The HRO should be patient

Danuta Pshivara – Chairman of the Board of the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights, a sociologist, worked first in the architectural bureau in the construction department, then at the Institute of Psychology, Polish Academy of Sciences. At the beginning of the “Solidarity” 80 was a member of the mediation committee in the department of MAZ. Since 1982, member of the Helsinki Committee in Poland and co-author of his reports. In 1989, co-founder of the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights. Since 2008 a member of its board.

– At the Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights vast experience of cooperation with non-governmental organizations in Russia. The necessary experience?

– The question of whether or not to cooperate with the Russian organizations operating with a view to the development of democracy and protection of human rights, has always touched me. After all, we should not forget that the world’s first Helsinki Committee was the Moscow Helsinki Group. A few months after the signing of the Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe in Helsinki in 1975. Soviet dissidents decided to set up this informal group as a “watchdog”. These were people who had already irritated the authorities and tried to remind about freedom and human rights in the Soviet Union, among them apart from all others was Andrey Dmitrievich Saharov, Yuriy Fodorovich Orlov, Elena Georgievna Bonner and Lyudmila Mihaylovna Alekseeva. Conference, which initiated the creation of the Moscow Helsinki Group, they held on the Red Square. The name of one of the founders of the Group, Andreya Saharova, is today the prize for freedom of thought of the European Union. The group has set a goal to check the extent to which authority is complying with its Helsinki obligations to respect human rights and freedoms. And although the first time, the Group did not last long, most of its members were arrested, some were sent to the camps, while others were forced to emigrate. But after Russia were also other Helsinki Group, Sweden, Austria, the UK and Poland. Some were sent to labor camps, others were forced to emigrate. But after Russia were also other Helsinki Group, Sweden, Austria, the UK and Poland. Some were sent to labor camps, others were forced to emigrate. But after Russia were also other Helsinki Group, Sweden, Austria, the UK and Poland.

– In Poland in 1989, turned out to transform the country, can not be said about Ukraine or Russia.

– Do not think about it in terms of “one-two and ready to go!” It is said that Poland was called “the most cheerful barracks of the socialist camp.” The reason for this was our struggle against the system. And as a result, something changed. It was June 56 th, March 68 th, December 70 th, August 80 th, the military situation in ’81 and only after 1989. We made two steps forward and one step back. Again and again. We have the right to travel abroad and can see how life in the West. The Russians, fortunately, too, can go. It should be part of the process of persuasion of the fact that our vision of how to live better.

– Poland has specific responsibilities in relation to Russia?

– says, “We, the Poles, against Russia …” causes a number of unwanted emotions. I just think that our sacred duty to give what we ourselves once received from the democratic countries. It is the duty of man to man. Not only to Russians, but also to Azerbaijanis, Armenians, Belarusians, Ukrainians, Turkmens, Uzbeks, Kyrgyz, Kazakhs and Tajiks. Of course, if we restrict ourselves in the arguments to the territory of the former USSR.

– However, I often hear the opinion not to equip their lives, as we do, these people have a very different mentality.

– And what do they like to be humiliated and tortured, right? What they do not like to rely on the court’s decision? They do not want to be treated fairly? And say what you think, but the happiest are those who are imprisoned or sent to labor camps? Conducted a lot of discussion on the topic of universality of rights and freedoms. I constantly hear about the cultural and historical differences, that the liberal conception of human rights and freedoms – is an attempt to impose on the countries with other traditions and history of the values ​​that are characteristic of our culture. I still insist that the Chinese, Koreans, nationals of different African countries, the people of Iraq, as well as Russian or Turkmen, do not like to be subjected to torture.

– But but 83% of Russians support Putin.

– And it’s probably approximate the results of sociological research. Russians in their belief pretty much lost after the 89th year. And they did not have the opportunity to feel that they have gained something. Democratic institutions in their country do not have time or until the end of form or get stronger. The inhabitants of Russian democracy is associated with a dashing 90-s, ie, with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the advent of the Yeltsin government. In short with a sense of insecurity, social or physical hazards. The old structure has collapsed, and the new has not yet appeared. That is, all of a sudden the Russians were in a country where the police no longer cope with what is happening, they are no longer time to pay wages and pensions, cleared of corruption, property division hardest hit by soldered to the principle of equality – and that with the fact that only imaginary. There was a group of oligarchs who snapped up a large part of their property. And the Russians are much stronger than the Poles, accustomed to the fact that all things in common and there is no private property. We have always been private property in land existed and handicraft, which shows that you can have something of their own, and at the expense of the living. Putin came to power gradually began to return to Russians “lost benefits.” Therefore it and support. His reign – this is for the Russians back to the feeling of being part of the empire, which are all considered. For Russians, it is very important. At the same time returned a sense of social protection. Salaries are listed in time, the pension – in time. And the loss of the opportunity to develop freedom and democracy? Many Russian citizens have not felt any benefits from the democratic rule of law, so it and do not get bored.

– Well, if they are happy …

– But this does not mean that people do not think about what could be better! I think about it a lot of people in Russia. There are at least more than ten percent of the citizens. It’s not enough! People who openly oppose what does the Kremlin, live in danger, but still working. Quote, Lyudmilu Mihaylovnu Alekseevu, who after the annexation of Crimea wrote: “Brothers and sisters from Ukraine, excuse us, we ask for forgiveness, we are ashamed for what does the army and the authorities of the Russian Federation. The truth is on your side. “It’s people like Ludmila pay Now the pain for what Putin does, and can pay even more for the opposition to it. We must stand with them shoulder to shoulder.

– What price for the work of non-governmental organizations from Poland can pay people like Alexeyev?

– In Russia, a number of laws, which is aimed at complicating the work of non-governmental organizations. Under these laws, any public organization, which is financed outside of the Russian Federation, and the activities which the government will assess how the political, although there are no precise criteria as to evaluate, must register as a “foreign agent” or it can be added to the list by the Ministry of agents Justice of the Russian Federation. But it remains unclear what fate awaits other organizations, which may also hang this stigma for accepting assistance from the West, not only financial.

– Does the law also applies to individual activists?

– If desired, all things are possible. If money will be transferred directly to the activist, it can be interpreted as a “benefit”. While that is not the case. However, the authoritarian state authorities may use any method, unless they want to. Including using the capabilities of other laws that have expanded the concept of “action at the expense of the Russian Federation” or even espionage. And there is in fact still the law significantly limits the field of action of organizations related to the LGBT community – their activists could be charged with “promoting homosexuality” and “homosexual propaganda”. Tools already exist. Not only still in use. Each one of us if he needs to answer the question himself, wants to leave them without help or will support?

– How to support?

Help, firstly, familiarize with their rights and freedoms, and secondly, democratic mechanisms that can stand in defense of their order. The Helsinki Foundation for Human Rights for many years working with the pro-democracy organizations and individuals in this area. We cooperate not only with those who are already convinced, but we try to reach out and to not yet convinced this.

– From the above you should be that careless cooperation could for partners in Russia become a threat by the authorities. What, then, look out for?

– Work with organizations from authoritarian countries certainly requires additional measures of confidentiality and special care. But about them, I just do not tell. That’s because in order not to expose people, ideas and projects. Disclosure of these rules would mean the infliction of harm, and certain affairs, and specific individuals.

– How to find a reliable partner organization?

– Communicate with different organizations and international platforms, gathering activists from different countries to communicate with organizations that are already many years working with partners there, closely monitor the performance of our colleagues from Russia, it is really visible.

– How not to harm their Russian partners?

– I think that here we have to rely on their assessment. It is they who must determine what we can and what can not. When and to what extent they are willing to take the risk and when not to. It is their life and their solutions. Our role – to support them and help them, not for them to decide and to put before a fait accompli.

– How, then, to start such cooperation?

– Does anyone have to learn. A few years ago there was a Civil Society Forum EU-Russia, which currently has more than 200 non-governmental organizations from the European Union and Russia. This forum was created four years ago. Earlier there was a program “Eastern Partnership” and the Civil Society Forum of “Eastern Partnership” as a social factor of maintaining the process of convergence of the EaP countries to the EU. For the balance, in order to artificially divide was created Cooperation Forum EU-Russia unites organizations that are already working with non-governmental organizations of the Russian Federation. How and whether to develop the possibility of cooperation in the light of the law on foreign agents and the sanctions imposed by the EU and the democratic community in the world with regard to Russia, I do not know.

– How much will need to wait for the results of this cooperation?

– As much as needs! Traits good “human rights defender” in Russian – is the courage, professionalism, integrity and, above all, patience. As Okudzhava sang – “one step forward and two steps back.” Our colleagues from the Russian Federation is very painful it is now experiencing, and we are working with them, too.

– This may discourage of Powerful.

– I myself for 34 years engaged in the protection of human rights. Marek Novitsky, a physicist, now deceased President of the Foundation, a very well known and respected among the activists in Eastern Europe, who introduced me into the swing of things, once wrote a text. “Human rights activists Unemployment is not threatened.” By education I am a sociologist and I know that we need years of work on the background of constant social change. We fall race for long distance!

– Have you seen the growth of Russophobia sentiment in Poland in connection with the situation in Ukraine?

– I do not know whether it is Russophobia. I would rather, it is called kremlefobiey. These attitudes do not belong to the citizens of Russia, and to members of their authoritarian rule. Although, of course, sentiment towards the Russians is worse than 8 years ago. However, if we are still going to read and listen to, that 85% of Russian citizens support Putin, but the overwhelming majority supports the annexation of Crimea, the negative sentiment may unfortunately increase (this stone also, dear journalists, and in your garden).

– There are voices that the funds that go into partnership with Russia, to be transferred to assistance to Ukraine.

– I would say that, too, go to Ukraine.

Susanne talked Pehovich

Sourse, 19/11/2014