Russia's Putin signs NGO "foreign agents" law

Thoughts (generally and how this applies to TWCS)?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...86K05M20120721

(Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has approved a law which will tighten controls on civil rights groups funded from abroad, the his press office said on Saturday, a step opponents say is part of a campaign to suppress dissent.

The law, which was cleared by the upper house of parliament earlier in July, will force non-governmental organizations (NGOs) engaging in "political activity" to register with the Justice Ministry as "foreign agents" and to file a report to officials every quarter.

Opposition groups say Putin is trying to silence groups whose criticism of his human rights record has undercut his credibility and helped fuel seven months of protests against his rule, the biggest since he came to power in 2000.

Putin, a former KGB spy, has dominated Russia for 12 years as prime minister or president and he won another six-year stint in March.

Earlier this month, the U.S. State Department voiced "deep concern" about the NGO law - and was promptly rebuked by Moscow for "gross interference", an exchange that underlined the impact the bill has had on already strained relations.

Putin said on Thursday that laws to open up competition in Russia's political system must be implemented with care, suggesting he remains wary about reforms introduced after the wave of protests.

In April then-president Dmitry Medvedev signed off on a law that eased regulations on the registration of political parties, cutting the required number of members in a party to 500 from the previous 40,000.

The law was aimed at appeasing demonstrators who had taken to the streets after accusations of voting fraud in a parliamentary election in December which gave the Putin-supported United Russia party a slim parliamentary majority.

"It is necessary that the laws which were passed on a legislative level make their way into society correctly, peacefully and in accordance with the letter and spirit of the law," said Putin.

"But in no case (may they) allow any destructive forces to shake up the situation or moreover allow them (to do so) in a destructive-terroristic way."

(Writing by Andrey Ostroukh; Editing by Mark Heinrich)

I read about this NGO-banning action before. Since many (so called) NGOs are under the guise of "human rights" etc., this can be a concern to the image of the TWCS country. What would be the ways of financing the "opposition" parties, DNZ? Do you think having our own US-government-type "NGOs" would be able to finance and control the parties subversively?

Re. image: only in the eyes of the bourgeois-liberal regimes.

Re. workers opposition: Well, you raised the question of worker-class movements organizing across borders. This kind of law is a double-edged sword. However, the immediate threat obvious comes from liberal funding in the guise of "human rights" and in the not-so-guise of regime change action in Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc.

From what I gather regarding this, Russia's NGO law is tougher than the US Foreign Agents Registration Act:

http://rapsinews.com/legislation_pub...263954264.html

However, it would be more effective at choking off imperial-interventionist funding (not just emphasizing the stigma of "foreign agency").

So how would the workers' "opposition" parties get their funding, through party members or the social funds?

Maybe, maybe Alternative Culture in such TWCS regimes could be the route, but the foreign funds would have to be used strictly for the Alternative Culture. We both know that's a politicization route, but the funds cannot be used for more overt expressions of "political activity" (to quote the new NGO law). No sane worker would want to see the domestic Alternative Culture being deemed "foreign agency."

FYI, the Venezuelan law on foreign funding for NGOs is even tougher than Putin's; it's banned.

Maybe, maybe Alternative Culture in such TWCS regimes could be the route, but the foreign funds would have to be used strictly for the Alternative Culture. We both know that's a politicization route, but the funds cannot be used for more overt expressions of "political activity" (to quote the new NGO law). No sane worker would want to see the domestic Alternative Culture being deemed "foreign agency."

FYI, the Venezuelan law on foreign funding for NGOs is even tougher than Putin's; it's banned.

I agree with you here, DNZ.

I think that the acceptance of money should be allowed as long as there are no conditions as to how it were to be used. That said, such strings are sometimes not visible and that is a solid argument against all aid in general. Opening the door to outside influence is dangerous, especially for small and weak nations.

I think that the acceptance of money should be allowed as long as there are no conditions as to how it were to be used.

Why? That's how the various imperialist bourgeois groups masquerading as "pro-democracy NGOs" slip through the door. I'm not talking about comprador petit-bourgeois elements, but about outright bourgeois elements.

I did say in a round-about way that it could be a bad idea since even "no strings attached" deals usually are used to influence anyway. I guess I just felt like writing in a flowery way haha. Seriously though, I know what you're saying.