What can you put you for?

Being behind bars due to dissent in modern Russia is becoming easier. I did not have time to subside the noise after a three-year sentence to Ildar Dadin, as the Krasnodar court sentenced another civil activist to the two years of the colony-settlement -Daria Polyudova, moreover, for the post on social networks. In fact, such sentences are made much more, but not all information about such cases falls into the press. A few months ago in Russia, the electronic release of the famous “chronic events” famous in Soviet times was renewed, but the authors admit that their lists of persecuted for political reasons are far from full.

Separately, it should be said about the string of cases for "Gosizman". Along with noisy processes: the failed business of Svetlana Davydova and the 14-year period, to which the GRU GRU General Grus, Gennady Kravtsov, was also information about a pair of less resonant processes. In both cases, the accused were convicted of state treason in favor of Ukraine (for 8 and 12 years, respectively). At the same time, the full statistics of the cases of Gosizmen are not available. If we also count numerous cases of the threat of initiating such cases by the FSB (frequently used, for example, to “squeeze out” disagreeing in emigration), then we can state: “Hunting for spies” in Russia began to acquire the nature of the epidemic. It is no coincidence that the lawyers of the “team 29” developed a memo how to behave if you are threatened by the accusation of “treason” for contacts with foreigners.

At the same time, the defenders of the regime continue to assure that there are no repressions in Russia, justifying such statements by examples of activists, journalists and politicians, who are still free of course. Human rights activists are mainly inclined to the fact that repressions certainly occur, but are mainly “point”, not mass in nature. At the same time, as the main problem, analysts and publicists most often distinguish the “illogicality” of persecution: when a difficult housewife can suddenly initiate a difficult article, while some journalists dare to criticize the current power by almost “impunity”.

I will try to name the main reasons why a person can be pursued for beliefs. My classification is largely conditional, but allows you to at least somewhat understand the logic of repressive actions.

Possible causes of repressions can be as follows:

1. For "status motives". Representatives of the highest authorities and power structures do not forgive the slightest damage to their status and authority. Recall the famous Pussy Riot. Such a harsh sentence regarding the participants in the punk group was unprofitable to the authorities from a practical point of view, since it caused the support of convicted girls even from those who initially did not approve of their act. However, the authorities do not forgive an open call, and even made in the defiant form. The same applies to the arson of the FSB door by the artist Peter Pavlensky.

In this kind of repressions, there is, of course, the motive of revenge, but the main goal of the prosecutors is to give a lesson for the future so that others are “unimportant” to show impudence in relation to the authorities and power structures, as well as to the Russian Orthodox Church, which turns into an instrument of state propaganda. At the same time, even an activity that does not cause real damage to the current government can stop - does not reveal its crimes, does not interfere with strategies, and does not raise revolutions. The fact of an encroachment on the "basics of the foundations" is important.

The vector of what is happening shows: the persecution of dissenters is tightened every month

2. Punishment for the "transition to the other side." Not only the former military or law enforcement officers who moved to the other side fall under this point, because, in the strict sense of the word, the desertion of soldiers and officers is formally considered a crime in any, and not just in a totalitarian country. This category is not limited to those civilians who went to fight in the Donbass on the side of the Ukrainian military. I mean any activity for the benefit of another country, which is defined by the Russian state as "hostile". And in this case, this is already about repressions.

Recall what a flurry of negative emotions caused the decision of Maria Gaidar to work in the Odessa administration. It can be assumed that there were few statements in Ukraine in Ukraine in Ukraine, few could hurt if they were made "from Russia." However, the clear fact of the “transition to the other side”, the condemnation of Russia is already “from Ukraine”, from a person who has become an official of the “enemy state”, in the eyes of the paratriots, looks frank betrayal.

This position is absurd, especially if Russia insists that he is not at war with Ukraine: specialists from one European country may well work under the contract in another, but to live in the third and, if their work is not related to admission to state secrets, it would not occur to anyone to accuse them of the Stateist. But for the current Russian regime, the situation is obvious: if the security forces are still ready, reluctantly, tolerate anti -war activists going to protest promotions within the country, then they do not forgive those who are “from the enemy”.

Let us recall the indicative example of the Russian in the past, and now the Ukrainian news agency "New Region". Its founder Alexander Shchetinin , as well as his colleagues who have Russian citizenship, threatened that if they return to the Fatherland, they would be initiated by the initiation of the case under the 275th article of the Criminal Code. A clear rejection of their country and the transfer of a large information resource "to the enemy camp" into the FSB is really perceived only as "treason to the homeland", especially if such actions are combined with emigration and any interaction with organizations abroad (moreover, not necessarily state -owned).

The authorities show approximately the same attitude to Russians who continue to live in their country, but to collaborate with foreigners. True, in this case, repressions can vary from ordinary bullying to prison - depending on the degree of fame of a person, the so -called "security publicity", the effectiveness of his work and the presence of at least insignificant grounds for initiating a criminal case.

3. "Red rags". In addition to direct contacts with foreigners, you can call several more "red rags" to which the repressive organs can react. This includes the receipt of foreign grants, the support of Ukraine (even “on behalf of Russia”), street protests, active participation in political activities, the disclosure of individual sensitive corruption schemes (not by order of a competitor, but spontaneous), a brightly pro -Western position, calls for federalization and the like.

Repression options here also vary, in many respects are random. Most likely, it is in this category that the most ordinary people are punished for posts in social networks or for participating in rallies - these citizens simply pressed on the buttons sensitive to the authorities and “fell under the distribution”, while serving as an example to intimidate the rest.

4. "For not related circumstances." A person acts formally "on behalf of his country", that is, does not cooperate openly with private or state foreign organizations, but his work against the crimes of the authorities is really effective. As a rule, it is these people who are most dangerous. A professional most often works in such a way that his actions are difficult to fit under the criteria of "extremism". To blame an ordinary person of state treason, even with the current "rubber" legislation, is also not so easy, especially if this troublemaken is quite known in Russia and in the West. The result may be the initiation of criminal cases on other, formally unrelated grounds (most often, economic), or banal murder, as was the case in the cases of Anna Politkovskaya or Boris Nemtsov.

Here is an approximate and incomplete list of grounds for repression. Indeed: the system of combating dissent in modern Russia is far from being built as consistent and all -hollow as it was in Soviet times, so in each of the listed categories there are many exceptions. However, the vector of what is happening shows: the persecution of dissenters is tightened every month, and people who fall into the listed categories are in serious danger if they continue to live in Russia.

Ksenia Kirillova - a journalist, a former correspondent of Novaya Gazeta (Yekaterinburg), lives in the United States