Reflections of a Meeting with the Russian President, Vladimir Putin
Release Date: 07 July 2006
By Kumi Naidoo, CIVICUS Secretary General
One of the concerns raised at the CIVICUS World Assembly was the growing number of legal restrictions that civil society is facing around the world. It is with this concern in mind that some delegates to the World Assembly set off to Moscow, Russia, where the Civil G8 – a gathering of civil society from around the world to keep pressure on commitments made around climate change and poverty eradication at last years summit in Gleneagles, Scotland – was to take place. We were also concerned about a newly promulgated NGO law in Russia, which has evoked a critical response from Russian NGOs as well as international NGOs, particularly those that have an operating presence in Russia. CIVICUS’ Civil Society Watch Programme, has been critical of this law and has been tracking its implementation.
President Putin’s office invited twelve international NGO networks and organizations to raise their concerns and issues in a dialogue that lasted three hours on Tuesday Evening. The organizations invited were: Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund for Nature, Amnesty International, Transparency International, International Council of Women, Social Watch, Action Aid International, Global Call to Action Against Poverty, CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Consumer International, Global Campaign for Education and Oxfam International.
Needless to say, some of the organizations invited took the opportunity to reflect on what the purpose of the meeting would be – a mere photo opportunity for the President or a real chance to have a proper dialogue with the hope that a united front of international NGOs might just get some movement at the G8 around issues of global concern, given that Russia holds the G8 Presidency this year. Gerd Leipold of Greenpeace took the lead and convened a preparatory meeting of the invitees to ensure that when the meeting happened we would use the time to push an agreed set of demands in a coherent manner. The four items that we agreed on before going into the meeting were: Climate change and energy security, poverty and development, Human Security and the War on Terrorism and the situation of NGOs in Russia.
I was asked by our colleagues to chair and facilitate the meeting with President Putin. The person who organized this meeting was Ella Pampilova, a former cabinet minister who resigned from the Yeltsin government, and former presidential candidate who now heads a Commission on Civil Society. Ms. Pampilova assured us that no questions were too sensitive to raise and that we should feel free to raise any recommendations that we felt appropriate with President Putin. With some trepidation and anticipation we set out for the meeting. Importantly, however, we did so, only after we had the opportunity to hear each of the working groups’ reports to the plenary and remarkably to hear President Putin’s response to them.
Whatever the skepticisms might have been regarding how serious the Russian government was about dialoguing with civil society and conveying these concerns to the G8 leaders when they gather in St. Petersburg next week, President Putin raised the bar on civil society engagement with the G8.
What we witnessed in the midday plenary of the civil G8 was quite extraordinary and is a testament of the growing strength of civil society and not simply for the civil society activists that were in Moscow but for the hundreds and thousands of grassroots activists around the world who struggle daily to make the world a more just, sustainable and democratic place. President Putin participated for two hours in the plenary session. He played the charismatic politician and even received applause for some of his responses. He calmly responded to a group of St. Petersburg activists, who donned t-shirts, declaring “No to nuclear” and stood on chairs disrupting him as he responded to the working group on climate change, saying that he respected their rights.
What was so exceptional was that the President of a country who was being attacked for democratic deficits opened up the greatest space of dialogue with civil society, while countries with long standing democratic traditions in the G8 who see themselves as exporters of democracy have not done what we witnessed. President Putin listened to every working group report and gave a five to ten minute response to each of them. Moreover, he did not make a speech to begin with, but instead opted for brief opening remarks. Also important was the fact that even though he had one senior official at his side, he answered all of the questions without referring to or being prompted by advisers.
While some of his responses were tantamount to a well choreographed charm offensive, most delegates were impressed by the fact that he listened more than he spoke, and that he responded to all the working groups reports. The response that drew the most attention domestically was on the NGO law in Russia and human rights more generally. President Putin pointed out that one of the problems with the G8 leaders is that they all want to talk about human rights in countries other than their own. This was an obvious reference to the human rights abuses being conducted by the United States in its war on terrorism and the illegal war in Iraq. He made a point of noting that Russia had no troops in Iraq, which elicited an applause from some of the delegates.
On the Russian NGO law he said the intention was not to stifle NGOs but to get greater order and stability in the functioning of NGOs, but noted that he was opposed to foreign funding of political activities of NGOs. He made a public commitment that should the concerns being raised by the civil society delegates manifest, then he would scrap the law.
It is against this backdrop that we made the one hour journey from the Civil G8 conference venue to President Putin’s residence. Once we arrived, we went through the normal security checks and were escorted to the meeting venue, a rather grand old historic building. Shortly after, we milled around waiting for him. President Putin emerged from the bushes walking his dog, which he brought into the meeting with him. At the opening of the meeting, I said that his responses in the plenary reflected areas of agreement on some issues and that we would rather opt for focusing on the issues where there was disagreement and concern, which he was comfortable with. The head of Greenpeace, kicked off on climate change and posed a pointed question to President Putin about whether he believed in climate change. President Putin responded that he did not know, and clarified later that he believed that climate change is a reality but was not sure about the causes. Both the head of Greenpeace and the WWF offered to assemble a global panel to convince him that climate change was being caused by human behaviour. Gerd, went so far as to suggest firing his current senior adviser on energy and security issues as a practical measure, since he was completely out of touch with global reality and the need for urgency in responding to climate change. While President Putin’s responses were not deemed to be satisfactory, he did commit Russia to further support for the Kyoto Protocol.
On poverty, he largely agreed to the demands pertaining to debt, trade justice and aid; and agreed to push for these at the G8. He pointed out that he was disappointed that although under pressure, Russia wrote off $8 billion of Iraqi debt, the situation was going bad to worse while his own people are asking how he could justify the debt write off.
He was pushed hard on the human rights situation in Russia, particularly with regard to Chechnya and the NGO law. Notwithstanding our appeal to immediately suspend the law, he agreed to review it, should our concerns become reality.
On content, I cannot say that we can feel any sense of accomplishment other than a chance to communicate our concerns in no uncertain terms in a cordial, respectful and dignified manner. However, what is most significant is the precedent this sets for Angela Merkel, the German leader who hosts next years G8 meeting, and for future G8 summits. We would expect nothing less from the German leadership and much more. If the G8 leaders are serious about democracy and accountability, the least they should do is be willing to subject themselves to the similar type of engagement with civil society. In Germany next year, we would like to see all G8 leaders come and address a broad based civil society meeting where they listen to our concerns and respond to them.
I apologise that this is a bit rushed and will write in more detail next week. It is important that we do not overstate the importance of G8 presidency engagements with civil society, and even more important that we bear in mind that we are beginning to push those in power to recognize that they cannot ignore the voices of civil society anymore.
