Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Actions taken by Estonian government contradict basic European standards

Actions taken by Estonian government contradict basic European standards —
interview with Member of European Parliament Sahra Wagenknecht
 
On January, 14, a trial of defenders of the Bronze Soldier monument was
started in Tallinn. The prosecution insists that leaders of the Night
Watch social movemnet Dmitry Linter, Maksim Reva and Dimitry Klensky
together with a student of a Tallinn high school Mark Siryk, whom the
Estonian government calls representative of the Russian youth Nashi
movement in Estonia, staged mass disorders in Tallinn on April 26-28,
2007. In case they are found guilty, they will face a sentence of up to
five years. In late January, Member of the European Parliament Sahra
Wagenknecht visited Tallinn. After returning from Estonia, Ms. Wagenknecht
published a harsh comment on what she had witnessed to at the trial. In an
interview to REGNUM Ms. Wagenknecht explained why she takes such position.
REGNUM: Ms. Wagenknecht, what was your motive when visiting Estonia to
observe the trial of the young men accused in organizing disorders?
My fear was — and is — that the trial against the four who are being
accused of having initiated and organized disorders last April will go
largely unnoticed. This to my mind would be in flagrant disregard of the
outrageous accusations brought forth against the four young men by the
Estonian authorities, which to my mind and from everything I know lack
basic substance. I regard it to be a very important task connected with my
mandate as member of the European Parliament to observe what is happening
and to try to shed light on matters that I consider important and that
tend to be forgotten. Unfortunately this trial may rank among such matters
because, unfortunately, there is a general tendency in the European Union
to look away when fundamental rights are disregarded by EU member states
themselves. The EU is always very quick to judge situations happening
outside the Union. When it comes to abuses committed by the member states
themselves the EU is more than willing to turn a blind eye. This is what
from my point of view is happening as regards all matters connected with
the events surrounding the so-called Bronze soldier in Tallinn. I have
watched the events closely, and also posed a question to the EU Commission
when it became known that the monument was to be displaced by the
authorities. The answer I received then was that the EU considered this to
be an internal matter, a position that prevailed also when the riots and
the abuses committed by the security organs in Estonia, became known.
Quite obviously this position is also upheld with regard to the trial. I
regard it all the more important to show presence at the trial in order to
show that proceedings do not go unnoticed but that there is a public
interest also from outside Estonia as to what is happening to the four men
who are facing those charges, as well as what regards the general
situation in Estonia which is very problematic, especially when it comes
to the situation of the Russian-speaking minority. 
REGNUM: In your statement, you say that there are grounds to suspect that
the government itself provoked the disorders in Tallinn streets in April
2007. Could you, please, elaborate on why you have such suspicions?
It was more than obvious that the removal of the anti-fascist monument
would be a provocation especially for the Russian-speaking minority to
which this monument has a highly symbolic meaning. The attacks on the
monument by the Estonian government had started well before the April
events of last year. There were continuous proceedings to change its
outlook and to gradually do away with the Bronze soldier as a relic of the
anti-fascist past. All those prior proceedings had already been done
knowing that this was hitting the Russian-speaking population. When,
however, the Estonian authorities decided to remove the monument outright
it was a very clear provocation. This is even more apparent when you look
at the date — the removal was done right before the day of liberation from
fascism. Even the Estonian president Toomas Ilves in an interview with the
German magazine SPIEGEL in June 2007 indirectly admitted this by saying
that from his point of view “it wasn´t a good idea to move the statue” but
was done out of public safety concerns because it “angered the Estonians”.
He, however, went on saying that “the Russians, for their part, insisted
that this was a holy place and that any change would be blasphemy.” How
else can you regard the removal of a “holy place” but as a provocation?
REGNUM: In April 2007, it looked like most European politicians preferred
to treat the April 2007 events in Tallinn as the country's internal
affair. Why don't you share the idea?
Unfortunately this attitude in the European Union has not changed. As I
already mentioned — it is a very typical approach by European politicians
to regard everything that happens within the EU to be an internal affair,
the more so when this is in coherence with the general political opinion.
From my point of view the situation in Estonia came more than handy for
the European politicians to indirectly hit at Russia without saying
outright that they were doing so. It is more than clear that most European
governments, if not completely agreed so at least sympathized with the
actions taken by the Estonian government — very well knowing though that
there was a contradiction with the standards the EU always emphasizes to
be their own — the adherence to human rights, the tolerance of differing
opinions, the acceptance of freedom of expression, the anti-fascist
consensus, the openness to criticism, the right to demonstrate, and human
rights standards that also bind police and security organs. All this was
disregarded in Estonia during the April events. Still, there was a silent
cover-up by the EU. This can only be understood by the general willingness
to turn a blind eye to proceedings in the EU itself — and by the strong
anti-Russian sentiment that is prevalent throughout Europe and which was
ever more palpable as Estonia is one of the three EU member states that
formerly belonged to the Soviet Union. 
On the other hand, and this is also something worth noting, there was a
determination to use the — quite dubious — accusations of the so-called
cyber attack that Estonia is supposed to have been subjected to in the
course of the April events, in order to have NATO devise a new strategy
against cyber warfare. It is a rather interesting sideline that now, if
what is reported in the media is true, one of the culprits of this
“cyber-attack” has just been found guilty by a Tallinn court and sentenced
to pay a fine of about 1000 Euro. This makes the entire setting ever more
dubious — at least the amount of the fine does not in the least coincide
with the importance attached to the alleged cyber attack. The story of the
cyber attack seems to have come extremely handy for all those in EU, US
and NATO who wanted to come up with a new NATO programme. 
REGNUM: What are dangers that the precedent of the trial in Tallinn can
bring about for the European Union?
The problem the EU is facing already is that standards are being lowered
by precedents and actual proceedings. If you look at minority rights in
Estonia you cannot but think that there is a general willingness to test
there what may become a reality elsewhere later on. The same is true for
other rights as well which are enshrined in the European treaties. There
are more and more countries which serve as test fields in the EU as
regards the lowering of standards in order to ever better enforce a
neoliberal policy and a weakening of basic rights. This is particularly
true for social standards and labour rights, but it also holds true for
other areas, like for example data security. Estonia which so eagerly is
working on being a modern technology society seems to have a severe lack
of data protection. This is also a major problem from my point of view as
regards the ongoing trial in Tallinn. The alleged evidence brought forth
by the authorities seems to be based heavily on the disregard of data
security standards. It is obvious that a lack of protection in this
respect raises serious concern as regards the adherence to elemental
privacy rights on the side of the Estonian authorities. 
REGNUM: Aren't you afraid that Estonian politicians might accuse you of
ties with the Kremlin?
This is already happening, and it does not come as a surprise to me. It is
always the easiest way to try and attack somebody who does not fit into
the general mainstream attitudes. But what am I doing? I am only asking
for the adherence to those standards the EU sets for itself. If it makes
me a “puppet of the Kremlin” to speak out against the criminalization of
anti-fascists and to call for the Russian-speaking minority to be granted
their full rights, then I am ready to take this. I am not willing to
accept it as normal that the Russian-speaking minority is deprived of
basic rights and to a large extent does not even have citizenship but is
considered to be alien in their own country. I am doing nothing but
speaking out in favor of the very standards the Estonian politicians who
were so eager to join the EU more than readily accepted upon accession to
the European Union. If they are now creating double standards with regard
to those very rights I have a problem and cannot but think that it is only
a change of affiliation which has not been done wholeheartedly but very
opportunistically. 
REGNUM: Do you plan further actions to explain your position on the
Tallinn trial to the European Parliament?
I will definitely follow the further developments and will look for ways
to make things public. In what way I will proceed further I am considering
at present. It is clear though that my observance of the situation in
Estonia is not over with my visit in Tallinn of last week. 
-- 
visitate 
http://www.comunisti-italiani.it/frames/index.htm
 
http://www.larinascita.org
http://www.italia-cuba.it/associazione/associazione.htm
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 ECCE HOMO
ossia era sicuro al 100% che in soccorso dei suoi camerati nazisti baltici
sarebbe accorso il quisling britannico amalric. 
LOL
