Dispelling a myth that 44-year-old Russian dissident Alexi Navalny is a “prisoner of conscience” in Russia, Amnesty International removed Navalny off its prisoner of conscience list, citing past statement advocating hate. President Joe Biden, 78, his 58-year-old Secretary of State Tony Blinken and 44-year-old National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan have rushed to Navalny’s defense, threatening to sanction the Kremlin unless 68-year-old Russian President Vladimir Putin releases Navalny from prison. Amnesty admitted that Navalny’s statements “reach the threshold of advocacy of hatred,” something that surprises the U.S. and European Union [EU], both ready to sanction Putin over Navalny’s incarceration. Whatever the charges against Navalny, phony or not, the 44-year-old dissident is no angel, developing a network around Russia calling for street demonstrations to oust Putin.
If any U.S. or EU opposition leader advocated the overthrow of Washington or Brussels they’d immediately be targeted by the FBI or EU’s Interpol for subversion. Yet after the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, Democrats in Congress charged 74-year-old former President Donald Trump with “incitement of insurrection,” a high-crime-and-misdemeanor accusing Trump of sedition. Can you imagine, a U.S. president was charged with “incitement of insurrection” for delivering a speech, with nine House manager pleading with the U.S. Senate to convict Trump. All nine House managers didn’t care that the Capitol riot and mob scene was planned months in advance, proving there was nothing in Trump’s speech that resulted in the Capitol rampage. Yet when it comes to Putin, the U.S. and EU are ready to sanction the Russian Federation based on pure propaganda from Navalny and his Chief of Staff Leonid Volkov.
U.S. and EU officials have been duped by Navalny, who’s running a crypto-sedition network trying to sabotage Putin’s 20-year reign of power. Amnesty International points out that Navalny has made hateful statements that don’t meet the groups definition of a “prisoner of conscience.” When Navalny returned to Moscow Jan. 17 after spending two months in Berlin recovering from alleged Novichok poisoning, what did he think would happen once he returned? Navalny and Volkov obviously thought there would be so much pressure on the Kremlin, they wouldn’t dare convict him of a probation violation. No one told Navalny to return to Russia, especially knowing he’s been calling for potentially violent street demonstration demanding Putin resign. Amnesty can’t have it both ways, calling Navalny a “freedom fighter,” and, at the same time, recognize he advocates the violent overthrow of the Russian government.
Amnesty’s public statement should give the U.S. and EU pause when it comes to slapping the Russian Federation with new economic and travel sanctions. “Some of these comments, which Navalny has not publicly denounced, reach the threshold of advocacy of hatred, and this is at odds with Amnesty’s definition of a prisoner of conscience,” read Amnesty. Admitting that Navalny’s a garden variety Trotskyite, a revolutionary trying to topple Russia’s government, should give Biden and EU’s Ursula von der Leyen reason to stop the madness of sanctioning the Russian Federation. Whatever internal problems Russia has with Navalny, the U.S. and EU have far too many common interests with the Russian Federation to turn Putin into an adversary. Under threat of new sanctions, Putin’s already asked the Federal Security Service [FSB] to prepare to counter foreign influences to undermine the Russian state.
Amnesty International tried to backtrack once they realized they discredited Navalny. “This distraction only serves the Russian authorities, who have jailed Navalny on politically motivate charges, simply because he dared to criticize them,” said AI Secretary-General Julie Verhaar. “We note that some of Alexi Navalny’s past comments have been actively used by his opponents to discredit him,” Verhaar said. Verhaar can’t have it both ways, removing Navalny off the “prisoner of conscience” list, claiming his past statements were manipulated by his enemies. Verhaar ignores the fact that Navalny is a subversive working day-and-night to undermine Putin’s government. U.S. and EU officials should think twice about advocating on behalf of Navalny, when they need a strong relationship with the Russian Federation to improve chances of maintaining world peace especially in volatile regions.
Amnesty International can’t get out its own way, stripping Navalny to “prisoner of conscience” status but, at the same time, trying to say her really represents the future of Russian democracy. Navalny once referred to Chechens as “cockroaches,” urging “the pistol” as the best way of getting rid of them. “We have a right to be [ethnic] Russians in Russia. And we’ll defend that right,” Navalny said in 2007. Whether Navalny’s more politically correct today is anyone’s guess. What’s known for sure is that he runs a cryptic organization designed to topple the Russian government. Navalny “still has nationalistic leanings,” said Julia Davis, a Russian media and disinformation expert. No Western power should denounce Putin and the Kremlin because of Navalny, a known revolutionary looking to overthrow the Russian government. However Putin deals with Navalny is purely an internal matter.
