
Study// What is the reaction of authorities to journalistic investigations?
Reading Time: 3 minutes“People expect logical consequences when they see cases of undeclared assets, conflicts of interest, protectionism or proof...
Secretary General of CoE called on Moldova’s state institutions to avoid constitutional crisis. Politicians took it the way they wanted.
Reading Time: 3 minutesAt the beginning of this month, Speaker of Parliament, Zinaida Greceanii, sent a letter to Secretary General...