Crime Russian opposition figure hospitalized

[Yevgeny]

Whatever man. Just take my misspelling as proof that Russian judiciary is great, Navalny is guilty, Putin is a cool guy and the rest of your BS narrative. Case closed.

First of all noone has to prove you anything. Because noone cares what some idiot from Bulgaria thinks. Secondly I personally think that Russian judiciary is far from perfect, Navalny is indeed guilty of corruption and Putin is a great politician. This is my personal opinion. Im not trying to persuade anyone.

Btw, in today's Russia even Christian Saints can be mixed with communism:

Btw Stalin opened many churches and rehabilitated many priests during the War. You just don't know it.

 

[muck]

Berlin reacted very insincerely to the diplomat's expulsion … If Russian diplomats partook in a protest march against the German government, the latter wouldn't tolerate such an intrusion into Germany's domestic affairs. It's irrelevant in this context that Russia is governed by an authoritarian regime that will persecute anyone threatening its rule; this is merely about what diplomats should and should not do.

About being a good guest, so to speak …

 

[1645556315]

Yesterday pro-western opposition leaders called for halt further protests.

That decision divided supporters, some of them are in denial and ready to continue, other accepted reality and admitted that protests failed and can not complete any task. They have too weak support and example of Belorussia where protesters with much greater support could not keep pace for a long time also not very inspiring.

 

[Ivan le Fou]

First of all noone has to prove you anything. Because noone cares what some idiot from Bulgaria thinks. Secondly I personally think that Russian judiciary is far from perfect, Navalny is indeed guilty of corruption and Putin is a great politician. This is my personal opinion. Im not trying to persuade anyone.

Going on a, unrelated to the present subject, tangent regarding the "proof" thing, because I think it is pretty hilarious.

Nemipuka was one of the most active and fervent supporter of the narrative "Trump colluded with Russia, Trump is a Russian agent and a traitor and should be trialed as such" and deemed it unnecessary to provide any kind of proof to substantiate these allegations because it was "common knowledge".

Though now he changed his stance on the importance of proof.

 

[nemipuka_]

Going on a, unrelated to the present subject, tangent regarding the "proof" thing, because I think it is pretty hilarious.

Nemipuka was one of the most active and fervent of the narrative "Trump colluded with Russia, Trump is a Russian agent and a traitor and should be trialed as such" and deemed it unnecessary to provide any kind of proof to substantiate these allegations because it was "common knowledge".

Though now he changed his stance on the importance of proof.

My criticism of Trump is no secret. The quote is false though. So yeah, another 10% truth and 90% lie coming from you.

 

[Yevgeny]

Berlin reacted very insincerely to the diplomat's expulsion … If Russian diplomats partook in a protest march against the German government, the latter wouldn't tolerate such an intrusion into Germany's domestic affairs. It's irrelevant in this context that Russia is governed by an authoritarian regime that will persecute anyone threatening its rule; this is merely about what diplomats should and should not do.

About being a good guest, so to speak …

Only those who represent real threat...

 

[nicememe]

It's irrelevant in this context that Russia is governed by an authoritarian regime that will persecute anyone threatening its rule

As Yevgeny mentioned, although I would expand:

1. "Anyone threatening its rule" is the key phrase. Please explain how exactly would Navalny, who has no connections in the Kremlin elite, threaten Putin? Either I don't know something about Navalny that you know, or there is literally no threat to speak of. Revolutions aren't made on the street, at least not in the 21st century. Any revolution that has any, even the slimmest, chances of success, must have defectors in the government or the military bureaucracy. In Russia's case, the entirety of the elite hates Navalny more than it could ever imagine hating Putin.
So "The Navalny threat" lives rent-free in the heads of western readers and possibly politicians (although I doubt even that). But you're free to change my mind on this one, if you think you can offer something new.

2. "Persecution" - maybe, as was in the case of Khodorkovsky, who had enough money and connections to turn the entire country on its head. But even he was handled pretty neatly. Now he's an exile funneling millions into supporting Navalny-minded movements and initiatives against Putin. Personally here, I'm wondering why he didn't get a taste of Novichok or Plutonium tea, given he's a far greater and realistic threat compared to nobodies like Navalny.

 

[morris]

Was Nava sentenced for defamation and abuse of the Second World War veteran yet?

 

[1645556315]

Another day, another hit on Navalny.

This time he was heavily criticized by other pro-western leader Yavlinsky. Leader of the Yabloko party that exists since the times of collapse of the USSR. He participated in presidental elections and party was in parliament 15-20 years ago. Last decades he lost most of the support, but still reputable amongst most hardcore russophobes in Russia.

That article in very harsh words. He basically called Navalny fascist and dictator.

Без путинизма и популизма | Григорий Явлинский

О смыслах текущей политики

www.yavlinsky.ru

 

[Yevgeny]

Was Nava sentenced for defamation and abuse of the Second World War veteran yet?

The hearing is going to be resumed on 12th.

 

[Ivan le Fou]

As Yevgeny mentioned, although I would expand:

1. "Anyone threatening its rule" is the key phrase. Please explain how exactly would Navalny, who has no connections in the Kremlin elite, threaten Putin? Either I don't know something about Navalny that you know, or there is literally no threat to speak of. Revolutions aren't made on the street, at least not in the 21st century. Any revolution that has any, even the slimmest, chances of success, must have defectors in the government or the military bureaucracy. In Russia's case, the entirety of the elite hates Navalny more than it could ever imagine hating Putin.
So "The Navalny threat" lives rent-free in the heads of western readers and possibly politicians (although I doubt even that). But you're free to change my mind on this one, if you think you can offer something new.

2. "Persecution" - maybe, as was in the case of Khodorkovsky, who had enough money and connections to turn the entire country on its head. But even he was handled pretty neatly. Now he's an exile funneling millions into supporting Navalny-minded movements and initiatives against Putin. Personally here, I'm wondering why he didn't get a taste of Novichok or Plutonium tea, given he's a far greater and realistic threat compared to nobodies like Navalny.

And assuming this is, indeed, the case: why would Navalny decides to go back to Russia?
Why didn't he ask for political asylum somewhere?

This is giving some strange Monthy Python vibes.

 

[Yevgeny]

1. "Anyone threatening its rule" is the key phrase. Please explain how exactly would Navalny, who has no connections in the Kremlin elite, threaten Putin? Either I don't know something about Navalny that you know, or there is literally no threat to speak of. Revolutions aren't made on the street, at least not in the 21st century. Any revolution that has any, even the slimmest, chances of success, must have defectors in the government or the military bureaucracy. In Russia's case, the entirety of the elite hates Navalny more than it could ever imagine hating Putin.
So "The Navalny threat" lives rent-free in the heads of western readers and possibly politicians (although I doubt even that). But you're free to change my mind on this one, if you think you can offer something new.

He wasnt viewed as a real threat until very recently. He was comparatively adequate, predictable and peaceful oppossition figure. Kremlin and Navalny managed to coexist for more than a decade. Problem is there are forces who are not happy with the status quo. They wanted Navalny to become radicalized and the whole situation unbalanced. I believe thats one of the reasons behind the poisoning...

2. "Persecution" - maybe, as was in the case of Khodorkovsky, who had enough money and connections to turn the entire country on its head. But even he was handled pretty neatly. Now he's an exile funneling millions into supporting Navalny-minded movements and initiatives against Putin. Personally here, I'm wondering why he didn't get a taste of Novichok or Plutonium tea, given he's a far greater and realistic threat compared to nobodies like Navalny.

Well normally people threatening Kremlin are either involved in corruption themselves or at least have some questionable business ties. All of that makes it much easier to fight them for the Kremlin.

 

[nicememe]

And assuming this is, indeed, the case: why would Navalny decides to go back to Russia?
Why didn't he ask for political asylum somewhere?

This is giving some strange Monthy Python vibes.

To me it seems like political theatre 101.
First Russian authorities request him to return immediately after his recovery, as, if he will refuse to return immediately, he will have huge problems and might end up getting a real jail sentence.
His response - I won't come back. (hence, "yes, I want a real jail sentence")
Once he violates the authorities' ultimatum, he then festively returns, now that he knows he will definitely be arrested and sentenced.

Demagoguery-levels of inciting anger in his followers, to produce violence on the streets.

Additionally, doesn't bat an eye at all, that he's returning into the embrace of an intelligence apparatus that tried to assassinate him just some months ago (by some claims, even tried to assassinate twice within a span of 48 hours).

So what we have is:
Navalny's words say: "Putin tried to kill me, and I am prosecuted unfairly"
But Navalny's actions say: "Actually I know Putin didn't assassinate me, and yes I really want to get prosecuted and jailed."

 

[Mardonius]

He wasnt viewed as a real threat until very recently. He was comparatively adequate, predictable and peaceful oppossition figure. Kremlin and Navalny managed to coexist for more than a decade. Problem is there are forces who are not happy with the status quo. They wanted Navalny to become radicalized and the whole situation unbalanced. I believe thats one of the reasons behind the poisoning...

The most important reason for the sudden change of tolerance towards Navalny imo were the protests in Belarus in 2020, with those in Armenia in 2018 and some others in Central-Asia in mind as well.

There appears to be increased resistance against the ancien political power structures in many former Soviet states. Putin recognized the growing threat and decided to deal with it at its early stage.

 

[Yevgeny]

The colour revolutions have been happening in former Soviet republics since 2003. Nothing new about it.

Last drop for Kremlin was Navalny accusing them of poisoning. He went too far this time...

 

[Mardonius]

Ethnic Russians were absent in those colour revolutions; Belarus changed the entire equation.

 

[Yevgeny]

What ethnic Russians have to do with Belarus actually?

Secondly if you indeed suspect Putin of poisoning according to Navalny himself FSB have been following him since 2017 and tried to kill him several times. Long before protests in Belarus ever took place.

There is no connection with Belarus either way.

 

[Mardonius]

I mean, it is one thing if protests are taking place outside your ethnic hemisphere. It is a completely different situation when opposition grows near and within your homeland.

One thing is clear: the threat may not be grave at this point, and Navalny might still not enjoy enough popularity to undermine Putin's rule, but the political movement he is building represents by far the most serious threat Vladimirovich has faced since his leadership.

I must say; I have been a bit surprised by what it appears to be an overreaction of Russia's political establishment towards Navalny. It only makes sense if the political elite believes that the current (geo)political landscape and economic state encourages and bolsters the Navalny threat.

Better to stop the threat in its tracks before it grows into something uncontrollable is probably Putin's justification.

 

[Yevgeny]

I mean, it is one thing if protests are taking place outside your ethnic hemisphere. It is a completely different situation when opposition grows near and within your homeland.

Most of the colour revolutions took place near Russias borders actually. Georgia and Ukraine both are Russias neighbours just like Belarus. Navalny was left intact after Euromaidan for example. The situation in Belarus is not much different. Moreover widespread protests took place in Russia itself in 2012-2013. Navalny was one of the leaders. Still left intact.

One thing is clear: the threat may not be grave at this point, and Navalny might still not enjoy enough popularity to undermine Putin's rule, but the political movement he is building represents by far the most serious threat Vladimirovich has faced since his leadership.

All his political programs were purely populistic. He released investigations from time to time, as a result he received donations and other forms of financial support, which he embezzled for the most part. Getting rich slowly. Kremlin turned a blind eye on this and many other things as long as Navalny didnt organize large scale protests and stuff like that. It went on for more than a decade. Both sides were interested in maintaining status quo.

I must say; I have been a bit surprised by what it appears to be an overreaction of Russia's political establishment towards Navalny. It only makes sense if the political elite believes that the current (geo)political landscape and economic state encourages and bolsters the Navalny threat.

The honeymoon ended last summer when he was poisoned and began accusing Russian goverment of crimes against humanity. Noone in Kremlin would like it obviously. Navalny crossed the line.

Better to stop the threat in its tracks before it grows into something uncontrollable is probably Putin's justification.

Problem is you are taking it all out of context. The construction of Nord Stream 2 was frozen in late 2019. Thats a big money. Noone in Kremlin would ever risk jeopardizing relations with EU (and Germany in particular) by organizing high profile assassinations in a period when the completion of startegic energy project is under question. Its simply unimaginable.

 

[Mardonius]

Most of the colour revolutions took place near Russias borders actually. Georgia and Ukraine both are Russias neighbours just like Belarus. Navalny was left intact after Euromaidan for example. Moreover widespread protests took place in Russia itself in 2012-2013. Navalny was one of the leaders. Still left intact.

That is why mentioned ethnic Russians. I mean, look at Ukraine; the protests mostly took place in the western part of the country, where people consider themselves to be part of a different political and cultural hemisphere. The Belarus protests took it much closer to home.

All his political programs were purely populistic. He released investigations from time to time, as a result he received donations and other forms of financial support, which he embezzled for the most part. Getting rich slowly. Kremlin turned a blind eye on this and many other things as long as Navalny didnt organize large scale protests and stuff like that. It went on for more than a decade. Both sides were interested in maintaining status quo.

It has always been an uncomfortable status quo, with both sides probably realizing that it would crumble at one point. The status quo was always maintained for pragmatic reasons; both sides were looking at each other with suspicion and were gathering ammunition for future clashes.

The honeymoon ended last summer when he was poisoned and began accusing Russian goverment of crimes against humanity. Noone in Kremlin would like it obviously. He crossed the line.

The status quo was breached by the state with its assassination attempt imo. I don't have an insight in the political calculations of the Kremlin for why they made that decision, but the fact that they undertook such operation means that some equation was changed.

Problem is you are taking it all out of context. The construction of Nord Stream 2 was frozen in late 2019. Thats a big money. Noone in Kremlin would ever risk jeopardizing relations with EU (and Germany in particular) by organizing assassinations against opposition leaders in the period when the completion of startegic energy project is under question. Its unimaginable.

I don't find that to be a particularly convincing argument. The likes of China, Iran and Russia have all made some risky domestic political decisions the past few years, which have had serious foreign policy repercussions, yet they did. The fact is that most authoritarian governments primarily act upon matters they consider to be existential for their ruling and domestic stability; energy projects like Nordstream 2 always come second.