Translated material
Back to triumphal
The correspondence of the American ambassador and the Russian Foreign Ministry regarding the dispersal of protesters on Pushkinskaya Square is lined up in the usual key "and your blacks are linked." Symbolically: both the authorities, the opposition, and even the “insidious State Department” return the rallies to their usual space. On the Triumphal Square.
The reaction to the power detention of oppositionists after a rally on Pushkinskaya Square was expected, but still indicative. Press Secretary of Vladimir Putin Dmitry Peskov noted the professionalism of the police and emphasized the legitimacy of her actions. “The legitimacy of the actions of the police”, however, is an obvious oxymoron, but let the mixture of “legality” and “legitimacy” remains on the conscience of the Putin spokesman.
A much greater resonance caused the condemnation of the detentions by the new American ambassador to Russia Michael McFol. The diplomat quite diplomatically wrote on his Twitter that “he looks anxiously at the arrests of the opposition”, for freedom of assembly is universal values. The Russian Foreign Ministry answered the ambassador through its own account on the same Twitter: the anonymous representatives of the department, leading the blog, noticed that the Russian police acted much more humane than the American one, which dispersed the participants in the “capture Wall Street” campaign.
This is generally a favorite occupation of Russian diplomacy: once having borrowed the term “double standards” from foreign colleagues (since the 50s of the last century, propaganda has been a variety of class inequality in the countries of the capitalist West), the Soviet, and then the Russian Foreign Ministry with rapture and even a certain holy trepidation pronounces it regarding and without. And even a serious struggle, such as the publication of his own report on human rights in developed countries, is on the field. Moreover, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs likes this activity to such an extent that even in the Putin article (rather muddy and, it seems, almost in the written Foreign Ministry itself) about foreign policy, words appeared about the need to continue and expand such practice. The way out, of course, is zero, but if the foreign policy department wants to play counter -propaganda - why not, there should be no tangible harm.
Undoubtedly, the ambassador was not entirely right when he performed with such a remark. Here the matter is not only and not so much in the law enforcement practices of the police of his native country as a demonstration of the mentor style of communication where it was obviously too. At least for the opposition themselves, who, as the further reaction of the authorities showed, threatened the danger much smaller than the hooligans from the “feminist punk group” Pussy Riot. The last court on the eve gave two months of arrest, and the opposition was charged with the maximum “disobedience to the legal requirements of the police” (Article 19.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses), which entails a fine or administrative arrest of up to 15 days.
The full -time oppositionists are pro -government propagandists and so love to blame the US State Department of work and make them “jackals from foreign embassies”, so why give an American ambassador to give an excessive reason for such bad fabrications? He, that he had already forgotten how, at the time of his arrival in Russia, the whole of the Makhin of the State Propaganda was tensed to Russia, up to the “Channel One” and his “fiery rostrum” Mikhail Leontyev. The repetition of the passed here seems unnecessary.
And in this sense, the police cannot be recognized in any way legitimate - of course, she is allowed to act like this by the law, but according to the basic law, she shouldn’t disperse anyone at all. However, in our legal culture, the politically motivated actions of the authorities are often described by the word “arbitrariness”. And by the word “lawlessness”, the adjective “cop” is just asking for. Cases in which the whole situation can be completely described by the phrase “acted according to the law” or “acted in a legal field”, where less.
Although, of course, the police acted in a legal field: the time allotted for the rally expired, the square had to be freed from people (however, to whom they could interfere in the late evening?), And people did not want to leave and tried to resist. Of course, this was considered a provocation (which, what was it already there) and the police took on the batons. Now everyone again blames political opponents: full -time opposition - power, power - full -time opposition.
If there was a period when the authorities were frightened of almost one hundred thousandth rallies, and the “leaders of the unsystematic opposition” were clearly confused by such mass support, now everything has come into the usual framework. Welcome back to the triumphal square with its riot police, autosaks and a miserable heap trying to march the "disagreements". At such a pace, Eduard Limonov can soon join again.