#26 - JRL 9290 - JRL Home
From: Ronald Hamilton <ronald.hamilton@us.army.mil>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 05:29:04 -0500
Subject: re JRL 9289 Nathan Arnold
Recently, 1LT Nate Arnold wrote that the prosecution of Khodorkovsky in
Russia is not about crime, but politics. This could also be said about the Tom
Delay case in Texas, which most likely is politically motivated in my opinion,
but it doesn’t mean America is less democratic like many try to say about
Russia.
He further makes the Sharansky argument that because some are breaking the
law and haven’t yet been caught or prosecuted that it is somehow sinister.
Again, unpunished illegal behavior can’t be used to excuse the illegal behavior
of those caught and prosecuted. There are examples of injustices and crimes that
go unpunished in all countries not just Russia. Why is the bar so much higher
for Russian courts?
The trial was indeed about right and wrong and also about maintaining control
of the political process. Prior to Putin, crime syndicates and Oligarchs
controlled the process. Any nation would prefer that control remain with the
elected government.
In Switzerland, Denmark, the Netherlands, and France among others, many
consider the US system of justice barbaric. I think that France will not even
extradite fugitives to the USA in capital case because of the death penalty.
This doesn’t mean the system is a joke just because others don’t like it or
because theirs is different. Taking a US centric point of view and finding the
Russians lacking in their ability to mete out justice is similar to what the
French do to the US.
All people, not just the Russians, trade some freedom for economic stability
and security. Things were so bad in Russia and so absolutely difficult to endure
that some discipline and a more controlled advance had to be instituted. It was
just indescribably hard to survive and endure the mental anguish and physical
hardship that the Washington Consensus-Laissez Faire approach put the Russians
through. Americans have traded some freedoms in the form of the Patriot Act in
response to a threat and to head off insecurity and instability in our own
country. It is what people do during tough times. We imprisoned the
Japanese-Americans during WWII to ensure security. Security and stability are
the primary responsibility and role of government. That is why we have various
levels of freedom to respond to certain conditions. For example, the US
President could declare martial law during a grave national threat and some of
our constitutional freedoms would be curtailed during such a period. Just
because we are using common sense and have adopted the Patriot Act, which
curtails some of our freedoms, doesn’t mean we are bad or insensible or
backsliding or regressing nor does it mean the Russian people are responding
inappropriately by selecting a leader and supporting his initiatives to help
ensure stability and security.
The idea that the rising Russian economy hasn’t trickled down to all Russians
is unfair. We’re only talking about the period from 2000-2005 - 4 ½ years here.
Putin has been dealing with an economic crash that occurred in 1998 that was
more severe than the US Great Depression. Our leaders dealt with our crash from
1929 to 1940 and only successfully pulled us out of it with the war economy. It
takes time to move an entire nation of 170 million people up economically. The
point is that it is being done and fairly successfully to boot. Give it a little
more time before using it as a point that the people aren’t enjoying a rising
Russian economy. Many average Russian citizens have gone from unemployed or
earning wages of 100-200 per month to 400-600 per month in various regions and
industries in Russia. Also look at the reasons for the crash. A big part can be
laid at the feet of the Washington Consensus plan and the selfish oligarchy.
Putin is just cleaning up the mess.
The idea that chaos is freedom is a stretch and the statement that Putin has
put a stop to freedom of the press, speech, and elections is false. This is a
question of perspective. The press was controlled by the oligarchy before. If
that is what is considered a free press then Nate and I are just different. As
for the election of governors, it was in response to regional governors not
being responsive to the central government. Many of the governors were from the
most powerful family and crime clans and not the free and fair choice of the
electorate. It was a situation very much similar to how Hughie Long ran
Louisiana. The USA fought a four-year civil war to avoid the country becoming a
loose confederation of states and to preserve a Federal Republic. During
reconstruction there was a congressional bias against allowing the confederate
states to have free and fair elections of their own governors, and military
officers were appointed to oversee the elected officials. The Russians are
trying to ensure that they have a federal republic with a strong central
government just like the USA and just like Hamilton argued for in the Federalist
Papers. If you were to place Russia on the US historical timeline, rather than
judging her from our current modern day perspective, she is roughly where the
USA was circa 1900 during the T. Roosevelt presidency. Russia has advanced from
zero democracy in 1991 to roughly where we were in 1900. It took us 124 years to
advance as much as Russia has in 14 years. Many countries appoint regional
governors. Tiny Georgia has been appointing them since independence and we don’t
consider her unfair or trading freedom for political control. It is just a phase
all of these countries are in and is just a response to the culture. It doesn’t
mean they aren’t free.
The argument that government is first and foremost about order, stability,
security and economic growth is true and has always been true. The entire
purpose for people uniting is to increase the chance of survival. Political
repression in Russia is a relative term. Repressed compared to what? The USA and
the Native American population or our two party system, China, Israel and the
Palestinians, Switzerland, France?
The first reason for government is security and stability and this is best
provided through freedom and democracy. Russia has both and just because it
doesn’t look like American democracy and justice overnight doesn’t mean it isn’t
going to get there. Again, comparing Russian democracy and her current place on
the developmental timeline to the USA is comparing apples to oranges. Most every
Westerner who thinks Russia isn’t advancing is using the Khodorkovsky trial and
Putin appointing regional governors similar to what other developing democratic
countries like Georgia are doing. Actually, Putin nominates a candidate and the
regional locally elected assemblies vote yes or no. Saakashvili in Georgia just
appoints governors by decree. The USA doesn’t see this as bad or undemocratic
and continues to support Georgia as a developing democracy. After Israel, it
receives the most US aid.
What it really comes down to is that the Russians have selected a slower
development path than the West is comfortable with. The vast majority of western
and anti-Russia pundits and philosophers are using the Khodorkovsky trial and
the 2004 (legally conducted) amendment to Russian law that allows Putin to
nominate regional governors as evidence of regression and backsliding on the
democracy front. Those who are ill informed are simply piling on and repeating
what they have heard. This is classic information warfare operations. Follow the
money and trace to the source of these two generally accepted beliefs and
propaganda tidbits and the truth will come out. They began about two years ago
and one year respectively. Do a search on the initial articles and look at who
wrote them and do a link analysis of reporters and owners and oligarchs-in-exile
since these articles' genesis.
Best Regards,
Ronald G. Hamilton Major (Ret)
U.S. Army Military Intelligence.
|