[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1603-1604]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                                 RUSSIA

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, over the past several years, we have 
witnessed a disturbing erosion in Russia's democracy. Checks and 
balances, essential to the functioning of any democracy, have been 
undermined in Russia through the elimination of the independent media, 
the weakening of the judiciary, and the decline of a political 
opposition and citizen participation.
  In his inauguration speech, President Bush spoke about the ``force of 
human freedom'' and stated that it is the policy of the United States 
``to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and 
institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of 
ending tyranny in our world.''
  But, the President has been unable to capitalize on his friendship 
with President Putin to prevent a backsliding in Russia's democracy. 
While President Putin speaks about his commitment to move down the path 
of democracy, his actions demonstrate otherwise.
  From 2000 until the present day, President Putin has tightened his 
grip

[[Page 1604]]

on Russia, increasing the authoritarian nature of the Russian state. 
While many Russian experts understand that President Putin inherited a 
state mired in corruption and political violence, and dominated by 
powerful, unaccountable oligarchs, they have called Putin's approach to 
establishing security ``flawed and unfair.'' A Washington Post article 
in March 2004 described how fear was creeping back into Russia, 
reminiscent of the Soviet Union. A week before the Russian Presidential 
election in 2004, the article states:

       Scholars, journalists, reformist politicians, human rights 
     activists and even business moguls describe an atmosphere of 
     anxiety that has left them wary of crossing the Kremlin.

  The imprisonment of Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Russia's richest man and an 
oil tycoon, the disappearances of critics of Putin, as well as the 
flawed parliamentary elections in 2003, have been disturbing signs for 
those who care about democracy in Russia.
  The U.S. State Department in its Country Report on Human Rights 
Practices for 2003 raise concerns over human rights abuses committed by 
the Government of Russia in Chechnya, as well as by Chechen rebels, the 
failure of the 2003 parliamentary elections to meet international 
standards, the impunity of law enforcement officials responsible for 
abuses, poor prison conditions, and a weakening of freedom of 
expression and the independence and freedom of some media. In the 
global survey, ``Freedom in the World,'' published by Freedom House in 
December 2004, Russia was downgraded to ``Not Free,'' the only country 
to register a negative category change in 2004.
  On all fronts, Russia's democracy appears to be weakening. In January 
2002, the last significant independent Moscow TV station was shut down, 
many believe due to government pressure. Furthermore, radio and print 
media have increasingly been restricted. It was widely reported that 
during the parliamentary elections of 2003, television coverage was 
heavily biased toward the propresidency party, largely ignoring or 
criticizing Putin's opponents. In May 2004, the nongovernmental 
organization, the Committee to Protect Journalists, CPJ, named Russia 
one of the 10 worst places to be a journalist. CPJ states:

       A shift from blatant pressures to more subtle and covert 
     tactics, such as politicized lawsuits and hostile corporate 
     takeovers by businessmen with close ties to Putin, has 
     allowed the Kremlin to stifle criticism of the president and 
     reports on government corruption and human rights abuses 
     committed by Russian forces in Chechnya.

  Furthermore, they note that journalists in Russia's provinces are 
murdered with impunity.
  As President Putin moves from ``managed democracy'' to soft 
authoritarianism, Freedom House, Human Rights Watch, and others argue 
that Putin appears to be cracking down on civil society, a vital 
element of any thriving democracy. In May 2004, Putin used his state-
of-the-nation speech to attack nongovernmental organizations, NGOs, 
accusing them of ``receiving financing from influential foreign 
foundations and serving dubious groups and commercial interests.'' The 
very real need to stop terrorist financing through charities or other 
organizations does not justify targeting legitimate civic groups and 
NGOs. Following Putin's state-of-the-nation speech, masked intruders 
ransacked the office of a major human rights organization in Tatarstan 
that provides legal support for victims of torture. In addition, the 
state-owned Center TV criticized NGOs, accusing them of being tied to 
anti-Russian interests. And, in June 2004, Russia's Foreign Minister 
met with several NGOs and urged them to rebut criticisms of the Council 
of Europe regarding Russia's human rights policies.
  Russia's judicial system is also believed to be far from independent, 
failing to serve as a counterweight to other branches of government. 
Human Rights Watch has expressed concern that the government under 
President Putin has conducted ``selective criminal prosecutions against 
perceived opponents . . . and scientists working with foreigners on 
sensitive topics.'' President Putin has proposed establishing executive 
control over the nomination of members of a key supreme court body that 
supervises the hiring and dismissal of judges. Furthermore, despite 
progress in implementing trial by jury, the Putin government appears to 
have manipulated jury selection in several high-profile cases or 
otherwise tried to influence jury deliberations.
  Chechnya continues to be an area of particular concern. While Russia 
has the right to combat terrorist threats on its territory, Russian and 
proxy forces regularly violate basic human rights of Chechen civilians. 
Disappearances, extrajudicial executions, rape, and torture of 
detainees all continue with disturbing frequency and with absolute 
impunity. Russian forces regularly conduct sweeps and cleansing 
operations, resulting in death, injury and abductions in what many call 
a . disproportionate use of force. These human rights abuses must end 
and those responsible should be held accountable.
  Since President Putin's reelection in March 2004, he has taken more 
steps to exert control over the state. In September 2004, following the 
tragic deaths of 330 people in Beslan, half of whom were children, 
President Putin undertook a set of political reforms that concentrated 
power in Moscow and decreased the power of Russia's regions. He 
proposed that regional governors no longer be popularly elected but 
instead be appointed by the President and ratified by regional 
legislatures. Legislation to this effect was introduced in October 2004 
and signed into law by President Putin on December 12, 2004. Putin also 
decided that all Duma deputies be elected on the basis of national 
party lists, based on the proportion of votes each party gets 
nationwide. As Human Rights Watch states in its recent World Report 
2005:

       The proposals would give the president de facto power to 
     appoint governors, even more sway over the parliament, or 
     State Duma, and increase the executive's influence over the 
     judiciary.

  While it is clear that President Putin must act to confront a 
legitimate threat to security, a marginalization of different regions 
outside of Moscow may create an even greater political backlash.
  President Putin faces a challenging political environment in Russia. 
However, human rights and political freedoms must not be ignored in an 
attempt to establish security; their neglect will only lead to greater 
political turmoil. The United States must stand by its commitment to 
democracy in its relations with Russia. If Russia wants to be a member 
of the community of democracies, it must demonstrate a meaningful 
commitment to democratic principles.

                          ____________________