Statement by the International
and Moscow Memorial Societies. Press Release. March
3, 2010
Officials from the Moscow Mayor’s
Office have stated that portraits of Stalin are to
be put up in the city for the 65th Anniversary of
Victory Day. As is usual, it is not known by whom
and at what level this decision was taken, but it
is clear that the portraits will be produced at the
expense of the taxpayers, who include those who lost
their relatives through the fault of the dictator.
But it is not a question of money, and nor is it that
some of those invited to the celebrations will probably
not wish to come to a city, decorated in such a dubious
manner. The appearance of portraits of Stalin on Victory
Day is an insult to the memory of the fallen...
If portraits of Stalin do indeed appear
on the streets of Moscow, we shall do all within our
power to ensure that, simultaneously, they will be
accompanied by other placards, stands, and posters
which tell of the tyrant’s crimes and of his
true place in the history of the Great War for the
Fatherland. We are convinced that hundreds of Muscovites
– the children and grandchildren of the front-line
soldiers, of those to whom Victory really belongs
– will help us in this.
President Dmitry Medvedev's police
reforms will turn into a sham if the public is excluded
from the process and other law enforcement agencies
are left untouched, opposition politicians and human
rights activists said Thursday.
“It is impossible to reform
the Interior Ministry without reforming the prosecutor's
office and the justice system,” Yabloko party
leader Sergei Mitrokhin said at a round table organized
by the Moscow police to discuss the reforms with the
public...
Why is Russia romanticising the
memory of Stalinism, enquires Memorial's founder Arseny
Roginsky, when its defining feature was the use of
terror?
The memory of Stalinism in contemporary Russia raises
problems which are painful and sensitive. There is
a vast amount of pro-Stalinist literature on the bookstalls:
fiction, journalism and pseudo-history. In sociological
surveys, Stalin invariably features among the first
three "most prominent figures of all times".
In the new school history textbooks, Stalinist policy
is interpreted in a spirit of justification.
There are also hundreds of crucial volumes of documents,
scholarly articles and monographs on Stalinism. The
achievements of these historians and archivists is
unquestionable. But if they do have any influence
on the mass consciousness, it is too weak. The means
of disseminating the information have not been there,
and nor in recent years has the political will. However,
the deepest problem lies in the current state of our
national historical memory of Stalinism.
Russia can only move forward in developing
a truly fair, free and democratic society if it puts
to bed once and for all the ghosts of its past. This
was the conclusion from a seminar organised by the
European Liberal Democrat's parliamentary group about
"how the Kremlin thinks and what this means for
Europe" that took place last Wednesday.
Panelists, including ELDR's Russian
party leaders, Sergey Mitrokhin, Yaboloko, and Mikhail
Kasyanov, People's Democratic Union, agreed that the
specter of Stalin's Russia is still hanging over modern
day society and is preventing the country from initiating
the reforms that are needed to facilitate its development,
including strengthening its ties with the European
Union.
Sergey Mitrokhin spoke about telling
Russian President Medvedev the importance of publically
acknowledging that Stalinism is in the past. Mitrokhin
referred to what he called a "hankering for former
times" that is pervading the thoughts of Russian
citizens as the present government fails to deliver
the reforms that are necessary for the country to
proposer in the 21st century.
Russia’s leaders are looking
to the country’s history to find ways to justify
renewed imperial ambitions. While a study of foreign
experience shows that there are numerous ways to for
a country to deal with its totalitarian past, the
problem is complicated in the post-Communist context
because politicians seek to use history as a tool
for their own purposes. The YABLOKO party recently
adopted a resolution dealing with the uses of history
to stimulate democratic transition, but it so far
has had no impact on Russian society.
Interview with Galina Mikhaylovna
Mikhalyova, Doctor of Philosophy, Director of Center
for Contemporary Politics Research, and Executive
Secretary of the Political Committee of the YABLOKO
party
On the threashold of Political Council
meeting on political reform sheduled on January 22,
the Kremlin received seven draft programmes for reform
from all the parties. The reader may recall that the
Communists asked Dmitry Medvedev to hold this State
Council meeting during their meeting with him after
the parliamentary opposition's demarche and announcement
that October elections were fraudulent. The parties'
proposals will become the basis of a report to be
presented at the State Council meeting by Kaliningrad
Oblast Governor Georgy Boos, the head of the working
group. Doctor of Philosophy Galina Mikhalyova, Director
of the Center for Contemporary Politics Research and
Executive Secretary of the YABLOKO Party's Political
Committee, talked about what the parties want from
the President.
Sergei Mitrokhin’s blog
at the Echo Moskvi web-site, January 17, 2010
My post about the criminal mapping
of the communist regime provoked an ardent discussion
[in my blog]. However, I think that not all the readers
have carefully thought over the issue.
In my post I wrote that there had
been different crimes of communism against nations,
and that they had been taking not only the form of
terror or Famine genocide. Artificial division of
nations implemented throughout the Soviet history
is also a crime. [President of Ukraine] Viktor Yuschenko
has been insisting on consideration of the Famine
genocide only as a crime against the Ukrainian nation.
In my view this represents typical political manoeuvring.
Stalinist-Bolsheviks crimes targeted not only the
Ukrainian nation. It is undeserving to speculate with
such things for political reasons and basing on our
common tragedy boost nationalism and hatred among
nations.
If International Tribunal on the crimes
of communism could take place, there would be certainly
raised an issue about criminal separation of nations
by means of arbitrary boundaries. It would be important
for Russia, but before this Russia should on the state
level and officially in the legal form condemn Stalinism
as the hardest crime, including such crimes as deportation
of nations and many other, including Famine genocide
as a terrible crime of Stalin’s regime.
Sergei Mitrokhin’s blog
at the Echo Moskvi web-site, January 15, 2010
Ukrainian President Viktor Yuschenko
put forward an initiative to call an international
tribunal on the crimes of communism.
I think that his initiative should
be completely supported by the Russian leaders. This
would be a good method to finally give a distinct
state assessment to the criminal acts of Bolsheviks
– communists.
Certainly it would be better if we
could initiate such a tribunal in our country. As
despite the Famine genocide, the Russian nation and
other nations living in Russia suffered far more from
the Bolshevik-Stalinist genocide than the Ukrainian
nation.
Speaking about crimes against people,
I should point out that they took place not only in
the form of genocide. Maybe Viktor Yuschenko did not
think about this, as if he did he would not propose
such an idea.
Artificial division of nations conducted
throughout the Soviet history is a crime. Maybe not
so grave as genocide, but nonetheless a crime.
After the dubious recent regional
elections in Russia, LI Full Member YABLOKO presented
a democratic alternative to the Russian people during
its congress. Party leader Sergei Mitrokhin said he
wanted to concentrate on the important upcoming elections
to the State Duma, with a focus on state control over
elections at all levels. He called for the launch
of a broad-scale discussion in society which should
lead to the formation of a new democratic project
for Russia. Grigory Yavlinsky, one of the party's
founders, presented a report on the political situation
in the country and the tasks of the party, and expressed
YABLOKO's democratic alternative for the Russian political
system: “The first goals are the introduction
of freedom of speech, development of local self-governing,
civil and human rights organisations, and trade unions.
It is necessary to move towards abolishing of censorship,
return to direct elections, gradual and complete refusal
from interference of the state into the parties' affairs,
change of election laws and freedom in party financing”.
Chair of the Electoral Commission
of the Sverdlovsk Region Vladimir Mostovschikov has
been undertaking efforts for withdrawing YABLOKO’s
candidates from the regional Duma campaign. The leader
of YABLOKO’s branch deputy of the Ekaterinburg
City Duma Maxim Petlin told to UralInfromBureau that
the decisions adopted on the initiative of Mostovschikov
demonstrated this too well.
Thus, the regional Electoral Commission
questioned the legitimacy of the candidates non-party
members proposed by YABLOKO. They had the right to
apply for being enlisted as Duma candidates within
the first three days on announcement of the date of
voting – from December 11 to December 14. However,
this norm is not mandatory. But Mostovschikov insisted
that the candidates should sign their applications
even after expiration of this period. Suddenly the
applications made on his request turned into a stumbling
block in further relations between YABLOKO and the
heads of the electoral commission.
Russia,
Yabloko Congress - elections control top priority
The second session of the 15th Congress of the YABLOKO
party took place on December 19-20, 2009.
YABLOKO’s Chairman, Sergei Mitrokhin (picture),
called on the Congress delegates to concentrate on
the tasks of the coming elections to the State Duma
focusing attention on the way the elections are conducted
at all stages.
“The regional elections we had in October 2009
demonstrated that degradation of the Russian political
system shifted to a new level,” Mitrokhin said.
According to the chairman, the country has been returning
to the initial point of the late 1980s – early
1990s, the point of passive social dissatisfaction
under the conditions of authoritative power.
