Tweet
Grani.ru, Russia
Nov 13 2012
America's Rollback
by by Aleksandr Podrabinek
[Translated from Russian]
On Tuesday, 13 November (in Moscow it will already be Wednesday), the
US Congress House of Representatives Rules Committee intends to review
a bill on repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which limits trade
relations with Russia. The committee's website reports that the bill
on repeal of the discriminatory amendment and the "Magnitskiy law"
have been combined into a single document.
As we may recall: The Jackson-Vanik Amendment, adopted in 1974,
prohibited granting the regimen of most favored status in trade, state
loans, and loan guarantees to countries that violate or "limit the
rights of their citizens to emigrate and other human rights" (restrict
freedom of emigration and other human rights). The amendment provided
for the use of discriminatory tariffs and fees on goods imported into
the US from such countries with a non-market economy.
At one time, this amendment played a significant role in facilitating
emigration from the USSR, and an even greater one in opposing the
"iron curtain" in other communist countries. It remains in effect even
to this day, for example, in regard to Cuba and North Korea. In the
past 20 years, the Jackson-Vanik Amendment as applied to Russia has
lost its main meaning, because since the late 80's of the last
century, emigration from the USSR - and then also from Russia - has
become unrestricted. As of 1989, each year the US has imposed a
moratorium on the amendment, and in 1994 President Clinton gave
guarantees of automatic extension of the regimen of most favored
status in trade. Since that time, the amendment has in fact not been
in effect. It was formally repealed for Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia and
Kyrgyzstan, and for Russia it remains only on paper. Neither its
repeal nor its preservation has any practical results for Russia.
Nevertheless, the Kremlin is stubbornly striving for its repeal. Why?
The simplest answer is: For the sake of satisfying its great power
ambitions. Evidently, Vladimir Putin is insulted that his "vertical"
regime is deemed in the West as being not very democratic. Retaining
the Jackson-Vanik Amendment is obvious evidence of that. He very much
wants to rid himself of this label of totalitarianism!
But there is also another, less reassuring, explanation. The Kremlin's
political course in the past year, especially in the sphere of
legislation and judicial practice, clearly testifies to a return to
Soviet methods of state management. Standards and concepts applied
back in Stalinist times are returning to the Criminal Code. Laws
limiting freedom on the Internet are being introduced. The
opportunities for activity of noncommercial organizations - especially
those cooperating with Western partners - are being limited. The
assault on human rights in Russia is proceeding on all fronts.
Including in such an important direction as the freedom to leave the
country.
Today, Article 27 of the Russian Constitution, which states that "each
individual may freely leave the confines of the Russian Federation,"
is violated not only in practice, but formally as well. Normative
statutes have been issued in the country which prohibit free exit
beyond the border for certain categories of persons - debtors on
administrative fines and taxes, persons who do not pay alimony, and
defendants in judicial lawsuits. In all of these cases, there are
already mechanisms specified in the law for collection and compulsion
- from seizure of property to administrative and criminal cases. The
question of "closing the border" is resolved by judicial statute --
not in a judicial session, but personally by a bailiff.
The ban on leaving the country is an excessive and unconstitutional
measure. Meanwhile, the lawmakers of our incompetent State Duma are
striving to maximally expand the list of those who are not allowed to
leave by means of introducing more and more new categories of
unreliable citizens. The tendency is obvious - only behind the "iron
curtain" can the leaders of the Putin regime feel relatively
comfortable. Only in max imal isolation from the rest of the world can
Russia be once again transformed into a harsh authoritarian state.
And the Americans intend to add their two cents worth to this lost
cause. Repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment would give Putin and his
team confidence of their future impunity. The US retreat from
positions of protecting human rights throughout all the world only
plays into the hands of the Kremlin. The Damoclean sword of economic
sanctions, which constantly hung over the regime that was thinking
about returning to authoritarianism, will soon be hidden in the sheath
of some reset or detente.
President Obama (as well as his predecessor, Bush Jr.) have been and
remain passionate opponents of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment. Because of
the stubbornness of the American Congress, these presidents were
unable to achieve the repeal of this amendment. Today, it is not
entirely clear specifically what kind of "rollback" the American
Administration expects. But it is for good reason that, at a meeting
with Medvedev in Seoul in March of this year, Barack Obama made an
offhand remark (over a live microphone that someone had forgotten to
turn off) to the effect that, after the presidential elections in the
US, he would have the freedom to maneuver and would become more
agreeable. The elections are over. And Obama is demonstrating his
amenability.
From: Baghdasarian
Nov 13 2012
America's Rollback
by by Aleksandr Podrabinek
[Translated from Russian]
On Tuesday, 13 November (in Moscow it will already be Wednesday), the
US Congress House of Representatives Rules Committee intends to review
a bill on repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, which limits trade
relations with Russia. The committee's website reports that the bill
on repeal of the discriminatory amendment and the "Magnitskiy law"
have been combined into a single document.
As we may recall: The Jackson-Vanik Amendment, adopted in 1974,
prohibited granting the regimen of most favored status in trade, state
loans, and loan guarantees to countries that violate or "limit the
rights of their citizens to emigrate and other human rights" (restrict
freedom of emigration and other human rights). The amendment provided
for the use of discriminatory tariffs and fees on goods imported into
the US from such countries with a non-market economy.
At one time, this amendment played a significant role in facilitating
emigration from the USSR, and an even greater one in opposing the
"iron curtain" in other communist countries. It remains in effect even
to this day, for example, in regard to Cuba and North Korea. In the
past 20 years, the Jackson-Vanik Amendment as applied to Russia has
lost its main meaning, because since the late 80's of the last
century, emigration from the USSR - and then also from Russia - has
become unrestricted. As of 1989, each year the US has imposed a
moratorium on the amendment, and in 1994 President Clinton gave
guarantees of automatic extension of the regimen of most favored
status in trade. Since that time, the amendment has in fact not been
in effect. It was formally repealed for Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia and
Kyrgyzstan, and for Russia it remains only on paper. Neither its
repeal nor its preservation has any practical results for Russia.
Nevertheless, the Kremlin is stubbornly striving for its repeal. Why?
The simplest answer is: For the sake of satisfying its great power
ambitions. Evidently, Vladimir Putin is insulted that his "vertical"
regime is deemed in the West as being not very democratic. Retaining
the Jackson-Vanik Amendment is obvious evidence of that. He very much
wants to rid himself of this label of totalitarianism!
But there is also another, less reassuring, explanation. The Kremlin's
political course in the past year, especially in the sphere of
legislation and judicial practice, clearly testifies to a return to
Soviet methods of state management. Standards and concepts applied
back in Stalinist times are returning to the Criminal Code. Laws
limiting freedom on the Internet are being introduced. The
opportunities for activity of noncommercial organizations - especially
those cooperating with Western partners - are being limited. The
assault on human rights in Russia is proceeding on all fronts.
Including in such an important direction as the freedom to leave the
country.
Today, Article 27 of the Russian Constitution, which states that "each
individual may freely leave the confines of the Russian Federation,"
is violated not only in practice, but formally as well. Normative
statutes have been issued in the country which prohibit free exit
beyond the border for certain categories of persons - debtors on
administrative fines and taxes, persons who do not pay alimony, and
defendants in judicial lawsuits. In all of these cases, there are
already mechanisms specified in the law for collection and compulsion
- from seizure of property to administrative and criminal cases. The
question of "closing the border" is resolved by judicial statute --
not in a judicial session, but personally by a bailiff.
The ban on leaving the country is an excessive and unconstitutional
measure. Meanwhile, the lawmakers of our incompetent State Duma are
striving to maximally expand the list of those who are not allowed to
leave by means of introducing more and more new categories of
unreliable citizens. The tendency is obvious - only behind the "iron
curtain" can the leaders of the Putin regime feel relatively
comfortable. Only in max imal isolation from the rest of the world can
Russia be once again transformed into a harsh authoritarian state.
And the Americans intend to add their two cents worth to this lost
cause. Repeal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment would give Putin and his
team confidence of their future impunity. The US retreat from
positions of protecting human rights throughout all the world only
plays into the hands of the Kremlin. The Damoclean sword of economic
sanctions, which constantly hung over the regime that was thinking
about returning to authoritarianism, will soon be hidden in the sheath
of some reset or detente.
President Obama (as well as his predecessor, Bush Jr.) have been and
remain passionate opponents of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment. Because of
the stubbornness of the American Congress, these presidents were
unable to achieve the repeal of this amendment. Today, it is not
entirely clear specifically what kind of "rollback" the American
Administration expects. But it is for good reason that, at a meeting
with Medvedev in Seoul in March of this year, Barack Obama made an
offhand remark (over a live microphone that someone had forgotten to
turn off) to the effect that, after the presidential elections in the
US, he would have the freedom to maneuver and would become more
agreeable. The elections are over. And Obama is demonstrating his
amenability.
From: Baghdasarian