ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Russia

Security

What You Need To Know About Chechnya And The Boston Bombing Suspects

Tamarlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev

After an overnight chase, the media is reporting that the two suspects the FBI identified in Boston Marathon bombers are brothers from the restive Russian state of Chechnya. Here’s what you need to know about Chechnya and why that matters.

Russia is actually a much more diverse country than many realize, with several ethnic groups and states making up the larger Russian Federation. Chechnya is one of those states, home to an ethnic group known as Chechens. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, Chechnya attempted to become its own independent territory as many of the former Soviet states did. A similar struggle took place in neighboring Dagestan, which, much like Chechnya, is a Muslim majority state within Russia where the suspects are believed to have lived for a time before emigrating to the United States. The Russian federal government launched several all-out wars to keep Chechnya within the country. The last open conflict ended in 1999, with Russian President Vladamir Putin accused of using excessive force against civilians.

Moscow’s victory in the North Caucasus has never been fully cemented, due to an on and off struggle between the separatists in the states and the central government. Various social media accounts discovered possibly belonging to the two suspects indicate that both share a heavy interest in Chechen issues.

Several Chechen separatists groups still exist and have carried out many heinous attacks over the years. The most notorious of these was in the Russian city Beslan, when a Chechen group took an elementary school hostage in 2004. More than 300 hostages were killed during the incident, including 186 children. Chechen separatists were also behind a hostage taking at a Moscow theater, which ended with the Russian government accidentally killing 130 of those inside the building. Chechens have also been identified or suspected as jihadi fighters in conflicts around the world, including in Syria, while continuing to wage an insurgency against Moscow for the establishment of an Islamic state in Chechnya.

Unfortunately, this does not tell us very much at the moment. An ethnicity does not indicate any sort of defined motive or ties to any possible group or groups and law enforcement has yet to provide any confirmation of the current reporting. Chechen groups also have traditionally focused their ire on Russia rather than targeting the United States. Finally, given their lengthy residence it is difficult to discern what — if any — ties or sympathies the two brothers have to Chechen terrorist groups. The older of the brothers — Tamerlan Tsarnaev — has been in the United States for years as a refugee and hoped to box for the United States in the Olympics one day.

Update

An earlier version of this story incorrectly indicated that Tamerlan Tsarnaev wanted to box in the 2002 Winter Olympics hosted in Salt Lake City.

Justice

How The Bush-Era Torture Memos Are Destroying America’s Moral High Ground Against Russia

Torture memo author John Yoo

John Yoo, the author of the infamous Bush Administration memos providing a bogus legal justification for torture, left the Department of Justice nearly ten years ago. Since then, he’s retained his prestigious position on Berkeley’s law school faculty. He has not been disbarred for providing some of the most incompetent legal advice in the Justice Department’s history. A 2006 law largely immunizes him from legal accountability for his work authorizing torture. And he uses the Wall Street Journal‘s opinion page as if it were his own personal blog.

In other words, when Yoo entered the Bush Administration in 2001, he was a little-known law professor writing pieces that were mostly read by other law professors. Today, he is one of the most well-known and visible legal commentators in the country — despite the fact that he is best known for what was, at best, professional incompetence.

Beyond the sheer injustice that Yoo gets to live an affluent and comfortable life despite being complicit in torture, Yoo’s lack of accountability is also providing Russia with an opportunity to chip away at America’s moral high ground as we try to pressure that nation to quit some of its human rights abuses:

Russia on Saturday banned 18 Americans from entering the country in response to Washington imposing sanctions on 18 Russians for alleged human rights violations.

The list released by the Foreign Ministry includes John Yoo, a former U.S. Justice Department official who wrote legal memos authorizing harsh interrogation techniques; David Addington, the chief of staff for former U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney; and two former commanders of the Guantanamo Bay detention center: retired Maj. Gen. Geoffrey Miller and Adm. Jeffrey Harbeson.

The move came a day after the U.S. announced its sanctions under the Magnitsky Law, named for Russian lawyer Sergei Magnitsky, who was arrested in 2008 for tax evasion after accusing Russian police officials of stealing $230 million in tax rebates. He died in prison the next year, allegedly after being beaten and denied medical treatment.

Now, let’s be absolutely clear, Russia’s record on human rights is atrocious and cannot be brushed away by loose comparisons to John Yoo’s actions or Dick Cheney’s. But a strong record on human rights is critical to convincing the the world that United States is serious when it calls for action against human rights abuses around the world. It is tough to offer such leadership so long as men like John Yoo go about their lives in the United States with impunity.

Alyssa

The Power Of Pussy Riot’s Feminist Faith

The Soviets Destroy Christ the Savior Cathedral

You can see why Russians might be a little touchy about perceived threats to this church, since it's already been blown up once.

Like a lot of pop-culture loving feminists who grew up in the Riot Grrrl era, I’ve been keeping an eye on the whole Pussy Riot fiasco in Russia.  It’s kind of humbling to know that music that inspired me to get my ears pierced multiple times and to buy Doc Martens inspired these women to the kind of social protest that gets you thrown in prison. But while I certainly understood why they were arrested for making a video of them storming the altar area of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow and singing their anti-Putin protest anthem, “Punk Prayer,” I didn’t really get why they were in the front of that church singing that song to begin with.

So, when I heard that Vanderbilt University was having a roundtable discussion on this very issue, I went over to hear what the experts had to say. I’m glad I went. The panelists were Timothy Beal, a professor from Case Western Reserve, Barbara Browning from NYU, Jen Gunderman from Vanderbilt, and Alex Spektor from Vanderbilt.  Joy Calico, also from Vanderbilt, moderated.

Professor Spektor went first and gave some context to why Pussy Riot picked that particular church for their performance. The cathedral was originally built to commemorate Napoleon’s retreat from Russia, and represented the power of God, and thus the Church, over Russian life. When the Soviets came to power, they destroyed the church. The symbolism of such an action is obvious. The Soviets then intended to build an enormous building commemorating Lenin on that spot.

The building never happened, but the foundation was built and the empty spot where the church wasn’t and where the Lenin monument was supposed to go took on a kind of symbolic power. In other words, even though the space was empty, everyone knew what had been there and what was supposed to be there. Khrushchev eventually turned the spot into an enormous swimming pool, to give the spot something to be other than just the emptiness where these important buildings weren’t. That, I would guess, did nothing to lessen the symbolic power of the spot. In 1990, the Russian Orthodox Church was given permission to rebuild the cathedral there and, in 2000, the cathedral was consecrated.

What Spektor explained was that the new church stands on a site of monumental rhetorical significance, a site that is always seen as meaningful by the people who have power at the time. So, it’s not just a church, not even just a cathedral, but a monument to who controls Russia. And the Church Patriarch has been incredibly supportive of Putin, seeing him as a man who is erasing the mistakes of history—in other words, erasing the erasure of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Pussy Riot, as Tim Beale later pointed out, is trying to disrupt this marriage of church and state, since the state uses religious leaders and religious symbolism to further the state’s agenda. Beale further went on to quote some from Pussy Riot about how they imagine religion as a “pool of creative wisdom” from which everyone is free to draw out what is meaningful and useful to them, whereas they see their opponents as using it as a political cudgel, which they think corrupts the Church.

Read more

Economy

Textbook Right-Wing Economics Can Ruin The Economy

Daron Acemoglu, an economist at MIT, and James Robinson, a political scientist and economist at Harvard, provide an interesting academic analysis of how mainstream (i.e., mainly conservative) economic policies centered on privatization, deregulation, and free trade lead to unwanted social outcomes.

Echoing warnings from progressives about the consequences of right-wing policies, Acemoglu and Robinson (authors of Why Nations Fail) use the financial crisis to show “how economic policy designed with a disregard for political implications can be injurious to social welfare.”  For example, the orgy of financial sector deregulation that started in the U.S. during the 1980s drastically tilted the political environment towards the interests of finance and encouraged the “moral hazard” of big banks taking excessive risks with the full knowledge that the government would have no choice but to bail them out when their bets went bad.  The financial crisis of 2007-2008 was the end result of this mainstream economic advice.

Similarly, conservative economists for decades have argued against the collective bargaining power of unions on efficiency grounds.  But steps to reduce union negotiating strength that began with the Taft-Hartley Act in 1947 – as well as numerous free trade agreements — not only reduced wages and leverage for workers, they also led to higher levels of inequality, outlandish CEO pay, and future deregulation by shifting the political equilibrium too far away from the needs of workers. The long term demise of the middle class was the end result of this economic thinking.

Outside of the U.S., the authors cite the “loan-for-shares” scheme of privatization in Russia to further the argument.  Although the textbook case for privatization initially led to economic gains for Russia, it later undermined democratic reforms and led to the rise of a new authoritarian government under Putin:

Not only did this type of privatization massively enrich and empower the oligarchs, but it also failed to create a large number of small shareholders. In 1994, workers owned 50 percent of the average Russian enterprise; by 1999, this figure had dropped to 36 percent. By 2005, 71 percent of medium and large industry and communications enterprises had a single shareholder who owned half the stock.

The unequal distribution of privatized assets in turn produced a backlash “against the process of economic and political reform in Russia, ultimately re-creating authoritarianism and firmly entrenching a form of state-led crony capitalism.”

Acemoglu and Robinson conclude their article by saying, “Our argument is that economic policy should not just focus on removing market failures and correcting distortions but, particularly when it will impact the distribution of income and rents in society in a direction that further strengthens already dominant groups, its implications for future political equilibrium should be factored in.”

Although their argument is not entirely novel, it does have important implications for how progressives should think about the current right-wing obsession with deficits, taxes, and spending. Conservatives often talk about the “unintended consequences” of liberal policies. What’s that old saying about glass houses?

LGBT

Russian Parliament Advances National Bill Banning ‘Propaganda of Homosexualism’

The Russia Parliament, the Duma, passed the first reading of a bill banning “propaganda of homosexualism” today with only one dissenting vote and one abstention — leaving the proposal just two more readings and President Vladimir Putin’s signature away from being law. It is unclear how “propaganda” and “homosexualism” will be ultimately be defined and enforced, but the law would punish public events and dissemination of information on LGBT lifestyles to minors with fines of up to $16,000 if passed.

The bill has caused an outcry from the global LGBT movement and domestic protests out of concerns the discriminatory nature will be used to effectively silence the LGBT community in Russia; Just earlier this week activists opposing the law were assaulted and twenty LGBT activists and militant Orthodox Christian activists were detained during protests outside the Duma this morning.

A similar local law in St. Petersburg previously used to arrest participants in pride parades was upheld by the Russian Supreme Court last year, but limited in scope to enforcement against direct appeals to minors to engage in homosexual activity. Other former Soviet states including Ukraine have promoted similar anti-LGBT equality agendas.

LGBT

Russian Gay Activists Assaulted For Protesting Proposed Ban On ‘Propaganda’

Russian lawmakers have been considering a nationwide law that would ban “homosexual propaganda,” modeled off similar laws that have been passed in St. Petersburg and other cities. Though the bill claims to protect minors from “propaganda of sodomy, lesbianism, bisexuality, and transgenderism,” the term “propaganda” is not defined, and thus such a law could essentially ban all free speech on LGBT issues.

Over the weekend, LGBT groups protested the proposed legislation in both Voronezh and Moscow and experienced physical violence in retaliation. Watch videos of the brutal assaults on the peaceful protesters:

RT reports today that consideration of the bill has been indefinitely postponed, but its proponents suspect a conspiracy among its opponents is preventing it from advancing.

Security

Russia Punishes U.S. By Blocking Adoption Of Russian Orphans

In retaliation for the United States placing sanctions on Russian human rights violators, the Russian parliament has passed a bill banning U.S. citizens from adopting Russian orphans. The action comes after President Obama signed the so-called “Magnitsky Act,” named for a Russian lawyer who died while in prison, into law on Dec. 14.

The Russians are responding with the Dima Yakovlev bill. The measure commemorates a young boy adopted from Russia who later died in the U.S and places travel sanctions on those Americans whom Russia has deemed violate the human rights of Russian citizens. The Russian Duma, or Parliament, voted unanimously in favor of the bill on Wednesday, and President Vladimir Putin is fully prepared to sign it into law. Putin attempted to head off criticism about the effect the ban will have on the already strained Russian system of care for its orphans:

In televised comments, Putin tried to appeal to people’s patriotism by suggesting that strong and responsible countries should take care of their own and lent his support to a bill that has further strained U.S.-Russia relations.

“There are probably many places in the world where living standards are higher than ours. So what, are we going to send all our children there? Maybe we should move there ourselves?” he said, with sarcasm.

Meanwhile, Deputy Prime Minister for Social Affairs Olga Golodets says that putting the ban into effect would not only violate Russian federal law, but also international law and a 2011 agreement that the U.S. and Russia put into place regarding adoption. At present, Americans adopt more orphans from Russian than they do any other country.

Update

Putin signed the bill into law on Friday and issued a decree “ordering a shake-up and improvement of Russia’s care for orphans.”

NEWS FLASH

Police Detain Protesters After Scuffle Between LGBT Activists And Opponents | Though the Russian State Duma delayed consideration of a bill banning promotion of gay “propaganda,” LGBT activists proceeded with a kiss-in protest outside Parliament. They argue the bill will force them to be invisible and inhibit free speech. Opponents of LGBT equality showed up to counter-protest by throwing eggs at them,  and when scuffles ensued, the police intervened. Reportedly, protesters from both sides were detained. Watch a video of the conflict:

Security

How Does America’s Love Of Guns Measure Up Internationally?


In the wake of the tragic events in Newtown, CT, a renewed debate about gun laws is forthcoming in the United States. With that in mind, the following is a look at the top ten gun exporting countries around the world, to see how the United States compares to them in that and other areas related to guns and gun violence. All of these numbers come together to paint a picture of a country with high ownership and production of guns, with high rates of death related to that ownership, and yet some of the laxest laws on the planet when it comes to regulating them.

Top Arms Exporter

When ranked among the top ten arms exporters, the United States is far and away in the lead in terms of sheer output. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the United States shipped off a total of $6.6 billion worth of arms in 2009, beating the next closest competitor, Russia, by over a billion dollars. Rounding out the list are Germany, France, the United Kingdom, China, Spain, Israel, the Netherlands and Italy.

The data combines both private sales from arms manufacturers and government authorized arms trades between states. For a better look at how the latter looks, and how the United States still outperforms all other countries, Google has an interactive look at where all these guns go.

Most Gun Owners Per Capita

Not only does the United States ship off the most guns in the world, its people own the most guns among the top ten exporters. The Small Arms Survey in 2007 pulled together a database of several countries’ gun ownership per 100 people, and found that an average of 88 guns per 100 people within the U.S. In comparison, the next highest country, France, had only 33 guns for every 100 citizens.

Most Gun Deaths Per 100K People

Rather than looking at the sheer number of deaths caused by firearms in the top ten exporters, a more accurate way to compare them is by gun deaths per 100,000 citizens. In that ranking, for those who break gun deaths out from their annual murder rate, the United States is again at the top of the list, this per the World Health Organization and the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime.

The United States in 2009 had 3 gun deaths for every 100,000 people over the course of the year, completely eclipsing the next nearest country’s rate of .96, coming from Israel, by a wide margin. When you factor in the .243 rate of France, the second-highest gun owning country, the United States’ gun troubles seem even more problematic. Notable in this context, in the aftermath of mass shootings, other countries have tightened their laws accordingly and seen a drop in gun violence.

Second Highest Percentage Of Homicides With a Firearm

One of the few areas related to gun ownership and violence where the United States does not come in at the top among the biggest arms exporters is the percentage of homicides within the country carried out using a firearm. In that statistic, Italy holds the first position, with the United States in second. According to the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime and the Organization of American States, 60 percent of the murders in the U.S. in 2009 involved a firearm.

NEWS FLASH

Russia Withdraws Proposal For U.N. Regulation Of The Internet | A coalition of states led by the Russian Federation has backed away from a proposal for the United Nations to have more direct regulation over the Internet. Conservatives within the U.S. had previously flagged the Russian proposal as sign of an imminent encroachment of America’s sovereignty by the U.N, despite Obama administration opposition to the measure. While tabled for now, the proposal could still be reintroduced and forced to come to a vote before the talks in on Friday, according to a Western delegate at the conference.

Older

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up