The scandal is raging on around the official recognition of the notorious Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny and the further strip of his ‘prisoner of conscience’ status.
On January 17, Navalny was declared a ‘prisoner of ‘conscience’ by international organization for human rights Amnesty International. This status considers anyone who is prevented from expressing their beliefs without incitement to political violence.
On January 24, this status has been already striped from Russian prisoner. In the result, such a move by well-known international organization will deprive Navalny from being awarded by a number of international prizes, including the Nobel Prize. The stripping of the prisoner of conscience status exposes his “controversial reputation”, which will push anyone to think twice before supporting him.
Folks, I should warn you that Kevin Rothrock’s strangely formulated tweet accuses me of having “strangely cropped” @AmnestyUK‘s email. By “strangely cropped”, he means me *fully publishing* the statement I received. Here it is with the name redacted, for all Better People to see: pic.twitter.com/f1M0TjdCdn
— Aaron Maté (@aaronjmate) February 23, 2021
The decision to strip the status was made after Amnesty International had received information about Navalny’s loud nationalist statements. Moreover, he has repeatedly publicly called for the violent overthrow of the official Russian government, his hate speech against Jews, representatives of other nationalities, as well as LGBTQ members, was largely spread in social media.
English subtitles: “If in order not to do something nice to me, our government want to leave 60 million people hungry, such a government should definitely be overthrown right now. Quite possibly even by violent measures. If they are now saying that: “You know, Navalny is now gaining some political points, because he offered something. Therefore, let them all famish … ” Then such government deserves the worst.”
It is for the same reason that in 2012 the famous German journalist Benjamin Bidder wrote on the DW website about the “horrors of Russian nationalism”, citing Alexei Navalny as a clear example of Russian chauvinism.
He wrote that Alexey Navalny took part in “Russian march” together with fascists and skinheads, took the stage calling to stop nourishing Caucasus!, he also turned to extremely dangerous ultra-rightists for help.
By the way, Benjamin Bidder was the first to interview Navalny after his alleged chemical weapons poisoning.
Moreover, Navalny has never retracted his nationalist statements and continues to openly declare that he does not change his views.
Obviously, Amnesty International found itself trapped in a bind. Apparently, it was decided to slightly adjust the official position, that is, while maintaining the harsh rhetoric against the Russian authorities, to deprive Navalny of his status.
However, everything went wrong for Amnesty International. This decision provoked a strong reaction from supporters of Navalny in Russia, as well as from its colleagues in the Euro-Atlantic structures.
On February 25, the scandal gained momentum. The rhetoric of Navalny’s supporters against Amnesty International turned to be increasingly outraged. Against the background of jokes and insults, there is a message from Amnesty International to the address of Navalny’s associate Volkov, who is now living in Germany. In response to this message, Volkov gave a humiliating comment.
Soon it turns out that Amnesty was a victim of a prank carried out via a video conference in Zoom. During the conference, the pranker Vovan, who claimed to be Volkov, had a frank conversation with the leadership of the international organization, which revealed its hypocrisy.
We recommend you to watch the full video to understand the essence of the issue.
The recorded conversation unveiled two core aspects.
Firstly, Amnesty is trying to save face in front of its partners from the Euro-Atlantic structures and is apologizing to the Russian pro-Western opposition.
Secondly, the conversation clearly and unambiguously says that the organization applies double standards in its practice. While continuing to support Navalny without checking his dossier and despite his nationalist statements, Amnesty in any case refused to react or make any statements regarding the detention of Sputnik and Baltnews journalists in Latvia.
In December, Russian-speaking journalists were detained in Latvia and charged with violating EU sanctions under article 84 of the Latvian Criminal Code. Despite the fact that these personal sanctions cannot be applied to media workers and the detentions have purely political purposes.
Today, the problem is that organizations that previously adhered to at least some moral rules and norms are no more ashamed to proclaim the implementation of double standards. They now operate under martial law, when they have their denoted ally and a bitter enemy, against whom all war means are acceptable.
MORE ON THE TOPIC:
- Sanctions Post-Navalny: Blitzkrieg, Trench Warfare, Or Armistice?
- Modern Ukraine: Unlawfulness In Name Of Sacred Democracy