EUROPE IS NOT FOR RUSSIANS. Russophobia
as a general pan-European trend
There’s no point comforting oneself with
a thought, that today’s events are merely self-will of the Baltic
ethnocracies, unwilling to follow the European norms. Look
at Sweden — 20 years ago it was current Prime Minister Carl
Bildt, who instigated greenhorn Baltic democrats to deprive Russians
of civil rights and impose the «non-citizenship» passports. And here’s
Finland, where state-controlled Lutheran Church is going to defrock
Pastor Juha Molari for his criticism of the «Kavkaz-Center» website and
militant’s leader Doku Umarov.
Death of Vasiliy Makarovich Kononov —
rebellion hero, Russian partisan and Latvian native citizen, who has fought for
liberation of his country from the fascist yoke — make us
reflect upon several issues.
For many years he was persecuted by Latvian nationalists —
in the end of the 20th century these collaborationist heirs,
responsible for blood of Salaspils concentration camp victims, created
apartheid regime in Latvia. Story of his almost 15-year-long stand
against Latvian «justice» is well-known. And I believe, that now
there’s no point repeating, what has already been said quite a number
of times.
Another fact is of far greater importance — Vasiliy Makarovich
Kononov spent last years of his life, trying to protect his good name
and names of thousands other rebellion veterans, fighting against fascism
in Italy, France, Belgium, Greece, Slovakia, Norway and former Yugoslavia.
The most tragic thing is, that he failed in his quest. United
Europe refused to honor Kononov as a hero and let him die
as a «criminal».
On the 17th of May, 2010 Grand Chamber of European Court
of Human Rights (ECHR) approved the criminal persecution of Kononov
due to «banditism» charges and proclaimed them fair. We’d remind you, that
fighters of Kononov’s compartment have executed collaborationists, that
sentenced 12 partisans to death — including female liaison
officer with an infant — before that.
Having returned its verdict, ECHR pointed out: if Kononov believed, that
villagers had committed war crimes, he had a right to arrest
them and then bring to trial, observing all the procedural requirements.
Besides, Kononov «has treacherously changed to the German uniform (!),
breaking various international regulations». He also violated other
international laws, guaranteeing special treatment to women (Kononov was
accused of executing three women).
If we consider ECHR verdict upon Kononov’s case
to be a precedent, the scale of legal consequences will
be mind-boggling. According to it, we for example, may accuse
Mussolini executioners of conducting war crimes. Mind that partisans have
shot not only Duce himself, but his mistress Clara Petucci as well. Thus,
they’ve seemingly violated the international legislation norms that ECHR refers
to as well.
Yet, there are grounds to believe, that ECHR decision won’t become
a precedent. Rebellion veterans from the Western Europe may sleep the
sleep of just — they won’t be touched. Quite the contrary,
authorities will keep persecuting the Nazi criminals. Then what’s the reason?
Perhaps, the matter is that there’s a peculiar kind of «justice
for Russians» in the united Europe — it is carried out due
to completely different rules.
During the last twenty years we’ve got accustomed of blaming Latvia and
Estonia of discrimination and repressions of Russians — we’ve
called to sense of justice and conscience of the Pan-European
House masters, subsidizing the «successful» Baltic ethnocracies. We’ve been
trying to figure out, why legal norms, defining the political
protection of, say, African and Asian immigrants, are not spread
to Russians, inhabiting the Baltic States for nearly a thousand years
now. The former even have the right to participate in the EU
elections, while numerous Russian citizens of Latvia don’t even have this
right.
And why, for example the 2001 Ohrid Agreements, guaranteeing the right
of Albanians citizens of Macedonia to keep their autonomy,
cannot be the precedent for the change of legal status
in north-western Estonian regions, where the share of Russian
citizens goes as high as up to 95%?
Can anyone explain, why Estonia and Latvia aren’t even going to sign the
European Charter of Regional Languages? That is why the very
statement of question about granting state status to Russian language
is considered to be a crime in these countries.
At the same time in Finland (state sponsor of Estonia) Swedish
is the state language, although only 6% of population
speaks it.
There’s no point comforting oneself with a thought, that today’s
events are merely self-will of the Baltic ethnocracies, unwilling
to follow the European norms. Look at Sweden — 20 years ago
it was current Prime Minister Carl Bildt, who instigated greenhorn Baltic
democrats to deprive Russians of civil rights and impose the
«non-citizenship» passports. And here’s Finland, where state-controlled
Lutheran Church is going to defrock Pastor Juha Molari for his
criticism of the «Kavkaz-Center» website and militant’s leader Doku
Umarov.
There’s only one answer to the stated questions. And this answer
is Russophobia. That is the only kind of xenophobia that
is not condemned and even silently approved in the EU. Xenophobia
is literally a «fear of the aliens» and that is seemingly
the way Russians are perceived in Europe.
Obviously, that’s the origin of the EU position on the visa
regime for citizens of the Russian Federation. During almost half
a century our European neighbors have been chattering about «Iron
Curtains» and «Berlin Walls», yet, when the old ones have collapsed, they’ve
built the new ones themselves and drew the curtain from their side of the
border. Recently Belgian ambassador in Russia Guy Trouveroy has claimed,
that the EU won’t cancel visa regime with the Russian Federation, even
if Russia cancels visa regime for Europeans. He explained
it with «European fears of illegal immigrants’ inflow from northern
Caucasus».
That’s quite paradoxical, given the fact that the EU has already issued
residence permits (and in some cases — «refugee» status)
to thousands of expatriates from that area. Mind, that we aren’t
talking about the law-abiding citizens — lots of them have previously
supported terrorists and separatist sentiments. Perhaps, Akhmed Zakayev
(currently residing in London) is the most prominent «legal
immigrant» — he dubs himself a «Prime Minister of Chechen
Republic of Ichkeria».
Or, perhaps, Belgian Ambassador meant to say, that Europe
is unwilling to host Caucasians that are still loyal to Russia?
But only few million people live in northern Caucasus and the EU may
hardly be afraid of migration pressure. Arguments about European
apprehensions of Russian criminals are every bit as nonsense,
too — otherwise, Europe should have closed its borders to visitors
from Latin American country. After all, drug mafia runs the show at the
lowest social levels there. Therefore, there’s no explanation
to the EU position rather than irrational xenophobia.
Let’s sum it up, though. Political decisions like Ohrid Agreement
of 2011 — which would have been quite appropriate in Estonia
or Latvia — are not designed for Russians. European Charter
of Regional Languages is not for them either. Neither
is tolerance and fight against national discrimination. And even the
verdicts of Nuremberg Trial are becoming null and void, when it comes
to those, who fought against Russians.
Thus, Russophobia is a general Pan-European trend. Will Europe
be able of overcoming it or will remain the way
it is today?
By Alexander Rublev
|
