Pravda On The Potomac-24 (What The Washington Post Wrote About Russia In February 2011)

The Washington Post's coverage of Russia in February hasn't recovered from its January slump: the month was short and the events in North Africa and the Middle East have sucked up all the attention.

Besides, Kathy Lally went MIA.  Her only (Feb. 8) article described a strange case of a British reporter, Luke Harding, who wasn't allowed to enter Russia with a valid visa.  Lally used the occasion to compile a list of foreign journalists whose entrance has also been denied — allegedly for their reporting critical to the Kremlin.  Incidentally, Harding was back in Moscow in a week, but Lally apparently didn't find this fact worth of reporting.

In Lally's absence, Will Englund stepped in and didn't disappoint.  During his trip to Kamchatka, he filed two reports.  In the first, on Feb.2, Englund told a story about ridiculous attempt, by the office of the Kamchatka's governor, Alexei Kuzmitsky, to censor a theatrical performance at the Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky city theater.  On Feb. 12, Englund introduced us to an Arkadi Gontmakher, an American businessman of Ukrainian decent, who found himself in legal troubles when running a crab business in Kamchatka.  After having spent three years in jail and being eventually acquitted by a jury, Gontmakher still couldn't leave Russia for his home in Seattle.  Then, all of sudden, Gontmakher was allowed to return to the United States.  In contrast to Lally, Englund reasoned that this news deserved a follow-up

Back in Moscow, Englund wrote (on Feb. 14) a short piece about Natalya Vasilieva's now-famous claim that her boss, Judge Viktor Danilkin, wasn't the real author of the verdict that Danilkin issued in the KhodorkovskyLebedev case.  Englund has wrapped up the month by attending an exhibition featuring lives and achievements of the American President Abraham Lincoln and the Russian Czar Alexander II.   

As the Post's regulars have been busy lambasting Middle East tyrants, the op-ed pages turned all-Russian.  On Feb. 7, Carnegie Moscow Center's Masha Lipman — in her trademark habit of fighting windmills that exist only in her imagination – argued that attempts to move Vladimir Lenin's body from the Mausoleum in Red Square won't achieve what Russia needs, in Lipman's not so humble opinion, the most: to cut its ties with the Soviet past.  (Lipman provides no practical clues as to how a country can "cut ties" with its past, whether Soviet or not.)

And then, on Feb. 20, the Post's space was offered to co-chairs of the newly-minted (and still unregistered) People's Freedom Party: Mikhail Kasyanov, Vladimir Milov, Boris Nemtsov, and Vladimir Ryzhkov.  If you read, back in June 2009, the opus penned by the four so-called Russia's limousine liberals, you can safely skip the one written by Kasyanov & Co.: the same hapless whining that the Western leaders' cozy relations with the Kremlin prevent the "united liberals" from advancing "freedom and normal democratic process" in Russia.  Yet, one could expect more intellectual vigor from the people claiming, as Kasyanov & Co. are, that their People's Freedom Party is the “only viable alternative to the current regime.”  Well, I guess, if this is the only viable alternative, then the "current regime" has nothing to worry about.  

About Eugene Ivanov

Eugene Ivanov is a PMI-certified Innovation Management Consultant who helps organizations increase the efficiency of their internal and external innovation programs.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Pravda On The Potomac-24 (What The Washington Post Wrote About Russia In February 2011)

  1. Pardon my not reading this one of yours earlier Eugene.
    On Mr. Harding, there’s the “whataboutism” matter raised at another thread at your blog, concerning Canada’s shamefully tight assed banning of folks that include Srdja Trifkovic and George Galloway – the latter eventually getting clearance.
    As you note, Luke Harding got clearance. Never mind the number of biased against Russia journos, politicians and academics who’ve been allowed entry into Russia. As you likely know, some Russians have been denied entry into the US on suspect reasoning.
    The ongoing scenario favors certain issues getting prominence over others.
    Best,
    Mike

  2. Eugene says:

    Thanks Mike,
    I’m a devoted disciple of “whataboutism” myself (which is hardly a secret for you:).
    What is interesting though in this “Harding case” is an assertion (articulated by Lavrov) that Harding had some paperwork problems. I read carefully everything I could find on Harding, but failed to find any refute of this assertion. Regardless of his position on issues, he must follow rules of the country where he works. If he violates them, then what is he complaining about? Characteristically, Kathy Lally, having compiled a list of “grievances”, danced around the issue as it didn’t even exist.
    One can only guess why.
    Best,
    Eugene

  3. You’re welcome Eugene.
    At Mark’s blog, someone suggested that Harding might have intentionally sought a news headline for the purpose of acquiring greater publicity before an upcoming book release of his.
    Salut!
    Mike

  4. Thanks Mike,
    Regardless of his position on issues, he must follow rules of the country where he works.As you likely know, some Russians have been denied entry into the US on suspect reasoning.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s