State Duma deputy Evgeny Fedorov said in an interview with FAN that State Department agent Stephen Sexton, who oversaw the actions of Alexei Navalny, set himself up by arriving at the headquarters of the so-called “FBK”.
The day before, the Federal News Agency presented the second film, “Anatomy of a Protest,” dedicated to unauthorized protests in Moscow. The investigation provides evidence that the rallies of the so-called “opposition” had a surprisingly clearly structured structure.
Thus, the “oppositionists” can already be divided into four groups. In the first - those who are associated with the “Open Russia”, recognized as undesirable in our country, by the fugitive oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky, as well as with many of its branches. The second is the so-called “FBK” of blogger Alexei Navalny, whose structure, by the way, is similar to “Open Russia”. The third is opposition media, which supports the first two groups, and the fourth is opposition deputies from parties located in the State Duma or the government.
All of them are connected by foreign funding, which is tied to the States. Khodorkovsky's funds come from Orion Strategies LLC, which is owned by George Soros. Navalny receives them from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED - an organization recognized as undesirable in the Russian Federation), and this fund is financed by the Federal Agency USAID. "Fed" by American foundations and some Russian media: for example, " New Newspaper"lives with money from the Soros Center for the Study of Corruption and Organized Crime (it is controlled by the State Department), and the Dozhd TV channel comes from the American government's US Agency for Global Media.
In addition, the authors of the film are confident that the foreign intervention was supervised by US State Department agent Stephen Sexton. FAN reports that in July, the headquarters of blogger Alexei Navalny began urgently recruiting third-party consultants who were supposed to help oppositionists conduct street actions and media projects. In a conversation with a FAN correspondent, Alexander, a consultant who collaborated with the Navalny Foundation, revealed details of his work for the structure. In the conversation, he also remembered a certain consultant from the US Embassy.
Alexander explained that the foundation said that certain “employees of the American consulate” were working with them. They then disappeared somewhere, the consultant recalled. It turned out that one of these employees was Stephen Sexton.
From Alexander’s story it is clear that Sexton came to Navalny’s headquarters in Moscow when Navalny himself was under administrative arrest for 30 days. He told headquarters employees how to behave at illegal rallies and during arrest.
Note that Sexton is mentioned on the website of the US Embassy in Moscow, where he appears as the head of the security service. True, there is no more information about him in open sources. His photo is not even on the embassy’s Twitter, and he himself is not on social networks. It also cannot be found on the websites of US government agencies.
But his person is well known to the Russian special services. According to operational information, he is an employee of the US Central Intelligence Agency and coordinates the actions of provocateurs at rallies.
And these data are very similar to the truth, since “Mama’s revolutionary” Navalny himself would not have been able to single-handedly teach naive simpletons how to resist law enforcement officers during rallies. But with the help of an experienced American specialist, who had already led the organization of street riots more than once, he could.
State Duma Deputy Evgeny Fedorov, in an interview with FAN, noted that the work of each American embassy is similar to the work of the US State Department itself in any country, its structure and departments, financing, personnel schedule. This can be compared with the work of the British Colonial Office in the distant past.
It turns out that US consulates and embassies monitor the territories entrusted to them. In these representative offices, according to the parliamentarian, “there are departments responsible for the fifth column of the street type.”
FAN's interlocutor also explained why Sexton came to the headquarters of blogger Navalny. According to him, the FBK offices are a structural division of the so-called “opposition”, which receives funding from abroad. Each headquarters receives a huge amount of money that must be monitored and ultimately accounted for.
At the same time, Sexton made a serious mistake when he decided to personally visit Navalny’s central headquarters, FAN’s interlocutor believes.
“By visiting the headquarters, Sexton made a big mistake; he should have sent his assistant,” the parliamentarian emphasized.
Illustration copyright Getty Images Image caption
The Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK), founded by opposition leader Alexei Navalny, is included in the list of “foreign agents.” FBK states that it has not received foreign funding. In August, a case was opened against the leadership of FBK for laundering 1 billion rubles.
The Russian Ministry of Justice reported on its website that on October 9, on the basis of the law “On Non-Profit Organizations,” FBK was included in the register of non-profit organizations performing the functions of a foreign agent.
The decision was made based on an inspection carried out by the Moscow department of the ministry, the statement said.
Later acting Department for NGO Affairs Vladimir Titov explained to Interfax that the basis for the decision was that the foundation’s employees “attempt to influence government bodies, take part and organize rallies and marches” and at the same time receive foreign funding. This is the main reason for being included in the register of “foreign agents”.
Titov claims that during the audit, several tranches of money were identified that came to FBK from foreign countries: “Two tranches from Spain and another from the USA, totaling more than 140 thousand rubles.”
The documents of the Ministry of Justice indicate that the funds, in particular, were transferred by the American company Star-Doors LLC. According to its website, the company installs closets and is registered in Florida.
Illustration copyright Google maps Image caption Star-Doors LLC will host visitors in Hollywood, Florida, in a small space numbered 5777The Open Media publication found the owner of the company - it turned out to be Yuri Maslikhov, a native of Russia. The company confirmed that Maslikhov transferred money to Navalny’s foundation, but did so as a private individual with Russian citizenship, and not as an American entrepreneur.
The translation from Spain came from a man named Roberto Fabio Monda Cardenas. From the Spanish registry legal entities It follows that the company Moto Auto Monda, which sells cars, is registered to a person with the same name.
FBK investigates and disseminates information about abuses and corruption in the highest bodies of Russian government, illegal enrichment of government officials and legalization Money. According to the founders of the foundation, it exists on funds received from public donations.
FBK reaction
FBK director Ivan Zhdanov wrote on Twitter that FBK is funded by Russian citizens and has never received foreign funding.
Navalny himself writes that FBK did not have foreign funding. “All FBK money is your donations (citizens of the Russian Federation),” he addressed his supporters. According to Navalny, the decision to include his foundation in the register of “foreign agents” was made by the Ministry of Justice “on the direct orders” of President Vladimir Putin.
The Kremlin does not make such decisions, this is the prerogative of the Ministry of Justice, the press secretary of the Russian President Dmitry Peskov responded to this.
Navalny commented on the situation again during a debate with American philosopher Francis Fukuyama. “We were declared a foreign agent today. Does this bother us? It worries us to the extent that they will demand all kinds of crazy reporting from us,” he said.
“But I know that the general public will never believe that we are foreign agents, because for many years our activities have been absolutely transparent and our reporting is completely open. Trust is our main capital. You can block bank accounts, but trust if it has already been earned - it cannot be taken away,” he added.
Zhdanov, in a conversation with Interfax, said that the fund was not notified of the decision of the Ministry of Justice. "We haven't received anything yet," he said. When FBK receives a notification from the Ministry of Justice, the fund will begin to challenge this decision, Zhdanov told The Bell.
Navalny's press secretary Kira Yarmysh called the Justice Ministry's decision pressure and "an attempt to stop our activities."
The Billion Case and Searches
On August 3, right during a protest in the center of Moscow, the Investigative Committee of Russia (ICR) announced the initiation of a criminal case regarding the laundering of 1 billion rubles by FBK employees. Later the amount was adjusted - 75 million rubles.
- A criminal case was opened against Navalny's foundation for money laundering
In dozens of Russian cities, employees of Navalny’s headquarters were searched in September in connection with this criminal case.
According to investigators, FBK employees received money in Russian and foreign currency, “knowingly acquired by other persons through criminal means.” The investigation claims that for the purpose of laundering, money was deposited through ATMs and entered into the fund's current accounts.
The Investigative Committee blocked the accounts of FBK and Navalny's regional headquarters in connection with the investigation of the case.
- Navalny's associates were searched in dozens of Russian cities
Navalny's associates connected the criminal case not only with the Moscow protests, but also with the Smart Voting project. During the elections to the Moscow City Duma, Navalny called for voting on his list, and as a result, candidates from this list received 20 mandates in the city parliament.
Konstantin Kalachev, head of the "Political Expert Group":
"I doubt that Putin personally made the decision, but he was informed, of course. Who is interested in such a decision? People who are responsible for the elections, because Navalny and his foundation influence the election results and influence very significantly. It is clear that everyone this is preparation for the big federal elections in 2021. This is an attempt to silence FBK and Navalny so that the elections take place without the influence of non-systemic opposition.
Navalny is engaged in investigations, he can conduct an exit testOly, research, organize “smart voting”, everything is fine with creativity. I believe that this decision is a reaction to the activity of Navalny and FBK in recent months, to the results of the elections in Moscow. This is pressure on the non-systemic opposition, which began in the form of lawsuits when they tried to ruin them, from the metro, the Armenia restaurant, and now the cherry on the cake - inclusion in the list of foreign agents.
This is not only a limitation of opportunities, but also part of the propaganda, thanks to which the average person should believe that Navalny is financed from abroad.
You can try to get around this: create new structures, because the FBK brand is not as valuable as the Navalny brand. In terms of presence on social networks, it is unlikely that anything will change.
Abbas Gallyamov, political scientist:
I am not sure that this decision will have any legal consequences, although this cannot be ruled out. Let me remind you that the FBK case is now being handled by the Investigative Committee, and there are resourceful people there - they will figure out how to use this status. Maybe as an aggravating circumstance in some other charge.
It cannot be ruled out that this status was needed to put pressure on the judges. Perhaps some of them are not ready to support the investigation’s too unsubstantiated accusations, and the authorities assume that, having heard the terrible words: “Are you shielding a foreign agent?”, Themis representatives will become more accommodating.
Although, most likely, the purpose of this whole action is purely propaganda. Try once again to force society to listen to an old record about State Department agents.
Law on "agents"
FBK was founded by Navalny in 2011. The law on “foreign agents” was adopted a year later. According to the law, such organizations are those that conduct political activities and at the same time receive foreign funding.
Non-profit organizations believe that the criterion for political activity is not clearly defined in the law, so a variety of organizations can become “agents” - for example, the sociological Levada Center.
For "foreign agents" a stricter mechanism of control by the state is provided. Such NPOs need to report to the Ministry of Justice more often and indicate on their materials and website the fact that the organization is recognized as a “foreign agent.” If there is no marking, then the “agent” will receive a fine, and criminal penalties are provided for repeated violations of the law.
Currently, there are more than 70 organizations - “foreign agents” in the Ministry of Justice register.
A real sensation fell into the hands ofjournalists VGTRK: correspondence between the famous “anti-corruption fighter” andBritish citizen known in connection with the Magnitsky caseWilliam Browder.
It was Browder who actively pushed for the creation of, in fact, the first “personal sanctions” against Russian civil servants and officials -.
The fact that the Briton is bluffing and openly waging an information war against Russia has been clear for a long time. The reasons are also known. First of all, this is, of course, money obtained not exactly in an honest way.
The second is Browder’s connections with British and American intelligence agencies. In this, everything is very similar to Navalny’s story: the active struggle “for everything good against everything bad” covers up a lot of unscrupulous and frankly illegal things.
The fact that Browder orders media attacks and stuffing on Navalny has also long been no secret. The latest case is the “sensational revelations” of Yuri Chaika. Then, by the way, many did not believe the Prosecutor General himself when he named Browder as the customer of the media stuffing against himself. However, this turned out to be true. And the main “media killer” for Chaika was Navalny, together with his Foundation.
And now new details have emerged about the secret and criminal connection between Navalny and Browder. Somewhat striking even to those who are aware of Navalny’s “business” and the peculiarities of the biography of the swindler Browder.
The latter repeatedly entrusted Navalny with various tasks. And he understood them correctly. Naturally, not for free. In addition, there is information about Navalny’s connection with foreign “specialists”, with whom Browder is also connected. The materials ended up in Moscow and were made public thanks to the armed coup in Ukraine and the former head of the Security Council of Boris Berezovsky, Sergei Sokolov.
“It was a place for unafraid idiots, excuse the expression, where it was possible to place mail servers,” he says about Ukraine. “It was recommended by the CIA curators who led the project. We removed about 60 servers on which a huge amount of correspondence and documents were collected. And There is absolute evidence of their connection and their activities, that no matter what Navalny says now, no matter what Browder says now.”
The documents include reports from the CIA and British intelligence MI6. Including, for example, the following: “December 23, 2007. To the Head of the Secret Intelligence Service A. Belt. Report from Agent Solomon on the completion of the study of Navalny and assignment of the pseudonym Freedom to him. A conversation took place over an encrypted communication channel between an employee of the SRS (SIS) and Agent Solomon . The agent has received consent to confidential cooperation with Alexei Navalny. Navalny needs to organize financial support to carry out his tasks as part of the special operation "Shudder" to undermine the current constitutional order in Russian Federation. Navalny was given the pseudonym Freedom."
Agent Solomon is . Judging by reports, he received his pseudonym for intelligence work even before moving to Moscow. And Operation Tremors, to which our heroes were involved, was developed in Langley back in 1986. The documents, classified “top secret,” were signed by then-CIA Director William Casey. The main goal is “to change the constitutional and political system in Eastern Europe and the USSR.”
The tasks described in detail within the document are as follows: changes in the political and constitutional system of states, achieving control over financial flows and extracting assets from the economies of developing countries. Although the USSR ceased to exist a quarter of a century ago, Operation Tremors was not curtailed—obviously, not all assets have yet been recovered even from the countries of the former socialist camp. Not to mention the territory of the current Russian Federation.
“Browder spreads lies, and his entire company is based solely on lies. Navalny is his student and the successor of all his ideas. They partly work together, work in parallel. They are completely looking in the same direction,” a former investigator of the Main Investigation Department of the Central Internal Affairs Directorate expresses his opinion Moscow Pavel Karpov. He was one of the investigators who uncovered Browder’s financial scams: tax evasion schemes and illegal purchases of shares in Russia under the roof of the Hermitage Capital fund. Karpov knows the handwriting of his friends and accomplices well.
Here is another interesting document, dated February 2006. Under the nicknames Will Prince-1 and Free-Diem - William Browder and Alexei Navalny, these are their first contacts. Browder has been banned from entering Russia for more than a year. Navalny is a young activist in the Moscow branch of the Yabloko party. Browder persuades Navalny to engage in financial blackmail.
“Let me formulate very frankly what I want to offer. I will teach you to “grab monsters by the balls.” Russian economy. Soon you will become a hero of minority shareholders and will be able to make reputational capital for yourself. Possibly political too. In return, I will ask you to support me when my problems come to light. Am I expressing myself clearly?" Browder asks Navalny. In fact, this is where Navalny was “born” as a media figure. The one we all know today.
Alexei, however, at that time still had doubts: “Your information is in exchange for my potential loyalty. Nevertheless, I am afraid that you are betting on the wrong figure. I may even have problems in the party. There I seem to be a nationalist.”
To this, Browder says that nationalism can also be a good “investment.” And in fact, Navalny later “worked on” the topic of migrants more than once in order to “knock out” the information capital on it. However, when it came to Crimea, he just as easily discarded his “nationalism”: it was unprofitable.
Next, Browder invites Navalny to conduct an “investigation” into fraud at VTB. But he, of course, is not ready to do anything for free: “William, thank you for the advice. But in order to take full advantage of it, I, as you understand, lack something.” There will be no problems with money, Browder promises: “A gentleman named Ashurkov will contact you.” Later, Ashurkov, Navalny’s “colleague” in FBK, will claim that he began to help Navalny after reading entries on his blog.
And here is the money itself: “Agent Freedom was familiarized with the first stage of secret measures to expose the facts of corruption and theft of Russian state assets. To implement the first phase of the plan, Agent Freedom was allocated funding in the amount of 100 million rubles. The first part of the funds in the amount of 7 million rubles will be transferred to our authorized representative from the Moscow Helsinki Group by January 26. Agent A. Belt."
By this time, things were going very badly for Browder in Russia: Hermitage Capital had completely curtailed its work in our country, all the main employees had left for London, the case of tax evasion was gaining momentum - only the auditor Magnitsky was left to “clean up the tails.”
“He was an accountant who was involved in tax evasion for Browder, that is, he registered companies through which money was withdrawn. As Magnitsky himself told me, it was his immediate boss who took away billions; as I later found out, it was Mr. Browder,” the journalist recalls Oleg Lurie.
“Alexey, now I need your support. Sergei was arrested. It will be very difficult for him,” Browder writes to Navalny during this period.
“William, I sincerely sympathize. In our country we love those who suffer. I’m not saying that Sergei’s suffering is your trump card, but the more journalists and people know about suffering, the less they will think about the essence of what is happening,” he replies Navalny.
Then many tears will be shed publicly about Magnitsky: cynically taking advantage of a problem or tragedy and spinning media hysteria around it is the favorite tactic of our opposition in general and Navalny in particular. Recent examples include the murder of Boris Nemtsov.
However, with Magnitsky it turned out even worse: “There will be no further increase in public outcry if we do not make adjustments to the plans for our special events.” In his message, the agent, based on the information he had, noted the deterioration of Magnitsky’s health.
The agent was asked, through proxies in the Russian penitentiary system, to organize the termination of any medical care Magnitsky." So, it turns out that Sergei was simply killed in order to use his name in the information war "with greater efficiency." On November 16, 2009, auditor Sergei Magnitsky died in the hospital of the Matrosskaya Tishina detention center.
What happens next is known. Media hysteria, “the fight against the criminal regime,” “the Magnitsky list” - and at the center of all this dirty information scandal is Alexei Navalny.
"January 23, 2010. Sash reports a meeting with agent Fried, during which he gave the agent 300 thousand US dollars for the upcoming program to support the "Magnitsky list" on social networks. Also in the report of the Sash agent it is said that the project related to the death of Sergei Magnitsky, already on initial stage greatly undermined the trust of Russian citizens in the judicial and law enforcement system of Russia. This leads to increasing chaos in the Russian judicial and law enforcement system, a decrease in its authority and a decrease in the authority of Vladimir Putin. Agent A. Belt."
The documents also contain information about the operation of Browder and Navalny against Prosecutor General Chaika. “Please note that before this there were searches in Browder’s companies in Cyprus, in offshore companies. That is, it was pressure. Immediately it comes out, information from Navalny immediately comes out, which, as it turned out, is not based on anything, it was originally not about what,” notes Oleg Lurie. Well, alas, the operation can be considered effective: Browder managed to prevent Browder from reaching the offshore sites of Russian law enforcement agencies.
And now we remember that not so long ago, LifeNews investigative journalists published a sensational video of another meeting of the former adviser to the governor of Vyatka Alexei Navalny with “experts” in velvet and not so velvet revolutions and coups.
Also, as Politonline already reported. ru, back in 2014, NTV showed on federal air and published on the Internet video and audio recordings that appeared on it, showing how and why blogger-politician Alexei Navalny met with foreign sponsors, begged for money and joked about his trips to the CIA.
Social networks then immediately remembered the details of the correspondence “leaked” into the network, in which Navalny shared with Yashin that he “needs contacts at the CIA.” In addition, bloggers remembered that at a special course at Yale, Navalny studied with activists who later “noted themselves” in coordinating the “Arab Spring.” Navalny was also “caught” by the media after reports at Chattam House and other “special events”...
And finally, I would like to remind you that it was and only for Navalny’s trial in Kirov, as well as for the elections with his participation in Kostroma that “political officers” from the US Embassy came. Among them are the first secretary of the American embassy in Moscow, a staff member of the US State Department, Bradford Bell, as well as diplomats from EU countries.
In a word, the true price and essence of the “fight for truth” from Navalny and Browder becomes even more obvious after these documents: betrayal of the Motherland, dirty money, lies, media scandals - and even indirect participation in murder.
This is the true face of our “honest fighters against the regime.” This is the background of the “Magnitsky list,” whose participants have been repeatedly called the most terrible words and accused of the most terrible things.
I would now like to ask everyone who said this, who participated in the promotion of media fakes - who can be considered, in connection with all of the above?
Two events of the week, directly related to each other. On Wednesday, the Ministry of Justice declared the Anti-Corruption Foundation, founded by Alexei Navalny, a foreign agent. The reason was payments from foreign accounts. The Fund itself expressed disagreement with the decision of the Ministry of Justice.
And the day before it appeared, the Federation Council reported: evidence had been received of the deliberate organization of mass riots in Moscow before the Unified Voting Day. Throughout the second half of the summer, the non-systemic opposition led supporters to uncoordinated street actions in the capital.
Water bottles are thrown at the police. They are sprayed with pepper gas from canisters in their faces, and the window of an official car is kicked out. The police are attacked from behind, an urn is thrown at them, and they are hit in the head with a bottle. Fences are thrown onto roadway, blocking traffic on the Garden Ring.
Mikhail Svetov and Alexey Navalny from the stage of the agreed rally, who called on these people to come out on July 27 for an uncoordinated rally in the center of Moscow, would definitely be upset if like-minded people really did not appreciate their contribution to what was happening.
At the rally, where an ultimatum was put forward to the authorities demanding that those who submitted falsified signatures to the election commission be registered as candidates for Moscow City Duma deputies, there were actually calls for mass unrest. Next is the “stage of mobilization” of potential participants.
“I understand, this is a hint, I catch everything on the fly,” as in the popular song. As a result, on July 27 there were “improvised means” in backpacks and pockets. This thrifty “caring activist” Ivan Podkopaev was later sentenced to two years in prison. At the trial, he insisted that he “acted in self-defense,” but if you watch the video, it becomes clear that this is a lie. Podkopaev first sprays gas from a can and then hides behind people’s backs. Based on the results of studying such video recordings, it is possible that new convicts will appear.
Instructions and videos with calls began to be actively uploaded through social media. First through anonymous chats “for our own people”, then these same “our own people” for everyone else.
In total, according to the calculations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, 19 thousand reposts were made, 40 thousand comments were written, the coverage, which means, according to the mathematical model, could be up to three million people.
The so-called “opposition online media” helped in informing; the German public television and radio company Deutsche Welle allowed itself an open appeal by posting this on its Twitter: “Moscow, come out!”
Calls with a calm agenda for actions for the “other public”, anonymously, “for our own”, a frank emphasis on forceful actions.
On July 27, a certain Egor Kolosov posted a drawing in a telegram chat showing a Molotov cocktail bottle. Well, the calls: “We must go to the Kremlin while there is a chance. It takes at least one cocktail to intimidate them. They’re not robots, they can be afraid too.”
The actions of those who came were coordinated using smartphones; they have a geolocation function, and you can determine where like-minded people are, you can send messages and videos, which helps to use flexible street tactics.
The first stage, the gathering of “activists” at three “gathering points”: at the Okhotny Ryad metro station, on Tverskaya Square, at the monument to Yuri Dolgoruky and at the Tverskaya metro station. From there, in three columns, simultaneously, they headed towards the city hall, breaking through the cordon, demolishing barriers, using canisters of pepper gas, jumping out onto the roadway. Another group of “activists” tried to approach the mayor’s office from Bryusov and Leontievsky lanes, provoking, bullying the police and National Guard, trying to force them to leave the cordon. It wasn’t just the internet that was used to coordinate and mobilize activists.
The Dozhd TV channel, on normal days with a paid subscription, suddenly announced on the day of the event that it would broadcast live and free of charge what was happening.
It was not possible to break through to the mayor's office; the most active participants in the action were forced into Stoleshnikov Lane, where some tried to build barricades from benches, others threw bottles and garbage bins to the police. It was not possible to gain a foothold there either; activist “navigators” send out maps with arrows in chats and direct traffic. The movement of those who are not looking at their phones is directed by “regulators” with their hands.
One of the columns, about 300 people, was at that moment “walking” along Sadovaya towards Tsvetnoy Boulevard in order to divert part of the police forces. The bulk of the “activists,” meanwhile, blocked traffic along the Garden Ring, and after the police arrived there, they tried to return to Trubnaya Square to hold a rally there and try to organize a tent camp. Alexey Sitnikov peers at the video recordings and sees in what happened on July 27 the “handwriting” of the author of the theory of “color revolutions,” the American Gene Sharp.
Sitnikov calls himself a “practicing political strategist”, the author of the concept of the first Ukrainian, “orange” Maidan. After that, he taught political science at universities in several countries around the world for 12 years, including High school economics: “I know Sharp’s technologies very well, they are classics of political science. I taught this. I have seen these technologies in 53 countries. Yes, they are used, yes, they are used. There were certainly attempts at provocation, including an attempt at provocation through the image of blood on the screen. Bringing children, an attempt to show that there is an attempt at aggression against children and civilians.”
One of the elements of “Sharpe’s technology” for organizing street riots is to cause indignation among people who are not involved in the protests. Then we can count on an increase in the number of protesters. The most radical way is to make sure that blood is shed as a result of what is happening. This was the case at the Maidan in 2014, for example, or in Egypt, in Tahrir Square. In Moscow, fortunately, it did not come to this, although the organizers tried to bring it to fruition.
In a training film dedicated to the use of “Gene Sharp technologies,” one of his students, Serja Popovic, who organized the “bulldozer revolution” in Belgrade in 2000, explains: “Instead of pushing strong men forward, you put girls, children, grandmothers, veterans.”
And now in Moscow, an “activist” is carrying a grandmother sitting in a wheelchair amid shouts and hooting. And this girl, apparently a person “with disabilities“, for the sake of an emotional photo, they specially rolled out in a wheelchair in front of the cordon, so, directly according to the technologists’ manuals, they make a picture for reports on the confrontation. On Pushkin Square, a man and a woman with strollers with children in them are also being filmed and photographed against the backdrop of the cordon. Trained and prepared activists directing the crowd, inciting people, begin to provoke attacks on the police.
“You pull from behind, the police turn around, hit you with a baton without looking, usually you dodge, and it hits someone, which means it’s innocent.” Everything went smoothly, as they say. Oh, you hit my girlfriend, you hit my father. This is such a provocation,” explains Marat Bashirov, political scientist, expert at the Institute of Communication Management.
Sharp’s training manuals also include a clause “exerting moral pressure on police officers.” Therefore, the call of activist Vladislav Sinitsa on his Twitter page, who proposed to consider the possibility of executing the children of Russian police officers under the lenses of video cameras, cannot be called an “accident” or a “stupid blunder”. The court decided that five years of imprisonment to correct the characteristics of the provocateur’s psyche is not too high a price from the point of view of the threat to the lives of children: “They will look at cute happy family photos, study geolocation, and then the child of a valiant defender of law and order simply does not come home from school one day. Instead of a child, a CD with a snuff video comes in the mail.”
During mass riots, the key calculation of their organizers is that it is not the “activists” who attack, but the ordinary people, either by chance who happened to be nearby, or who came to the rally for completely peaceful purposes. This often happens, the effect of involvement is triggered, and a kind of mass psychosis occurs. Activist Sergei Fomin, judging by the way he behaved during the street riots, knew about this. There are many videos that show how skillfully and energetically he “turns on” people with slogans and chants.
Indicates the direction of movement, actually leads the crowd, now leading it, now retreating into the “background” for a while. Fomin also fled the scene, what is called “technically”, taking the baby from the stroller of his friends, using him as a “human shield”.
He came to surrender to the police with his mother at night, having learned that he was wanted for participation in uncoordinated actions. Before surrendering to the hands of justice, Fomin posted an appeal on the Internet reproaching those who explained to him that “being a little rowdy” on the streets is normal, and they will not be seriously punished for it.
He, as he assures, “due to his relative youth” and lack of curiosity, knew little about the mass riots on Bolotnaya Square in May 2012 and the sentences for their participants: “I knew very superficially about the Bolotnaya case. And I never thought that I could be attracted to this. You didn’t warn people in any way how to behave, you just said to go to Tverskaya and didn’t give any recommendations.”
For many young participants in the uncoordinated actions of the summer of 2019, even the events of 2012 look like a long time ago. And one’s own “life experience” is often limited to something like the experience of a multi-user computer game GTA, where mass fights with the police are commonplace, which cannot end in anything bad for the player.
“They are promised that if something happens to you, firstly, we will scratch you out of these clutches, yes, bloody ones, as they say.” Here. And the second thing you will receive after this is some kind of bonus. You will go to study, you will go to work in the West, this is what they are promised. Here, too, such an element of lies, in general, is present. And it is clear that the people who take these actions, the people who are recruited, they are not very far-minded; in fact, it is not difficult to promise them something, yes, continues Marat Bashirov.
In such cases, to begin the conscious accumulation of life experience, it may be worth telling an old joke, retelling it “in a new format”: “Let’s go beat the police!” What if they beat us themselves? Why are we here?”
To what extent will this complicate the activities of the Anti-Corruption Fund and its perception in society?After searches in the branches of the Anti-Corruption Foundation in a money laundering case, the Ministry of Justice recognized him as a foreign agent. This may significantly complicate reporting for the organization, but is unlikely to harm the image of FBK, experts say
Alexey Navalny (Photo: Zuma / TASS)
How the Ministry of Justice motivated the recognition of FBK as a foreign agent
The Russian Ministry of Justice has included the non-profit organization Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) of Alexei Navalny in the register of non-profit organizations performing the functions of a foreign agent. The Ministry's Main Directorate for Moscow, as part of the “current monitoring” of the work of the FBK, discovered that it “corresponds to the characteristics of an NPO performing the functions of a foreign agent,” follows from the official statement of the department.
“The conduct of political activities has been established, as well as the receipt of funds from foreign sources: from foreign organizations in Spain and the United States,” the ministry said. As the acting clarified to Interfax. Department for NGO Affairs Vladimir Titov, the foundation “tried to influence government bodies and organized rallies with foreign funding.” According to the Ministry of Justice, the fund received two tranches from Spain and one from the United States for a total amount of more than 140 thousand rubles.
As on the website of the Ministry of Justice, foreign sources of funding for FBK were Roberto Fabio Monda Cardenas from Spain and Star-Doors.сom from the USA. Star-Doors.com is a closet door store in Florida. An employee of the company told Meduza that the owner of Star-Doors.сom is a Russian citizen, he donated money to FBK as a private individual.
FBK Director Ivan Zhdanov on Twitter emphasized that the organization receives money exclusively from Russians and “the fund has never received any foreign funding.” He called the inclusion of FBK in the register of foreign agents another attempt by the authorities to “strangle” the fund, whose activities are transparent, and reports on them are regularly submitted to the Ministry of Justice. “We demand that the Ministry of Justice publicly explain to everyone and provide evidence that FBK received at least one penny of foreign money,” wrote Alexey Navalny. “The actions are completely illegal and, obviously, on the direct orders of Putin.” Presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov told reporters that the Kremlin does not make such decisions, this is the prerogative of the Ministry of Justice.
The Ministry of Justice has not yet sent an official notification, press secretary of Alexei Navalny and FBK Kira Yarmysh told RBC.
FBK was registered by Navalny in September 2011. According to the foundation's public reporting, it is funded by donations. In 2018, FBK received 58 million rubles from supporters, the fund’s expenses amounted to 65.3 million rubles. The average donation amount was 720 rubles, the fund reported more than 16 thousand donors in 2018.
In mid-September, FBK employees were searched in 31 Russian cities. Investigative actions began after a case was opened about the organization laundering 1 billion rubles. in 2016-2018. This case was brought against the fund's managers by the Investigative Committee in early August. During the summer, FBK actively participated in protest events dedicated to the exclusion of opposition candidates from the Moscow City Duma elections, including fund director Ivan Zhdanov and FBK lawyer Lyubov Sobol (the city election commission was not satisfied with the quality of the signatures they collected).
What does the new status mean for the fund?
The Law on NPOs - Foreign Agents was adopted in 2012. Since 2014, organizations involved in political activity and receiving funding from abroad are forcibly included in the relevant register of the Ministry of Justice. Human rights activists criticized the provisions of the law on NGOs-foreign agents for vague formulations, under which political activity was recognized, for example, the work of sociologists () or patients with diabetes. In November 2018, a law was adopted that allows media outlets receiving funding from abroad to be recognized as foreign agents.
In fact, the law sets one exclusively “technical” restriction - the organization must reflect in its materials that it performs the functions of a foreign agent, lawyer for the Amulex National Legal Service Dmitry Tomko explained to RBC.
In addition, an NPO - a foreign agent must submit a report every six months on its activities, on the personal composition of its governing bodies, quarterly - documents on the purposes of spending funds, including from foreign sources, and annually - an audit report.
For the absence of markings on the materials of the NPO indicating its status as a foreign agent, in accordance with Art. 19.34 of the Administrative Code, officials are fined up to 300 thousand rubles, legal entities - up to 500 thousand rubles. According to the law on NGOs-foreign agents, evasion from submitting documents necessary for inclusion of an organization in the register is punishable by a fine of up to 300 thousand rubles. or up to two years of imprisonment.
In practice, the reporting process for NPOs included on the list is greatly complicated, Vasily Vaisenberg, an expert at the human rights organization Golos, which is also a foreign agent, told RBC. For FBK, which collects millions in small donations of 500-700 rubles, this is a huge amount of work; the fund will need a serious staff of accountants to submit such a volume of reporting.
The head of the legal department of the Sitting Rus' Foundation, Alexey Fedyarov, believes that at FBK the work of the accounting department is done professionally enough to submit the necessary reports on time. According to Fedyarov, the new status will not harm the image of the foundation, “since due to the widespread recognition of human rights organizations as foreign agents in recent years, it becomes “uncomme il faut” for NGOs not to bear this status.” He cites the example of Sitting Rus', which, despite receiving such status, still actively contacts officials at different levels.
Another provision in the federal election law prohibits foreigners and foreign NGOs from participating in elections, but due to vague wording, this provision was not applied in practice, Weissenberg noted.
Will the decision of the Ministry of Justice affect the reputation of FBK?
FBK was declared a foreign agent because, against the backdrop of declining ratings and the erosion of the “Crimean consensus,” the authorities stopped perceiving the fund as a purely marginal opposition force, says political scientist Alexei Makarkin. According to him, if in 2014 the liberal candidate, accused by the authorities of working for the West and not recognizing the annexation of Crimea, would not have had a chance in the elections, then due to the difficult economic situation recent years, raising the retirement age and other unpopular reforms, the attitude towards oppositionists has become different.
At the same time, according to Makarkin, if in the capital the status of a foreign agent is perceived by opposition supporters and undecided voters with sarcasm, then in the regions the decision of the Ministry of Justice may complicate the work of the FBK. There, local officials and security forces will perceive the fund’s employees as “spies,” the expert predicts.
After the summer protests in Moscow, a number of private and government agencies filed lawsuits against their participants and alleged organizers. At the end of September, the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs demanded compensation for “damage caused in connection with the involvement of forces and means to ensure public order as a result of uncoordinated mass events” on July 27 and August 3. For two claims, a total of 18 million rubles. The defendants were Alexei Navalny, Ivan Zhdanov, Lyubov Sobol and others.
Prior to this, Mosgortrans, the Moscow Metro and the State Budgetary Institution " Car roads" The court satisfied these three claims, collecting more than 4.6 million rubles from the oppositionists. Due to the uncoordinated action on July 27, a lawsuit was also filed by Ankor LLC (Armenia restaurant), which managed to win about 240 thousand rubles.