Majorityrights Central > Category: World Affairs

The government needs to be sending a signal that it is not acceptable to discriminate against non-Russians. It should not be participating.  The irony is that in the Soviet era Russia was famous for promoting “friendship between peoples”, hosting large numbers of students from the developing world.  But now that slogan seems to have been turned on its head.  It is now Russia for Russians.

Allison Gill, head of the Moscow office of Human Rights Watch, following the coming into effect yesterday of a law reserving retail jobs for ethnic Russians.

From the Independent:-

Russia bans foreign workers from retail jobs

The legislation, which has been described as state-sponsored racism by human rights activists, bans non-Russians from working in large chunks of the country’s retail sector.

In particular it prevents anyone who doesn’t hold a Russian passport from working in Russia’s huge indoor and outdoor food-and-clothing markets and in the thousands of roadside kiosks that sell anything from newspapers to cosmetics. Such jobs are usually low paid and involve working at least 12-hour days.

Until yesterday, it was not uncommon to visit a market staffed exclusively by migrant workers from across the former Soviet Union. But, as of yesterday, hundreds of thousands of migrant workers from countries such as Georgia, Azerbaijan and Tajikistan are looking for a new job.

In Russia’s Far East, where such positions have typically been filled by Chinese migrant workers, the impact was felt immediately. Many of them appear to have already packed their bags and returned home.

At Ussuriysk’s vast market near the Chinese border, almost all the stalls were reported to be deserted. “We had hoped good sense would prevail ... This could disrupt the economy and bring many problems,” said Sergei Simakov, a district councillor from Ussuriysk.

Some commentators have raised fears that prices may rise as employers are forced to pay higher wages and have questioned whether ethnic Russians will be willing to take up jobs that entail such long hours. At Moscow’s famous Dorogomilovsky food market several stalls were denuded of their usually exotic mixture of fruit and vegetables from across the vast region. In their place hung signs that read: “Wanted: Sales-people. Must be Russian.”

Officials from the country’s migration service raided a Moscow market yesterday. That is a sign that the Kremlin expects the new law to be scrupulously followed. Four foreign workers were detained.

A spokesman for the Federal Migration Service said the raid proved that the new law was effective. “Considering that this particular market has 1,200 trading stalls and only four foreigners were detected you can conclude that in general the law is working.” The Kremlin insists that there is nothing racist about the law that it says is intended to protect the rights of ethnic Russians, who have complained of being squeezed out of the retail sector by migrant workers.

READ MORE...

I am very pleased to post the third of the essays PF has sent to me, venturing this time upon global and third world politics, and Iraq.  PF will now join the MR writers panel and post without further need of my engagement.  On behalf of everyone, then, I welcome a “potentially” valuable and unquestionably interesting and informative new member of the team.
GW

It certainly was an interesting facet of 20th century politics that both CIA and Communist intelligence agents were most interested in peddling/enforcing their universalist ideologies in oil-rich and resource-rich regions (Bolivia, Chile, Iran, Kosovo).

Its an open question whether the CIA and Russian intelligence were motivated by “Freedom” and “Socialism” respectively, or by the potential for large-scale resource acquisition.

READ MORE...

Open Democracy has a straightforward but informative piece by Patrice de Beer on next year’s French presidential election.  The passage on Jean-Marie Le Pen told me two things I never knew before.

First:-

There is a snag - the same one that derailed his efforts in 1981. By law, each candidate needs the support of 500 elected representatives (from national or local assemblies, or mayors) to enter the contest; for the FN this is always difficult, as the party has few elected members (none in parliament), and Le Pen has always relied on courting rightwing village mayors.

Second:-

Jean-Marie Le Pen combatively proclaims a determination to win; and if he can’t reach the ballot, he threatens to unleash “his” voters against forces on the right he accuses of betrayal (thus the covert efforts from Sarko’s” camp to help him obtain the 500 signatures he needs).

Obviously, Sarko has his eyes on Le Pen’s 13 to 17% poll rating.  Right now, the Sarkozy-Royal contest is too close to call.  But get the old devil into the race and his supporters won’t vote for Royal.  Get the old devil out of the race at the first poll on April 22nd and they will have to vote for the Monsieur with the riot baton.

The interesting thing is that Le Pen is thinking along not dissimilar lines.  That 17%, polled in mid-November, is a record for him.  And there’s still ample time for a surge between now and April.  If the mainstream right is split going into that poll Le Pen could repeat his shock-wave performance of 2002, when he eliminated Jospin.  This time the victim would be Sarko, followed by a face-off against the left.

Le Pen, the unity candidate.  Well, maybe.

A last thought.  Which candidate would the denizens of les banlieues prefer to see in the Élysée?  Royal, no question.  But which of the others would they prefer her to contest the second ballot against?

And what methods do they have to hand to engineer that happy outcome?

The Litvinenko poisoning has, and with what terrible, slow inevitability, become the Litvinenko murder, and is well on its way to becoming the Litvinenko Affair.

How much the public will be told from herein is, to say the least, moot.  Both the British and Russian secret services have become involved, we are told.  Both involvements, though, may be more diversionary than truly investigative.

Mr Litvinenko himself was in no doubt as to who his killers were, and then there is this:-

Chemists said that a fatal dose of polonium could only be produced artificially, by a particle accelerator or nuclear reactor.

“This is not some random killing. This is not a tool chosen by a group of amateurs. These people had some serious resources behind them,” Dr Andrea Sella, a lecturer in chemistry at University College London, told Reuters.

So what, in the shark-infested waters of international diplomacy, does the Litvinenko murder portend?

Probably not that much, after all the cloak and dagger stuff has receded from the headlines.  It isn’t in Britain’s national interest to humiliate Putin and find a radioactive FSB hand in the killing.  An effective police investigation could prove disastrous.  One can already hear the seasoned Foreign Office Russophiles proclaiming, “What, just so Blair at the Met can claim to keep the streets of London free from the FSB!”  No one will reply that Russian state gangsterism impacts on our global interests - consider the dioxin-scarred features of the Ukrainian leader, Victor Yushchenko - and now there is some leverage against it.

The plain truth is that we need considerably greater cooperation with Mr Putin, gangster or no.  Our main interest is energy.  Until recently Britain imported only modest volumes of gas from Russia.  That will almost certainly change if security of supply can be established.  If.  The Ukrainian experience in January 2006, when the pipeline from the east was shut down for purely political reasons, is holding us back now.  Only a reliable, cooperative Russia can encourage our trust, but Russia itself must be encouraged to that end.

Then there is the Iranian nuclear problem, and the question of a regnant Iran regardless of that.  Being America’s second best little buddy doesn’t auger very well for influencing Nejad.  Russia has influence in Tehran.  It is also a vital ally in resisting terrorism, for which sound working relations with the FSB are a prerequisite.

So all in all we shouldn’t expect too much clarity from the Litvinenko investigation.  It will, I believe, leave a bitter taste in many mouths.  But diplomacy was ever thus.

The following is a story about the inherent dishonesty - or possibly leftism - of the little hero of the French right, Nicolas Sarkozy.  It involves guns in private ownership, and actually originates not from a French source but from a Swiss gun website.

Swiss men, incidentally, like their guns - by which I mean not the odd twelve-bore but massively lethal military hardware.  Guns are a central part of Swiss life.  By government decree every adult male who is not on active service is a Reservist.  He must be armed and ready to venture forth in defence of his country … fighting his own way through enemy lines to join up with his unit if necessary.  So there’s cold steel in every true Switzer’s home, and that’s how they like it.  It’s been that way for generations. 

Even so, it isn’t liberal to leave well alone, and all loved customs in the West must come under the “critical” gaze.  Now there is a growing movement in Switzerland to take the gun out of the home.

But that’s Switzerland, and somewhat off-topic.  So we’d better get back to the little Hungarian Jewish guy who, as Minister for the Interior, is the top chief of police in all France.

It’s true that mainstream politicians famously dislike an armed citizenry.  But why does Sarkozy, who enjoys whipping up populist support with his tough-guy posturings on immigration, want to disarm native Frenchmen at this point in time?  Is he simply travelling leftward for political effect, as David Cameron is?  Is he trying to draw the sting from the Socialists?

His reasoning as stated below is certainly no guide.  It is contorted and unconvincing, and I don’t think he can really believe it himself.  It reads as though he confected it on the spur of the moment because the real logic of his argument can’t be made public.  See for yourself.

Here’s a translation from the Swiss website by MR reader Michael R:-

FRANCE: WORRYING NEWS FOR GUN-OWNERS

The pre-electoral campaign is underway in France.  Next year French citizens must choose a new president. The two designated favorites are:

- for the left, Segolène Royal, self-styled “passion flower”

- for the right, Nicolas Sarkozy, disfavoured by his short stature and his Hungarian name, but appreciated by his supporters for his muscular stance on the lack of security, the incapacity of French justice to command respect and restore order in les banlieues, etc.

The majority of private gun-owners and enthusiasts were getting ready to vote for Sarkozy until, during a radio show, the presidential Ccndidate answered a question about the right to keep a gun and the right of self-defence. It was on the RTL radio network on 22nd September:-

“I’d like to say one thing about my conception of the Republic …

Security is the responsibility of the State.  I am against militias.  I am against the private ownership of firearms, and I’m trying to make you think about that.

READ MORE...

It’s no surprise that the kings of the fraud business turn out to Nigerian.

More than $380bn has either been stolen or wasted by Nigerian governments since independence in 1960, the chief corruption fighter has said.

Nuhu Ribadu told the BBC that Nigeria has “nothing much” to show for the missing money.

He said the worst period for corruption was the 1980s and ‘90s, but currently two-thirds of governors are being investigated by Mr Ribadu’s agency.

Does anyone seriously suppose things will change?  That screw-you style of pig-individualism isn’t a spot of temporary bad luck in Sub-Saharan political life.  It’s much more likely that ordinary Africans do indeed like their vaunted “strong man” rulers because they are, basically, what the ordinary African male would rather like to be himself.  A life of quiet dedication and public service doesn’t enter into it.  Lord Acton’s moral sewer does.  It’s all sociobiology.

So, then, what do the dreamers and the Western idealists think they are up to?

Ah yes, striving to devote 0.7% of the national GDP of each developed nation in aid for the fight against global poverty.

That should work.

The reburial yesterday of Tsaritsa Maria Feodorovna, mother of the last Tsar, in the royal crypt of St Petersburg’s Peter and Paul Fortress was a fine and hopeful event.  The Russian people do not deserve to have escaped the horrors of the 20th century only to find that because the murderers and revolutionaries cut the cord of the past the bastards had a victory after all.  A future of economism (in which only the big cities prosper) and a losing battle against the awfulness of American cultural imperialism will not feed that famous Russian soul.

But it may be that, unlike in the West, there is no shortage of politicians in the country who have the right instincts.

After the service, the funeral cortege made a final journey around the former royal capital where the Empress had lived for more than 50 years, then received a full military escort when it arrived at the fortress.  Russia’s Culture Minister, Alexander Sokolov, said: “Today we have fulfilled the innermost will of the Empress.  It means the time has come to fill the gaps in our history and culture.”

Or, as one ordinary Russian woman said:-

We have waited such a long time for this day.  I thank God that He has brought Empress Maria Feodorovna back.

It would be my dream to see the Romanov dynasty come back.  Until there is a Tsar in Russia again, Russia will never be at ease.

Why am I heartened by this?  Because our situation today is not better than that of Russians during the days of Soviet empire.  We are prosperous but we are dying.  Where is the value in that?

I hope with all my being that someday we, too, will be able to talk about filling in the gaps in our culture and history, and from time to time I shall watch Russia to see, perhaps, how it is done.

NBC News anchorman got his reward yesterday for comparing the Iranian hostage-takers to the Founders last year and elite American forces to suicide bombers last month: an exclusive interview with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a Midtown Manhatton hotel.

Here are the interesting exchanges as reported by Williams:-

Brian Williams: How do you think the discussion has been allowed to get that far, that we’re discussing possible war between the U.S. and Iran?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: I think we need to ask this question from American, U.S., politicians. The world has changed. The time for world empires has ended. The U.S. government thinks that it’s still the period after World War II, when they came out as a victor and enjoyed special rights. And can rule, therefore, over the rest of the world. I explicitly say that I am against the policies chosen by the U.S. government to run the world. Because these policies are moving the world towards war.

READ MORE...