Galina Arapova - defending human rights in Russia

Here are some extracts from a speech given last week by Russian human rights lawyer Galina Arapova, who was in Washington DC accepting the 2016 Human Rights Award from the International Bar Association (IBA).

"Recognition in one’s profession means a great deal," said Arapova, addressing the IBA's annual conference. "Needless to say it carries even more weight when we are dealing with work that is of significant public interest and involves a heightened degree of danger. Defending human rights is exactly such work in many regions of the world, including Russia. But I implore you to keep on doing it. It is of paramount importance - it’s not just years of hard work, it’s both victories and disappointments, threats, solidarity, trust in the values we defend.

Arapova: "Keep on working, keep on hoping"

"How successful we are depends a great deal on the independence of the judiciary and necessitates respect for the rule of law among the relevant ruling bodies and authorities and society in general. To talk openly and to defend those voices brave enough to raise issues of public concern, to be critical about the current state of affairs in Russia, requires both courage and hope that things can change, can improve for the better.

"You probably expected me to talk about the repressive regime, about the negative role of propaganda and censorship, about the loss of our freedom, about 350 journalists killed in Russia in just the last 20 years for freely speaking their minds and whose deaths were not properly investigated, about Internet blocking, politically motivated cases, restoration of criminal defamation.

"I can talk about these issues for hours, with examples and arguments, but I won’t. I am not going to dramatize the situation, as we do our best in the current environment and are not going to quit. I believe that freedom of expression and media diversity and independence are values that are worth defending everywhere because they are at the very core of a democratic society. In some countries it just so happens that this defense is quite a bit more difficult than in others. And human right lawyers are just crazy enough to keep working, to keep hoping, despite the multitude of difficulties they face and the obstacles they must constantly overcome."

Congratulations to Arapova and her team on receiving due recognition for their courage and conviction. Her award was reported world wide by a single news organisation, the web site of Voronezh-based 36on.ru.

The next round of qualifying games for the upcoming state- and Fifa-led propaganda fest that will be Russia 2018 takes place early next month. Please avoid watching these games.

Opposition in Russia - like playing blank piano keys

Russian opposition politician Wladimir Kara-Musra, who last year survived an assassination attempt by poison, is interviewed in today's Süddeutsche Zeitung about what motivates him to continue campaigning ahead of Sunday's elections. While state-controlled TV broadcasts ridiculous items smearing his reputation and his party, Open Russia, he tours around the country holding meetings and listening to people.

The keys to opposition

At the end of the interview, Kara-Mursa - a close friend of the tragically murdered opposition politician Boris Nemtsov - talks about Rudolf Kehrer, the child of a Swabian piano-maker who emigrated to Russia during World War Two. He'd already been awarded a place at the Moscow Conservatory when Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941. Kehrer then spent 13 years in a camp, unable to play the piano.

"And so he painted the keys on a block of wood and practiced in silence," says Kara-Mursa. "When he was released after Stalin's death, he continued his studies and became a celebrated pianist, playing concerts everywhere.

"What we're doing with Open Russia, is exactly that: practicing on a block of wood with painted-on keys. At some point the day will come when we can take the stage."

Former Qatar resident hits out at economic slavery

An article in the increasingly daring Doha News has highlighted the problem of dissent in Qatar. Lawyer Kristen Jarvis Johnson, a former resident of the Gulf state, concedes that she kept quiet about economic slavery while living there, but has now urged ex-patriot residents still in Qatar to do the opposite and speak out.

The World Cup - smothered by a nation's flag
 and rooted in economic interests 

Better late than never, except for those who've already died. The customary depressing comments below the piece slate Johnson for speaking out from the safety of abroad. But then that's somewhat the point, isn't it? She writes that after the excitement of settling in a new country with a new job wears off, "the dark realization sets in that we are supporting modern day slavery. We feel that we risk our reputation and livelihood if we speak out.

"The consequences of contrarian speech are drastic and create huge risk for those who wish to voice an opinion," she continues, citing the country's cyber-crime law. But now she's ready to concede that "six months after leaving, I am still haunted by the thousands of people working under harsh conditions to prepare for the 2022 World Cup and to build the country’s infrastructure. All of these workers are employed under the kafala (sponsorship) system, one that many people in Qatar are quick to criticize behind closed doors."

There are a lot of things that happen behind closed doors in repressed Arab societies. The consumption of alcohol and other drugs. Homosexuality. And, according to Johnson, political dissent. Most expats, she writes, "wait to speak up, if at all, until after they have completed their stay in Qatar. This leads to criticism about people living large while in the country who only publish scathing commentaries after they leave. It’s more complex than this, but it is true."

What are the options? Leave the country? Don't go there in the first place? Form a huge union of expats and picket building sites? (Yes, I'm being facetious, but it would beat handwringing from several thousand miles away - would the Qatari state arrest and imprison several hundred wealthy foreigners?) Johnson's answer is that "we, the international community, must continue to stand up for the rights of those slaving away on Qatar’s World Cup preparations. We can implore the leaders of Qatar to scrutinize their legal system, to get rid of laws that violate basic human rights, and to protect the workers building the nation’s infrastructure."

Well, human rights groups have been trying that for years, but "the leaders of Qatar" would rather stifle dissent than listen to it. They will only act if Fifa pulls the tournament, but the chances of that have now diminished to almost nothing. Beyond the vacuous tokenism of its slogans, Fifa does not care about human rights. The most disgraceful World Cup in football's history will take place as planned, because the business of sport has become more important than human life itself.

Russia: independent pollster named 'foreign agent'

Don't like your showings in the polls? In a democracy, you have to suck it up and up your game. In Russia, you can just force the pollster to shut down using the label 'foreign agent'.

Another Russian institution gets punished
for reporting the truth

The Levada Centre, Russia's main independent pollster, has made the mistake of reporting that Vladimir Putin's United Russia party is down in the polls ahead of Lower House elections on September 18. Now it's been designated a 'foreign agent' and faces closure, like many other non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in the country. Under the dubious law passed by the Russian parliament in 2012, any NGO receiving funds from abroad is designated with the 'foreign agent' label to make it seem like a devious, subversive influence from beyond the Motherland, out to destroy all that is true and Russian.

"Although a new electoral commission head seen as more progressive was appointed in March," the Guardian noted yesterday, "opposition candidates have been marginalised in state-controlled media and even attacked at appearances this year. The elections have been moved from December to September, which is likely to promote low turnout and benefit United Russia."

The President deigned to mention his party's lower ratings in an interview with Bloomberg News,  saying that its numbers had "slightly fallen" (from 39% to 31%, according to Levada). The reason? "They [opposition politicians] all criticise the government," said Putin. "They don't offer solutions to make things better, though. Sometimes they simply say things that even laymen realize are hardly practicable or just unfeasible. However, they look good on screen, scolding and holding up to shame members of the ruling party. They don't say whether they are ready to take on responsibility for making unpopular, but in the long run necessary, decisions."

Unpopular, but necessary - another way of saying, we'll do what the fuck we want, and then claim that we're sacrificing ourselves and our souls by having to make hard decisions. Like Tony Blair claimed after the publication of the Chilcott Report on the disastrous, ill-conceived US-UK invasion of Iraq. "Look, I'm sorry I was wrong, but I had to make a jolly hard decision." But what was harder - invading Iraq or seeking a diplomatic solution? Or, in Putin's case, invading the eastern Ukraine to look like a strong man or seeking a diplomatic solution?

Note: Speaking of Strong Men, there was a delightful question from the Putin interview touching on a touchy subject. Bloomberg's journalist asked the leader about Donald Trump's "great sort of affection to you [sic], almost bordering on the homoerotic". Sadly, Putin does not confess that the attraction is mutual. Under Russia's homophobic legislation, this would have lead to his own arrest.

Kaepernick puts the right kind of politics into sport

Ask an American sports fan why the US national anthem is played before every single sporting event, and you will not receive a satisfactory answer. The truth is, no one knows. "That's just what we've always done" is about the best you can hope for. "Is it in case you forget which country you're living in?" I always ask. In case all those US flags that top so many buildings and that are displayed on so many suburban streets disappear overnight and you suddenly can't remember where you are? Nepal? El Salvador? England, for God's sake?

Heaven help you if you fail to join the overwhelming majority in standing up for it. I've tried, and have been - on the worst nights - cursed at and stared at with naked aggression. 

Daring not to stand for the SSB (note: this image
 on Facebook posted by a white US woman in Texas
 complaining the woman pictured had "zero respect"
 caused a furore on social media earlier this summer)

In the end, getting older, I capitulated and started to stand up with everyone else. Many US sports fans I know reluctantly do the same because it's just not worth the hassle. No one wants to spend a night at a sports event feeling like they're about to be confronted by a Bud-fuelled, raging redneck. It's not like there's going to be a debate. Ask an irrationally patriotic American why they play The Star-Spangled Banner and he or she will ask you back why you don't go and live in another country. That sophisticated discourse hasn't changed for decades.

The brave decision of San Francisco 49ers quarter-back Colin Kaepernick not to stand for this tedious ritual on political grounds is the best thing to happen in the National Football League since Ben Fountain's flag-challenging novel, Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk. That excellent work of fiction lays bare the empty ceremonies that NFL teams stage for marketing reasons to honour members of the armed forces. They are tokenistic, borderline insulting calls for fans to mindlessly cheer at fighter jet flyovers and reluctantly waving service members forced to smile politely when the kind of citizen who would vote for war but never venture close to a battle field blandly thanks them "for your service".

Kaepernick's absolutely reasonable justification is that he won't honour the anthem of a country which defies its own constitution by failing to treat black citizens as equals. You'd think that in a democracy, this statement from a high-profile athlete would be the starting point for a civil discussion of a pertinent truth. A section of the conservative white US citizenry is, however, still so threatened by the idea of equality, especially for those it's been oppressing for centuries, that the reaction is dominated by shrill accusations of treachery that barrel towards a single conclusion - patriotism is deaf and blind. It has to be, otherwise it can not bear the scrutiny of calm analysis that would expose it as a sham and a pernicious means of barking down dissent.

Novel approach to patriotism - Ben
 Fountain's brilliant novel.

What does this have to do with the 2018 and 2022 World Cups? Only that big-time, big-money sport wants politics to be a one-way street. It secures the advantages of political association when it's a simple matter of waving flags, playing anthems, and paying tributes to member of the armed forces - living, dead or just surviving. As at Rio 16, it will field a team of refugees as proof of its humanity, while ignoring the simultaneous state murder of poor people, including numerous children, in favelas just down the road. Because when a difficult political debate rears its head, sport stands back and claims to have no position, no authority, no interest. Sport and politics shouldn't mix, administrators and figure-heads explain with a straight face. Except that they do, every day, all the time. 

European qualifying games for Russia 2018 begin this weekend. Russian armed forces are currently amassing on the eastern Ukrainian border, threatening to invade. Russian armed forces are currently bombing Syrian civilians in a heinous alliance with the war criminal and dictator, President Bashar al-Assad. Maybe they'll be back in time for a flyover at the opening ceremony to showcase the power of the state. Fans can stand and applaud at their awesome might and noise. Why? That's just what we always do, just like we always stand for the anthem, and even sometimes sing along. Why, though? Why? 

When trying to answer that question we must spare some mighty applause for Colin Kaepernick, for his dignified protest while putting the right kind of politics into sport. And also ask: how will Fifa stage a global sporting event in a country which in 2018 may still be heavily involved in two wars, maybe more? And will fans and players remain politically, patriotically deaf and blind so that they can participate too? 

The triumph of Olympic values in China and Brazil

The founder of the modern Olympics, Baron de Coubertin, believed that physical education was a key factor to moral education. The three pillars of Olympian idealism are said to be Excellence, Friendship and Respect. It was reassuring to read in the newspapers this morning how hosting recent Olympics has helped these values become entrenched in China (2008) and Brazil (2016) respectively.

All these values are now widely instilled in Brazil
and China thanks to hosting the Olympics

In Hong Kong, which reverted from British dependency to Chinese rule in 1997 (Margaret Thatcher's name is about as popular in HK as it is in northern England), there's a new push for independence among young people who are experiencing first hand the Chinese government's broken promise of 50 years of autonomy. In 1997, the Chinese pledged: "One country, two systems." It turns out that they lied.

Hong Kong's Chief Executive Leung Chung Ying, widely presumed to be a Communist Party stooge, has enriched himself on the territory's property market. The umbrella movement that demonstrated for free elections two years ago has been ignored. Peking is interfering in university appointments, and the independent anti-corruption commission. Critical journalists have been fired, independent newspapers bought up by Chinese concerns, and five Hong Kong publishers were kidnapped by Chinese security services, one of them on Hong Kong territory.

Excellence (in skulduggery). Friendship (be our friend or we'll shut you up). Respect (for totalitarian law, or we'll shut you down).

In Brazil, a parliamentary coup (61 votes out of 81 in the Senate) has confirmed the ouster of democratically elected President Dilma Rousseff (54 million votes in 2014). She has been usurped by the conservative right-winger Michel Temer (no votes in 2016) on the grounds that she allegedly fiddled with the figures to beautify the nation's budget deficit. Rousseff claims she was continuing a practice already put into place by her predecessors (Note: imagine how easy it would have been to cut $12 billion from the budget deficit by not staging the Olympics...)

The Rio correspondent of the German daily Süddeutsche Zeitung describes the use of the statutes in the Brazilian constitution to justify Rousseff's removal as "highly controversial from a legal standpoint". 

Excellence (in flouting democracy). Friendship (with political rivals to overthrow a democratically elected leader in a dubious grab for power). Respect (for no one, least of all our own constitution). Olympic values triumph again!