A STAIN ON A WHITE TAILCOAT.
Why cannot Britain
be considered as a reputability etalon any more?
A period of being enchanted by the British traditions,
evoked by the wave of perestroika, USSR dissolution and troubles
caused by it, is over today. And one of the most obvious proofs
of London’s self-interested hypocrisy which easily outweighs the mythology
of "good old reputable Britain" is a man named Boris Abramovich
Berezovsky.
The Russians inherited their being in sympathy with the traditional
English society, from books and movies of the Soviet times, despite the
fact that Soviet pieces of art, inspired by Agatha Christie and Conan
Doyle’s works, were rather far from the nowadays reality. The manifested
antipode of the Soviet humanist ideals — "the British colonial
imperialism" — took place in former Soviet schoolchildren’s minds
without mixing up with sweet, although bourgeois Miss Marple and Sherlock
Holmes. That made substantial difference with the Tsarist age, when the
educated part of the Russian society, even when they expressed their
respect towards these or those aspects of British national way
of life or British temperament, were judging it by their
minds, not hearts. The Anglophobia was widespread then, and even Russian
political emigrants, who had found their asylum in Britain, followed
suit.
A period of being enchanted by the British traditions, evoked
by the wave of perestroika, USSR dissolution and troubles caused
by it, is over today. And one of the most obvious proofs
of London’s self-interested hypocrisy which easily outweighs the mythology
of "good old reputable Britain" is a man named Boris Abramovich
Berezovsky.
During Boris Yeltsin presidency, Boris Berezovsky, for majority of the
Russian people, was probably the best example of a criminal oligarch,
who had gained his riches by robbing the country. Such image was developed
by a mix of behavior stylistics, which would have suited some
godfather perfectly, and a fleur of scandalous articles about his
machinations and connections to corrupt officials. As a result
of all that, Mr. Berezovsky has become, literally, a killing factor
of discrediting.
The appearance of Mr. Berezovsky by the side of Aleksandr Lebed
was enough to weaken the rating of the general by the Russians,
who initially trusted him, and his political career soon diminished. Then the
press wrote about his connections to Chechen militants’ bosses and
to the bosses of the Chechen mafia. It was on the brink
of the second attempt (the successful one) by Russia to restore
its control over Chechnya, when Vladimir Putin came to power, and these
articles played an important part in changing public attitude towards
the Chechen separatists. The romantic image of freedom fighters, created
by the majority of the Russian media in the mid-1990s, for the
majority of the Russians was replaced by the image of gangsters
and terrorists, linked to the international terrorist organizations. The
fact that the former FSB officer Aleksandr Litvinenko, who had told the press
that his agency was responsible for Russian apartment bombings, appeared
in London by the side of Mr. Berezovsky, was enough
to prevent the Russians from believing him. Russians are likely
to connect Mr. Berezovsky to the death of well-known opposition
journalist Anna Politkovskaya, because they remember press reports about the
Chechen Mafioso, Khozh-Ahmed Noukhaev, who was Mr. Berezovsky’s business
partner, being concerned in the murder of Paul Klebnikov.
Probably, a story of Mr. Berezovsky’s involvement in Vladimir
Putin’s political career rise, which was given a great publicity
by Mr. Berezovsky himself, was intended to discredit Mr. Putin, too.
But the fast and fierce reaction together with Mr. Berezovsky’s re-reaction,
which took the shape of anti-Putinist statements, the most notorious
of which was the statement of his readiness to finance
overthrowing the administration of Vladimir Putin by force, really
contributed much to the increase of the Russian leader’s popularity.
Mr. Berezovsky’s involvement in financing the human rights movement
in Eastern Europe (the most famous project is bearing the name
of International Foundation for Civil Liberties) discredits human rights
activists, who are perceived by the Russian public as the agents
of transnational capital and the greedy West. And when Mr. Berezovsky
talks about his investments into the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and
expresses his absolute support of Viktor Yushchenko’s ideology, who had
awarded Roman Shukhevich, an SS battalion commander, a title
of "Hero of Ukraine", an average Russian fully understands that
this man is an enemy of his Motherland.
It is understood not only by the Russians, but by many
Ukrainians, Poles, Slovaks, Jews — by all who suffered from the
actions of Nazi supporters from OUN-UPA, headed by Bandera.
And now "reputable" Britain offers an asylum to this oligarch
in exile, refuses to extradite him to the Russian justice, tires
to exercise a pressure on Russia to make it extradite
Mr. Lugovoy, who is allegedly concerned in Mr. Litvinenko’s death,
allows Mr. Berezovsky to continue making his business, i. e.
to continue getting rich using money stolen in Russia... And
on the background of all that are activities such as fighting
"dirty money", preventing criminal money laundering etc?! So as far
as we get it, there are some rules in Britain but there are
also some exceptions?
What is the better way of discrediting the British policies and the
British establishment in the eyes of the Russians? So these are
British politicians and tycoons that are interested in instigating the war
in the Caucasus region, in making heroes from the Nazi criminals and
in enslaving the Russian economy! Mr. Berezovsky’s demonic image here
is perceived much better than that of less known Lord Alistair
McAlpine. The fact that radical organizations like "Hizb ut-Tahrir" have their
headquarters in London, that Tony Blair supported the US invasion
in Iraq and tried to persuade the Pope to legalize the same-sex
marriages only makes the Russians stronger in their opinion that the
British policy is the root of all evil.
Of course, the British public may not be interested in Boris
Berezovsky’s serving as a discreditor of their country for
Russians, but it seems like the person of that "refugee" becomes
a factor in Britain’s discredit in the world.
If the representatives of the pro-Western Georgian and Kyrgyz
opposition regarded statements of connections between, respectively,
Georgy Khaindrava and Kurmanbek Bakiev and Boris Berezovsky
as a damaging evidence, in is naïve to think that the
general public of these states sees nothing wrong in the British
authorities’ attitude towards this man.
The name of Mr. Berezovsky is used to confront the "English
influence" in some lands which are economically and geographically closer
to Britain. On February 6th 2008, representatives of the law
enforcement agencies of Switzerland, France and the Netherlands, speaking
at a meeting at Eurojust, stated the "major violations"
of the international agreements of the criminal proceedings
by the British Home Office. They also expressed their determination
to raise this question again at various European institutions
in order to discuss the destructive position of the British
party when it comes to fighting the transnational organized crime.
Taking numerous criminal cases against Mr. Berezovsky, initiated by law
enforcement agencies of Switzerland. Brazil, Lithuania etc into account,
it’s no wonder that this gentleman is depicted by the European
press as a typical example of the cosmopolitan moneymaker, who
uses the British protection and thinks that "money doesn’t stink!" Some
Canadian online paper even supposed that Mr. Berezovsky is concerned
in Muslim radicals’ attempts to get "dirty bombs" which were supposed
to be used against the Western countries.
Some time ago Britain was an asylum place for serious politicians,
political writers, philosophers seeking an opportunity to develop
their ideas. The famous Russian democrat Gertzen moved there, and "Das Kapital"
was written there by Marx, too. But, as far as we can see,
there is something deeply rotten in the British kingdom, if the
same status can be obtained now by "godfathers" (as Paul
Klebnikov called them) like Boris Berezovsky.
By Taras Pasyuk
|
