#dnaEdit: A political killing

Unfortunately, Russia stands beyond the pale of democratic countries even a quarter-century after the fall of totalitarian Communism. The killing of Boris Nemtsov, who has been a prominent politician for over a decade, starting out under the wings of Boris Yeltsin, in Moscow last Friday confirms the misgiving that Russia, true to its Czarist and Stalinist image, is a politically ruthless and murderous country. Nemtsov is a political insider of the post-Soviet era, who had been a deputy Prime Minister and a provincial governor. He has emerged as a strong opponent  of Putin’s authoritarian ways and an opponent of Russia’s war in Ukraine. There is no forensic proof at this stage that the murder of Nemtsov was carried out by the agents of the State. It is unlikely that it will ever be established. It does not, however, hide the gory truth that it has been a long established historical  practice, through the Tsarist-Stalinist periods to the present, that political opponents were killed and no questions were ever raised. 

Putin may feign both ignorance and innocence about who killed Nemtsov, and who killed journalist Anna Politkovskaya in Moscow, Alexander Litvinenko in London in 2006. A former Kremlin aide has argued on the Al Jazeera website that Nemtsov was reduced to a marginal player, that he had passed his peak in the late 1990s, and that Putin had nothing to gain from getting him killed in so obvious a fashion. It will be necessary to keep in mind the truly Byzantine nature of Russian politics. There is, however, no doubt that critics and opponents of the government get killed from time to time and this alone makes Russia a dangerous polity.

Russia’s internal politics cannot be separated from its foreign relations. Anna Politkovskaya was a strong critic of Kremlin’s Chechen policy, and Nemtsov opposed its Ukraine stand. It will be easy for Russia’s foreign critics to condemn the killing of Nemtsov as well as Putin’s stand on Ukraine. Russia’s Ukraine stand has to be assessed and criticised on its own terms. Nemtsov’s assassination raises issues specifically with regard to Russia’s domestic politics. Nemtsov and others are being seen as liberal, in the pejorative sense, politicians and that they do not count. Liberalism and its individualist credo has not become an effective political force in Russia. To be a democracy, as it is generally understood in polities across the world, Russia will have to create space for liberalism and individualism. 

The path of democracy in post-Communist era has been quite erratic. A bunch of staunch liberals have been holding ground against all odds, and many of them, like Politkovskaya and Nemtsov, had paid with their lives. It may not be enough to demonise Putin because it will not serve the purpose. The problems of democracy and authoritarianism in Russia go beyond individuals. The presence of thousands of mourners at Nemtsov’s funeral on Tuesday is a clear signal that Russians are not willing to be silent and passive spectators, and they are willing to be seen protesting against a political killing. It is again a positive sign that there are dissenting voices inside Russia against the government’s policy in Chechnya and in Ukraine. It is a fact that the dissenters as yet have not attained critical mass. This is indeed the weakness of Russian democracy. This cannot be remedied by Western critique. Russians will have to create the liberal space themselves.  If the people understand the need of liberal values and work for it, then the deaths of Politkovskaya and Nemtsov would not go in vain.