[article] Russia Criticised over memorial

BlitzKrieg

A group of politicians, academics and human rights campaigners have signed an open letter attacking Russia's record on democracy and political freedom.

They say official ceremonies to be held in Moscow undermine the memory of those who fought and died in the war.

Signatories include ex-Czech President Vaclav Havel and former US ambassadors.

Moscow has also upset neighbours Georgia, Estonia and Lithuania, who all plan to boycott Monday's ceremonies.


Russia's retreat from freedom and democracy in the post-Soviet era has never seemed more rapid or broad scale
Extract from the open letter
Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili is staying away because Russia and Georgia have failed to agree on a timetable for closing Soviet-era bases in his country.

In a separate row, Estonia and Lithuania are boycotting the ceremonies because they say their liberation from the Nazis marked the start of Soviet occupation.

Latvia will send dignitaries - but along with Estonia and Lithuania it wants Russia to apologise for the Baltic states' annexation by the Soviet Union in 1940.

'Mockery'

Russian President Vladimir Putin said recently that the three Baltic states had been "treated as pawns in world politics" but said Moscow had already apologised and would not do so again.

"Must we do this every day, every year? That is downright senseless," he told German television.

Winston Churchill, Franklin D Roosevelt and Stalin at the Yalta conference in 1945
During wartime Allied leaders fought together against Germany
Pro-democracy campaigners in Europe and the US have expressed growing concerns about modern Russia.

In the letter, to be published in full in the UK's Financial Times newspaper to coincide with the 9 May ceremonies, signatories accuse Russia of betraying the principles behind victory in 1945.

They write: "[We] believe the venue and hosting of this event are altogether unsuited to the fundamental principles for which that historic victory... was achieved."

Russia in 2005 lacks strong democratic institutions, while political freedoms, civil liberties and the rule of law are weak, the signatories allege.

"It seems to us a mockery of the occasion to gather there in honour of the 20th century's climactic sacrifice for Europe's freedom."

As well as Mr Havel, the letter's 75 signatories include former prime ministers of Estonia and Bulgaria and academics and democracy activists from eastern and western Europe and the US.

Several current and former members of the European parliament, US congress and UK parliament also signed the letter.

Richard Allen, former national security adviser to former US President Ronald Reagan, has signed, alongside several former ambassadors.

Russia has been accused of concentrating too much power in the hands of the Kremlin, and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice recently criticised levels of media freedom

Ok i understand the attack on Russia's track record in its affairs in democracy and the law.

But why this attack is focused on a celebration to the end of the second world war, a war where Russia lost more lives then any other nation of the Allies. Why is a memorial of the dead and a celebration of the sacrifice undermining the dead? I mean if a open letter was presented after the *good old days * earlier then thats understandable but i cant agree with this black and white treatment of history (WW2 was purely a democracy vs evil war) as an excuse for a political statement.

discuss

RagShagBill

BlitzKrieg wrote:

Ok i understand the attack on Russia's track record in its affairs in democracy and the law.

But why this attack is focused on a celebration to the end of the second world war, a war where Russia lost more lives then any other nation of the Allies. Why is a memorial of the dead and a celebration of the sacrifice undermining the dead? I mean if a open letter was presented after the *good old days * earlier then thats understandable but i cant agree with this black and white treatment of history (WW2 was purely a democracy vs evil war) as an excuse for a political statement.

discuss

Well, this Russian victory saw the beginning of a new oppression for many, so I suppose it is understandable. That, and Russia hosting the thing this year made everything look like it had worked itself out. But Russia clearly hasn't. It's judiciary and political systems are both ballsed (is that a word?) up.

Quantum

BlitzKrieg wrote:

Ok i understand the attack on Russia's track record in its affairs in democracy and the law.

But why this attack is focused on a celebration to the end of the second world war, a war where Russia lost more lives then any other nation of the Allies. Why is a memorial of the dead and a celebration of the sacrifice undermining the dead?

The problem is not with the celebration per se. It is because while they celebrate the victory against Nazism, they refuse to acknowledge the flip site of the victory which was the enslavement of the centre of Europe and the oppression of the Stalinist dictatorship.
This kind of persistent denial will continue to dog Putin and Russia for a long time to come imho.

While on the subject, it is also about time that the WWII allies accept their responsibility for the Yalta agreement which handed over a basket of small countries to Stalin.

Manach

Whilst I see Quantum's point, from reading of the history books from that time, the Western Allies were war-weary and not about to go into a fresh conflict with "Uncle Joe", as he was kindly protraited to the public whilst the Soviet's were fighting against the same enemy.

Also, it was many years after Stalin's death that the true extent of his reign was apparent. The WWII allies were in all likelyhood deluded into believing his promises.

Quantum

Manach wrote:

Whilst I see Quantum's point, from reading of the history books from that time, the Western Allies were war-weary and not about to go into a fresh conflict with "Uncle Joe", as he was kindly protraited to the public whilst the Soviet's were fighting against the same enemy.

Also, it was many years after Stalin's death that the true extent of his reign was apparent. The WWII allies were in all likelyhood deluded into believing his promises.

Both good points. But I still think they shold express an apology simply out of generosity and to acknowledge the tragedy that resulted.