by Israel Shamir for the Unz Review
Can the Putin Fans League win municipal elections in New York City? Not bloody likely, you’ll murmur, and probably justifiably so. However, in the municipal elections last week, pro-American forces captured one third of the seats in Moscow. A great shock, slightly mitigated by the media silence that accompanied both the election and its results.
As a rule, I do not dwell much on internal Russian politics (as opposed to foreign relations). They are parochial, obscure and not democratic. That is true for internal politics in every country I am aware of, but in Russia, they aren’t even competitive. Kremlin wiseguys try and fix the results with all the subtleness of Democratic primaries under Ms Debbie Wasserman Schultz. This time they had a seemingly brilliant idea: wouldn’t it be nice if few people would turn up at the election booths? Only those requested to vote? So they had zero publicity, zero announcements, zero TV coverage. People were vaguely aware of the municipal elections but the affair was so low profile that very few cared to attend: slightly over ten per cent of the electorate. The cynical subterfuge flopped badly.
In Moscow (which is the only place in Russia that counts) the three main opposition parties, the Communists and the Nationalists, as well as Kremlin-friendly Socialists, were been decimated. Their votes had been snatched by pro-Western liberals, self-described as “those of good genes”, “the fair-faced ones”, “handshake-worthy”; all these epithets vaguely connected in Russian mind with prosperous Jewishness, of sorts, or with Jewified Soviet nomenclature. The best-known names include Ms Lucy Stein, a young Jewish journalist of some notoriety – she installed plaster copies of her breasts and filmed a staged act of a little boy being roughly treated by Putin’s police. Another one is Mr Maxim Katz, a young Jewish activist – he organized the delivery of flowers to the place of the opposition leader Mr Nemtsov’s assassination, allegedly with some profit for himself.
These youngsters (in their early twenties) have been led by Mr Dmitry Gudkov, a Russian Parliament Member and a son of a Russian Parliament Member. This sounds like the House of Lords, but Gudkov the Senior is an ex-KGB colonel, an oligarch and the owner of a bailiff business, rather than a hereditary peer. Gudkov’s people made a loose coalition with Yabloko (Apple, in Russian), a liberal party of some prominence in the Yeltsin years. They are against Putin’s policies, for the restoration of the Crimea to the Ukraine and for an alliance with the liberal West.
While other parties didn’t give a hoot, the liberals cared to come to the neglected elections, and they delivered their voters to the booths. For that purpose, they imported American technology, and one of Sanders’ operatives, a Russian-born Mr Vitali Shklyarov, who had come to set up what they called “a political Uber”, a web app for fielding candidates and getting voters. In addition, they vastly overspent their competitors.
Democracy in action? Forsooth! This was a clear-cut example of real (as opposed to imaginary) interference in foreign elections. While endless FBI probes have never produced any tangible proof of Russian interference in the US elections, and the Facebook investigation “revealed that it had sold as much as $150,000 in political ads to pro-Kremlin entities between 2015 and 2017”, the US interference in recent Moscow elections had been vast, powerful and effective. The pro-American forces spent over sixty million dollar in Moscow alone by very conservative estimates, and probably much more. And the funds came from abroad.
The very idea of Russian interference in the US elections had been flattering but silly. The Russians are not in the same league, in speaking of political technologies. The Americans are much more masterful, being trained in a competitive environment. The Russians’ only chance to have fair elections is adopting another American technology, namely the active fight against foreign interference. The Kremlin could and should investigate the path of every US buck to the Stein-Katz Gang, and deal with it as harshly as Americans are dealing with imaginary Russian interference. But would they? I doubt it. The wiseguys who mismanaged elections for Kremlin will do all they can to kill the story. No important Russian media carried it, by direct orders from Kremlin.
We have proof to back up our claims of the US interference in the Russian elections: a confession made by the coordinator for Open Russia, a political body created by Mr Michael Khodorkovsky. This oligarch, once the richest man in Russia, did nine years in a Russian jail for massive tax evasion, white-collar crimes, organized crime and conspiracy for murder, as brutal and ruthless a shark as ever swam murky waters of Russian business and politics.
Mr Khodorkovsky had been an American agent of influence for many years. Since being pardoned by President Putin, he moved abroad and became the focal point for the US-led clandestine campaign for regime change in Russia. Together with other exiled (and wanted) oligarchs, Tel Aviv-based Mr Nevzlin and London-based Mr Chichvarkin, Mr Khodorkovsky funnels money to Russia’s pro-Western opposition.
His coordinator Ms Maria Baronova had been quite close to Mr Khodorkovsky but parted with him some time ago. In her Facebook blog she admits that “Gudkov and Katz are a secret project of M. B. Khodorkovsky” while other elements of the opposition are a public project of Mr Khodorkovsky. In other words, the whole campaign has been organized from Washington, or perhaps from Langley.
As we learned from Wikileaks-published State Department cables, this is the current trend of CIA for orchestrating regime change: instead of sending money directly to the opposition with a courier, they employ oligarchs as go-between. This mode has been used in Syria since 2006, as well as in Lebanon, and now is being applied in Moscow.
The winners of the recent municipal elections in Moscow weren’t just the “fair-faced” children of nomenclature, but appointees of the US deep state. They did it using American know-how and American money. This is the real and very successful interference, and the organisers got away with it.
The Russian post-Soviet political system as organized by Putin’s wiseguys should share the blame. The Communists, Nationalists of Mr Zhirinovsky and Socialists of Mr Mironov have been tamed and house-broken so efficiently that they lost their balls, their will power, their desire for victory – and their voters, as well. People stopped to care about them. The ruling party United Russia isn’t better; it is a toothless clone of the toothless CPSU, the late Soviet Union Communist Party that was dismantled by Gorbachev and Yeltsin without a single objection from millions of card-carrying members. It is a party of people who want to have power and its privileges.
The Ukraine had been ruled by a similar Party of the Regions. Led by Mr Victor Yanukovych, the party fell to pieces after the coup, its members deserting the sinking ship as fast as they could. United Russia will also run away in a case of trouble; they will helplessly watch Mr Khodorkovsky enter the gates of the Kremlin and probably applaud him. The United Russia’s 70% of vote is no guarantee of support for Mr Putin’s independent course. It would be better for Putin to rely upon smaller but more reliable and devoted cadres. Lenin used to say, ‘a small anchovy is better than a big cockroach’.
(This is true for other countries, too, as Mr Trump and Mr Corbyn discovered: their big parties just aren’t reliable. A small and reliable party of their dedicated supporters would be a better bet.)
The Kremlin spokesmen comfort themselves and others by stressing very limited powers of the elected deputies. By law, they may deal with municipal questions only. However, it is not unusual for such bodies to reach for more power in a revolutionary situation. In France, in 1789, the elected parliament was intended to be an advisory to the monarch, but very soon it assumed all the powers and chopped off the king’s head. In the USSR, in 1991, the Russian Federation parliament had very few rights being subservient to the Soviet parliament, but it assumed rights and broke up the USSR.
Forget about Mr Navalny. Perhaps we should get used to the idea that the next president of Russia will be called Maxim Katz, and Lucy Stern his Foreign Minister. That is, unless Mr Putin will do a better job at the forthcoming Presidential elections.
Israel Shamir can be reached at adam@israelshamir.net
This article was first published at The Unz Review.
Interesting article, though I suspect rather alarmist.
“However, in the municipal elections last week, pro-American forces captured one third of the seats in Moscow.” & “slightly over ten per cent of the electorate.”
One third of 10% is less than 4%. The actual figure is probably less since the israeloamerican influence is less outside of Moscow, where the majority of people in Russia live.
The other thing is the lack of recognition of the role israel/zionazis have in influencing Russian politics and society, even though all the people mentioned are zionazi Jews with as strong, or stronger ties and loyalty, to israel than the usa. The latter overwhelmingly relying on israel firsters for its ops inside Russia.
Interesting article, though I suspect rather alarmist.
Exactly my take too. I asked Israel for the right to repost it here because it provided the best analysis about these (rather insignificant) elections in English. Sergei Mikheev, one of my favorite commentators in Russia, was however much more dismissive. While there definitely was a “push” on the side of the zioliebrals in Moscow, they only “won” a small percentage of districts. The fact that there are a lot of “liberals” in Moscow, of the ‘zio’ persuasion or not, is hardly big news. What we had is just a confirmation of that. Big news? No. Is Israel a little alarmist? In my opinion, yes. But his article is still very informative, so I ask him to let me repost it. As always, he very kindly agreed.
Cheers,
The Saker
yes thank you for posting.
To quote an American President:–Fool me once, shame on you: Fool me twice, shame on me.
Actually, GWB flubbed the punch line with: er..it aint gonna happen.
I believe that we had best keep abreast of these alarming municipal developments within Moscow before the Kremlin itself is booby trapped!
touché !
Two cents from a Canadian: isn’t it a truth of humans generally that they like opposition in politics? So even if they are generally supportive of the person/party in power nationally, at the regional or local level, they may wish to see someone elected who opposes the mandate – genuinely – to counterbalance the absolute power of the national leadership (who they don’t necessarily want to replace?) People like plurality, I guess, that’s what I’m saying. And genuine checks on power at the top. Maybe it’s just as simple as that?
That may well be the case, S113, in a normal situation, a sort of “hedge” to keep a check on the ruling party. In view of the current situation, however, with Russia under diplomatic and economic attack, the coup in Ukraine, the Nato military drills on Russia’s borders, … the result of municipal election is quite astonishing. Hopefully it will serve as a wake-up to all of VVPs supporters for the presidential election!
These are good points, but do Moscovites feel threatened by all that? Don’t most Russians seem to believe that their country is safe and well-managed, and not vulnerable to an eccentric local politician, whoever may be backing her (and everyone in politics is backed by someone in power – everyone). Wouldn’t they likely laugh at the suggestion that this ‘gang is a threat to Russia?
When I lived in Georgia (southern US, not south of Russia), the “two-party” state was in full power. This was actually an improvement over the “one-party” state which existed when I moved to the state in the 1970’s. But it meant that “3rd Parties” like the Libertarians had a very hard time to get on the ballot.
However, they found a loophole they could exploit to get ballot access. The state law at the time said that if a party got a certain percent (maybe 20 in my foggy memory) in ANY statewide election, that got a 3rd Party ballot access for the next cycle. Georgia happened to elect all of its ‘cabinet officials’, so the wily Libertarians always spotted one race where the incumbent was running un-opposed, and then ran a candidate in that race.
Thus, supporting the hypothesis that people like to vote in ‘opposition’, the Libertarian candidate always got a significant percentage of the vote, as they were the only choice besides the incumbent on the ballot. They usually got 30% or more in those races, and did it for little more effort than filing to get on the ballot. This was from the percent of people who would always vote in opposition to an incumbent. And thus the Libertarians were a constant on the Georgia ballots challening the two-party monopoly that the Dems and Repubs tried to enforce in the state. Georgia has since changed that law IIRC.
A ‘check on power at the top’ by a foreign state is, at best, subversion and at worst, invasion.
If the threat was that ominous, then why was she allowed to run for office? So Russia’s the banana republic now, who can’t handle democracy?
We are talking here about the lowest level of the municipal representative government of some Moscow districts. These are people who will be responsible for snow and trash removal, mostly.
Some of them are notorious crisis actors, like the Washington paid Radio Svoboda journalist Lucy Stein, with an open visa to Israel in her passport, who made a statement that they will be looting the city budget.
https://twitter.com/ScottsHumor/status/909807278592839680
Like Ilya Yashin, a gay activist who made a statement about having the gay pride parade in Moscow.
Having gay pride parades and looting the city budget is a crime from the federal laws standpoint.
All of them are the crisis actors who try to bring the society to a boiling point
In reality, the opposition has lost many seats that they used to have before this municipal elections.
With less than 18% of voters participating.
The liberal anti-Russia pro-Israel opposition parties, all of them together, got less than 1/4, less than 15%. Not, as Shamir reports, 1/3.
The United Russia party got 77%.
The Communist party candidates lost the most representatives.
Yes Scott, the win wasn’t that significant despite all the money poured in. It was from what I have read a 15% turnout of voters reflecting the lack of power held by municipal councils and the Liberals won the wealthy central parts of Moscow only. United Russia gained 1,150 deputies and the liberals 180 deputies.
The liberals didn’t even manage, with all the money they allegedley got from abroad, enough votes to pass the municipal filter for participation in the Mayoral elections in September 2018 – which this Gudkov wanted.
Also municipal councils in Moscow have no access to the city budget and as you say deal with pretty mundane stuff.
That may be why the Kremlin isn’t bothered…….
I can hardly believe that Putin’s inner circle has no knowledge of the massive flow of money for the opposition parties and traitors of all kind. As a remembering, Stalin waited for the right opportunity and crashed them down, then came Barbarossa. The price was enormous but successful. Putin has a totally different character, what will he do ? one thing is for sure : waiting…
I’m curious for comment from this site. I’d read this article on another site (unz.com which also publishes The Saker), and I was a bit suspicious of parts of it.
There are parts where the author seems to fall back on western propaganda as a shorthand.
For instance, the author acts like the Ukrainian party that was overthrown just willingly dissolved and dissappeared. Yet I remember video clips showing mobs of men armed with clubs and wearing black masks telling the party members in some cities that they’d better abandon their party or else.
If an armed mob is threatening to beat you, then a lot of people might just ‘dissolve’ their political activities. But that’s more indicative of the power of threats of violence upon people than it shows any lack of character and resolve on the part of the people involved.
Why is it that I suspect many Russians might reject the notion that in Russia, Moscow is ‘the only place that counts’?
I know a similar comment about the US and either New York City or Los Angeles would be objected to by many, many Americans. So, I’m not real sure the people of St. Petersburg or other places in Russia would agree with this author.
Honestly, there are many more areas where Mr. Putin could do better job. How about getting rid of criminal oligarchy altogether.
I understand Putin doesn’t have the power to get rid of all the oligarchs.
I would be interested in others’ thoughts on this.
Elections are a weak point in which enemies of the political order, foreign or domestic, can use to foment discord and disruption, with the longer term purpose of undermining the government. Elections empower toads like Soros and his NGOs to worm their way onto the political table, via local oligarchs and such tools as this Lucy Stein.
Putin should me made the Czar as Vladimir IV (not sure of the number), the first Czar of the new Putin dynasty. Likewise, the upper house of Parliament, regional governors, mayors and other key people should all also be hereditary.
This allows the government to remain focused on its objectives, without being distracted by having to pander for votes, placate or mollify various special interest groups, refute spurious charges or make promises to such groups that really shouldn’t be made.
I don’t get the enchantment that anyone patriotic has for electoral, representative democracy. Its the chink in the armour of government that allows those of ill intent, whether foreign backed NGOs or local oligarchs to infect and undermine the system.
Antoinetta III
That’s why the Khazars killed the Czar and the King of France: they organized ziorevolutions to take over the government. The zios brainwashed everybody by telling the usual b.s.: stopping the “tyranny”, “bringing democracy”, “egalité” (the biggest lie!!!), and rewrote the story (sic) books to erase the real facts from the collective memory…
The reality is that the normal behavior for any established King or Queen was the strength and richness of the Kingdom, in other words, solid and continuous politics of prosperity, a strong nationalism, and most of the benefits that a good governance could bring about. That’s why the King in Cambodia was reinstated by popular demand, and the King of Thailand remains.
The Khazars want to be the totalitarian rulers, but before they can consolidate that position, they create as much chaos as possible, because they perfectly know that with their psychopathic militancy, organization and mafia tactics, they can seize any position and resource in a society. The Khazars tolerate the Kings or Queens only if they are ziopuppets, e.g. the “King” of Spain, who actually is a member of the Committee of 300 (a group controlled by the usual culprits: Mjew6, the reptoqueen of Albion and the supercriminal City of London). That is: he openly works for the enemy of Spain & the Latin world!!!!
Even if slightly on the alarmist side, still a very interesting and instructive read. What made my heart stop for an instance was this passage:
“… pro-Western liberals, self-described as “those of good genes”, “the fair-faced ones”, “handshake-worthy”; all these epithets vaguely connected in Russian mind with prosperous Jewishness, of sorts, or with Jewified Soviet nomenclature”
They always go unabashedly for the lowest denominator, for the base instincts residing in the subconscious, don’t they? This is straight from CIA’s MK-Ultra training manuals.
“Elections of Russian president will take place on March 18, 2018, Secretary of the Russian Central Elections Commission (CEC) Maya Grishina told TASS on Monday that Russia’s presidential election next year will occur on March 18.
“The week from March 5 to 11 includes one holiday, hence presidential elections will be held on the following Sunday. So, we say it officially that the elections will be organized on March 18,” Grishina said.
TASS explained that under the Russia law, presidential elections are appointed by the Federation Council upper parliament house within 100 to 90 days ahead of the voting day, which is the second Sunday of the month of the previous presidential elections.”
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/date-for-next-years-presidential.html
another example of the land of absurdity
“President of Ukraine Pyotr Poroshenko, speaking at the UN Security Council, will demand an expanded mandate for peacekeepers, which allows them to use weapons not only for self-defense. This was stated on Monday by the representative of the president to the Ukrainian parliament Irina Lutsenko.
“The President, speaking at the Security Council, will demand an expanded mandate for UN peacekeepers that will allow the “blue helmets” to use weapons if necessary, and not just for self-defense,” she said.
Lutsenko also noted that the main requirements of Ukraine would be “the deployment of such a mission throughout the occupied territories of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions,” as well as the deployment of peacekeepers on the border between Ukraine and Russia.
“Their duties will include not only the protection of the OSCE mission, but also compulsory extortion to demining and disarmament, as well as the withdrawal of foreign, that is, Russian troops and instructors from the territories of Ukraine, that is, we will demand all those necessary moments that are characteristic of the peacekeeping mission,” she added.
DONi News Agency”
maybe though it might stop
“Ukrainian saboteurs committed another terrorist act, destroying the Memorial to the perished warriors of the airborne forces in the city-centre of the LPR capital at night on September 18.
‘
“Situation around the idea of deploying peacekeepers to Donbass depends on whether Kiev and Washington take a constructive stance, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told TASS on Monday.
“Certainly, now everything will depend on whether Kiev and the United States have a constructive stance,” Peskov said commenting on the prospects of the UN’s considering of a proposal on deploying peacekeepers to Donbass.
The Kremlin spokesman called against “eroding the essence of the Russian proposal” on a peacekeeping mission that is aimed at ensuring security of staff members of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) working in the conflict zone.
Peskov recalled that Moscow has been pursuing the line towards contributing to searching for a solution to the conflict in eastern Ukraine and is one of the countries-guarantors of the Minsk peace deal. These agreements are not implemented due to “Kiev’s unpreparedness and unwillingness to implement those unambiguous points signed by all the respective sides in documents,” he noted.
On September 5, President Vladimir Putin said that Russia would submit a resolution to the UN Security Council on the deployment of UN peacekeepers along the demarcation line in Donbass to ensure security of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission.
He stressed however that deployment of UN peacekeepers could only be possible after weapons withdrawal from the area and upon agreement with the self-proclaimed Donbass republics. The president said the peacekeepers could be deployed not only along the contact line.
According to TASS”
note
“Mikhail Saakashvili, the former head of the Odessa Regional State Administration, announced his intention to speak on October 17 in Kiev together with activists, public organizations and politicians with three demands on Poroshenko.
“We decided to join the initiative of civil activists and gather in Kiev on October 17 with three demands: the creation of anti-corruption courts, the abolition of parliamentary immunity, the adoption of a new election law. And the rest of the requirements we will collect throughout Ukraine until the 17th, “he said.
On September 10, Saakashvili arrived illegally in Ukraine. He literally broke into the country, fought through the border with a crowd of supporters. ”
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/saakashvili-to-announce-ultimatum-to.html
(I know this is off topic but a quick reply)
Hi JJ,
Canada’s PM Trudeau held a press conference today (19th) and mentioned that Poroshenko will visit Ottawa on the weekend. Watch for Canada to establish a peacekeeping mission in Ukraine. I’ve been postulating that Trudeau wants to help protect the Chabad-Lubavitch university in Dnepropetrovsk – both for support from international allies, and also to bolster his government’s domestic support. Trudeau’s personal base is in Montreal, which has a prominent Hasidic Jewish population. I can just see it — Canadian Armed Forces peacekeepers, a large Canadian flag, maybe a plaque of some kind…
He’s got high hopes… he’s got high hopes… he’s got high apple pie, in the sky hopes.
ta for info s113-must try and catch Poro’s comedy speech at UN ……………..meanwhile check out
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/project-2020-preparation-for-war-in.html
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/ukrainian-general-admits-truth-about.html
see ya round!
OT:
It looks like Russia is preparing yet another bailout of the Ukrainian banking system. Following Putin’s 2014 order that it is essential for Russia to support the Ukrainian economy and banks (1), state-owned VTB Bank is, yet again, preparing to recapitalize its Ukrainian subsidiary by 2.592 Billion UAH ($100 million USD). (2, 3) VTB is not only heavily sanctioned by the West, but under Ukrainian sanctions which forbid VTB to remove profits, intrabank loans, or any other monies from the country. This is, in other words, a $100 million gift to the Ukrainian economy funneled through a subsidiary which generates constant losses.
Oh, and as with similar “gifts” to Ukraine from state-owned Sberbank and VEB bank, VTB’s losses will ultimately be repaid by the Russian people and state.
(1) http://tass.com/russia/750689
(2) http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/economic/449524.html
(3) http://news.rin.ru/eng/news/61892/
What would I do without I. Shamir’s analyses?
Lost in a a whiteout I’d be.
But-
Could it be that these results could be the “traditional”-
come on in invitation too threats that Russia could teach
the dumbinon of canaduh how too pull off much much better than we do -at any point in the last thousand years?
These elections results would seem too me too have lined up a fine array of
foreign operatives too syphon funds out of.
The trick will be too stop them from squawking too loudly as they are plucked.
Oh well that’s what security agency files are for after all. *
If the treason from within can be managed.
That part is tricky.
*”The Czar So loved the Russian people that he wanted them too be closer too their government.
That’s why he formed the Secret police.”
-Encyclopedia Britannica early 1950s edition entry- Nic the first.
Via my memory hole(Paraquote)
Patrick Armstrong’s latest Russia Sitrep gives another opinion on these elections:
(https://patrickarmstrong.ca/)
“MOSCOW ELECTIONS: While the pedestal party won overall, there was some excitement because, in a very low turnout, “liberals” organized to win some seats in Moscow. Karlin is not impressed and points out the correlation with bicycle rental stations. [That’s hilarious] Shamir takes it more seriously seeing it as the latest Washington regime change effort. Perhaps he’s right: both The Guardian and Newsweek hail it (BTW: the comment from Germann Arlington absolutely nails The Big Inconsistency of Western reporting: “If the elections are rigged then the result should have been the usual 98% for Putin’s party. If the election is not rigged, then why is it always presented as such?”) Russian politics are pretty frowsty: the pedestal party dominates (but the Putin Team is popular) the KPRF and LDPR were led by the same guys when the USSR was still around, even Yavlinskiy (then, now) is still out there (Crimea is part of Ukraine: not a big vote getter.) [Also hilarious.] One day things will start to change but I doubt this is the moment.”
He includes many embedded links – available at the website above.