Robert Amsterdam journeyed to Finland to attend the anti-Putin conference there, and met with Oleg Kozlovsky. He praises him to the sky, calling him "a young man of admirable courage and intelligence - the kind of person that means so much for the future of the country" and saying "It was a great pleasure to meet Oleg, and he has my full support in his peaceful resistance to authoritarianism, and his demands for greater political inclusion and participation." He brings back a postcard from Finland written by Oleg himself:

In the meantime, yet another event of presidential scale took place: premier Putin in Paris met not only with his colleague François Fillon, but also with the current president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy and with the previous one – Jacques Chirac. Sources have reported that Putin and the heads of the French state “exchanged opinions on urgent foreign policy questions”. In the meantime, even a child knows that questions of foreign policy, in accordance with the Constitution of the RF, are the prerogative of the president, and not the premier.

That is, once again we see the presidential habits of the former president.

Dave Essel translates Oleg Kozlovsky's first column in the Yezhedevny Zhurnal online newspaper:

The Dissenters March: a Postscriptum

Yezhedevny Zhurnal

June 5, 2008

It has to be admitted: the March of the Dissenters on 6 May was a failure, first and foremost because of us, the organisers. The organising committee got together once or twice and never decided anything much. After that, matters were left to take their own course and the individual member groups each did its own thing. Disastrously little money – to all intents and purposes none whatsoever – was spent on the march's needs. Handmade National Bolshevik stickers and a few Oborona graffiti weren't going to make a mark, and the issue of the United Citizens Front (OGF) newspaper didn't come out in time for 6 May.

Furthermore, no attempt was even made to involve other organisations, as was done previously, in the preparations for the event. The prize in the disorganisation stakes has to go to the appearance at Chistye Prudy of Denis Bilunov to announce that the event had been cancelled at the very time that activists from Oborona, Smena, the OGF, the National Democratic Union of Youth (NDSM) and the National Bolsheviks were trying to break through to the march. Bilunov did of course try to save the situation but the end result was basically an admission that we had failed. One of the really special things about the Dissenter's March was that it was going to take place no matter what, regardless of pressure from the authorities. When its organisers voluntarily cancelled it, that could only be taken as an admission of defeat.

The failure of the 6 May event was in some ways a foregone conclusion. We lost interest and drive; the enthusiasm that existed during the preparations for previous events was not there. As a result, after the well-known spring demonstrations of 2007, the number of events we held went down and down while interest in them dropped as well. The early Dissenter Marches were some of the most outstanding and most discussed political events in the country. As time has passed, however, they have become more routine sorts of events, almost like May Day Communist demonstrations. Worst of all, new people have stopped joining in.

I am sorry to say this but I think that this demo-march format has lost its relevance. Each demo is going to be weaker than the preceding one until the very concept of "Dissenters' March" becomes totally discredited. To hold them purely for the sake of getting a few fresh photos of OMON cops arresting participants is fairly pointless: there are years' worth of such photographs on the internet already. The cops too are getting better at dealing with our demos. What we need to do now is something different – and that is to get as many people as possible involved in resistance against the authorities, help then get over their concerns and fears about doing so, and teach them how to peacefully defend themselves on the streets.

For example, we could set ourselves the task of holding the largest mass meeting of recent years this autumn, perhaps in the form of a concert or festival. It does not matter much where it would be held – even Tishino will do so long as it is possible to get together somewhere. An event of this kind will need serious resources and take months of time and effort to organise. However, if we make a success of it, it will be far more useful and important than three hurriedly organised Dissenters' Marches of a few hundred people in each. An event of this kind could be arranged under the banner of The Other Russia and perhaps even be the first ever event in support of the National Assembly. The main things is that we need to attract new people – people who did not previously join opposition demos – and show that we can do more than just present our backs to the police so that they can beat them with truncheons.

The following is our staff translation of Oleg Kozlovsky's first major interview with the Western press following his release, with German Deutsche-Welle radio:

Oleg Kozlovsky, the coordinator of the youth movement "Defense," arrested for intent to participate in a "March of Dissenters," believes that Russian law enforcement was in fact not executing the criminal code but rather instructions from on high. Having just gained his freedom after serving a 13-day sentence, he tells Deutsche Welle his story.

Deutsche Welle: Oleg, using the phraseology Russia's new president, is freedom is better than the lack of freedom?

Oleg Kozlovsky: Of course, based on recent my personal experience I can't dispute this thesis.

DW: What is it about your work the authorities do not like? Why did you spent 13 days behind bars?

OK: I think that those in power have accumulated irritation against me for my protest activities, and they tried, one after another, different methods of combating their opponents. The first arrests were ineffectual because the charges were minor and resulted only brief periods of a few hours behind bars. But as time has passed the authorities have apparently begun to fear that a mass movement is developing, and they've begun to impose more draconian measures. So they've invented new charges to put against us.

DW: What was your attitude towards the police officers in the detention facilities?

OK: Ordinary policemen were usually reasonable. It's a sad commentary that they've apparently become used to us, and openly refer to us as "political prisoners." Of course, this is not the formal charge leveled at us, which might be disorderly person for instance. These officers do not question the basis of the charges, but simply see themselves as carrying out the instructions of the state. Many of them recognize us as possessing advanced degrees, and and such they tend to address and treat us rather respectfully.

DW: Were they able to explain why you had been arrested?

OK: I was not arrested by ordinary policemen but by plain-clothes officers from the terrorist enforcement section known as UBOB, an arm of the FSB (formerly the KGB). They've been on point in the FSB's efforts to impede my organization at every possible turn. They told me nothing about the charges being made against me and refused to answer my questions. They simply tossed me on a bus and then gave instructions to the policemen later as to how to write up the arrest report.

DW: So the regular cops had no actual idea of the circumstances of the arrest?

OK: That's right. But of course they are aware that the charges have been essentially fabricated and are based on political motivations. Unfortunately it's quite normal for them to be expected to participate in fundamentally corrupt enterprises.

DW: What happened in court?

OK: More of the same. They judges, too, are fully aware that the charges have been rigged, and they overlook the predictably confused testimony of the police when they testify about the arrest (UBOP offices don't appear in court). For instance, in my case a policeman testified that I had been arrested in a completely different place and at a completely different time of day that had actually occurred. The judge simply ignored the anomaly. Nobody wants to be the one to take the risks and try to break out of this vicious cycle, so it continues. I presented a great deal of direct evidence that the charges were without basis, but all of it was simply ignored.

DW: So the officers are not really aware of wrongdoing?

OK: Unfortunately, all police officers I have encountered in such situations feel that an order from their superiors is above the law. While they are perfectly aware that the order is illegal, they believe they can't be blamed and the matter should be taken up with those in authority.

DW: If the guardians of the law behave in this manner, what are the prospects for reform? What does this say about the president's remark?

OK: The fact is that our police are not safeguards the law, it is obvious. They are simply bureaucrats, carrying out instructions given to them by their superiors, who in turn are acting on instructions from their own superiors.

DW: So in Russia there is no law, only instructions?

OK: Yes, rather, orders and instructions. Often, in fact, only oral instructions, nothing in writing to document it. To tell a lie in a report, to carry out a firing squad, it's not clear that there are any borders.

DW: Aren't there any dissenters?

OK: My impression is that those who would have scruples would not enter police service in the first place, and the same thing for judges, whose attitude is no different from that of the police by and large.

DW: How can this cycle be broken? How can Russia be made into what Medvedev calls a "nation of laws"?

OK: It is said that "a fish rots from the head." So the political will do to so must come from the top. What happened, for instance, to Khodorkovsky was authorized from the very top. Until there is true respect for the law at the very top, nothing will change down below.

Russian opposition leader Oleg Kozlovsky, hours after being released from prison last week after serving a 13-day sentence on bogus charges designed to intimidate him and prevent him from taking part in the first meeting of Russia's new shadow parliament organization. His haggard appearance is due to a hunger strike undertaken to protest the illegal nature of his arrest.


Soon after his release, Oleg was surrounded by his comrades in arms at a local watering hole for his first decent meal in two weeks.

Pity poor Edward Lozansky.

There he was on Monday morning about to open his sick, sordid little confabulation of Russophiles, seeking to dupe unwary Americans into dropping their guard and allowing Vladimir Putin to further consolidate his malignant rule over Russia. He'd lined up financial support for his dastardly enterprise from the Kremlin's propaganda TV network, Russia Today, and he was even given an op-ed column in the Moscow Times to publicize it. All the bedraggled Russophile garbage across the land was converging on Washington DC for his "World Russia Forum" including even the vile Yuri Mamchur of Russia Blog.

And what happens? He opens up his morning edition of the Washington Post and what does he find? An op-ed column by none other than leading Russian dissident Oleg Kozlovsky (shown above in the loving embrace of Vladimir Putin's neo-Soviet goons), a column accusing his benefactor of turning Russia into a giant neo-Soviet gulag! We republish the column below, together with a second op-ed from the post on Russia in as many days, this one from Masha Lipman of the Carnegie Center decrying Russia's lack of a free press.

And it wasn't just any op-ed. It ran in the upper left corner of the hard copy of the paper and included the above photograph of Kozlovsky -- not one but two distinct honors for the column, showing the Post's influential editors stood behind Kozlovsky 1,000 percent.

Ouch. Miracle if Lozansky wasn't rushed to the emergency room with a nasty case of acid reflux. Lozansky is well known to regular readers of this blog; we've exposed him repeatedly in prior posts as the fundamental fraud he is. Reading Kozlovsky's terrifying words, its impossible to see Lozansky as anything other than a modern Neville Chamberlain.

Lozansky claims that presidential candidate John McCain is "alone" in his stark opposition to Russia, but in fact it's neo-Soviet collaborators like Lozansky that stand alone, surrounded by their truly ridiculous, detached-from-reality, neo-Soviet lies. In a classic bit of Soviet dishonesty, he claims that the U.S. needs Russian uranium to run its nuclear reactors; in fact, Russia itself just inked a deal to import uranium from Australia, without which it couldn't run its own reactors. Moreover, the idea that the U.S. should ignore Russia's barbaric desecration of the institution of democracy just so that it can get hold of Russian energy resources defiles the very foundations of American civilization. This man is truly beneath pond scum.

Lozansky claims that Russia needn't worry about McCain's threat to oust Russia from the G-8, because the other members wouldn't go along. Apparently, he thinks McCain is crazy and off the reservation. But if that is so, why is Lozansky so worried? The fact is that McCain can, with the stroke of his pen, make the G-8 choose between the U.S. and Russia as members. If he does that, the nations of Europe won't have to think twice before siding with their NATO ally.

The only person Lozansky actually names as disagreeing with McCain is the senile lunatic professor Steven Cohen, whom this blog has, like Lozansky himself, repeatedly discredited for the ridiculous gibberish he spews from the radical Nation magazine published by his own wife. The fact that Lozansky is insane enough to believe that Professor Cohen's opposition means that one of the most powerful figures in America's foreign policy establishment stands alone is proof positive, all by itself, of what a ridiculous fraud Lozansky really is.

And then, in classic bit of Russian insanity, he completely contradicts himself. He states:

To be fair to McCain, the other two presidential front-runners, Democratic Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, have not offered a positive-thinking agenda for Russia either, pledging to be tougher with Russia than Bush and endorsing further NATO expansion by accepting Ukraine and Georgia into the alliance. All three presidential contenders have promised to expand the Bush administration's effort to "spread democracy," a policy that an overwhelming majority of Russians see as a thinly veiled smoke screen to strengthen the U.S. position in the world at the expense of Russia.

Hmm. So then, it seems that McCain isn't really so alone after all, now is he? No wonder Lozansky is getting desperate.

In his MT op-ed, Lozansky complains that he'd invited McCain to attend the Forum and debate his hard line on Russia and was apparently surprised to find that McCain was ignoring him. Of course, Lozansky doesn't say a single word about his failure to extend any Forum invitations to any Russian opposition figures -- such as Garry Kasparov or Kozlovsky himself. Though Mr. Lozansky's forum made a place for pro-Russian propaganda from Russia Today and many other sources, no such place was laid for the United States -- nor did his column say a single word about any changes any Russian leader needs to make to accommodate the U.S.

We can't help but wonder how Americans would have reacted in 1938 to a forum sponsored by a state-owned Nazi TV network and calling for "economic, political and military alliance" with Hitler's Germany. Since the sponsor of Lozansky's conference is Russia Today, Putin's propaganda network (recently condemned by the New York Times), one would hope Americans will be just as suspicious of his effort, kicked off by the Russian ambassador. Does Mr. Lozansky, a card-carrying Kremlin shill, really believe Americans might be foolish enough to believe he's concerned about their national security interests as well as those of Russia?

Simply put, Americans can't trust Kremlin mouthpieces like Mr. Lozansky to look out for their best interests, and won't do so no matter how much Kremlin money greases the skids. Fool me once, Mr. Lozansky, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!

Oborona opposition leader Oleg Kozlovsky, writing in the Washington Post:

Vladimir Putin hails stability among his greatest achievements as president of Russia. But stability in Russia exists in appearance only, supported by enormous oil revenue and massive propaganda from the government-controlled mass media. Behind the facade lies an unprecedented increase in corruption, a population largely mired in poverty, and a bureaucracy and domestic intelligence apparatus whose power is unchecked.

Putin's stability is the stability of the gulag, where wardens ensure that all the prisoners have their allotted rations, reward the most obedient and punish potential troublemakers to preempt disorder. The difference between Russia today and the Soviet gulag is that most Russians have never known another type of government, so they do not realize that they are confined.

As you read this, I am in prison in Russia. I am a leader of the youth movement Oborona ("Defense"), which advocates nonviolent resistance to oppression by the authorities. Before my arrest this month -- I was picked up while walking on the street and charged with civil disobedience -- my last encounter with the government had occurred in December, when officers of the FSB (as the Federal Security Service, a successor organization to the KGB, is known) forcibly placed me in the army under Russia's draft.

My activities with Oborona have long caused me problems with the government. At age 23, I have been arrested more than a dozen times, have twice served short terms in prison and have been fired from a job at the FSB's request. The government could never find a reason to imprison me for the long term, so it has yet to get rid of me completely.

Late last year, the intelligence services took a different tack. On Dec. 20, I was once again arrested. Despite health problems and the fact that I am a student, both of which should have exempted me from conscription, I was sent to the army to serve as an enlisted soldier. FSB officers escorted me to a military unit in a forest about 150 miles from Moscow and told me that I was expected to serve for one year.

My trip into the army took only a few hours, but getting out took 2 1/2 months. I was finally freed on March 4, two days after Russia's presidential "election" was held. Military authorities have acknowledged that I was inducted into the army illegally, but no one has apologized to me. Shortly after my release, the Moscow headquarters of Oborona was raided by the police. I and 10 others were arrested and threatened; some of us were beaten by the police, who confiscated our leaflets, papers and a computer.

I am just one of the many political activists in Russia who face repression. Others include Maxim Reznik, the prominent leader of the Yabloko political party in St. Petersburg. He was arrested after being falsely accused of beating up three police officers and was held without trial. He is still alive, though. In December, a member of the Other Russia coalition, Yuri Chervochkin, was beaten to death; it is thought that his killers were employees of a special police unit.

Over the past two years, the scale of repression in Russia has reached a level similar to that in the worst years of the Cold War. The regime's clampdown and strategic mistakes made by previous opposition leaders have brought us to the point where traditional political parties have lost any influence in this country. Old illusions about how democracy advocates might achieve power through the vote were smashed with the results of December's parliamentary "elections." Old parties are unlikely to return to Russia.

The recently inaugurated president, Dmitry Medvedev, is an old friend of Putin's and is part of the system. Hopes that Medvedev will ensure a more open future are misplaced. Far from having interest in liberalizing Russia, Medvedev well understands that any such attempt would lead only to a loss of control, which would present a fatal threat to the corrupt heights of power in Russia.

The only real possibility for changing the political regime in Russia today is through grass-roots pressure. Nonviolent resistance on the model of Mahatma Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. is the last option available in the arsenal of pro-democracy advocates. This has already become clear to some of the most open-minded politicians, such as those in the Other Russia coalition.

To be successful we must first analyze our mistakes, learn to work together more effectively and rouse society from its apathetic state. For this we need groups such as Oborona, a union of sincere young people striving not for power but for change in their country. The mission of those planning an uprising in the modern Russian gulag is to not become the next wardens.

IN THE REPORT WE TRUST

Posted on the Website of Oborona 15 May 2008

On May 14 the Basman Court of Moscow levied a fine of 1000 rubles against the Oborona activist Ivan Simochkin for walking along Chistoprudniy Boulevard on May 6.

The court reached its verdict despite the testimony of six eyewitnesses for the defense, who testified that unknown individuals dressed in civilian clothes and showing no identification detained Mr. Simochkin without warning. The ruling of the court indicated that the testimony of the witnesses was not taken into account, because “the witnesses were called only to mitigate the punishment of the accused.”

Following is the speech which Ivan Simochkin read in court.

Your Honor,

I have absolutely nothing to request forgiveness for. Neither I, nor my associates, nor the passers-by who happened to be on Chistoprudniy Boulevard on May 6 did anything wrong, and we do not deserve even a reproach, let alone long terms in jail.

Moreover, I wish to inform the court about a series of criminal actions that we endured at the hands of identified and unidentified individuals, that should be examined under the laws of the Russian Federation. The individuals who perpetrated these acts should be punished under the administrative and criminal codes of the Russian Federation.

Firstly: On May 6, at 6:00 p.m., a group of citizens, myself included, were peacefully and quietly walking along Chistoprudniy Boulevard when we were subject to a violent assault by unidentified individuals dressed in civilian clothes. The attackers, pursuing whatever objective they had, did not identify themselves, made no requests of us, and in general said nothing, but flung themselves on my associate Oleg Kozlovskiy and tried to drag him away by force to an unknown location.

My natural reaction was to try and prevent the criminals from kidnapping my associate. I will tell you further, regardless of what sentence the honorable Basman Court may impose on me, if I ever again see unidentified, criminal-looking individuals attack a pedestrian on the street, I will not fail to do exactly the same thing - come to his aid.

No sooner had I done this, than the individuals in civilian clothes turned their attention to me, and I myself became the target of their attack. I loudly demanded that the attackers identify themselves and state the reason for their actions, but got not a word in reply. I loudly called for the police to come to my aid and stop these illegal actions of unidentified civilians, but the policemen stayed at a distance and passively watched what was happening.

Other passers-by also tried to stand up for those who were being attacked. Anna Chernobylskaya, the mother of a young child, tried to intervene on my behalf as I was being dragged down the boulevard. She yelled for the police to help and called on passers-by to witness what was happening, as a result of which the unidentified individuals then came after her. Anna Chernobylskaya was called as a witness on my behalf. And the episode I just described was captured on a videotape made by Dmitriy Borko, who was also called as witness.

Following the attack, the unidentified individuals forcibly dragged and threw us into a police van. And let no one be led astray by the fact that the attackers, as it later turned out, were acting in concert with the authorities. On the contrary, it would have been much simpler if this criminal attack had been carried out by some kind of unknown criminal group. In that case, we - as citizens of Russia - would have had the ability to call on the law enforcement agencies for help, and had a chance of being defended.

When crimes are committed with the criminal consent of law enforcement officials, or the police themselves, or at the direct order of those under their command (as is obvious to me was the case in the current situation), the citizen is left completely defenseless and without rights. And the state that commits such acts is a lawless police dictatorship.

Further: Unfortunately, the illegal actions committed against me and other citizens did not end here.

We were illegally and absolutely without grounds placed in the Krasnoselskiy precinct holding cell, where officers of the Anti-Organized Crime Directorate (UBOP) and riot police (OMON) openly fabricated their reports with absolutely false, fraudulent accusations against these illegally detained citizens.

All of the reports were written as if in carbon copy. Like the rest of those detained, I was accused of supposedly “participating in a protest, failing to respond to repeated requests by members of the OMON under Sergeant V.A. Gasheka to cease and desist, and continuing to commit illegal acts.”

Your honor, and honorable ladies and gentlemen, a multitude of testimonies by unbiased witnesses, as well as a multitude of photographic and video evidence from the site of the events under consideration, unambiguously show that these accusations are lies, from beginning to end, and you can be certain of it.

1) I and the others accused, now unjustly convicted, did not participate in any sort of protest, if only because in the area where the events took place no one was planning any sort of protest.

2) I and the other victims of this criminal attack did not have the chance to “obey” or “disobey” any sort of request, since no request was ever made of us by any of those individuals who illegally deprived us of our freedom.

3) I and the other citizens who were illegally deprived of their freedom could not have “resisted” or “not resisted” “police personnel”, since we were attacked by individuals dressed in civilian clothes, who categorically refused to either identify themselves or explain the objective or meaning of their actions, and I saw the police only at a distance, from which they had no contact with me.

Nonetheless, I can absolutely assure you that neither I nor any of those who joined in my misfortune offered any kind of resistance.

The records of arrest and administrative infraction were compiled under a mass of flagrant violations of procedure. Despite my request, I was not given a copy of the record of arrest. The time of arrest was improperly recorded - we were arrested at 6:00 p.m., but the records of arrest showed it occurring at 6:45 p.m. In the report of administrative infraction there is no signature by the so-called witness, OMON officer Fomin, to the effect that he had been informed of his rights and responsibilities.

I can imagine the reason why the so-called witness Fomin’s signature is not on the report. I would not be surprised if this so-called witness Fomin not only never held the report in is hands, but was not even present at the events described in it.

At the Krasnoselskiy precinct detention cell, my rights as a detained person were repeatedly and grossly violated. In the course of the two days I spent there, the people detained were never offered any food. The space where over 20 people were held was not equipped with any place to sleep, and we were given no blankets. We had to sleep on tables and the floor, often taking turns.

Conditions were worsened by the fact that during the two days we were in the cell the air temperature remained extremely low, to the point that I was extremely incapacitated due to low body temperature.

And finally, third: The illegal treatment of me and the other citizens was not limited to an attack by unidentified assailants on Chistoprudniy Boulevard, illegal detention in the Krasnoselskiy precinct holding cell, falsification of accusations and multiple violations of our rights as detainees.

The culmination of this flagrant abuse of power occurred right here, within these very walls. Fourteen times the honorable judge Skuridina heard the testimony of witnesses and agreed or refused to consider photographic and video evidence proving the innocence of the accused. Repeatedly, within these very walls, supposed witnesses for the prosecution - the authors of the police reports - appeared and every time were unambiguously exposed as being fraudulent, having irreconcilable contradictions in their testimonies, etc.

In spite of this, all 14 cases ended in guilty verdicts, and absolutely unfounded and unjust sentences and fines, handed down by the honorable judge Skuridina. Justice deserted us in these four walls; in its place came lawlessness and abuse of power.

From the Basman Court, Judge I.A. Skuridina presiding:

1. Oleg Kozlovskiy - 13 days (hunger strike announced)

2. Karen Makmuryan - 7 days

3. Aleksandr Vaynshteyn - 6 days

4. Maksim Polyakov - 5 days

5. Ivan Afonin - 6 days (hunger strike announced)

6. Vladimir Akimenkov - 6 days

7. Nikolay Novokhatskiy - 6 days

8. Vyacelslav Yeliseev - 5 days

9. Kirill Ananev - 4 days

10. Vladimir Michurin - 4 days

11. Vyaceslav Mertsalov - 3 days

12. Dmitriy Potapov - 2 days

13. Andrey Malitskiy - fine of 1,000 rubles

14. Anna Chernobylskaya - fine of 1,000 rubles.

I am absolutely innocent, and deserve only complete exoneration. But I have no objective reason to expect that consideration of my case will result in anything but anoter addition to the endless list of unjust sentences handed down within these walls. It is not in vain that the term “Basman Court” has become synonymous with injustice and abuse of power.

The ones who are really guilty in this abuse of power - to the last one - sooner or later will stand before a real court and answer for their crimes to the full severity of the Law.

Thank you for your attention.

NOTE: Our Original Translator also discovered the following short video related to the piece on the Grani.ru website. It's about the same farce of a trial, showing the names and sentences handed down to the Oborona activists, against a black background, while Medvedev drones on with a patriotic speech in a cathedral.

Though Garry Kasparov may have outlived his usefulness as a real-world political leader on the ground in Russia, nobody can doubt that he writes a mean newspaper column in English. Writing in the Los Angeles Times, he gets Oleg Kozlovsky once again into a major world newspaper, and delivers a ringing condemnation of Russia's new "president":

Dmitry Medvedev was sworn in Wednesday as the president of Russia. Many reports have stated that this is his first elected office, an ignorant portrayal at best. The March 2 presidential election was widely recognized as a fraudulent charade. The presidency was assigned to Medvedev, in the same way he gained his previous titles -- as outgoing President Vladimir V. Putin's campaign manager, chief of staff and deputy prime minister. After the ceremony, Medvedev returned the favor and made Putin prime minister.

Putin has balked when asked if he would follow the tradition of government officials hanging the sitting president's portrait in their offices. But the joke going around is that he will indeed have one: a portrait of Medvedev in the president's office looking at a portrait of Putin.

According to the Russian Constitution, Medvedev is now in charge. But until there is evidence of his independence and authority, it is safe to assume that Medvedev still needs Putin's permission to use the Kremlin lavatory. The real "smooth transition of power" was moving Putin from the presidency to prime minister.

We can expect a few proclamations and perhaps even token policy changes. Unfortunately, the early signs show that Medvedev's statement about developing civil freedoms and ending "legal nihilism" were only a show for the West. Such displays are needed to offset elections with the results known in advance, lack of media freedom and businessgrowth that only benefits Kremlin loyalists. Otherwise, Putin's gang of oligarchs might lose easy access to billions in looted assets held in the West. So far, though, as Putin learned over the last eight years, there is no such danger. Russia pretends to be a democracy, and the United States and the European Union pretend to believe Russia is a democracy.

That morally repugnant pact is not working so well for those of us fighting for real democracy here. The day before Medvedev took power, several dozen people were arrested simply for being in the general area of a planned rally that had already been canceled. The police had promised that no one would be detained if the rally was called off; apparently they did not receive Medvedev's message about civil freedoms in time.

Oleg Kozlovsky, a member of the Other Russia opposition coalition leadership, was given 13 days in prison. Arrest reports for him came from two officers, each giving a different time and place of arrest. According to the judge, this curious fact "was not related to the case." A photojournalist working for the Russian paper Izvestia was sentenced to six days in prison for trying to do his job.

It is essential to resist the temptation to give this new/old Kremlin regime the benefit of the doubt. Let us not pretend Medvedev was truly elected or that we know anything about him. Far more is known about Barack Obama's former pastor. Medvedev is tainted from the start by his membership in Putin's dictatorial Kremlin regime. Action, not words, will establish whether he is his own man.

For that action to be meaningful, Medvedev must give immediate attention to these issues: He must free the long list of political prisoners who were jailed as Putin developed his dictatorship by KGB cronyism. Mikhail Khodorkovsky and other members of the Yukos Oil Co. management are the most prominent names, but there are also scientists convicted on spurious espionage charges and activists whose only crime was speaking out against the Kremlin. And the new president must act against the wave of hate crimes that have claimed 40 lives this year, mostly immigrants or nonwhite Russians. Homicidal neo-Nazi gangs roam the streets while pro-democracy marchers are locked up.

The basic human right of thinking and speaking one's mind has been drastically curtailed in Russia over the last eight years. The real test of Medvedev's presidency will be the way in which he deals with his most vocal critics. Other Russia is planning to hold a national assembly on May 17 in Moscow to facilitate dialogue on the most relevant problems and to determine a national agenda by bringing together representatives of diverse social forces, including those with opposite interests. We will also continue our street protests across Russia.

Will our activists still be harassed and detained for handing out pamphlets? Will our people still be followed by the security services? Will our peaceful actions again be violently dispersed by police? Will we again be denied access to legal counsel after being arrested? Will the courts continue to rubber-stamp our prosecutions? Until we have the answers to those questions, there is no reason to take Medvedev's word about anything.

The International Herald Tribune reports:

Dmitry Medvedev, Russia's president-elect, has preached freedom and the rule of law, and raised hopes for an end to government pressure on opposition leaders, rights advocates and businesses whose assets the Kremlin wants to control.But events of past weeks are adding to mounting suspicions that Medvedev's presidency may not be all that different from that of his steely-eyed predecessor — Vladimir Putin. [LR: In other words, Medvedev is clearly a mendacious liar]

Since Medvedev's election on March 2, authorities have continued to crack down on human rights activists and political critics. Nor did the election halt the targeting of foreign firms that control major Russian assets, like the British-Russian joint venture TNK-BP.

What is not clear is to what extent the events reflect the continuing influence of Putin and his allies or Medvedev's silent support for Putin's policies.

"Medvedev today is Putin yesterday. There is no change in the regime whatsoever," veteran human rights campaigner Lev Ponomaryev said.

Authorities in the central city of Nizhny Novgorod on Thursday seized computer servers of a longtime campaigner against rights abuses in Chechnya. Stanislav Dmitriyevsky, who has been repeatedly targeted for arrest, said the seizure coincided with searches at apartments of several activists from the Other Russia coalition.

In Russia's second largest city, St. Petersburg, a leader of the liberal political party Yabloko was jailed for nearly three weeks for allegedly interfering with police in a case supporters said was tied to his work organizing an opposition conference. A court on Friday ordered Maxim Reznik's release pending trial.

Officials also have searched the party's St. Petersburg headquarters looking for materials that allegedly could be considered extremist — a broad legal term that activists say is used for politically motivated prosecutions.

Other groups report similar pressure. Oleg Kozlovsky, who says he was drafted into the army because of his work with the activist group Oborona, told Ekho Moskvy radio that authorities were trying to evict him from his Moscow apartment, in retaliation for his activities.

Investigators continue to press their case against Mikhail Kasyanov, the former prime minister who was denied a spot on the presidential ballot. Officials accuse him of falsifying signatures on nominating petitions, and his supporters say authorities plans to file criminal charges in an effort to discredit him.

"We've seen in this last two months what the freedom (Medvedev) talks about really means," Andrei Illarionov, a former economic adviser to Putin and now a prominent critic, told reporters Thursday. "Are there any examples of real actions, not just words, that someone can use as proof that Medvedev is a liberal person, economically, politically or over civil rights?"

Medvedev has been credited with supporting more liberal economic and business policies. He reportedly supported, for example, easing restrictions in a bill to limit foreign ownership of Russian publishing companies and Internet providers.

But Medvedev also heads the gas giant OAO Gazprom, the state-controlled monopoly that has continued to play hardball tactics in negotiations over contracts to supply Ukraine with natural gas. Europe, which gets most of its Russian gas via Ukrainian pipeline, has accused Russia of using its energy assets as a political tool.

On Thursday, Russia's top security agency announced that two brothers with dual Russian-U.S. citizenship had been charged with industrial espionage involving Russian oil and gas fields. One of the brothers works for TNK-BP, the British-Russian joint venture whose Siberian fields are coveted by Kremlin-allied business interests.

In recent years, the government has used regulatory and criminal investigations to pressure major energy companies into ceding assets to state-controlled companies.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Krivtsov tried to tamp speculation that the arrest of the TNK-BP worker was linked to troubled ties between Moscow and London. "There's no sense in searching for links between events that are in no way connected to each other," he was quoted by RIA-Novosti as saying.

Many, particularly in the West, pointed to Medvedev's background — lawyer, university professor, business executive — hoping that the Kremlin's hard-line domestic and foreign policies might soften with his election.

In a pre-election speech, Medvedev promised to champion media freedom, strengthen the judicial system and reform criminal legislation. He returned to those themes Wednesday in an address before the Public Chamber, an advisory body created by the Kremlin.

"A mature civil society is a vital necessity, a foundation, a guarantee of stable development of our nation," he said. "And our task is to create a system when civil society groups participate in setting the government course and assessing its efficiency."

Some observers wonder if Medvedev is just paying lip service to liberal ideals. Putin himself has warned that the West should not expect Medvedev to be a more compliant partner.

Medvedev won't formally take the reins of power until after his May 7 inauguration, and any change in Kremlin policies and practices — if they come — may come only gradually, and only after Medvedev installs his own team in positions of power.

But Putin is expected to become prime minister, and it remains to be seen whether Medvedev will try to alter his predecessor's course. To do so, he may have to dislodge the siloviki — veterans, like Putin, of the intelligence, police and military services — whom Putin has installed in positions of power.

Meanwhile, debate is growing among Russia's often fractious opposition groups as to how to continue their fight under Medvedev.

Ponomaryev predicted the Kremlin will seek to create a puppet opposition to create the appearance of a political counterbalance and quiet critics. That theory was bolstered earlier this month by a rare public meeting between Putin and Grigory Yavlinsky, the leader of the national Yabloko party who, like other opposition figures, has been shut out of politics.

Some opposition groups berated Yavlinsky, who defended himself by saying he raised Reznik's arrest with Putin.

"There is a crisis among the opposition," said Garry Kasparov, the former chess champion who has waged a determined, though largely ineffectual campaign against Putin. "A party that considers itself to be in opposition ought to behave in quite a different manner."

Oleg Kozlovsky, writing on Robert Amsterdam's blog, outlines the prospects for integrating and coordinating Russia's heretofore impotent opposition forces:

Early April marked a new wave of opposition coalition building. Three events took place in each of the three main political camps. Liberals gathered in St. Petersburg on 5 April, the leftists met in Moscow on 6 April and the nationalists had their convention on 12 April. The goal of each of these events was to unite the majority of political forces of the corresponding wings.

"Why do they want to evict the leader
of Oborona from his apartment?"

An interview with Oleg Kozlovsky

By Matvey Ganapolsky & Masha Mayers

Echo of Moscow Radio (Audio Link Available)

Originally Aired March 18, 2008

GANAPOLSKY: Our guest today is the leader of the movement "Oborona" -- Oleg Kozlovsky. Greetings.

KOZLOVSKY: Good afternoon.

GANAPOLSKY: Tell us your story.

KOZLOVSKY: Well first of all, I heard your announcement today, and it was not completely accurate. So I think it would be best if I started from the very beginning. The problem is that the apartment I rent is located in the Khamovnika region of Moscow. Activists of the "Oborona" movement meet there fairly frequently, as do activists from a variety of other organizations, for example the group organizing the demonstration "For a Volunteer Army." Yesterday I was summoned to meet with a local police officer named Sergei Alekseevich Nikolaev.

MAYERS: Did you bring a tape recorder with you?

KOZLOVSKY: That has not been my habit up to now, but perhaps I should have, because it was very interesting conversation. What most impressed me was the man's frankness. I had expected that there would be a problem of some sort, but usually they try at least outwardly to maintain a certain neutrality and legality, and look for some kind of normal justification that will make them seem more-or-less decent. But this time everything was right out in the open. Cynical and plain. In a way I almost have to thank him for not being sneaky about it.

He began: "I've been told that an organization meets at your place, 'The March of Those Who Disagree', and a magazine where this organization is also talked about. Here's the magazine, 'Oborona', which this group publishes. And it is my understanding that this is an undesirable organization for us here." This is the usual basis for these sorts of complaints. "Now you understand," he continued, "the Kremlin is located not far from where you live." The Kremlin, in fact, is some distance away. But this is the Centralniy District, you see. "He himself may drive by." And here he did not even mention the name, but simply motioned to Putin's portrait on the wall. "You never can tell what might happen. So you should move somewhere out to Butovo, or better yet Zelenograd. There are a lot of regions somewhere further away, but not here. You shouldn't be here. And I am going to do everything I can to make you leave quickly."

So I said, "We have a completely legal, official rental agreement. We have every right to remain here until July. We are not violating any laws."

"I understand completely," replied the policeman. "I will not interfere in your civil rights. But I think that you need to revoke your contract. This should be considered a force-majeure situation."

At the same time, they began putting pressure on my landlords. They told them that an extremist organization was located in their building. That they were practically preparing acts of terrorism. I was told that if I did not leave voluntarily they would turn to the homeowners of the building, who would write complaints that we were loud, held drunken parties, engaged in debauchery, and bothered everyone. That I would be visited every day by the police, who would conduct searches and force everyone to submit written explanations for their presence. In general, they would use every means to force us to leave. The policeman added that he would send reports to the FSB, MVD headquarters, and every other agency of that type, in which he would include any political publications that mentioned "Oborona", so that they too would take part in this process. In other words, the situation was made absolutely clear, with no attempt at creating any kind of legal basis. Just a completely brazen, simple, cynical racket or more exactly - blackmail.

MAYERS: So you didn't actually engage in any drunkenness or debauchery there? It's a little hard to imagine, given that hot-blooded young men from the "Oborona" movement were gathering in your apartment to talk about the current realities in Russia.

GANAPOLSKY: How do you know they were hot-blooded?

MAYERS: And maybe with girls too. Are you sure you never raised your voices there?

KOZLOVSKY: Our hot-blooded young men and women know all too well that we are under constant scrutiny, that we need to cross the road at the right place, so that no one will take notice of us and detain us. We've had things like that happen to us, where the OMON riot police have detained us literally for crossing the street in the wrong spot. So obviously, in the places where we meet, we strictly adhere to the letter of the law, so as not to give them the slightest cause to pick on us.

GANAPOLSKY: What does you landlord think about all this?

KOZLOVSKY: I spoke with my landlords about all this in fairly great detail even before this conversation, and they were inclined to abide by the rental agreement, at least until it expires in July. But after that, they said, we'll have to wait and see.

GANAPOLSKY: And what was the result of the pressure they put on your neighbors?

KOZLOVSKY: I don't know yet. But I think it is entirely likely that they will start writing things, because people do not usually want to argue with police, and in any Moscow entryway you can find one resident or another who will gladly create a stink against anyone. Especially if you tell them that these people present a great danger, are criminals and extremists, and may blow up your building any day now.

GANAPOLSKY: We can imagine that his will be set in motion too, because once someone decides to take up this task, it becomes his sacred mission. It's also possible that the policeman is being pressured himself to get you out of there. Do you plan to leave, or do you have any way of defending yourself?

KOZLOVSKY: Legally, and according to my rental agreement, we have the right to remain in this place for as long as the agreement is in force, and we plan to do that. If they try to evict us by some illegal means, we will defend ourselves. Both by all legal means, and simply physically, we will hold onto this place, because the police have no legal grounds for their demands.

GANAPOLSKY: But what if the landlords on their own revoke the contract, claiming that they have a sick grandmother coming in from Narofominsk?

KOZLOVSKY: Then that will be decided in court. Until the court decides that there is actually some legal basis for evicting us, we will stay here. We have fulfilled all our obligations, and we continue to fulfill them. We have always paid our rent on time. So there is not going to be any backing down on our side.

GANAPOLSKY: A lot of our radio listeners probably do not know about your movement. What are your aims, your goals?

KOZLOVSKY: On the one hand our aims are enormous, on the other hand they are nothing less than absolutely necessary. These are, foremost, the establishment in Russia of a political system which will allow regular citizens to have an influence on events in the country, on who they elect, on what these elected representatives do; a system that will provide a return channel of communication between the government and the people. Right now there is nothing like that. I don't think anyone right now entertains any illusions about the influence we can have on any of the country's decisions.

GANAPOLSKY: So what are you going to do about it? Where's the struggle?

KOZLOVSKY: First of all, this is, of course, about working with people, with society. Because the root of the problem is always buried there: In the fact that our people usually either do not know their rights, or are afraid to defend them; in how our people often take it as normal that the government is allowed to treat them like dirt - at best, as nothing more than tax-providers. So we work through the Internet, carry out protests, try and reach people through the mass media. We also go out and distribute leaflets, newspapers and bumper stickers to young people, students, and those who have finished, let's say, college. And in this way we make contact with a fairly large number of people in Russia. Probably tens of thousands of people every year.

GANAPOLSKY: And how many of you are there?

KOZLOVSKY: There are about one thousand of us in Russia.

GANAPOLSKY: Do you ever get the sense that this campaign of repression that is underway is not directed against your movement, against your one-thousand people, but against you personally? I'm thinking of your story with the army. And now with your apartment.

KOZLOVSKY: The story with the army recently came to a complete close. Exactly two weeks ago I told you here how it went. In December I was illegally inducted into the army for two and a half months. I was released just two days after the end of the elections, when it became clear, in their opinion, that I no longer presented any particular threat.

MAYERS: But as you can see, you do present a threat. Especially with your logo.

KOZLOVSKY: I don't think this is just about me. I may be a sort of additional irritant, but one soldier does not make a battle. I don't think that as just Oleg Kozlovsky I have the power to irritate anyone. More likely, it is the activities of the organization itself, its various members, who continued the organization's activities in my absence and continue them now after my return. And, to be sure, this complicates the lives of the authorities.

GANAPOLSKY: Who are your role models? Or is it to each his own?

KOZLOVSKY: I would not call any of the current crop of politicians our role model, hero or leader, either formally or informally. That's because we are made up of a lot of different types of people, with different sympathies and interests. Our people have many different points of view. There are liberals, those of a leftist point of view, and patriots. But I think that in our methods or perhaps in the way we view our work, we are closest to Mahatma Gandhi - with whom Putin never would have had anything to say, by the way. But if for Putin this was just a joke, we regard Gandhi's activities with absolute seriousness. These were the sort of people who, resolutely without the use of force, and guided by their ideals, fought for their ideals.

GANAPOLSKY: Let's take a vote. Sitting here with us is Oleg Kozlovsky, and I want to ask everyone: What do you think, should Mr. Kozlovsky, along with his comrades and his magazines, and his singing of revolutionary hymns - not too loud, mind you, so that now one should hear what they are doing - should he be forced to leave this apartment.

MAYERS: A bad one.

KOZLOVSKY: Yes. And the further away the better. Because God only knows what they are doing in there. He says one thing, but maybe they are doing something completely different.

(Break for instructions on voting by telephone.)

GANAPOLSKY: I would like to hear from just those listeners who believe that the demands made of Kozlovsky are justified. You need to call and say: "Oh, you poor young man, sitting in this apartment out of love for liberalism. Then some monsters come and throw grenades in it, but that's entirely understandable." Those of you who think that Kozlovsky and people like him, who generally, to be honest...

KOZLOVSKY: Need to move at least 101 kilometers outside Moscow.

GANAPOLSKY: I didn't say it, he himself said it! Call and you can tell Mr. Kozlovsky himself what a bad guy he is. Because there is a certain percentage of our listeners, and not just the young ones, who think that he and his friends should get out. Hello.

LISTENER: Good afternoon. Mikhail. City of Moscow. I think these young people should leave the apartment. Stop all their private activities. Residential buildings are for living in, whereas these sorts of meetings...

GANAPOLSKY: Understood. This is not an office. It's an apartment, not an office.

KOZLOVSKY: Right. Let me explain why we have the right to be there. The "Oborona" movement is not registered, so there is no violation of the law. It is not required to register by law. Accordingly, it has no legal identity, and therefore cannot rent an office, apartment, hall, or anything.

GANAPOLSKY: There you have it.

KOZLOVSKY: But we have the constitutional right to assemble.

GANAPOLSKY: Next caller.

CALLER: Hello, this is Semyon. These kids are doing what they can, and I think what they are doing is completely normal and good. The authorities think we are all just so much trash...

GANAPOLSKY: I asked that only those who think that he should leave should call! Anyway, whatever the authorities may think of someone, whatever you allow yourself to be called, and that's what you become. The authorities do not consider me, for example, trash, because I don't allow them to. And apparently you don't allow them to either.

MAYERS: And Oleg Kozlovsky so far is not allowing them to evict him from his apartment to somewhere 101 kilometers outside Moscow.

GANAPOLSKY: They haven't tried to yet.

MAYERS: What do you mean, of course they have.

GANAPOLSKY: Hello. Greetings.

LISTENER: Where is this Kozlov registered, anyway?

GANAPOLSKY: First, you need to start with the phrase, "Good afternoon."

LISTENER: Good afternoon.

GANAPOLSKY: Secondly, you need to introduce yourself.

LISTENER: Moscow. Konstantin.

GANAPOLSKY: And third, it's not Kozlov, it's Kozlovsky.

LISTENER: Where is he registered?

KOZLOVSKY: I am registered at the apartment where my parents live, in Moscow.

LISTENER: Then go to your parents' apartment and hold your meetings there.

GANAPOLSKY: Why?

LISTENER: Well, who needs him here anyway?

GANAPOLSKY: Who do you mean by "who"?

MAYERS: And where is here?

LISTENER: Well, in this building.

GANAPOLSKY: Well, who needs you on this radio program?

LISTENER: F--k you.

GANAPOLSKY: You heard him, right?

MAYERS: I had nothing to cover my ears with.

GANAPOLSKY: Yeah, they're out there.

MAYERS: And I so adore them.

GANAPOLSKY: Go get your prostrate gland massaged, Konstantin - believe me, it will help. Next question.

LISTENER: Good afternoon. Aleksandr, in Ivanteevka. I think the authorities are proceeding absolutely correctly, even if it is by an illegal route. Because all of Russian history shows that from meetings like this both the "will of the people" and the Bolsheviks can gather together and pick away at the authorities. So of course they have to nip it in the bud.

GANAPOLSKY: You really think that?

LISTENER: Yes.

GANAPOLSKY: Well let's talk about this. Maybe you have a point.

KOZLOVSKY: This is a very good commentary. The caller exceptionally well, in my view, reflects the official position: "So what if it is illegal, it's still the right thing to do." And here lies our problem. For us, the law was not written for the government to abide by. The law applies only to individuals. And it can be used against them.

LISTENER: That's absolutely right. Because in this country, we live under a practically totalitarian government. So what's surprising is...

GANAPOLSKY: Wait a minute. You're being ironic. You're telling a joke.

LISTENER: No, I'm not joking.

GANAPOLSKY: Which side did you vote on?

KOZLOVSKY: That he should be evicted.

GANAPOLSKY: Explain why that is so. Kozlovsky has said that there is no real legal basis for this. So?

MAYERS: But you are saying maybe not under the law, but by an understanding.

LISTENER: Why by an understanding?

MAYERS: You said: "It's not legal, but it's right."

LISTENER: Because every government has to defend itself. That's what it was created for.

MAYERS: It was created for that?

KOZLOVSKY: I thought the government was supposed to be used to defend us, its citizens.

LISTENER: We are talking about Russia. Let's not make references to the western experience...

MAYERS: Any person should be defended from other people.

GANAPOLSKY: There are listeners who play this game. He's say, sure, if we were in America, then of course they should fire this policeman. But since we live in Russia, it's completely understandable. And that explains why you should be kicked out of your apartment. In other words, he's generally a liberal, but in this case he will explain why you need to be kicked out. This is very elaborate. You won't be able to grasp this, Kozlovsky. You're out there with your Oborona, working with the people, but we have such a unique group of people here on the air.

KOZLOVSKY: All our people are unique.

MAYERS: Sending Lenin into exile was great. But they should have sent the Decembrists out
too, for example, well before 14 December - many kilometers out.

GANAPOLSKY: Okay. We need to finish up. You are gradually going to become a regular on "Echo Moscow" radio programs. Because first they haul you off somewhere, then they try to kick you out of somewhere else. First into the army - instead of kicking you out, they hauled you off. And now you’re back in your apartment, and instead of just leaving you alone, they try to kick you out. What's a guy to do?

MAYERS: The vote is finished. By 82% to 18%, listeners do not support the position of the authorities.

GANAPOLSKY: Thanks for coming. As you know, we can't draw any conclusions from this program. And we also can neither support nor condemn you. This is just civil society, such as it is. And you see what it is.

MAYERS: How civil it is.

KOZLOVSKY: Thank you.

GANAPOLSKY: But we gave you some airtime so you could tell us about the moral values of this great land, which is getting up off its knees in such an unusual way.

Grigory Pasko, reporting on Robert Amsterdam about the latest persecution of Oleg Kozlovsky (he's working on a new English-language blog, as noted above, for reasons that will become obvious upon reading of the most recent barbaric horror visited upon him by the Kremlin; the blog contains a translation of his interview with Echo of Moscow radio just before the raid described below).

We have recently reported here on the blog about the search conducted by the local police of a human rights center in Chita. In that same article, we reported on the police threats to evict coordinator of the youth movement «Oborona» Oleg Kozlovsky from an apartment.

Just a few days later, this threat was realized by the Moscow police. On Saturday, 22 March, Oleg Kozlovsky and several of his close associates were detained by employees of the Moscow police and sent off to the Division of Internal Affairs (OVD). Eyewitnesses reported that the activists of the movement «Oborona» were treated very roughly; they were pulled and dragged along the ground and the asphalt, and then seated in a police car.

Robert Amsterdam publishes a post written by Oborona youth opposition leader Oleg Kozlovsky:

In expectation of the inauguration of Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian siloviki structures are conducting their latest “mopping up” of the opposition not under their control. The hopes of optimists for a “thaw” are being demolished by these police operations.

On 17 March, I had a talk with officer of the militia Sergey Nikolayev, the policeman responsible for one of the precincts of Moscow. In this precinct is being rented an apartment, where meetings of the movement «Oborona» take place. Lying on the desk in the policeman’s small office as “material evidence” are newspapers put out by the organizers of the «Dissenters’ Marches» and «Oborona». Hanging on the wall, side by side, are portraits of Vladimir Putin and Felix Dzerzhinsky, the founder of the Cheka – the foremother of the KGB. In August 1991, the whole world watched as the monument to “Iron Felix” was taken down on Lubyanka Square, accompanied by the jubilant cheers of a crowd of thousands. Now, the likeness of this hangman is quietly returning to many offices. And it never even left some of them, not for a minute.

The candidness and the audacity of the threats that are coming out of captain Nikolayev’s mouth are unusual even for me. He says straight out that on his territory there must not be any opposition organizations and that soon there won’t be any «Oborona» there either. The policeman promises to arrange daily checks of the space and to organize pressure on the owners of the apartment. For greater effect, he intends to involve in the process higher-standing structures of the MVD and the FSB, to which he is specially sending specimens of those same newspapers «Dissenters’ March» and «Oborona». “You’ve got no business doing anything in the center of the city; after all, he might drive by here”, says the officer, unable to decide whether to pronounce the name of Putin, and merely pointing with his gaze at his portrait. The guardian of the law doesn’t even try to find some kind of legal grounds for his demands; he is simply confident in his impunity.

On the next day, I get a phone call from the owner of the apartment. I can hear disquiet and fear in her voice. She asks to cancel the lease contract: she doesn’t need problems with the police. I explain that the actions of the police are unlawful and constitute blackmail. “But you know what kind of country we live in and in what times!”, she exclaims despairingly. On a human level, I feel sorry for this woman: she has always been loyal to the power, didn’t go to the Dissenters’ Marches, and has patiently borne all the humiliations that the state subjected her to. Nevertheless, she too has turned out to be a passing victim in the struggle of the siloviki with the democratic opposition.

During the times of Felix Dzerzhinsky, people liked to say about this sort of thing: “When you chop wood, chips fly”. But isn’t it shameful to be a “chip”? Innocent victims of the repressions can evoke only pity, but those who have suffered for their consciously-taken position and for trying to change something – these evoke respect and admiration. Luckily, there still are not a few people in Russia who do not find the role of chips in a forest acceptable.

In actuality, there is no benefit whatsoever to the power from such “wood chopping”. Okay, maybe it will help keep them warm… It is naïve to assume that you can annihilate «Oborona» by kicking it out from this space. Instead of this, we will gather in the apartments of activists, in cafés and parks, each time choosing a new place. If before, there was an outdoor surveillance car on duty under the movement’s windows for days at a time, now it will be much more complicated to keep a watch on «Oborona».

On the other hand, with such an example Vladimir Putin’s regime demonstrates its most unsightly features: arbitrariness, lawlessness, cynicism, intolerance of another’s opinion, indifference to the fates of ordinary people. They are pushing «Oborona» into a semi-underground state, but in this way it only becomes more attractive for young romantics: in the depths of their soul, everybody wants to be a part of something secret, prohibited, inaccessible to the majority. The power, by its own stupidity and cruelty, is once again creating martyrs for itself and making its enemies stronger. One day, the lumberjack is going to get crushed when he chops down one tree too many