Russian Analysts, Rights Activists, Opposition Comment On USAID Closure

RIA Novosti – September 19, 2012

The Russian authorities’ decision to bring to an end the work of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) has been widely commented by Russian political analysts, opposition politicians and human rights activists.

Analysts

The closure of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) operation in Russia is a disturbing signal which indicates that Moscow’s importance as Washington’s partner is declining, deputy director of the Institute of USA and Canada Victor Kremenyuk has said.

“The fact that the Americans happily followed our government’s request means that the importance of Russia for them is falling,” he told RIA Novosti on 18 September.

According to the expert, USAID’s operation in Russia showed the Americans’ wish for a dialogue with Russia and “certain friendliness”. Now the trend is clearly changing, he said. According to Kremenyuk, this is due to the fact that President Obama understands that his policy towards Russia is deficient, and he is criticized for it not only by rivals from the Republican Party, but also some of his fellow party members, and he has to pay heed to the criticism.

“They don’t like Russia. Of course, they don’t see it as an enemy like (Mitt) Romney does … but they see it as a backward country, not suitable to be a partner and therefore not deserving special attention,” the analyst said.

At the same time, his colleague, deputy director of the Institute of USA and Canada Viktor Supyan believes that the termination of USAID’s operation in Russia shows only that the organization has played its role in Russia’s recent history and its departure will have no effect on further development of bilateral relations between Moscow and Washington.

“I think that in the 1990s, when there were a lot of problems in our country, – economic, social, humanitarian, – it (USAID) played its positive role,” Supyan said.

The analyst said that the agency, with the help of Russian and US experts, had launched in Russia several projects in public health, information technologies, education and science, “but now, after 20 years, I think Russia is fully capable of seeing through most of these projects independently. I think that this is the main reason why USAID stopped its operation in Russia,” the expert said.

Supyan said that USAID’s departure from Russia “is sometimes associated” with disagreements between Moscow and Washington on human rights and some foreign policy issues, but Supyan himself did not share this point of view.

“I think there is simply no need for this (USAID’s work in Russia),” he said.

According to political analyst and a member of the Public Chamber Sergey Markov, USAID might resume its operation in Russia if Moscow and Washington sign a contract which will lay down the Russian side’s requirements to such organizations.

“The Russian government would like USAID to operate under a Russian-American agreement which would lay down the Russian side’s requirements to such organizations, i.e. USAID must comply with goals set by the Russian government for all international organizations working in Russia. I believe that both sides can show the will to ensure the signing of such an agreement, under which USAID could resume its operation,” Markov told RIA Novosti. He added that the situation with USAID in Russia might be used during the election campaign in the USA.

“I think this will weaken Obama, who focuses on positive relations with Russia, and will strengthen Mitt Romney, who, as we know, believes that Russia is his geopolitical enemy,” Markov said.

Markov observed that the British Council – another foreign government agency of the same stature as USAID, which left Russia in 2007, had not resumed its operation. “This is due to the fact that the British government chose to worsen relations further. If relations between Russia and the USA improve in other areas, this will allow us to sign an agreement,” Markov said.

The termination of USAID’s work in Russia will have no significant effect on relations between the two countries, political analyst and chairman of the presidium of the Public Council for Foreign and Defence Policy Sergey Karaganov told radio Ekho Moskvy on 18 September, as quoted by Ekho Moskvy news agency.

“I do not think the relationship will get worse significantly, as they are built on cold iron logic on both sides. The Americans will complain, but there will be no significant deterioration in relations as a result of this gesture,” he said.

According to the analyst, it’s not in the USA’s interests to spoil relations with Russia. “The Americans need us in critical issues; they need help in leaving Afghanistan, and our position on Iran and Syria is important to them,” he said.

In addition, Karaganov believes that the Republicans’ demand that the Russian authorities’ action be condemned will not affect Obama’s electoral chances. “We should not overestimate our importance in the eyes of the American public. We use the American factor in our domestic politics, but this does not mean that they do the same,” he said.

The Russian authorities’ decision to close the USAID office in Russia will be supported by all responsible political forces, deputy secretary of the One Russia (United Russia) General Council Aleksey Chesnakov told Interfax.

“The decision to end USAID’s activities in Russia marks the beginning of a new stage in the development of civil society in our country, and shows confidence in the viability and effectiveness of existing NGOs,” Chesnakov told Interfax.

In his view, the termination of USAID’s work in Russia will help promote equal opportunities and fair competition between Russian NGOs.

He believes that “this decision was made by the Russian authorities in the interests of, above all, citizens of Russia and will be supported by all responsible political forces in the country”.

Politicians

Leader of Yabloko party Sergey Mitrokhin described the closure of USAID in Russia as a bout of spy mania and a sign of the state’s weakness, Interfax news agency reported.

“Spy mania does not befit the Russian state. This is nonsense. An agency whose name I do not even know is affecting the country’s politics! The state is suffering from schizophrenia,” Mitrokhin told Interfax.

He said that thus Russia showed its weakness to the whole world.

According to him, such contemptible behaviour undermines the credibility of Russia on the international arena.

Opposition politician Boris Nemtsov told Interfax that the authorities had no evidence that USAID had financed political organizations.

According to Nemtsov, USAID had helped only environmental and human rights organizations.

“If it had financed political activities, these organizations would have been closed down and their organizers put in prison. We do not see this happening. Believe me, all resources have been thrown in in the hope to find money from the US Department of State, but they have no evidence,” Nemtsov said.

He believes that the closure of USAID had been prompted by Putin’s “visceral fear that the US Department of State is financing protests”.

Human rights activists

Human rights activists believe that the closure of the agency in Russia is a worrying development and many non-profit organizations will suffer as a result.

Head of the Memorial centre Arseniy Roginskiy said that Russian civil society would survive the closure of the USAID Moscow office.

“This is a heavy blow but not a disaster,” Roginskiy told Interfax.

“Some programmes will be cut down but on the whole everything will be continued,” Roginskiy said.

“With regard to human rights organizations, we experienced worse times, for instance, in the early 80s… Now we will have to rely more on volunteers,” Roginskiy said.

“The development of civil society cannot be stopped now with the closure of one, albeit important, source of funding. This applies to Memorial and many other receivers of USAID’s grants,” he said.

The human rights centre Memorial will be forced to dramatically cut down on some of its projects in Russia due to the closure of USAID, Memorial employee Oleg Orlov told RIA Novosti.

“If we don’t get financing, we will have to radically cut down some of our many projects, unfortunately. I do not think that we will close them down. At the end of the day, we can work from home. In the Soviet Union human rights activists worked from home. We are probably going back to this,” Orlov said.

Director of Transparency International Russia Yelena Panfilova believes that the closure of the Moscow office of USAID will primarily affect small NGOs in the regions.

“This will hit small organizations which help citizens directly in all areas of life. Often these are social organizations, organizations dealing with public health, education, and environment in the regions. Small, not yet well-known organizations in the regions often experience acute problems with financing,” Panfilova said.

She described the closure of USAID in Russia as symbolic and said that this decision was the logical conclusion of the new law on the status of foreign agents for NGOs which are funded from abroad and engage in political activity.

“It was obvious that the overall trend was aimed at limiting the funding of organizations that deal with civil control over the authorities and democratic procedures,” Panfilova said.