Terror in Moscow
Fearing the wider consequences of a bomb attack on the Moscow metro
The Economist reports on Monday's Moscow metro bombings. Quotes from President Putin returned as PM when he said the government will "destroy," the terror group. Consider the hard-line response with this from Anna Politkovskaya in 2001 -- five years before her murder.
"People in Chechnya have rights guaranteed by the Russian constitution to live, like you, me or anybody else. The western world is depriving them of these rights by supporting Putin."
_____________________
"TWO terrorist bombers on the Moscow metro killed at least 37 people and injured 102 in the morning rush hour on Monday March 29th. The first explosion, which killed 22 people and injured 12, struck just before 8am at the Lubyanka metro station, a few hundred feet from the Kremlin and next to the headquarters of the Federal Security Services, the successor to the KGB. The second bomb went off at Park Kultury, by the main circular road in central Moscow, killing at least 15.....Russia has grown tragically familiar with terrorist attacks over the past two decades, during which it has fought two brutal wars in Chechnya, in the 1990s. But Moscow has not seen attacks such as these since August 2004, when a bomb on the Moscow metro killed nine people. Last November a bomb on the Nevsky express, which travels between Moscow and St Petersburg, killed 26 people and injured 100.
Chechnya itself has been relatively calm in recent years under the thumb of the local strongman Ramzan Kadyrov, installed by Mr Putin as Chechen president in 2007. But violence has spread to neighbouring republics, particularly Ingushetia and Dagestan, both of which have descended into a state resembling civil war. Yet although killings and explosions have become daily occurrences in these north Caucasian republics, in Moscow they are not considered to be attacks on Russia itself."
www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15806684
_________________________
Discussion questions for Putin's Russia
1) Big terrorist attacks have in the past been used by the Kremlin to justify tightening its grip on power and curbing the opposition. The second war in Chechnya, in 2000, which helped to propel Mr Putin into his presidency, was accompanied by a move to bring Russian television
under Kremlin control. In 2004, after the school siege in Beslan, in North Ossetia, Mr Putin scrapped regional elections. Using examples from the reading, what would the author predict for Russia's new north Caucasus policy? Why would this be a mistake according to the author? Do you agree?2) Putin's more autocratic state is supposed to be a more effective state. The author emphatically answers that fear is the only public good that Putin's Kremlin provided effectively. Explain.
3) The author devotes considerable space showing how Putin's government did little to provide most basic state services. She argues hotly that the Russian Armed Services, rather than protecting civilians from terrorism or violent crime, have themselves become perpetrators of state terrorism. How?
4) Effective States have independent courts capable of enforcing the Rule of Law. Institutionally, does Politkovskaya see Rule of Law in Putin's Russia?
5) According the the author, Russian Courts served the interests of criminals and oligarchs. From our unit of study, did that seem to be reformed in Putin's Modern Russia?
6) By the author's account, Putin does not care about the people. She criticizes the political and economic system he has consolidated with true stories and reporting that probably cost her her life. But every day an Army private is hazed to death, a middle class family in Moscow drives to Ikea to purchase furniture for their newly renovated Dacha. Russian GDP grew steadily for 6 years under Putin, and the number of people below the poverty line dropped significantly. In your opinion, do the ends justify the means in Putin's Russia?
7) JusticeforNorthCaucasus.com wrote in 2001, "That Politkovskaya herself has withstood poisoning and harassment to tell the truth about Putin's Russia should give even the most pessimistic observer of Russian affairs hope." But in 2006, the author was murdered and the president called her, "a person of no significance." What does this say about the hope for modern Russia becoming a liberal democracy?
8) Some have claimed Politkovskaya's critique of Putin's Russia is over the top. One on-line reviewer called her, "Russia's Michael Moore." Do you find this analysis objective and legitimate, or illegitimate opposition propaganda?
http://www.slate.com/id/2151209/
____________________________
Discussion questions for Red China Blues
1. Jan Wong tells us that all existing dictionaries and language textbooks were destroyed at the time of the Cultural Revolution. Why was this necessary? How effectively could a political system be shaped or controlled by such a measure?
2. When the author realises, early on, that she is not allowed the freedom to think, she says this is “only the beginning of my real awakening, a painful process that would take several years more.” Why was her awakening such a slow process?
3. If the author had grown up in China, do you think her doubts and questions would not have arisen in her student years? Or do you think her classmates went through similar “awakenings”?
4. In theory at least, the workers had better living conditions than intellectuals in China in the early 1970s. Does this strike you as any more unfair than the opposite situation?
5. Having completed the book, what are your feelings about Jan Wong’s informing on Yin (the girl who wanted help getting to the West) while she was 
still an unquestioning Maoist?
6. Could you characterize the four sections of the book? Do they differ in tone as well as content?
7. Broadly speaking, the first half of the book avoids overviews or hindsight, but in the second half the author adopts a more knowing perspective. What effect does this have for the reader?
8. What fresh insights have you obtained from Jan Wong’s analysis of the Tiananmen Square demonstration and the detailed description of the subsequent massacre?
9. The author says that the Tiananmen massacre could have been avoided: “An experienced mediator could have solved things so easily.” How different do you think life in China might have been after the demonstration if there had been no violence?
10. At the beginning of the book the author is writing largely about herself and her reactions to the political system. The last part of the book is more concerned with the stories of individuals living in post-Tiananmen Square China. What can you deduce from this? How much do you think she has changed, and how much has China changed?
No comments:
Post a Comment