Paul Goble
Vienna, June 18 – Two Russian leaders – one the outsider who has now been confirmed as president of Buryatia and the other the Presidential plenopotentiary for the Siberian Federal District – sent very different messages to the Buryats over the last few days.
Vyacheslav Nagovitsyn, the Kremlin’s nominee whom the republic parliament confirmed on Friday by a vote of 57 to 4 (three deputies did not take part) (http://www.vip-buryatia.ru/page?php?t=3&id=5567), went out of his way to indicate that he would be solicitous of Buryat interests and concerns.
He told the deputies that “a knowledge of the Buryat language is obligatory for the president of Buryatia” -- even though the dropping of that requirement earlier had made his appointment possible -- and said that he had already found an instructor to teach him that tongue (http://www.vip-buryatia.ru/page?t=3&id=5576).
Nagovitsyn, an ethnic Russian who had never been to Buryatia let alone served there before last week, also said that he would follow the course of his predecessor in order that “the national dignity and culture be preserved, lest Buryatia be lost as such. Then this would be some kind of other republic.”
But if Nagovitsyn was supportive almost to the point of pandering, Anatoliy Kvashnin, the former army general who serves as Presidential plenopotentiary to the Siberian Federal District within which Buryatia is now located, appeared to be dismissive of Buryat and broader regional concerns (http://babr.ru/index.php?pt=news&event=v1&IDE=38446).
Kvashnin rejected out of hand that President Vladimir Putin had appointed an outsider in order to “block national movements” interested in uniting Eastern Siberia into “a single region.” And he said that he had “not heard about such initiatives,” which he noted would require “the [as yet unexpressed] will of the population.”
Monday, June 18, 2007
Window on Eurasia: Kremlin’s Media Restrictions Allowing Extremists to Mobilize
Paul Goble
Vienna, June 18 – In Soviet times, intense government censorship meant that many people living in the USSR were forced to rely on rumors, reliable or not, as one of their most important sources of information about things the Communist regime did not want them to know or talk about.
Such rumors, however, typically had a limited impact because they depended on informal, face-to-face contacts. But now, as the Putin regime tightens its control of media reporting, rumors are once again an important source of news for Russians – and now these rumors are being spread more widely and effectively by the Internet.
The dangers of this situation, one that combines an increasingly unfree public media with a still more or less free Internet one, have been very much on public view over the last ten days following clashes many have described as ethnic in the southern Russian city of Stavropol.
In an article posted on Friday, Galina Kozhevnikova, the deputy director of the religious and human rights SOVA Center, pointed to the dangers that are arising from the Kremlin’s failure to allow journalists to cover honestly ethnic and religious clashes, among other things (http://grani.ru/opinion/kozhevnikova/p.123451.html).
Saying that she did not believe that “the situation in Stavropol is in principle different from the situation in an average city of Russia,” Kozhevnikova said that Moscow’s unwillingness to cover problems in the first virtually guaranteed that people would be prepared to believe that there are similar problems elsewhere.
That is something xenophobic Russian nationalists are exploiting, she noted, arguing that “the appetites” of the Movement Against Illegal Immigration are “growing as is growing the inadequacy of the reaction of the mass media” under the control of the central government.
Were the Russian media freer, she suggested, journalists would be able not only to report accurately on what is going on but also to be in a position to make critical distinctions between genuine ethnic clashes and those with other sources and to have the authority to be believed.
But because that is not the case now, xenophobic nationalists like those around DPNI have every reason to believe that their claims will be accepted – simply because they can put stories up on the Internet that at least some more responsible outlets may report without in every case being able to check DPNI claims for accuracy.
That happened last week when DPNI’s Aleksandr Belov picked up a blogger report of ethnic clashes in Omsk (http://www.dpni.org/articles/novosti_dp/2437/). His claims were then disseminated on a number of sites, including several with large numbers of visitors, without being immediately challenged.
But as Kozhevnikova argued and as an article in “Ekspert Online” today (http://www.expert.ru/articles/2007/06/18/kazahi_s_armaturoj/) documents, the Omsk story was in whole or in part dreamed up by the extremist nationalists for their own purposes – propagandizing the notion that Russians are under threat.
Unfortunately, this is far from the only case where reports about supposed clashes the authorities do not respond to or allow to be reported on have surfaced on the Russian Internet. Indeed, in the last week, there was yet another: an unconfirmed report that the Northern nationalists had seized key institutions in Yakutsk.
This report suggested that something called “the United Shamanate of the North” had taken over the Sakha capital as part of its campaign to unite all the peoples of the North into a single entity and combine them with the peoples of Alaska and Canada (http://www.politcensura.ru/stol_cenzora/eho_stavropogi_na_beskrajnem_severe).
Few people are likely to believe this report, given both its provenance – the website involved is known for its provocatory articles – and its fancifulness – it includes an interview with someone identified as “Chukut Kuzhug, the supreme Shaman.” But given how little information comes from Russia’s distant periphery, some may.
And that raises a serious question the Kremlin has been unwilling to confront: Can Russia avoid disaster if its public media are under the control of the government while its Internet is far freer, sometimes irresponsible, but often believed because the former fail to report what is going on or have the authority to counter inaccuracies found in the latter.
Vienna, June 18 – In Soviet times, intense government censorship meant that many people living in the USSR were forced to rely on rumors, reliable or not, as one of their most important sources of information about things the Communist regime did not want them to know or talk about.
Such rumors, however, typically had a limited impact because they depended on informal, face-to-face contacts. But now, as the Putin regime tightens its control of media reporting, rumors are once again an important source of news for Russians – and now these rumors are being spread more widely and effectively by the Internet.
The dangers of this situation, one that combines an increasingly unfree public media with a still more or less free Internet one, have been very much on public view over the last ten days following clashes many have described as ethnic in the southern Russian city of Stavropol.
In an article posted on Friday, Galina Kozhevnikova, the deputy director of the religious and human rights SOVA Center, pointed to the dangers that are arising from the Kremlin’s failure to allow journalists to cover honestly ethnic and religious clashes, among other things (http://grani.ru/opinion/kozhevnikova/p.123451.html).
Saying that she did not believe that “the situation in Stavropol is in principle different from the situation in an average city of Russia,” Kozhevnikova said that Moscow’s unwillingness to cover problems in the first virtually guaranteed that people would be prepared to believe that there are similar problems elsewhere.
That is something xenophobic Russian nationalists are exploiting, she noted, arguing that “the appetites” of the Movement Against Illegal Immigration are “growing as is growing the inadequacy of the reaction of the mass media” under the control of the central government.
Were the Russian media freer, she suggested, journalists would be able not only to report accurately on what is going on but also to be in a position to make critical distinctions between genuine ethnic clashes and those with other sources and to have the authority to be believed.
But because that is not the case now, xenophobic nationalists like those around DPNI have every reason to believe that their claims will be accepted – simply because they can put stories up on the Internet that at least some more responsible outlets may report without in every case being able to check DPNI claims for accuracy.
That happened last week when DPNI’s Aleksandr Belov picked up a blogger report of ethnic clashes in Omsk (http://www.dpni.org/articles/novosti_dp/2437/). His claims were then disseminated on a number of sites, including several with large numbers of visitors, without being immediately challenged.
But as Kozhevnikova argued and as an article in “Ekspert Online” today (http://www.expert.ru/articles/2007/06/18/kazahi_s_armaturoj/) documents, the Omsk story was in whole or in part dreamed up by the extremist nationalists for their own purposes – propagandizing the notion that Russians are under threat.
Unfortunately, this is far from the only case where reports about supposed clashes the authorities do not respond to or allow to be reported on have surfaced on the Russian Internet. Indeed, in the last week, there was yet another: an unconfirmed report that the Northern nationalists had seized key institutions in Yakutsk.
This report suggested that something called “the United Shamanate of the North” had taken over the Sakha capital as part of its campaign to unite all the peoples of the North into a single entity and combine them with the peoples of Alaska and Canada (http://www.politcensura.ru/stol_cenzora/eho_stavropogi_na_beskrajnem_severe).
Few people are likely to believe this report, given both its provenance – the website involved is known for its provocatory articles – and its fancifulness – it includes an interview with someone identified as “Chukut Kuzhug, the supreme Shaman.” But given how little information comes from Russia’s distant periphery, some may.
And that raises a serious question the Kremlin has been unwilling to confront: Can Russia avoid disaster if its public media are under the control of the government while its Internet is far freer, sometimes irresponsible, but often believed because the former fail to report what is going on or have the authority to counter inaccuracies found in the latter.
Window on Eurasia: Russia Unprepared for Nuclear Accidents, Medical Specialist Warns
Paul Goble
Vienna, June 19 – The Russian government today is less ready to cope with nuclear accidents than the Soviet regime was before the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, according to a Moscow medical specialist who has worked on how to respond to the accidental release of radiation since the 1940s.
In a book released last week, “On the Edge of the Nuclear Knife” (“Na lezsvii atomnogo nozha,” Moscow: Meditsina, 1200 copies), Angelina Gus’kova, a senior scientist at the Health Ministry’s Institute of Biophysics, discusses what she describes as a continuing tragedy in which Moscow could save far more victims than it has.
Many of the problems, she said, were the result of the desire of bureaucrats to cover up the problems. In the case of the Chelyabinsk accident 50 years ago, the Soviet-era managers of the nuclear power station did not allow doctors to see anyone exposed to less than six times what was considered dangerous.
As a result, many died of cancer and other diseases, Gus’kova continued, but the true toll was obscured not only by Soviet censorship but because there were two few doctors to track those living near the site and because no one was able to conduct serious follow-up research (http://www.nr2.ru/chel/124215.html).
From the outset, doctors were not allowed to certify those exposed, the latter were seldom able to claim nuclear-related disabilities. Ordinary physicians, the biophysics specialist said, simply did not have the expertise to do so, and the place of work and residence of those exposed was kept classified.
Indeed, Gus’kova recounts with regret, “only six or seven doctors” working in the region knew “the code word” Soviet officials employed for the reactor site and the adjoining regions. She estimates that more than half of those in the region later diagnosed with cancer were in fact victims of radiation exposure.
In the period immediately preceding the Chernobyl accident, Guskova said, her colleagues developed drug to protect those involved in clean up actions. But, she reports, despite a large stockpile that would have allowed Russian officials to give ten doses to each of those involved in the 1986 accident, none of these medications were handed out.
Again, and as a result of this bureaucratic incompetence, far more people involved in that accident and its aftermath came down with cancer and died.
Unfortunately, Gus’kova continues, the situation today may be even worse. On the one hand, much of the up-to-date equipment Western governments and agencies provided Moscow with after Chernobyl is wearing out and has not been updated or replaced.
And on the other, she continues, “the single institution in the country” where those exposed to radiation are treated on a regular basis – the Institute of Biophysics – does not have the licenses and certificates it needs to treat its patients. Indeed, she says, “its activity is illegal.”
The institute’s clinic is listed as a subdivision of Moscow City Hospital No. 6,” Gus’kova notes, “and [its] specialists are listed as scientific consultants.” As such, they do not bear “any responsibility” for the patients there, “and those who do bear such responsibility by position and the law are not specialists in this area.”
Gus’kova said she has tried to bring this problem to the attention of higher ups, including the new minister of health. But his deputy told her “the minister cannot receive you.” Such a situation, she said, underscored the truth of President Vladimir Putin’s recent observation:
“The most refined form of sabotage is the strict observance of the letter of the law.”
Vienna, June 19 – The Russian government today is less ready to cope with nuclear accidents than the Soviet regime was before the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, according to a Moscow medical specialist who has worked on how to respond to the accidental release of radiation since the 1940s.
In a book released last week, “On the Edge of the Nuclear Knife” (“Na lezsvii atomnogo nozha,” Moscow: Meditsina, 1200 copies), Angelina Gus’kova, a senior scientist at the Health Ministry’s Institute of Biophysics, discusses what she describes as a continuing tragedy in which Moscow could save far more victims than it has.
Many of the problems, she said, were the result of the desire of bureaucrats to cover up the problems. In the case of the Chelyabinsk accident 50 years ago, the Soviet-era managers of the nuclear power station did not allow doctors to see anyone exposed to less than six times what was considered dangerous.
As a result, many died of cancer and other diseases, Gus’kova continued, but the true toll was obscured not only by Soviet censorship but because there were two few doctors to track those living near the site and because no one was able to conduct serious follow-up research (http://www.nr2.ru/chel/124215.html).
From the outset, doctors were not allowed to certify those exposed, the latter were seldom able to claim nuclear-related disabilities. Ordinary physicians, the biophysics specialist said, simply did not have the expertise to do so, and the place of work and residence of those exposed was kept classified.
Indeed, Gus’kova recounts with regret, “only six or seven doctors” working in the region knew “the code word” Soviet officials employed for the reactor site and the adjoining regions. She estimates that more than half of those in the region later diagnosed with cancer were in fact victims of radiation exposure.
In the period immediately preceding the Chernobyl accident, Guskova said, her colleagues developed drug to protect those involved in clean up actions. But, she reports, despite a large stockpile that would have allowed Russian officials to give ten doses to each of those involved in the 1986 accident, none of these medications were handed out.
Again, and as a result of this bureaucratic incompetence, far more people involved in that accident and its aftermath came down with cancer and died.
Unfortunately, Gus’kova continues, the situation today may be even worse. On the one hand, much of the up-to-date equipment Western governments and agencies provided Moscow with after Chernobyl is wearing out and has not been updated or replaced.
And on the other, she continues, “the single institution in the country” where those exposed to radiation are treated on a regular basis – the Institute of Biophysics – does not have the licenses and certificates it needs to treat its patients. Indeed, she says, “its activity is illegal.”
The institute’s clinic is listed as a subdivision of Moscow City Hospital No. 6,” Gus’kova notes, “and [its] specialists are listed as scientific consultants.” As such, they do not bear “any responsibility” for the patients there, “and those who do bear such responsibility by position and the law are not specialists in this area.”
Gus’kova said she has tried to bring this problem to the attention of higher ups, including the new minister of health. But his deputy told her “the minister cannot receive you.” Such a situation, she said, underscored the truth of President Vladimir Putin’s recent observation:
“The most refined form of sabotage is the strict observance of the letter of the law.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
