The
key ingredient of democracy is the freedom of expression and of
speech though a degree of restraint is of value to avoid the heavy
hand of authority freely expressing itself. Humanity's struggle for
freedom has peppered the history of all nations, some had to face
violence to achieve their freedom, others with far less sacrifice.
Yet Russia in its long history has never known true freedom, and the
fall of the Soviet Union did nothing more than provide democracy with
a threatening noose around its neck.
Czarist
Russia kept the masses uneducated and obedient whilst the chosen few
enjoyed immense wealth and power. Russia's Orthodox Church did not
object to being a willing partner ensuring that the populace remained
obedient and superstitious. In the end anger brought about a demand
for equality and the Russian people through uncontrollable violent
struggle exchanged Czarist oppression for Soviet suppression.
Regardless of who was the supreme leader whether it was Joseph
Stalin, Nikita Khrushehev or Brezhnev the Orthodox Church suffered
persecution and was forced to recognize the Soviet regime as the
ultimate power over the church.
Russia
and its people survived the Revolution, Civil War and the Second
World War and little fight was left in them as they became human
fodder for the Soviet power machine. The promise of equality never
was realized under the iron hand of a new era of government. Under
Mikhail Gorbachev and Glasnost the Soviet Union found a softer face
and new political and social freedoms. This brought about an
eventual end of the Soviet rule with promises of a new Russia,
democratic and free. This fantasy did not last long.
Under
Vladimir Putin Russia faces no less of an iron fist, only this time
the disguise is democracy not communism for a face. Putin has to
deal with public protests and open opposition something the old
Soviet leaders destroyed. He must find a way to discourage such open
opposition and still remain acceptable by world leaders, hence once
again the use of the puppet – the Russian Orthodox Church. Pussy
Riot played a bluff with the Putin power machine and the Cathedral of
Christ the Savior was only a stage. Was it always the intention of
these political activists to fail and face the corrupt judiciary? A
legitimate question that has not been answered, though the statement by Pussy Riot band member Yekaterina Samutsevich appears to point to
the affirmative.
Maria
Alyokhina, Yekaterina Samutsevich and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova only
lasted less than a minute in the Cathedral before being led out by
security. Their arrest came days after the event and only after a
cry of blasphemy had been engineered across the country. The judge
at the trial called their act as being offensive to Orthodox
believers and the church. Nothing of the anti-government stance by
Pussy Riot was publicly recognized by the judge only the fact that
they had offended the church. In a fashion the apparent guilt of the
Russian people of surrendering their faith during the Soviet years
has now been manipulated in this public condemnation of these three
young women. Black scarfed old women clamoring at the prison gates
demanding severe punishment against these unbelievers is not so much
of a satirical vision.
Putin
has been successful and the voice of democracy seems to have been
intimidated, but has it. Today Russia is in a new era and the modern
world has brought with it new weapons to the struggle. Eduction,
travel and the internet have provided a broader base for the
anti-government movement. At its head Alexey Navalny who has shown
no fear of Putin and has seen the wrath of a power hungry individual
willing to manipulate everything to stay in position. Navalny has
bought attention to corruption in the main Russian political party,
United Russia, calling its members “crooks and thieves.”
Alexei shared a prison with
other activists for 15 days for “defying a government
official,” after a protest in
December 2011. Then again in May 2012, Navalny was sentenced to
another 15 days jail after another anti-Putin rally. Alexei Venediktov has said that “jailing Navalny transforms him
from an online leader into an offline one.”
Russian
political tactics have been the same for centuries. Fear and
intimidation used as weapons against any protests. Today Russia
faces world scrutiny which it cannot afford to have swing against it
and the anti-Putin protesters are more courageous due to that fact.
If Alexei Navalny who organized protesters in the thousands against
Putin was jailed twice for 15 days, how is it that the three young
women of Pussy Riot found such a harsh sentence?
There
is no doubt that the actions of Pussy Riot were offensive. One may
question their decision to perform a protest at a place of extreme
reverence such as the Cathedral, still the resulting punishment seems
outrageous. Like the jailing of Alexei Navalny, the sentencing of
Maria Alyokhina, Yekaterina Samutsevich and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova
will only make them public martyrs to the anti-Putin cause. Public
outcry has come from around the world in defence of Pussy Riot
members, and the three women now are world-famous for their
'courage'. Still those outside Russia raising their voices against
the heavy hand seen in the Russian courts have some serious issues of
credibility. In an article titled, 'The west's hypocrisy over
Pussy Riot is breathtaking' for the guardian.co.uk, Simon
Jenkin states “Anyone in England and Wales with a dog out of
control can now be jailed for six months. If the dog causes injury,
the maximum term is to be two years.” He spoke of a London
court jailing a young man Charlie Gilmour to 18 months “after he
swung on a union flag from the Cenotaph and tossed a bin at a police
car.” Simon Jenkins does not defend these individuals nor the
British courts.
In
America human rights activists and Madonna condemned the Pussy Riot
jail terms as disproportionate. Simon Jenkins reports “a US
military court declared that reporting the Guantanamo Bay trial of
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would be censored. Any mention of his torture
in prison was banned as “reasonably expected to damage national
security.” This has no apparent connection to proportionate
punishment or freedom of speech.” (Simon Jenkins, guardian.co.uk,
August 21st 2012)
True
the actions of Pussy Riot would hardly seem to justify such a
sentence. Reading the closing statement of Yekaterina Samutsevich
it becomes clear that the motivation behind their actions had nothing
to do with anti-Orthodox sentiment, the women of Pussy Riot were
there to make a loud anti-Putin protest. Understanding Russia's
history and the attitudes of the Russian people then it is not hard
to understand the final outcome. Vladimir Putin has played musical
chairs with Dmitry Medvedev to continue his hold on power even after
his two-term limit in 2008 ended. No amount of protest outside of
Russia will make any difference as long as Putin is able to convince
Russians, in particular outside of the large cities, that this had to
be done. The women of Pussy Riot are simply pawns in a game that has
one prize at the end.
Send comments to: demtruth@gmail.com
It's wasn't the first performance against Putin, but no one touched them before. And it's a big difference what Samutsevich said before and after arrest. Of cause they wrote a great speeches, of cause they said that they didn’t want to hurt Christian, but was it really so?
ReplyDelete