- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
Merits (or lack thereof) of this article aside, I find this rush to defend Putin a little disconcerting. While I agree it's best not to be hasty in judgment and to take all possibilities into account before laying blame, this 'who benefits?' argument that's being used as a magic bullet to shoot down any criticism of the president ignores recent history and the precedent the man himself has set in dealing with political adversaries.
They're right on some points, of course - Putin is an intelligent man, intelligent enough to know that half the world - including all of Eastern and Central Europe - rely on him for energy. With no comprehensive European plan to diversify energy sources, he also knows his grip on the market will only tighten in the forseeable future. This gives him virtual carte blanche to treat domestic adversaries any way he sees fit, knowing that the foreign press will offer up little more than a few weeks muted grumbling before letting the matter fade into obscurity. For a head of state to publicly call out Putin would be putting that country's future energy supply in jeopardy, a thing no one, no matter how principled, is prepared to do.
Such a bizarre and dramatic move as poisoning a man with a radioactive toxin might seem counterintuitive for a president trying to keep his sordid reputation off the front pages, but Putin knows that while the press and general public may have short attention spans, his opponents do not. This very well could have been a message killing, the message being that no matter who you are or where you live, you will never be safe if you openly oppose the Kremlin's policies. Not only that, but your death will be exotic and painful, a much more effective deterrent than a simple bullet to the head. Creative cruelty such as this has a profound effect on the human psyche, and recalls the sort of paranoia-inducing techniques utilized in Stalin's time.
And of course one has to ask, what reputation would Putin be risking by such a brazen execution? This is the man whose country routinely ranks at the bottom of every list Human Rights Watch compiles, who shut down around 90% of Russia's NGOs since coming to power, who jailed their employees on trumped-up charges, kidnapped, tortured and executed family members, threw out the Peace Corps in 2003 (on charges of espionage!), routinely trades weapons to Iran and much of Central Asia, and created "Nashi", his own version of the Hitler Youth.
While I can find several compelling arguments indicating third party involvement in this killing, don't fool yourself over who we're dealing with in Vladimir Putin. The suspicion thrown on him is more than justified.
