General Discussion

pampango

(24,692 posts) Tue Aug 11, 2015, 06:59 AM Aug 2015

Kremlin considers changes to law that labels NGOs receiving funding from abroad as "foreign agents".

Kremlin Forms NGO Expert Group

Vyacheslav Volodin

The Kremlin has announced the creation of an expert group to consider changes to a controversial law that labels NGOs receiving funding from abroad as "foreign agents," the RBC news agency reported Monday, citing deputy presidential chief of staff Vyacheslav Volodin.

The law on foreign agents has been broadly criticized for failing to adequately define the "political activity" that is required to qualify for the label, and for stigmatizing NGOs and evoking a Stalin-era spy mania. In June, President Vladimir Putin told the Civic Chamber that the law required “additional correction.”

The decision to create the group was taken in response to a request from the Presidential Human Rights Council seeking clarification about the foreign agent law, RBC reported Monday, citing Yelena Topoleva-Soldunova, a member of both the Civic Chamber and the Human Rights Council.

Dozens of Russian NGOs have been labeled foreign agents since the law came into force in 2012, and several prominent organizations including human rights group the Committee Against Torture and the Dynasty science foundation have closed their doors rather than accept the label.

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/kremlin-forms-ngo-expert-group/527666.html

It will be interesting to see what "additional correction" will be forthcoming. The 'foreign agents' label is reminiscent of the Stalin era as was the 'communist' label during the McCarthy era in the US. There are undoubtedly some foreign agents in Russia and in the US but exaggerating the extent of it was, and is, done for political purposes.

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Kremlin considers changes to law that labels NGOs receiving funding from abroad as "foreign agents". (Original Post) pampango Aug 2015 OP

Xenophobia, nationalism, and militarism.... Adrahil Aug 2015 #1

Have no doubt that a good number of American NGO's... MattSh Aug 2015 #2

True for that one. The problem comes when one is used to tar other NGO's for political pampango Aug 2015 #3

Adrahil

(13,340 posts)

1. Xenophobia, nationalism, and militarism....

Reply to pampango (Original post)

Tue Aug 11, 2015, 07:10 AM

Aug 2015

All right on schedule.

MattSh

(3,714 posts)

2. Have no doubt that a good number of American NGO's...

Reply to pampango (Original post)

Tue Aug 11, 2015, 07:19 AM

Aug 2015

are in the regime overthrow business.

Why Russia Shut Down NED Fronts | Consortiumnews

Exclusive: The neocon-flagship Washington Post fired a propaganda broadside at President Putin for shutting down the Russian activities of the National Endowment for Democracy, but left out key facts like NED’s U.S. government funding, its quasi-CIA role, and its plans for regime change in Moscow, writes Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

The Washington Post’s descent into the depths of neoconservative propaganda – willfully misleading its readers on matters of grave importance – apparently knows no bounds as was demonstrated with two deceptive articles regarding Russian President Vladimir Putin and why his government is cracking down on “foreign agents.”

If you read the Post’s editorial on Wednesday and a companion op-ed by National Endowment for Democracy President Carl Gershman, you would have been led to believe that Putin is delusional, paranoid and “power mad” in his concern that outside money funneled into non-governmental organizations represents a threat to Russian sovereignty.

The Post and Gershman were especially outraged that the Russians have enacted laws requiring NGOs financed from abroad and seeking to influence Russian policies to register as “foreign agents” – and that one of the first funding operations to fall prey to these tightened rules was Gershman’s NED.

Complete story at - https://consortiumnews.com/2015/07/30/why-russia-shut-down-ned-fronts/

pampango

(24,692 posts)

3. True for that one. The problem comes when one is used to tar other NGO's for political