More information is coming out about the individuals arrested for Anna Politkovskaya’s murder. Moskovskii komsomolets gives a run down of the suspects. The most high profile suspect is Pavel Riaguzov, 37, a former FSB lieutenant-colonel at the Moscow City Directorate. Riaguzov has been under FSB suspicion for some time for his alleged involvement in organized crime. Riaguzov’s specialty is surveillance. Investigators claim that he tapped Politkovskaya’s phone.
Four others under detention are former police officers Dmitri Lebedev, Dmitri Grachev, Oleg Alimov, and Alexei Berkin. None of them currently work for the police. Their specialties were, according to the Moscow daily, “external surveillance”. I take this to mean that they specialized in tails and monitoring Politkovskaya’s activities outside her home.
There is also Sergei Khadzhikurbanov, 40. Four years ago, Khadzhikurbanov led a police sting against business man Frank Alcapone (aka Fizuli Mamedov). The latter was arrested for possession of a kilo of heroin, which Alcapone ‘s bodyguards claimed police planted on him. He was eventually acquitted for lack of evidence.
Then there are the three brothers Makhmudov–Tamerlan, 36, Dzhabrail, 49, and Ibrahim, 25. All three are Chechen natives. Tamerlan and Ibrahim are Moscow residents, while Dzhabrail resides in Zaraisk, Moscow oblast. Authorities claim that the three had no particular grievance against the outspoken journalist and only participated in the caper for a large sum of money. Murad Musayev, the lawyer for one of the brothers, dismissed the charges as “scare-mongering,” telling the RFE/RL’s North Caucasus Service that Russian Prosecutor General Chaika’s press conference “resembled a certain collage of populist cliches — sort of an essay that combined all the demons of Russia. Individuals from Chechnya, corrupt law-enforcement people, someone vicious and scary who is sitting abroad and contemplating a revolution in Russia, and so on.” He claimed that there was no evidence against his client and that he “did not even know who Politkovskaya was before his arrest,” adding that it appears that only two people are actually connected to the crime. Musayev also claims that his client has been repeatedly abused by Russian police during interrogation, “including being hit over the head with a bottle.”
Then there is the alleged driver (there is always a driver) Akhmed Isayev. Isayev drove the three brothers to the scene. Isayev, a former fish monger and father of one year old triplets, is said to have aided the brothers in obtaining documentation to purchase the car used in the crime.
So far only the Chechens have been officially charged with the murder. It also appears that the Russian authorities aren’t the only ones interested in the perpetrators. Ivars Godmanis, Latvia’s Interior Minister, is planning to ask Russian authorities if they have any information on whether their suspects operated in Latvia. Godmanis thinks that the group might be connected to two unsolved homicides.
Russian Prosecutors are clearly looking to get as much political mileage out of the arrests as the can. Chaika is also claiming that the 10 suspects (or 11, it’s unclear) might also have committed the murders of Forbes journalist Paul Klebnikov and Russia Central Bank head Andrei Kozlov! From the sound of it, these guys are a killing machine that is usually only found on celluloid.
And while the Russian media is focusing on the identities and backgrounds of those arrested, the foreign press, and its Russian representatives, remain focused on the allegation that Berezovsky is behind the murders. The Moscow Times ran an editorial saying that prosecutors will eventually have to provide proof that the hit was commissioned from abroad. If not “questions will linger over whether they carried out an objective investigation or simply built their case around the notion that any action besmirching the Kremlin’s reputation must have been ordered by foes-in-exile.”
Fred Weir of the Christian Science Monitor also devoted his column inches to the Berezovsky connection. Quick to point out the obvious, that Chaika’s assertion that the real criminals hail from abroad was a “political statement”, Weir proceeded to devote the bulk of the article to dismissing the notion of Berezovsky’s involvement.
Sadly, Weir is not alone in beating up on the outrageous claim that Berezovsky was involved. The San Francisco Chronicle filled their report on the arrests with a slew of experts to refute Chaika’s “enemies from abroad” claim. Several papers dealt with the same topic ad nauseum: The New Zealand Herald, Reuters, The Telegraph, and The LA Times. There are more, but you get the picture.
But it seems that the Berezovsky connection is being taken seriously in some quarters. It is no surprise that some Russian politicians are pimping Berezovsky as the devil. Russian Lower Duma rep Gennady Gudkov told Vesti that Politkovskaya’s murder falls into a slew of recent attempts “to compromise the Russian state.” In blog post on the subject, AJ Strata thinks that the idea holds some water. Bucking the supposed conventional wisdom, Strata claims that Berezovsky could certainly be behind the murder, and it could be part of a wider attempt to foment a coup against Putin.
I for one don’t buy the Berezovsky claim and think that it should be quickly dismissed as political theater. One shouldn’t make much of the fact that Russian authorities take any opportunity to bash BAB. As they should. The guy is a bastard and I have no doubt in my mind that he’s criminal that should be extradited to Russia and prosecuted. I also think that if there is one murder that sticks to Berezovsky it is Paul Klebnikov’s. Klebnikov rightly vilified BAB in his Godfather in the Kremlin, exposing the robber baron for numerous crimes. If the British had any sense of justice, they would toss him to Putin’s salivating prosecutors.
But to focus on Berezovsky’s involvement in Politkovskaya’s murder is only fit for the tabloids. It is clear that much of the Russian media understands politics when they see it and instead have moved on to more substantive issues in the story. Ironically, through their constant denial, the very people who reject Chaika’s claim are inadvertently championing its possibility. The constant mention of Berezovsky’s name, even though Chaika himself never once mentioned it, can result in one walking away with some suspicion that maybe he is involved. After all, if the claim is that ridiculous, then why all the effort to dismiss it so forcefully?
{ 138 comments }
← Previous Comments
As for genocide in Sudan, it rather depends on which advocacy groups one wishes to believe (not that there could possibly be any political reasons/benefits for using the ‘G’ word):
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/3723/
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v29/n05/mamd01_.html
Genocide is great. No matter how thinly one can manage to slice it, it is always genocide….
Aleks:
I meant Oric.
Abdic was the secular Muslim opposed to Izetbegovic.
“db”
Confused in what way? You don’t know much and play nitpicking games and do so in a manner indicative of a not so talented individual.
All
Violence wise: when compared to the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia, the Soviet led intervention in Czechoslovakia more resembled the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicage. BTW, the Vietnam War was bloodier than what the Soviets did in Afghanistan.
All this said to burst that propaganda bubble.
Aleks
I remember Sobaka and met someone who knows its editor Cali Ruchala, a Roma Serb. Someone else I know who wrote for that site said that Ruchala seemed to have packed it in out of disgust.
Mr Shedd — no, there was no comparison intended in my posting. I don’t assume or argue that the American media provides a balanced and nuanced view of world events or US foreign policy. Actually, as far as I can tell, they don’t do a very good job of it and/or people remain uninterested, so they don’t seek the information that’s available.
That doesn’t change my point, which is that when a lot of people around the world criticise US policy, it’s not the policy that you or I might be criticising. It’s that the US sent the Colorado potato beetle to the USSR to starve the nation, that HIV-AIDS programs supported by USAID are meant to get Russian kids hooked on drugs and kill them off, and that all NGOS are front organizations for an orange revolution (just to name a few statements I’ve heard on Russian TV lately, made by gov’t officials).
This is a bad comparison, since it’s not based on research — but I have found Europeans more informed about the US and their criticism to be well-considered and sensible. Well, except for the French:)
mab
Mr. Shedd and yours truly were addressing your very mainstream Anglo-American mass media claims about how wrong the Russians are when it comes to commenting on the wars of the last decade in former Yugoslavia.
We conclusively showed:
- that not to be the case
- how misinformed many on the Anglo-American side are about that matter
Note how you didn’t offer a counter-reply to those points. Instead, bringing up other issues.
We in turn can show other examples of misguided Anglo-American mass media perceptions subconsciously duping many of its targetted audience.
Well, I’m not sure that’s what Mr Shedd had mind, but I can explain why I didn’t respond to your comments. 1) The fact that Croats were guilty of masacres of Serbs does not justify Serb masacres of Croats. Just because “they do it too” doesn’t make it right. 2) I don’t find any “sound, reasonable doubt” in the Srebrenitsa figures. 3) My point is that most Russians don’t know about any involvement of NATO in Kosovo at all — it is presented as “the US bombed Kosovo” as a unilateral decision. 4) Most Russians have never even heard of Srebenitsa. As I wrote, it’s not a matter of them having a different opinion based on facts. They’ve simply never heard of it. In general, they’ve never heard of any of the accusations against the Serbs.
I’m not arguing that Americans have a nuanced and detailed view of their foreign policy. Or that US media does a great job of putting US foreign policy issues, and in fact what used to be called “world events,” at the center of attention. I’m not arguing for US foreign policy (I in fact am deeply ashamed of most of it.) I’m arguing that some — much — of world condemnation of US foreign policy is not based on facts. That is certainly true in Russia. In my experience (limited), it is less true of Europe. I’ve had very interesting discussions with Italians, Romanians and Turks (if you consider them parat of Europe) about US foreign policy. They were very well informed and their judgments were well-considered.
The non-bombing of Turkey for its treatment of Kurds and bombing of Yugoslavia for its actions against Albanians marks a profound and largely unchecked hypocrisy within mainstream Anglo-American circles.
The Srebrenica number of those Muslims who were summarily executed is in point of fact very questionable. In addition: regarding Srebrenica, the large Anglo-American ignorance of the referenced Nasir Oric highlights Anglo-American ignorance of what did happen at Srebrenica.
You original posted comments here on the subject of former Yugoslavia are akin to what you claim of the Russians. Specifically, in your instance, an unawareness of particulars not conforming to the slant of your perceptions that match the biases typically found in English language mass media.
On the whole, Turks aren’t more historically flexible than Russians. Just look at how much of turkey views the Armenian genocide.
Mike, stop attacking people, stop looking for bias everywhere, and stop changing the subject. It’s incredibly annoying and why no wants to play with you.
Why when discussing Serbia must I mention every other atrocity that has taken place on the planet? Why does one atrocity in one place make another atrocity in another place acceptable? Or why is it unacceptable to criticise — express horror, condemn — one atrocity without criticising and condemning every other atrocity committed on the planet from the dawn of time?
And you can write “in point of fact,” but actually you don’t cite any of those facts.
Beside, before you changed the subject, my point was and remains: Most Russians have never heard of Srebrenica. Never heard of it. Don’t know where it is, what is alleged to have happened there, what investigations were done, what questions there are about the invesitgations. Nothing. Their criticism of US policy is not based on knowledge of facts.
“Most Russians have never heard of Srebrenica.”
To be fair, I doubt most Americans have ever heard of Srebrenica.
Hey, it was 4 am and I was on my sixth beer after the bar. I didn’t double-check the dictionary. Go sue me.
“To be fair, I doubt most Americans have ever heard of Srebrenica.”
Don’t know. Could be. Don’t live in the US now.
And if you can still type after six beers at 4 am, who cares if you can spell?
Not only that, I was distracted by my game of Warhammer 40,000 Dark Crusade! I blame the Necrons.
Anyway, I mean, lots of people all over the world don’t know lots of stuff. I’ve met Americans who thought Karl Marx was the inspiration for Hitler, and Uzbeks who didn’t know what the Gulag was. I’ve seen teenagers in Yarslavl who thought the statue of Marx was of Tolstoy (because of the beard).
“Mike, stop attacking people, stop looking for bias everywhere, and stop changing the subject. It’s incredibly annoying and why no wants to play with you.”
****
Bullshit! I play fair as in trying to legitimately critique whatever there’s out there to legitimtately critique. In comparison, others show more of a biased stand. I’m based in the West and keep up to snuff on how the former Yugoslavia and former USSR are covered. I’m also aware of some of the absurdities written by the likes of Yulia Latynina on those subjects. Shedd and yours truly clearly busted your ignorantly stated biases on the subject. Views shared by many other not so critical followers of Eng. lang. mass media.
You made its appear like NATO’s aggression wasn’t so American (Clinton admin.) orchestrated in addition to not knowing much, if anything about Nasir Oric.
You’re confusing “personal attack” with a legitimate critique of questionable views. On the matter of former Yugoslavia, note how you felt it okay to paint a broad picture of ignorant Russians over more knowledgeable Westerners.
When compared to the West, the Russians are generally the more correct on former Yugoslavia.
———————————————-
“Necrons” as in neocons?.
Pardon the period after the qustion mark.
Some media critique on the dubious Western mass media coverage of former Yugoslavia:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=18®ion_id=8
My own stated views weren’t meant as personal towards mab.
Just what Georgia needs for being more “truthful”.
http://en.rian.ru/world/20070904/76461299.html
No, the Necrons. The ancient slaves of the C’Tan Star Gods, recently awoken from their tomb worlds to once again rid the galaxy of life and seal it off from the Warp and the Fell Powers that reside within. Jeez! Do I have to explain everything?
(I really have been playing this game far too much.)
“Do I have to explain everything?”
In some instances.
Speaking of computer games, somebody should do an article on the Russian computer-games industry. The shelves seem to be overflowing with Russian-made games, a lot of them dealing with the Great Patriotic War. Unfortunately the Day Watch game seems to require a better graphics card than my laptap is equipped with. *sniffle*
On the matter of knowledge pertaining to former Yugoslavia, how many Americans know that Alija Izetbegovic was a bonafide Islamic fundamentalist (refer to his 1970 written “Islamic Declaration” which he never recanted), who supported the WW II era SS Handschar unit?
Well, this is boring (except for the Necrons, which I find fascinating.)
The thing is, Mike, I DIDN’T compare Russian knowledge of US policy to American knowledge. Those are words and opinions you are putting in my post and then attacking.
Follow-up from last posted comments:
How many Americans know that Serbs were numerically the greatest victims of 1990s ethnic cleansing in former Yugoslavia. The falsely cruel neocon/neolib belief that they deserved it, is what’s grossly ignorant.
“The thing is, Mike, I DIDN’T compare Russian knowledge of US policy to American knowledge. Those are words and opinions you are putting in my post and then attacking.”
***
Of course you did, as it’s a matter of record.
Now, if somone could find some history of Necron involvement in the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, that would be awesome. The world needs more skeletal killer robots.
Seriously, why this obsession with what Americans think or what the Anglophone media say? Really, who cares?
“Seriously, why this obsession with what Americans think or what the Anglophone media say? Really, who cares?”
****
That could be thrown at others including PL.
MAB brought up the claim of not so informed Russians. The subject of former Yugoslavia was her example. It wouldn’t be appropriate to let her comments go as posted without addressing them.
Again, nothing personal. Also, it’s high time to show how in general, comparative terms, Americans aren’t more knowledgeable than Russians on a good number of international issues.
On a somewhat related note, here’s an article in need of constructive grammar Nazificiation program:
http://en.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=929
To go along with some cogent points, IMO, he takes the new Cold War issue a bit too, too.
Bully for “PL.” We’re not talking about him. As for me, I just don’t care what somebody writes in the New Onanist or which shamans got invited to the mystic circle in Washington, DC.
“Bully for “PL.” We’re not talking about him. As for me, I just don’t care what somebody writes in the New Onanist or which shamans got invited to the mystic circle in Washington, DC.”
***
The topic was addressed here and followed up on. Like it or not, that DC crowd has clout. They shouldn’t have carte blanche.
That doesn’t change my point, which is that when a lot of people around the world criticise US policy, it’s not the policy that you or I might be criticising. It’s that the US sent the Colorado potato beetle to the USSR to starve the nation, that HIV-AIDS programs supported by USAID are meant to get Russian kids hooked on drugs and kill them off, and that all NGOS are front organizations for an orange revolution (just to name a few statements I’ve heard on Russian TV lately, made by gov’t officials).
This is a bad comparison, since it’s not based on research — but I have found Europeans more informed about the US and their criticism to be well-considered and sensible. Well, except for the French:)
While I doubt the AIDS-HIV/drug-addiction link, there actually IS some historical evidence regarding the potato beetle being introduced to Russia by the United States through food shipments. Considering that France and Germany did use the potato beetle in the late 1930′s against each other’s potato crops, it isn’t such a stretch to imagine the CIA introducing the potato beetle to Russia.
Regarding potato beetle warfare:
http://fas-www.harvard.edu/~hsp/bulletin/cwcb33.pdf
There is pretty strong financial and historical information that indicates NGOs were being used by foreign governments to forment revolution under the guise of peaceful protests, etc. While I wouldn’t suggest this was the case for all NGOs, I don’t begrudge the Russians the right to restrict what foreign governments can and can’t fund within their borders. We certainly do the same, without accusations of “cracking down on freedom”, etc.
So actually, I would say those ARE fair game criticisms of U.S. foreign policy, even if they are of the more covert variety. Even though I was aware of the discussion of the potato beetle accusation and the HIV-AIDS corporate greed/drugs discussion, I likely wouldn’t have cited that as U.S. foreign policy examples. Definitely might have cited the NGOs, however. I likely would have discussed expansion of NATO and changes to the CFE treaty as perceived aggressive acts against Russia as well. Jackson-Vanik is another easy target for such foreign policy discussions (as regards Russia, anyway).
Regarding the French – I once had a French girlfriend. I never argued so much in my life. Not loud arguments – just constant debate on everything. If I were to say the sky is blue, she would have countered that it was light azure or something. It was at once frustrating and strangely intriguing.
Not only DC. NY is the main location for Freedom House, the Open Society Institute, Council on Foreign Relations and “the paper of record”.
Speaking of computer games, somebody should do an article on the Russian computer-games industry.
I actually have some links on this topic at home. I was considering writing a blog post on the topic. In particular I had an interview conducted with several of the bigger names in Russian computer game industry. The discussion centered a bit on how the Russian games differentiate themselves, stylistically, from Western games, etc.
I also used to chat with the sister of the guy who founded GSC Game World. The “Cossacks” game series were his babies. I found it pretty interesting how this young guy ended up providing for his entire family, etc.
You should definetly do a blog post.
You Are Empty looks pretty cool. It’s a first-person shooter set in an alternative 1930s in which an attempt to create Soviet Man goes awry, resulting in hideous mutants instead.
That game does look good.
Really, Russians really can be darkly comedic and self-deprecating. I really appreciate it, as I have a warped sense of humor myself.
However, I’m never sure if this is a cultural strength or if it provides an easy avenue towards individual despair!
Regarding the topic of the Russian computer game industry, I may revisit my bookmarks and check for some additional articles in give that a whirl. I have such a staggeringly vast array of bookmarks on topics that I have never actually put together into coherent blog entries. Usually I end up putting such things on the back-burner until some inspiration comes along. Too often I find myself thinking “who the hell (other than me) gives a shit about such obscure topics?”
Something is always of interest to somebody. A friend of mine actually wrote a bit on the Russian computer industry here: http://www.efn.org/~dredmond/Uplink/Uplink09.html
Mr Shedd:
Well, that’s a nice little sidebar about the potato beetle, but I’m afraid I don’t see why it leads you to think the CIA put the potato beetle in the USSR. Bug nuts have tracked their movement, and they’ve migrated X kilometers per year from Mexico north and east, with no “jumps” that smacked of CIA operatives carrying suitcases filled with bugs.
Actually, you rather supported my point with my example of HIV-AID drug programs. You perceived it to be a discussion of the corporate greed/drugs discussion. But that is the informed criticism about Big Pharmacy (regardless of nation). What I’m citing is the belief among many (don’t have the data with me, but there is a fair bit on attitudes about HIV-AIDS) that the Western programs, especially the harm reduction programs, are designed to turn kids into heroine addicts, get HIV-AIDS and die. This is an instrument of US foreign policy, as are the family planning programs, the goal of which is to kill off the Russian nation. (I should say that this isn’t specific only to Russians; it’s typical of most countries when they are in an HIV-AIDS epidemic.)
On NGOS –My hackles go up when people write about “NGOs being used…” Have you had any dealings with the kind of human rights NGO that gets this financing? I have. They would have something to say about the notion of them being hapless dupes of American imperialism. I know all that supposed financial and historical evidence, but I have also been associated with many of these organizations since the early 90s. I don’t care what the funders thought they were doing, and in many cases I hoot over what they take credit for. But on the ground it’s very different than you seem to imagine. But in any case, the point is not that people have looked at reports, read books, or studied the subject; they simply believe that all NGOS are fronts for British spies or orange revolutions, except for the ones that are designed to ensure the genetic death of the Russian nation (which reminds me of that recent brouhaha over biological material being sent abroad so that the CIA could make Russian-specific biological weapons).
NATO? Well, NATO is at our borders with weapons pointed at us waiting to attack or colonize us. The CFE treaty? Why should we be restrained when the US is threatening us with missiles in Poland? What else… well, the US only intervenes abroad in order to get oil. Kosovo? Well, that was to destroy Serbia, which (depending on the version) might have aligned with Russia to make a pan-Slavic union or was an Orthodox nation (there is a confusing digression about the Pope, Masons and Jews). Kursk? Torpedoed by US ships. 9/11? Carried out by the CIA to give the US an excuse to attack Iraq (and go for the oil). All the murders and terrorism in Russia? Carried out by minions of Berezovsky in concert with the CIA.
I’m delighted when the world lets Bush and Co. know what they think of their appalling, criminal, heinous, constitution-defying, dangerous, mad actions. And of course, Russia is a big place, and there are people with an informed and nuanced view. But I still make a distinction between informed criticism and ill-informed, demonizing criticism. I think the majority of the public here, influenced by a wildly distorting media, is not criticizing the US foreign policy for informed reasons. Maybe that doesn’t matter to you. But it matters to me. A generation of rabid America-haters is potentially dangerous.
“I think the majority of the public here, influenced by a wildly distorting media, is not criticizing the US foreign policy for informed reasons. Maybe that doesn’t matter to you. But it matters to me. A generation of rabid America-haters is potentially dangerous.”
****
The political likes of Nina Khrushcheva and Andrei Zagorski do the reverse for Russia unfriendly interests. Those two aren’t the more objective.
You don’t seem as concerned about the hypocritically warped Russia and Serb bashing out there. Disinformation which doesn’t get much of a critical challenge at high profile Eng. lang. venues.
This blog is called Sean’s Russia Blog. We write about Russia here. There are zillions of other blogs that deal with the US. I’m commenting on Russia on this blog. On other blogs, I comment about the US.
Fine.
I’m commenting on your very Eng. lang. mass media like mis-perception that the Anglo-American audience is generally better informed than their Russian counterparts on such issues as former Yugoslavia.
You initiated the discussion of that topic at this thread. I correctly replied to it.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.