Dmitry Tymchuk’s Military Blog: Summary – April 22, 2014

Dmitry Tymchuk, Information Resistance

04.22.2014
Translated and edited by Voices of Ukraine
10173325_481968728598454_1124228004_n

Brothers and sisters,

Here’s the Summary for April 22, 2014 (for the previous summary, please see the Summary for April 18).

The bad news:

1. Easter holidays brought no hope that Russia and the extremists pay any heed to the Geneva agreements. Extremist acts continue.

On the part of the security forces, sadly, we see no effective response, not even in blocking the loci of this infection. This problem must be addressed, and urgently. At this time, the flames of terrorism have engulfed Sloviansk and Kramatorsk. Unless urgent action is taken, the next few days will see the entire region covered in such “Sloviansk-s.”

Especially since we continue receiving information about the diversions and provocations being prepared. By the way, today a journalist voiced an accusation against Information Resistance group – alleging that we are instigators because we “forecasted” the diversion in Kramatorsk two hours before it happened. Supposedly, our messages are spreading panic among the public.

Personally, I think that’s bull. Panic is spread by the events, not by messages. What’s more, such events can be avoided by using incoming information appropriately. But alas, this issue is not for us to address.

2. The deadline for refusal of Russian citizenship for residents of Crimea expired on April 18, and will not be extended. This was reported today by Sergei Kalyuzhny, Deputy Head of the Federal Migration service of Russia.

Earlier, the self-proclaimed Crimean princelings (Putin’s henchmen) from the “government of Crimea” swore that this term would be extended. Clearly, they are just like their master – liars through and through.

The bad news is, that this lie impacts the fates of hundreds and thousands of Crimeans who became hostages of the situation. While Ukraine, for some reason, has not voiced a single word of alarm about their future. Let alone any real attempts to solve these people’s problems. Lord High Officials, after losing Crimea, let us not lose our conscience yet.

3. Nelya Shtepa, the mayor of Sloviansk, continues to play the part of some surreal comedy character. One moment, she is with the separatists; the next, she swears that her support was not genuine.

She reminds me of the unnamed drunken major from Evelyn Waugh’s Vile Bodies. Now and again, appearing out of nowhere, spouting some gibberish, and vanishing again. To what end? Nobody knows.

Today, in an interview with Russian TV channel lifenews.ru, Shtepa, once again, started licking Putin (“very grateful to Putin for entering Crimea”) and the insurgents (“they are strong in spirit, they will defeat both the Right Sector, and the military – they will defeat everyone here.”)

If I had any commentary on this lady’s personality, it would only be very rude. Being a gentleman, I will keep such commentary to myself. But the bad part is that such lovely creatures [as Shtepa] are supplying Russian PutinTV with a picture that Moscow so sorely requires.

The good news:

1. The Cabinet of Ministers registered a bill on the amnesty of extremists with the [Verkhovna] Rada [Ukrainian Parliament]. This means an exemption from liability for those who didn’t cause too much trouble and decided to hand themselves over.

After the law is passed, the criminals have three days to make a decision. Personally, I’m not that in favor of cottoning up to terrorists. But in current conditions, this is still a good move, which allows those who unintentionally found themselves involved in separatism to leave this mess behind quietly. Let us see what results it brings.

2. Joseph Biden, Vice President of the United States, declared that the U.S. is entirely in support of Ukraine.

This means not only moral support in the current situation. This also means strategic perspective – for example, their readiness to help lower [Ukraine's] dependence on energy resources supplied from Russia.

It should be understood that the very visit of the U.S. Vice President to Kyiv is already a powerful political declaration.

However, Joseph Biden is a rampant optimist. He says that Ukrainian politicians currently have “a historical chance” to create a truly united state. This, alas, is an illusion. Should Ukraine become truly united, it will happen through the efforts of Ukrainians themselves. It looks like the less our politicians meddle in this, the higher the chances for success.

3. The “People’s Militia” in Mykolayiv work together with the police, and successfully detain miscreants.

Today, the headquarters of the city’s “People’s Militia” reported that approximately ten pieces of traumatic and combat weapons were confiscated at block posts around Mykolayiv in the last few days; several people were detained.

This is a vivid example of a situation where people don’t expect favors from the law enforcement, but take the bull by the horns. This is especially important for the South. While everyone’s attention is drawn to the events in the East, the enemy keeps working here.

4. The Cabinet of Ministers allocated UAH 5.304 billion [USD 451.4 million] from the reserve fund of the State Budget for improvement of defense capabilities. Of this amount, the Ministry of Defense is set to receive UAH 3.1 billion [USD 263.8 million], the Interior Troops of the MIA, UAH 1.8 billion [USD 153.2 million], and the State Border Service, UAH 0.109 billion [USD 9.28 million].

This amount may not be that large, but the main question is how to manage it. Sadly, corruption remains a reality, and a thief in an official’s chair is a threat as large as an armed separatist in an ambush. I hope we can manage both of these types of threats.

, , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

Putin 2014 vs Hitler 1939: Shuster LIVE Show Draws Uncanny Parallels Between Speeches (VIDEO w. English subtitles)

By Shuster LIVE – Aired on March 21, 2014
English subtitles by Voices of Ukraine
Source: Savik Shuster Studio

Shuster LIVE is a popular Ukrainian talk show, hosted by Savik Shuster and aired on the First National Channel (Ukraine). The show focuses on pressing social and political issues, and analysis of current events.

This is an excerpt from the show aired live on March 21, 2014. The full version can be found at Shuster LIVE on Youtube.

Highlights of the Putin and Hitler speeches presented in the video:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5 Comments

Crimea: The Censorship of Jemilev

10245553_543628332419916_4048295603487939927_n

By Yuri Yizhakevych
04.21.2014   Facebook status
Translated and edited by Voices of Ukraine
Source: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=543628332419916&set=a.480189192097164.1073741828.100003182610068&type=1

IMPORTANT! PLEASE SHARE AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE!!!

Jemilev has been banned on TV, but the voice of the people always shouts louder than censorship!

Today it became known that the new powers in Crimea are applying sanctions against the legendary leader of the Crimean Tatars, Mustafa Jemilev. In particular Crimean television announced its latest odious editorial decision today. The heads of GTRK [state television] are censoring Mustafa Jemilev. From now on, GTRK are not allowed to show him, interview him or even show anything he is involved in. GTRK announced this decision to their employees today. This censorship extends to any mention of the legendary leader’s name.

This news caused a huge internal protest among the television company’s employees. They are worried that they could be fired, or that there will soon be more changes in staff. Whatever the politics of power may be, Crimean Tatars have their sense of truth, which has been tempered by a 70 year struggle for their rights. No authority, not even the strongest and most authoritarian can prohibit the living symbol of that truth, Mustafa Jemilev. People must now stand up for the truth!

I propose a flash mob: let’s spread this message about GTRK censoring Jemilev and put his portrait on all social networking sites. Soon Crimea will stand up with Jemilev against the terrified attempts to hide any information about Jemilev.

Use any of these images:

RELATED READING:

http://maidantranslations.com/2014/04/23/omsk-process-mustafa-jemilevs-court-case-of-1976/

, , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

France does not want Putin to visit on April 23.

By David Zhvania

04.21.2014 Facebook status
Translated and edited by Voices of Ukraine
Source: https://www.facebook.com/david.zhvania/posts/4260123916847

Paris has cancelled Russian Federation President Putin’s visit which was scheduled for April 23 to participate in the official ceremony commemorating the fallen soldiers of the Russian Expeditionary Force during the World War I.

Although the Elysée Palace has not made any official statement to this effect, the President of France’s [publicized]  schedule for the week, on his website, makes this quite clear, the Ukrinform correspondent says.

“The order of the day for the Head of the French Republic foresees his meeting with French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, attending the meeting of the Council of Ministers and a meeting with the Defence Minister Jean Yves Le Drian on the first half of April 23. Francois Hollande will dedicate the second half of the day to celebrating the centenary of the death of Socialist Jean Jaurès in the city of Carmeau (South France),” according to the official document.

The preliminary program of the Head of State’s visit to Carmeau also indicates a meeting with the local community. On Thursday, April 24, Francois Holland is expecting to meet Donald Tusk, the Prime Minister of Poland, and attend a number of other business meetings and official functions.

As a reminder, last week the French Ministry of the Interior did not confirm the Russian President’s visit to France, mentioning that it was subject to the Elyssée Palace and advised to turn to them [for confirmation]. Earlier, an official ceremony of April 23 had been planned for the Presidents of France and Russia at the village of Courcy, 10 km [6 miles] from Reims where 100 years ago around 700 soldiers from the Russian Empire were killed.

The French media reported that Putin’s visit to France was putting Paris in an embarrassing position because of the unprecedented tension in Russian relations with the West arising from the annexation of Ukrainian Crimea and the events in eastern Ukraine. While the Elyssée Palace was silent, the French media noted that Francois Hollande’s only mention of any high level meetings with his Russian counterpart referred to the 70th anniversary celebration of the D-Day landings in Normandy on June 6, 1944.

, , , , , ,

1 Comment

Wichtige Nachrichten über die Situation auf der Krim, wenn Sie darüber überhaupt noch etwas wissen wollen.

Quelle: Ekaterina Sergatskova

Von Ayder Khalilov

Wichtige Nachrichten über die Situation auf der Krim, wenn Sie darüber überhaupt noch etwas wissen wollen.

Politisch: Die Machthaber und hiesige Militärs haben angefangen, nationalen Zwist heranzuzüchten und ziehen Tataren mit rein – die Bevölkerung petzt aktiv gegeneinander an die FSB (russ. Geheimdienst-Übers.) darüber, wer welche Position bezogen und ob man am Referendum teilgenommen hatte – alles Ukrainische versucht man auszumerzen (jede Erwähnung, Graffiti, Fahne, Wappen usw.) – in den Schulen russische Propaganda komplett, darüber, dass die Krim immer russisch und seine Zugehörigkeit zur Ukraine ein Fehler war, Schüller müssen die russische Hymne singen und auswendig lernen. Krim ist überflutet von russischen Beamten, die man aus verschiedenen Regionen herbringt und welche die hiesigen ersetzen. Angefangen von der Strafverfolgungsbeamten. Die Mitarbeiter der Staatsanwaltschaft hat man dazu angehalten, die ukrainischen Pässe abzugeben und russische anzunehmen und dann entlassen, weil sie nicht den Anforderungen entsprechen. – Prorussische Propaganda und Antiukrainische Agitation übertreffen jedes vorstellbare Maß.

Wirtschaftlich: Das Banksystem ist gelähmt. Ukrainische Banken gehen weg, und russische kommen nicht (sie alle sind vom Westen finanziert und wollen keine Probleme wegen der Krim haben) – die einzige Bank, in der man Zahlungen vornehmen kann (Steuern zahlen; Strafen, für die Bildungseinrichtungen, Nebenkosten bezahlen usw.), ist die Chernomorskiy Bank für die Entwicklung und Wiederaufbau. Bis dato hat diese Bank kaum jemand gekannt und sie hat praktisch kein Netz. Jeden Tag stehen 300-400 Menschen hier Schlange, es gibt Probleme mit dem Bargeld in Hrywna ( Menschen können kein Geld vom Konto abheben, weil Banken nicht genügend Bargeld haben oder schließen) und mit dem Bargeld in Rubel. Rubel haben nur Rentner und Beamte. Interessante Art der Bezahlung: LKWs mit den Rubeln fahren in der Stadt rum und bringen das Geld in die Behörden oder Postfilialen zur weiteren Bezahlung. Geldscheine sind alle neu, sind aber 1997 gedruckt. Alle ohne Ausnahme ziehen es vor, in Hrywna zu bezahlen, Weil es gewohnter und bequemer ist, aber sog. Regierung versucht die Bezahlung in Rubel durchzusetzen, indem sie die Preise kontrolliert und Panik verbreitet, dass in 2 Monaten Hrywna nicht mehr gültig sein wird.

Diese Politik führt zur Bereicherung der Wechselstuben, welche immer die Kursdifferenzen ausnutzen und die ohnehin arme Bevölkerung ins Ruin treiben. Ich denke es ist klar, wer dahinter steckt. – Schon anerkannt ist die Tatsache, dass es den Bau der Brücke Kertsch-Kuban in der nächsten Zeit nicht geben wird – mit dem Wasser gibt es riesige Probleme und der ganze Norden, Westen und Osten der Krim haben gute Chancen im Sommer auszutrocknen. Das Wasser aus dem Nord-Krim-Kanal ist notwendig nicht nur für die Landwirtschaft, sondern auch für solche Städte wie Feodosija, Ketsch, Jewpatorija. – Putins Idee ist es, Krim zu einer Spielzone zu machen. Es bleibt nichts anderes übrig, weil es keine andere Idee für Investitionen auf der Krim gibt. Weder westlicher Business noch russischer wird dazu bereit sein. Was bleibt – auf der Krim das Schwarzgeld zu waschen. Das ist dann die ganze Wirtschaft.

Von Kuban, Kradsnodarskij Kraj kommen Russen und kaufen auf der Krim Nahrungsmittel und Haushaltsgeräte ein. Es hat sich herausgestellt, dass dort alles 2xmal so teuer ist. Sie lachen über uns und wundern sich, warum die Krim den Anschluss an Russland nötig hatte. Von alles Seiten nur schlechte Lose.

So sieht es aus.

, , , , ,

Leave a comment

Omsk process: Mustafa Jemilev’s court case of 1976

By The Sakharov Center
3.28.2014 18:28  slon.ru
Translated and edited by Voices of Ukraine
Source: http://slon.ru/calendar/event/1077275/

b6ce67424c166cb1a57e89c4c6c5c764

 

 

Mustafa Jemilev – the Soviet political prisoner, human rights activist, and until recently the Chairman of the Mejlis, the highest representative executive body of the Crimean Tatar Peoples operating during the period between sessions of the qurultay, a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada [Parliament] of Ukraine from the “Fatherland” [Batkivshchyna] party and still the informal leader of the Crimean Tatars. He is 71 years old, but today he is one of the most noticeable and influential politicians in Crimea and Ukraine. In the run-up to a referendum, Vladimir Putin considered it necessary to communicate personally with him, the legendary fighter for the rights of the Crimean Tatar nation. The telephone conversation between them, which took place on March 12, didn’t lead to a rapprochement of positions, the press service of the head of state didn’t extend any official statements about it, but for the President of Russia it undoubtedly was an important symbolic gesture towards all Crimean Tatars, if not hoping to get support then to be convinced of some restraint in their position.

Jemilev – an opponent of Crimea’s exit from the structures of Ukraine, calls the new authorities [military] occupiers, didn’t accept the results of the March 16 referendum, and insists that neither he nor his people accept them either. A symbolic gesture is not something that can satisfy him. Ahead lies the moment of truth, in an extraordinary session of the qurultay of the Crimean Tatar people, planned for March 29, and then perhaps a popular vote of the Crimean Tatars “national referendum on the issue of self-determination,” which Jemilev talks about.

Of all the figures of the human rights movement in the USSR during the 1960-1980′s, Mustafa Jemilev is the most active today as a politician. In the 70 years since the deportation of the Crimean Tatars, the consequences of Stalin’s crime again arise, and history does not let Mustafa Jemilev retire. At the beginning of the new period of the biography of Jemilev we decided to recall one of the central episodes of his past, the Omsk process of 1976, and to speak about it in Andrey Dmitriyevich Sakharov’s words.

Andrei Sakharov

Andrei Sakharov

Sakharov was older than Jemilev by twenty two years. It seemed, they were divided by an abyss. One – the ingenious physicist, the academician, thanks to his scientific talent, had risen to the top of the Soviet military-political elite and from there, stepped further on to a more important problem – the struggle for human rights, the highest goal. In 1975, he received the highest mark of global recognition for his humanitarian merit – the Nobel Peace Prize. The other – at six months old, together with his family and fellow countrymen he survived a brutal deportation from Crimea to Uzbekistan. He grew up in exile, was expelled from the university for his bold advocacy of the protection of the rights of the people. At the age of 26 he became one of the founders of the Initiative Group of Human Rights in the Soviet Union (the first to openly declare itself a human rights organization in the USSR), and then spent many years in prisons.

Mustafa Jemilev was first tried in 1966 for refusing to serve in the Soviet army. “A state that violates the rights of its citizens, cannot rely on the fact that the citizen will carry out his duties,” – for such a position Jemilev paid with one and a half years of imprisonment. The next time – he received three years in a high security colony – he gained the following term in the 1970′s for “dissemination of false fabrications defaming the Soviet state and social system.” Together with the young Crimean Tatar activist, were Moscow human rights defenders General Pyotr Grigorenko and the poet Ilya Gabay. The first the court sent to a psychiatric special hospital, the second together with Jemilev during the process demanded verification of the facts set forth in the documents for which they were tried, denying the presence of libel in them; the court declined to verify the facts. The transcript of this process was dispersed in a “samizdat,” and the last word of Mustafa Jemilev’s has become one of the most striking documents in the history of the human rights movement in the Soviet Union:

“Whatever repressions and persecutions I have been subject to, I can firmly say that no one, never, under any circumstances, will be able to force me to give up the duties imposed by honor, dignity and national civic duty.”

That these were not empty words, Mustafa Jemilev proved all of his subsequent life.

The next time he went to jail for a year in 1974, formally – for failing to participate in military training, but in fact because authorities became aware of his intention to go to Moscow during US President Nixton’s visit to the USSR, to give him a letter on the problems of Crimean Tatars.

The discrimination of the Crimean Tatars lasted even after the formal withdrawal of their stigmatization as traitors, the unofficial ban on their return to Crimea, brutal persecutions of families who dared to violate this prohibition, repression against activists – all of this was well known to Sakharov. In 1975 during his Nobel lecture, announced by Elena Bonnaire, Sakharov talked about it from a podium in Oslo and mentioned Mustafa Jemilev’s name among other Soviet political prisoners whom the whole world needs to know about. In the 1976, having learned that in the three days prior to the termination of his term of imprisonment a new criminal case had been opened against Jemilev and that he was holding a months-long hunger strike in protest, and was undergoing the painful procedures of forced feeding, Sakharov went to Omsk hoping his presence in court would support Jemilev and draw attention to his fate. They were not personally acquainted then and even during the process could not meet. The academician and Nobel laureate was not allowed in the meeting room of the regional court. Only during the defendant’s last words, when the noise heard from the corridor, of dispute and scuffle resulting from the removal of Jemilev’s brother Asan, did the sister of the defendant Wasfi Hairov throw some words in the Tatar language together, letting Mustafa know who was behind the door: “These are our friends. The loudest voice is Sakhar (that is, “sugar”).”

A young Mustafa Jemilev

A young Mustafa Jemilev

By that moment Jemilev had refused voluntary food intake for more than nine months. He was very emaciated, his health was undermined. After the verdict, before being sent to the colony, he was given a meeting with his brother. His brother showed Mustafa through the glass a card where Sakharov had written by hand, please stop the hunger strike. As Jemilev remembers, he was thirty- three years old and Sakharov addressed him as “son.” Jemilev agreed to withdraw his hunger strike.

Even in our time, the special edition devoted to the Omsk process in which the indictment, conviction, detailed records of what was happening in court, is published. But in May of 1976 a report on the trial of Mustafa Jemilev and the campaign in his support was promptly put into the “The Chronicle of Current Events” – a samizdat newsletter through which the facts of human rights violations in the USSR were made public. These materials were supplemented by the “Memoirs” of Sakharov. Much in those events is surprisingly similar to today’s current political processes.

“Two courts were appointed on April 6, 1976 – over Andrey Tverdokhlebov in Moscow and over Mustafa Jemilev in Omsk at the same time. Undoubtedly, it wasn’t a casual coincidence: KGB wanted to deprive everybody, including me [Sakharov], of an opportunity to be present at both courts. I decided that it is more important to go to Omsk. In Moscow, at that time, there were still many people who would go to the courthouse for the trial of a famous dissident. In Moscow there are foreign correspondents, in Omsk there is nothing like this present. There was the danger that almost no information about the process in Omsk would generally be available to the public or become available in the near future. I made a statement about this decision, and with Lucy (Yelena Bonner, Sakharov’s wife – The Sakharov Center) took off for Omsk (3:00 flight tickets were not easily bought but with the help of my “heroic” book).

(… ) 1976 marked the end of another prison term that Jemilev was serving in a penitentiary near Omsk. Six months before the end of this term, another case was opened against him, on charges of “deliberate slandering of the Soviet state and social regime” – allegedly, he was saying that “Crimean Tatars had been forcibly removed from Crimea and they are not allowed to return.”

Essentially, that was exactly the case; Mustafa wrote about it many times in documents he had signed, and, naturally, he could have said that as well – but the investigation needed a witness. Upon arriving in Omsk, the KGB investigators focused their efforts on Ivan Dvoryanskyi, a prisoner in the same penitentiary, serving a 10-year term for involuntary manslaughter (committed under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance) of a man who, he believed, had insulted his sister. At first, Dvoryanskyi resisted the investigators’ pressure and sent a note to the outside, detailing the threats and promises he was receiving. Several months before the trial, Dvoryanskyi was separated from other prisoners and put into solitary. We don’t know what happened to him there. A month later, he gave the necessary testimony, which became the foundation of a new case against Mustafa Jemilev. Since the opening of this case, Mustafa had been on a hunger strike, which concerned us greatly. Among the people present at the trial were the attorney Shveisky from Moscow, Mustafa’s family (mother, brother, sisters), and Crimean Tatars from Tashkent. Shveisky had previously defended V. Bukovsky and A. Amalrik, and we knew that he was able to find the perfect middle ground between the demands of legal and professional ethics (being a wonderful attorney) and the work realities of a Soviet attorney representing a dissident.

Naturally, not everything about this middle ground was to our satisfaction, but it was much better than nothing. During our first visit, the trial was cancelled under some ridiculous pretext (we believe, a burst water pipe in the pretrial detention facility). Clearly, the authorities wanted us to leave and not come back (this wish of theirs only served to confirm my belief that I had made the right choice). The delay was particularly worrisome for us because we did not know what state Mustafa was in, considering his ongoing hunger strike. Even though taking this long journey for the second time was tiring and expensive (not only for me and Lucy, but for everyone who attended the trial), we were bent on not backing down, and on April 18 (if I’m not mistaken), took a flight to Omsk again. (Sakharov is, in fact, mistaken, as the trial of Mustafa Jemilev was held on April 14-15, 1976. – The Sakahrov Center).

An amusing incident took place when we were checking into the hotel.

After seeing my name in my passport, the receptionist threw it aside nervously and declared,

“To a scumbag like you, I wouldn’t give a piece of bread, let alone a room.”

In the hallway behind us, Crimean Tatars stood silently – they already had accommodation. They were used to ignoring similar insults when addressed to them, and now were watching to see what would happen to me. Then the receptionist started fussing.

“Oh, oh, I’ve been shaken up so badly, my heart is aching. Does anyone here have any validol [popular Soviet OTC cardiac drug]?”

The Tatars remained silent. I said,

“We have no validol, but, Lucy, dear, we should have some nitroglycerin.”

“No, I’m scared of [nitro]glycerin.”

We went with the Tatars, to their room – we had things to talk about. Half an hour later, the same receptionist came back.

“Comrade Sakharov, here are the keys to your room. When you’re free, please come downstairs and fill in the form.”

Undoubtedly, I got the room by order of the [K]GB, who did not want a scandal, while the earlier episode was the result of a personal initiative of a “true Soviet citizen.”

At the end of the day, Sasha Lavut arrived from Moscow (Alexander Lavut was a member of the Initiative Group for Human Rights Protection in the USSR, permanent editor of the “Chronicle of Current Events” section dedicated to the persecution of Crimean Tatars. – The Sakharov Center). The following day, the trial begun. Originally, in addition to the hand-picked audience and the GB people, all of Mustafa’s relatives were allowed into the courtroom – his mother, brother Asan, and sisters. The situation inside the courtroom and, as a result, outside, started heating up by the second, right away. Mustafa, who was continuing his hunger strike, could barely stand. The judge kept interrupting him, barely allowing him to get a word out. Then the judge got particularly furious when Dvoryanskyi withdrew his earlier, so painstakingly acquired, testimony. The prosecution’s case was collapsing! The judge found offense in some statement made by Asan, and removed him from the room. Then Vasfiye (Mustafa’s sister) was removed, after trying to let Mustafa know that Sakharov was in Omsk (she used a Tatar word meaning ‘sugar’ [sakhar - Russian for 'sugar']). Finally, on the second day of trial, Mustafa’s mother was removed from the courtroom as well. When she was denied entry after the break, she covered her face and cried. I yelled,

“Let the mother in, her son is on trial!”

The GB people standing by the door responded with sneers and started pushing us away from the courtroom doors. At that moment, Lyusya [Lucy] forcefully hit a tall bruiser in civilian clothes in the face, who was in charge of the situation, and I hit his subordinate: both were undoubtedly from the KGB. We were instantly attacked by the policemen and Druzhinniks [members of Druzhina], the Tatars shouted and rushed to our rescue – a total dogfight ensued. I and some Tatars were dragged outside, and thrown into avtozaks [paddy wagons] that were waiting for us. I found myself next to a Tatar girl and one of the policemen who earlier dragged me way. He turned out to be a Kazan Tatar, and the girl immediately started to chide him loudly. The policeman was sheepishly wiping his face, sweaty after the fight. At this point, they pushed Lyusya into a small room. They dragged her very rudely, pushing her, her arms were all in bruises and bloodied contusions. I was taken to the police department, they tried to interrogate me; I refused, demanding to see my wife. In an hour – an hour and a half, I was released, and meanwhile Lyusya was brought to the same police department I had been at earlier. There, Lyusya started demanding to see me, and they sent a car for me (I managed to walk all the way to the court building by then). Finally, we saw each other again. Lyusya began to demand to be seen by a doctor, to examine the injuries inflicted on her.

They brought some outpatient hospital employees, but they announced (probably rehearsed) that they could provide medical assistance but not issue any type of notes. They released Lyusya and I, informing us that there could be a criminal case open against us, and this was after Mustafa Jemilev was sentenced to two and a half years in prison. Moreover, the court stated that  the original testimony – against Jemilev – by Dvoryanskyi is truthful, and his refusal from this testimony in court – was the result of psychological pressure exerted on him by the defendant. We don’t know what consequences Dvoryansky had to face because of his heroic act. (The transcript of the interrogation of Vladimir Dvoryansky was one of the cornerstones of the Omsk trial. In the end, the court made a special ruling to press criminal charges against the witness Dvoryansky, for false testimony, i.e. for his refusal to confirm his earlier testimony against Jemilev. On May 18, Sakharov and Grigorenko propagated a statement in defense of Dvoryansky, which said, “The court’s ruling is the payment for honesty, for the repentance of a man who falsely accused a fellow inmate and his subsequent courage to admit the lie. The court wants to create a precedent of making an example of someone who refuses to lie by order of punitive agencies. The court hands the defenseless prisoner over to the people who had forced him to give false testimony necessary for the investigation.” In September 1976 , Vladimir Dvoryansky was convicted, and an extra year was added to the ten-year term he was already serving. – The Sakharov Center.)

On the same day, a TASS message was sent overseas (via teletype), with a vivid description of a brawl started by Academic Sakharov and his wife in the Omsk courtroom (where we had never set foot, and where even the mother of the accused was denied entry). This message, and silence from us, had caused some worries across the world. Our silence was caused by the fact that inter-city telephone communication in Omsk, particularly with Moscow, had been cut off for the duration of the trial. We have a saying that goes, “The company doesn’t care about the expenses,” but in this case, that would be putting it mildly. In general, I believe that we fulfilled our task, which was to draw the global community’s attention to the Jemilev trial.

From the Jemilev family’s account of the trial. The judge declared,

“Jemilev says that Crimean Tatars are not granted [residential] registration in Crimea. So what? No one will register me in Moscow, but I’m not complaining.”

Such is the logic of a lawless state, where an agent of the law uses one example of lawlessness to justify another. I talked to the judge during my first visit to Omsk, trying (and failing) to find out why the trial was being delayed. The judge looked like a fairly regular person, with personal merits and flaws, war veteran, active officer, family man, and someone who, I was sure, believed he was doing an important and difficult job. But what was his role in Jemilev’s case, and probably, in some “regular” criminal cases? I can’t really find any words…

On the day following the verdict, Jemilev’s family decided to demand a meeting with him. I wrote a letter to Mustafa, imploring him to stop his hunger strike, which was going on 9 months (with forced feeding). Perhaps, it was this letter, of which the higher-ups were aware, that resulted in the family being granted the meeting. Mustafa decided to stop the hunger strike. I was very glad about that.”

The Omsk trial was not the last trial in the biography of the human rights activist Mustafa Jemilev. In 1979, soon after his release, he was convicted again, this time for fabricated “violations of administrative supervision regulations.” This time, he was tried in Tashkent. Sakharov flew there as well, and the comedy with the sudden change of the trial date was repeated. The new verdict was – five years of exile.

“During this visit, I met many activists of the Crimean Tatar movement residing in Tashkent,” Sakharov writes. “Most of them had served several years in prison. They were fascinating people, deeply committed to the idea of returning Crimean Tatars to the Crimean land, to which they were tied with thousands of historical bonds. They did not try to conceal that in their midst, there were strong disagreements and passionate arguments as to the tactics of their struggle and its realistic prospects. But they agreed on one thing – only legal, non-violent means, exercised within the existing state structure, were acceptable. One of the pressing issues was the attitude to the general human rights movement. Some believed that contacts with us (such people as Lavut and Sakharov) mixed the simple and obvious Crimean Tatar cause with a number of other complex problems, therefore complicating it. They were obviously concerned that repressions against human right activists would ricochet towards them. Others (the majority) believed that the Crimea Tatar cause was an organic part of the entire complex of human rights issues in the USSR, including freedom of movement, information and beliefs, and therefore, we would only be able to succeed by working together.”

History showed who was right at the time. But history is not finished yet, it continues today, right before our eyes. A new knot of history is being wound around the Crimean Tatar people.

——————–

af851f93dfa38a17ed36f7b2341fff64

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 Comment

One of the separatist leaders is arrested in Kharkiv

Originally posted on Euromaidan PR:

Monday, April 21, 2014, 20:49

долгов

One of the organizers of the pro-Russian rallies in Kharkiv, Kostiantyn Dolhov, was detained and taken into custody for two months, his associates reported to UNIAN.

According to their reports, Dolhov was arrested on April 19 in the city center, then he was taken home while his residence was searched. In the evening of April 19, Dolhov was taken to the Kyivskiy District Court of Kharkiv for arraignment and pretrial detention.

View original 196 more words

Leave a comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,211 other followers