Skip to main content

The public calls for the West to apply pressure on Russia will obviously be counterproductive


As we go to press, Mr. Khodorkovsky has been found guilty as charged of numerous economic crimes, including fraud, tax evasion and embezzlement as relates to Yukos. We are still awaiting the verdicts as regards the fraudulent Apatit privatization. Furthermore, the Prosecutor's Office has announced that a new slew of charges will be brought - primarily involving money laundering.

Given the billions that Menatep has abroad the charges seem well-founded. What we are still awaiting is prosecution for crimes of violence. Nevzlin stands accused of murder, and if the reputation of the Menatep boys is anything to go by (the Apatit privatization alone reportedly could have filled up a small cemetery) there is more to come.

There are two great mysteries here. The first - which we have returned to repeatedly - is how anyone as intelligent as Mikhail could have done something so stupid as to engage in a fight to the death with the Putin administration (perhaps there is something about having grown up in a Soviet-era communal apartment - then finding oneself a multi-billionaire surrounded by scores of adulating flunkies - which causes a loss of the sense of perspective). But the second mystery is, if anything, even more bewildering. What on earth do they expect to gain from their scorched earth tactics against Russia?

Defense counsel Robert Amsterdam has been accusing the Russian government of theft, all matter of human rights violations, and has publicly attempted to pressure, inter alia, the German government to downgrade relations with Russia (with a straight face, in the same interview he also spoke of his "love for Russia"!) Meanwhile, Menatep has been furiously lobbying in Washington against fundamental Russian diplomatic interests, in particular WTO accession.

Of course, the notion that Germany would abandon a vital part of its diplomatic and economic strategy to support a Russian crook in trouble with his own government is laughable. When the Menatep boys requested that the British ambassador write a letter to Putin in support of Khodorkovsky (unlike the fawning response from the US ambassador) they were promptly shown the door. Now, even the Bush administration - which strongly supported Khodorkovsky in the days when it appeared that he could deliver Russia oil to the US - has belatedly realized that they have drilled a dry hole, and seems to show less enthusiasm. Certainly, much of the US Neocon faction is still generously funded by Yukos, so yes, the senators-for-sale that Khodorkovsky once owned in the Russian State Duma have now been replaced by some bought US congressmen. Alas, for the fallen oligarch, their writ extends to the Russian border, but not far beyond. Since it was apparently the promise of support from the American Neocons which led Khodorkovsky to so disastrously overplay his hand, they certainly owe him one!

No, the simple fact is that Amsterdam and his mates have no doubt with the active complicity of the accused, simply succeeded in gaining the worst possible outcome for their client. Their public calls for the West to apply pressure to Russia will obviously be counterproductive: Mr. Putin does not intend to kowtow to the West in the manner of his predecessors. Amsterdam is correct in his assessment that the Russian government has suffered much PR damage from this affaire - certainly, the Menatep PR machine is nothing if not professional. He should bear in mind that the Nazis' siege of Leningrad did infinitely more damage - but Russia never capitulated!

-- Pravda

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Arundhati Roy: The 2004 Sydney Peace Prize lecture

The 2004 Sydney Peace Prize lecture delivered by Arundhati Roy, at the Seymour Theatre Centre, University of Sydney. Peace & The New Corporate Liberation Theology It's official now. The Sydney Peace Foundation is neck deep in the business of gambling and calculated risk. Last year, very courageously, it chose Dr Hanan Ashrawi of Palestine for the Sydney Peace Prize. And, as if that were not enough, this year - of all the people in the world - it goes and chooses me! However I'd like to make a complaint. My sources inform me that Dr Ashrawi had a picket all to herself. This is discriminatory. I demand equal treatment for all Peace Prizees. May I formally request the Foundation to organize a picket against me after the lecture? From what I've heard, it shouldn't be hard to organize. If this is insufficient notice, then tomorrow will suit me just as well. When this year's Sydney Peace Prize was announced, I was subjected to some pretty arch rema

"Global Doubts as Global Solutions"

by Amartya Sen Melbourne Town Hall Tuesday, May 15, 2001, 6pm 1. Misery and Resignation We live in a world of unprecedented prosperity - incomparably richer than ever before. The massive command over resources, knowledge and technology that we now take for granted would be hard for our ancestors to imagine. But ours is also a world of extraordinary deprivation and of staggering inequality. An astonishing number of children are ill nourished and illiterate as well as ill cared and needlessly ill. Millions perish every week from diseases that can be completely eliminated, or at least prevented from killing people with abandon. The world in which we live is both remarkably comfortable and thoroughly miserable. Faced with this dual recognition, we can go in one of several different directions. One line of thinking takes the form of arguing that the combination of processes that has led to the prosperity of some will lead to similar prosperity for all. The advocacy of this perspective c

How not to manufacture patriotism

by TJS George Was anyone patriotically inspired by this year's Republic Day speeches? Or any year's for that matter. Or by any of the Independence Day speeches over the years. These have become mere rituals. Rituals do not inspire. This is not necessarily the fault of our leaders. Speeches that lift the souls of listeners have been heard only rarely in history. The occasion, the mood, the speaker's personality and convictions are all decisive in giving a speech lasting impact. As Macaulay's children know, Edmund Burke made many a memorable speech. But none of them acquired the stamp of greatness that a short speech by Abraham Lincoln did _ the Gettysburg address. Pre-independence India bristled with great scholars, orators and visionaries. None made the impact Vivekananda did at the Parliament of Religions with the opening words, "Sisters and brothers of America .... I thank you in the name of the mother of religions. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan could hold