The Russia Conundrum

As always, truth is the first casualty of war. Nuanced and balanced reporting has no place in the new polarised media landscape. Investigative journalism in Russia, seeking to correct the Kremlin’s narratives and hold the powerful to account, is a dangerous business; but a small group of courageous men and women continue to do so, upholding the honourable tradition of Politkovskaya, Baburova, Estemirova and others. When the leading business newspaper, Vedomosti, was taken over by a Putin crony in 2020, many of the editorial staff resigned in protest to found their own journal,

VTimes. Articles on corruption and economic mismanagement by the Kremlin brought swift retaliation. In 2021, the Kremlin placed VTimes

on its list of ‘foreign agents’, with a consequent, disastrous withdrawal of advertisers. Announcing that the journal could no longer continue to function, the editors acknowledged defeat in the unequal struggle against state control.

When we launched VTimes last year, we announced that we were creating not a propaganda tool, but a high-quality independent media outlet and a platform for the free exchange of constructive opinions. We are proud to say that we achieved that aim. But we have now seen for ourselves that the authorities have no time for professional, non-government-controlled media … The ‘foreign agent’ label has destroyed our business model. Advertisers are unwilling to cooperate with a ‘foreign agent’ and we cannot blame them for that.

The ‘foreign agent’ law, which I mentioned earlier, allows the authorities to penalise any media outlet, NGO or independent organisation that receives funds, including even nominal grants and advertising, from non-Russian sources. It requires them to label anything they publish – from lengthy articles and reports to one-line tweets – with a lengthy, sinister-sounding description of their ‘foreign agent’ status, making their material virtually untouchable. Distributing or quoting from it without appending the 22-word ‘foreign agent’ label in typeface twice as big as normal could entail serious legal consequences, with heavy penalties, including prison sentences for repeat offenders.

Ministers and senior Kremlin officials reinforced the hysteria surrounding independent journalism by alleging that Russian non-state media sites are tools of the West. The director of the Foreign Intelligence Service, Sergey Naryshkin, accused Proekt, Insider and iStories of working for Western spy agencies, claiming that the Navalny poisoning was the work of Western agents, carried out so that troublemaking journalists could make Russia look bad, and warning of further such ‘attacks’ in the future. ‘We expect new provocations ahead of the [2021] parliamentary elections. We have information about which points will be hit, but we will not say anything publicly yet. The United States is looking for an external enemy, so they point the finger at us.’

Naryshkin alleged that the source of much independent journalism, the Netherlands-based investigative and fact-checking organisation, Bellingcat, was a front for Western intelligence. ‘Bellingcat is needed to exert pressure,’ Naryshkin wrote. ‘They use dishonest methods. The information they use in their investigations is false and unverified. This group includes a number of former intelligence agents. They’re prepared to carry out any task for money. Bellingcat, Navalny’s organisations, Proekt, iStories, the Insider — they’re all interconnected. It’s a complex [intelligence] operation that involves great skill and effort.’

When journalists and activists have tried to defend themselves against the Kremlin’s legal intimidation, they have found their advisers subjected to threats and violence, further darkening the outlook for civil society in Russia. The human rights lawyers, Team 29, which represented defendants in several politically motivated cases, including that of Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation, were forced into liquidation following harassment by the authorities. Team 29’s website was blocked by the Russian censor, Roskomnadzor, allegedly for linking to material from the Prague-based NGO ‘Freedom of Information Society’, a designated ‘undesirable organisation’. In an interview with the Meduza website, Team 29 lawyer Yevgeny Smirnov spoke of the Kremlin campaign against them. ‘[We] received threats. They said we were a bone in the throat not only of investigators, but also of other people, people in government agencies. Therefore, the decision was made to bomb us with all their might.’ Meduza itself has remained operational only by having its headquarters in Latvia, reducing staff salaries and appealing for readers’ donations.