Interviewed by Aleksey Leonov, Osetinfo.ru, Ossetia-war.com
The third day of the PACE session was marked by severe criticism of and even insults to Russia. In an interview with Osetinfo.ru, Aleksandr Brod, the chief of the Moscow Bureau for Human Rights comments on the delegates’ speeches and shares his views on the further development of the Russia-Western relationships.
Osetinfo.ru: How strong is the criticism of Russia?
Aleksandr Brod: Some speeches were extremely severe. Russia was accused, sometimes inappropriately. Some statements were like “the Russian Bear should be stopped”, “Russian tanks entered Georgia and Georgia lies in ruins”, “The tanks are not only in Georgia, but in this very hall, and in Europe”. It was said the Russian occupational forces invaded a sovereign state, amid allegations of mass rape and looting by Russian servicemen. Similarities were drawn with the Rwanda tragedy and the topic of the USSR’s invasion of Czechoslovakia was stirred again.
The Kremlin was accused of fearing democracy. Russia was called an “Empire of Evil”, while a Georgian delegate spoke about the low corruption level in his country and about Russia’s attempts to disrupt the peaceful process of democratisation in Georgia.
The question of issuing the passports of a foreign country to local residents was raised again. It was said that the Russian passports thus issued were forged.
Even those who admitted Georgia’s injustice accused Russia of “insufficient actions to prevent the invasion of South Ossetia”.
Some Western officials even made the absurd statement that Russia had sent its ships to South Ossetia’s shores, which meant they were not at all aware where South Ossetia was actually located.
O: Were there any positive statements about Russia?
AB: Oh, yes. For instance the representative from Greece spoke in support of Russia. He said that some delegates were trying to veer from the truth, and he insisted that it was Georgia that started the war, thus violating all the norms of international law. He also said it was now necessary to forget about the Soviet path and to stop identifying modern Russia with the Soviet Union.
One of European delegates made the following statement: “Georgia admits it has done something wrong.” Within the current session this statement is rather positive. It was also said that Russia was becoming a big and powerful state that must be taken into account.
Two statements were made on behalf of Great Britain. One of them was saturated with criticism of Russia, while the second one was aimed at investigating the objective causes of the tragedy. Ukraine’s representative also had good words for Russia. He was rather strict in his support of Russia and appealed for Georgia’s actions to be denounced.
O: Is it possible to convince the European colleagues and change their negative attitude towards Russia?
AB: I think it is, although not so fast. The West shows that the clichés about Russia are so deeply rooted in people’s minds that they are virtually unchangeable. For many, Russia is identified with the “Evil Empire”, the Soviet Union. As to what has happened in the past 20 years, it is terra incognita for many.
I think an unbiased investigation of the situation should be carried out. The investigators’ group must be comprised of representatives from different countries. It is possible that after such an investigation, the PACE delegates could be influenced on their stance.
For many, Russia is identified with the “Evil Empire”, the Soviet Union.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Plus
Minus
Reset
Russia is Evil
President Reagan: Speech to the House of Commons, June 8, 1982.
We're approaching the end of a bloody century plagued by a terrible political invention -- totalitarianism. Optimism comes less easily today, not because democracy is less vigorous, but because democracy's enemies have refined their instruments of repression. Yet optimism is in order because day by day democracy is proving itself to be a not at all fragile flower. From Stettin on the Baltic to Varna on the Black Sea, the regimes planted by totalitarianism have had more than thirty years to establish their legitimacy. But none -- not one regime -- has yet been able to risk free elections. Regimes planted by bayonets do not take root.
The strength of the Solidarity movement in Poland demonstrates the truth told in an underground joke in the Soviet Union. It is that the Soviet Union would remain a one-party nation even if an opposition party were permitted because everyone would join the opposition party....
Historians looking back at our time will note the consistent restraint and peaceful intentions of the West. They will note that it was the democracies who refused to use the threat of their nuclear monopoly in the forties and early fifties for territorial or imperial gain. Had that nuclear monopoly been in the hands of the Communist world, the map of Europe--indeed, the world--would look very different today. And certainly they will note it was not the democracies that invaded Afghanistan or suppressed Polish Solidarity or used chemical and toxin warfare in Afghanistan and Southeast Asia.
If history teaches anything, it teaches self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly. We see around us today the marks of our terrible dilemma--predictions of doomsday, antinuclear demonstrations, an arms race in which the West must, for its own protection, be an unwilling participant. At the same time we see totalitarian forces in the world who seek subversion and conflict around the globe to further their barbarous assault on the humhttp://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1982reagan1.htmlan spirit. What, then, is our course? Must civilization perish in a hail of fiery atoms? Must freedom wither in a quiet, deadening accommodation with totalitarian evil?
Sir Winston Churchill refused to accept the inevitability of war or even that it was imminent. He said, "I do not believe that Soviet Russia desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here today while time remains is the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries."
Well, this is precisely our mission today: to preserve freedom as well as peace. It may not be easy to see; but I believe we live now at a turning point.
In an ironic sense Karl Marx was right. We are witnessing today a great revolutionary crisis, a crisis where the demands of the economic order are conflicting directly with those of the political order. But the crisis is happening not in the free, non-Marxist West but in the home of Marxism- Leninism, the Soviet Union. It is the Soviet Union that runs against the tide of history by denying human freedom and human dignity to its citizens. It also is in deep economic difficulty. The rate of growth in the national product has been steadily declining since the fifties and is less than half of what it was then.
The dimensions of this failure are astounding: a country which employs one-fifth of its population in agriculture is unable to feed its own people. Were it not for the private sector, the tiny private sector tolerated in Soviet agriculture, the country might be on the brink of famine. These private plots occupy a bare 3 percent of the arable land but account for nearly one-quarter of Soviet farm output and nearly one-third of meat products and vegetables. Overcentralized, with little or no incentives, year after year the Soviet system pours its best resources into the making of instruments of destruction. The constant shrinkage of economic growth combined with the growth of military production is putting a heavy strain on the Soviet people. What we see here is a political structure that no longer corresponds to its economic base, a society where productive forced are hampered by political ones.
The decay of the Soviet experiment should come as no surprise to us. Wherever the comparisons have been made between free and closed societies -- West Germany and East Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia, Malaysia and Vietnam -- it is the democratic countries that are prosperous and responsive to the needs of their people. And one of the simple but overwhelming facts of our time is this: of all the millions of refugees we've seen in the modern world, their flight is always away from, not toward the Communist world. Today on the NATO line, our military forces face east to prevent a possible invasion. On the other side of the line, the Soviet forces also face east to prevent their people from leaving.
The hard evidence of totalitarian rule has caused in mankind an uprising of the intellect and will. Whether it is the growth of the new schools of economics in America or England or the appearance of the so-called new philosophers in France, there is one unifying thread running through the intellectual work of these groups -- rejection of the arbitrary power of the state, the refusal to subordinate the rights of the individual to the superstate, the realization that collectivism stifles all the best human impulses....
Chairman Brezhnev repeatedly has stressed that the competition of ideas and systems must continue and that this is entirely consistent with relaxation of tensions and peace.
Well, we ask only that these systems begin by living up to their own constitutions, abiding by their own laws, and complying with the international obligations they have undertaken. We ask only for a process, a direction, a basic code of decency, not for an instant transformation.
We cannot ignore the fact that even without our encouragement there has been and will continue to be repeated explosion against repression and dictatorships. The Soviet Union itself is not immune to this reality. Any system is inherently unstable that has no peaceful means to legitimize its leaders. In such cases, the very repressiveness of the state ultimately drives people to resist it, if necessary, by force.
While we must be cautious about forcing the pace of change, we must not hesitate to declare our ultimate objectives and to take concrete actions to move toward them. We must be staunch in our conviction that freedom is not the sole prerogative of a lucky few but the inalienable and universal right of all human beings. So states the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which, among other things, guarantees free elections.
The objective I propose is quite simple to state: to foster the infrastructure of democracy, the system of a free press, unions, political parties, universities, which allows a people to choose their own way to develop their own culture, to reconcile their own differences through peaceful means.
This is not cultural imperialism; it is providing the means for genuine self-determination and protection for diversity. Democracy already flourishes in countries with very different cultures and historical experiences. It would be cultural condescension, or worse, to say that any people prefer dictatorship to democracy. Who would voluntarily choose not to have the right to vote, decide to purchase government propaganda handouts instead of independent newspapers, prefer government to worker-controlled unions, opt for land to be owned by the state instead of those who till it, want government repression of religious liberty, a single political party instead of a free choice, a rigid cultural orthodoxy instead of democratic tolerance and diversity.
Since 1917 the Soviet Union has given covert political training and assistance to Marxist-Leninists in many countries. Of course, it also has promoted the use of violence and subversion by these same forces. Over the past several decades, West European and other social democrats, Christian democrats, and leaders have offered open assistance to fraternal, political, and social institutions to bring about peaceful and democratic progress. Appropriately, for a vigorous new democracy, the Federal Republic of Germany's political foundations have become a major force in this effort.
We in America now intend to take additional steps, as many of our allies have already done, toward realizing this same goal. The chairmen and other leaders of the national Republican and Democratic party organizations are initiating a study with the bipartisan American Political Foundation to determine how the United States can best contribute as a nation to the global campaign for democracy now gathering force. They will have the cooperation of congressional leaders of both parties, along with representatives of business, labor, and other major institutions in our society. I look forward to receiving their recommendations and to working with these institutions and the Congress in the common task of strengthening democracy throughout the world.
It is time that we committed ourselves as a nation -- in both the public and private sectors -- to assisting democratic development....
What I am describing now is a plan and a hope for the long term -- the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people. And that's why we must continue our efforts to strengthen NATO even as we move forward with our zero-option initiative in the negotiations on intermediate-range forces and our proposal for a one-third reduction in strategic ballistic missile warheads.
Our military strength is a prerequisite to peace, but let it be clear we maintain this strength in the hope it will never be used, for the ultimate determinant in the struggle that's now going on in the world will not be bombs and rockets but a test of wills and ideas, a trial of spiritual resolve, the values we hold, the beliefs we cherish, the ideals to which we are dedicated.
The British people know that, given strong leadership, time, and a little bit of hope, the forces of good ultimately rally and triumph over evil. Here among you is the cradle of self-government, the Mother of Parliaments. Here is the enduring greatness of the British contribution to mankind, the great civilized ideas: individual liberty, representative government, and the rule of law under God.
I've often wondered about the shyness of some of us in the West about standing for these ideals that have done so much to ease the plight of man and the hardships of our imperfect world. This reluctance to use those vast resources at our command reminds me of the elderly lady whose home was bombed in the blitz. As the rescuers moved about, they found a bottle of brandy she'd stored behind the staircase, which was all that was left standing. And since she was barely conscious, one of the workers pulled the cork to give her a taste of it. She came around immediately and said, "Here now -- there now, put it back. That's for emergencies."
Well, the emergency is upon us. Let us be shy no longer. Let us go to our strength. Let us offer hope. Let us tell the world that a new age is not only possible but probable.
During the dark days of the Second World War, when this island was incandescent with courage, Winston Churchill exclaimed about Britain's adversaries, "What kind of people do they think we are?" Well, Britain's adversaries found out what extraordinary people the British are. But all the democracies paid a terrible price for allowing the dictators to underestimate us. We dare not make that mistake again. So, let us ask ourselves, "What kind of people do we think we are?" And let us answer, "Free people, worthy of freedom and determined not only to remain so but to help others gain their freedom as well."
Sir Winston led his people to great victory in war and then lost an election just as the fruits of victory were about to be enjoyed. But he left office honorably and, as it turned out, temporarily, knowing that the liberty of his people was more important than the fate of any single leader. History recalls his greatness in ways no dictator will ever know. And he left us a message of hope for the future, as timely now as when he first uttered it, as opposition leader in the Commons nearly twenty-seven years ago, when he said, "When we look back on all the perils through which we have passed and at the mighty foes that we have laid low and all the dark and deadly designs that we have frustrated, why should we fear for our future? We have," he said, "come safely through the worst."
Well, the task I've set forth will long outlive our own generation. But together, we too have come through the worst. Let us now begin a major effort to secure the best -- a crusade for freedom that will engage the faith and fortitude of the next generation. For the sake of peace and justice, let us move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny.
This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes in modern European and World history.
Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use of the Sourcebook.
God will destroy all communist.
WB
Just dropping by to say howdy. Keep up your excellent work as always.
Gary
WB's comment is a perfect illustration of what Russia is up against. Europe, and certainly the United States sees Russia as suspect, as a reemerging power with the ambition to regain the territory and the clout of the Soviet Union at it's height, as antidemocratic and totalitarian.
Russia is going to have to show that this is not the case. It will take a long time.
Hey, just stumbled on this blog, and it looks riveting with communication. I'm an American from California interested in learning more about Russia, and I plan to when I return to school.
I'm curious, have you done any blogs on the atmosphere of Moscow to gays and lesbians?
Parry
Hello there, I'm an American from California interested in learning more about Russian culture in larger cities like Moscow.
Have you done, and if not, would you, any blogs on Moscow attitude towards gays and lesbians?
Hi Kyle and Svet,
"Some Western officials even made the absurd statement that Russia had sent its ships to South Ossetia’s shores, which meant they were not at all aware where South Ossetia was actually located."
Looks like we all better read blogs like this one and keep close tabs with happenings in Russia before the dis-information campaign by the U.S. et. al., further inundates the world with lies and just plain idiocy.
L. R.
WB - if you ever get round to doing a research degree, you will find out that you cannot apply random quotations. If you read some of the rhetoric from about the same time as your quotation from Reagan concerning Afghanistan, you will find that what we now call Taleban were the US's best friends in the region, and Osama Ben Laden was a great leader in the struggle against communism. Go back further and you may find that in the early 30's the US seriously considered declaring war against the UK. If you look hard enough you will find a speech from a Soviet General, a quick summary and paraphrasing of which says that the final communist strategy will be to pretend to abolish the communist dream, dress the country in capitalism, and lull the West into a false sense of security before throwing off the disguise to catch everyone unaware.
It is wrong to call any country evil, just as you cannot call any country good. Despite my distaste for some of his policies, I honestly believe that President Bush is a relatively honest man, who intended to make the world better (anyone remember the proverb: 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions'?). The same can be said of Tony Blair, and others. Even Stalin and Hitler thought they were doing the right thing.
Look at things with a wider perspective if you can. If Mexico started sending reconnaisance drones over the South of the US, building a military presence of the border, and then started shelling a city with a large US population, the US reaction would have been hugely more damaging than Russia's limited reaction to similar events in Ossetia - anyone remember the "Axis of evil" speech?
You probably won't read this, or respond to it, but the US would be better served if people like yourself opened their eyes to the fact that there are other opinions and worldviews that do not necessarily coincide with yours, but are equally valid
i trust russia and i dont think they are evil.
Hey Rotus,
You are correct and I have even had to erase the last few of his comments because he got rude crude and socially unacceptable.
Thanks for stopping by.
Kyle
Hey Anonymous,
I like Russia also.
Thanks for stopping by.
Kyle
Hey Matt,
WB did answer but I had to moderate. He got verbal issues and I cut him off. I like a clean blog.
Thanks for stopping by. I will have lots of posts on Israel.
Kyle
Hey Lydia,
Glad you stopped by. We were just thinking oabout you guys.
Thanks
Kyle & Svet
Hey Gary and Perry,
Thanks for stopping by.
Kyle