Our Sponsors:

Read more »

Trending Stories

Our Members

Many thanks to Michele Flores and Chad Haight some of our many supporters.


Most Commented


    Feeling the wrath of Putin in Russia from the Northwest

    The Northwest has a long history of promoting freedom in Russia. The latest anti-democracy moves raise questions about how to respond without causing more trouble.
    A December 2011 demonstration in Moscow

    A December 2011 demonstration in Moscow Maxim Trudolubov/Flickr

    In the last few weeks, disturbing reports of harassment of Russian NGOs by the Russian government have alarmed civil society activists. Numbers vary, but as many as 5,000 organizations may have been targeted, including Memorial, one of the country’s oldest human rights organizations, and the Moscow office of Amnesty International.

    Natalya Taubina of the Moscow-based human rights organization, Public Verdict, reports that in some cases authorities "may just ask for a few documents; in other cases they may request an exhaustive list, essentially comprising all of the work of the NGO.  This contributes to a sense of randomness, harassment and uncertainty for all of us.” 

    This latest step in what has been a steady drumbeat restricting Russia’s civic space is part of a scare campaign to hinder NGO contact with international partners and a payback by the Kremlin for a year of unrest and opposition that spilled into the streets.  In December 2011, Russian parliamentary elections were held and widely perceived to be deeply flawed.

    Those elections had come on the heels of an extraordinary announcement by then Prime Minister Vladimir Putin that he and President Dmitry Medvedev had planned all along to switch roles and allow Putin to run again for Russia’s presidency.  For the first time since the end of the Soviet Union, Russians in huge numbers took to the streets to protest and express frustration with the corruption and political cynicism of the Putin machine.  Hundreds of thousands of Russians made their voices heard in a series of rallies from that winter through spring, culminating in a massive rally the day before President Putin’s new term began on May 7, 2012. 

    Putin’s crackdown has come within the context of unprecedented anti-Western and anti-American rhetoric. In January 2013, the U.S. Congress passed the Magnitsky law. The late lawyer Sergei Magnitsky’s abuse and ultimate death in prison galvanized support for concrete measures that would bar Russian officials from obtaining visas and holding assets in the U.S. The Magnitsky bill was explicitly linked with Russia’s graduation from the Cold War-era Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which denied favorable trading status to the old Union of Soviet Socialist Republics until it gave its citizens the right to emigrate.

    Washington state’s Sen. Henry M. “Scoop” Jackson championed that law, taking on a reluctant Nixon White House. Jackson was a believer in human rights and a staunch friend of Israel; he deplored the plight of Soviet Jews and other religious minorities in the USSR.  Nearly 500,000 Jews, Catholics, and minority Christians left for the U.S. as a direct result of that groundbreaking law, which was the first to inject the concept of human rights into American foreign policy. An estimated one million more Jews left the USSR for Israel.

    Tens of thousands of former Soviet citizens settled in the greater Seattle region and more in the Northwest. Those who came in the 1970s and 1980s link their freedom directly to Sen. Jackson and the role he played in the struggle for Soviet Jewry.

    Recognizing the symbolic heft of Jackson-Vanik and its continuing leverage in U.S.-Russian relations, Congress and the White House earlier this year therefore weighed in on Russia’s treatment of its citizens with the passage of the Magnitsky law.  The Kremlin reacted predictably, slamming the U.S. and enacting measures — most notoriously, a ban on American adoption of Russian children — meant to punish America for interference in Russia’s domestic affairs.

    Russia watchers have been waiting for the Kremlin to respond. Not long after Putin resumed the presidency, the other shoes began to drop, restricting freedom of speech, assembly, and association. In June, there was a new law against unlawful protests; in July, a measure to make defamation a felony and an internet law that allowed the blocking and blacklisting of certain websites; a pending measure that criminalizes public outreach about homosexuality; and in November, two harsh laws. The first law requries that any NGO involved in political activity that accepts money from foreign sources must register as a “foreign agent.” The second law expands the definition of treason to encompass practically any communication between Russian citizens and foreign individuals or entities. The NGOs most at risk are human rights organizations and election-watch groups like Golos, targeted by the Kremlin for their perceived role in political opposition and suspect because they have Western support.

    Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!


    Posted Sat, Mar 30, 9:06 p.m. Inappropriate

    While I don't doubt that the Putin regime is guilty of all sorts of nastiness, who made the U.S. into judge and jury over them?

    "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone..." Seems to me like the U.S. has plenty of its own dirty laundry, and maybe we should be dealing with that rather than sticking our noses into other people's business, nasty though it may be. Say what you will about Putin, he is popular in Russia for having restored a degree of national pride after the comic opera of the Yeltsin years, not to mention the U.S. triumphalism over "winning" the Cold War.

    It's hard to blame the Russians for restricting the holier-than-thou activities of the Jackson Foundation. Do these people have any idea how their preachiness comes across to people in other countries? It's almost enough to make one feel downright embarrassed to be American.

    Posted Tue, Apr 2, 6:12 p.m. Inappropriate

    What good did the Magnitsky law do anyone? Magnitsky is still dead, his British client is not helped, and Russian orphans are a lot worse off. Scoop Jackson was smart, but the reflexive Russophobia of his foundation doesn't do us or the Russians any favors.


    Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

    Join Crosscut now!
    Subscribe to our Newsletter

    Follow Us »