NS Christmas campaign: Show your solidarity for Pussy Riot

The New Statesman is supporting Amnesty's Write for Rights Campaign.

Their trial made international headlines. Their conviction sparked criticism from politicians to pop stars. Yet widespread censure and general outrage could not deter Russia’s judiciary from enforcing the harsh punishment on the three members of punk band Pussy Riot for their performance in a Moscow cathedral.

Charged with "hooliganism on the grounds of religious hatred", Maria Alekhina and Nadezhda Tolokonnikova are now spending two years imprisoned in Russia’s penal colonies after they performed a song in a cathedral in Moscow criticising Russia’s president and some leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church (the third member Ekaterina Samutsevich had her conviction reduced to a suspended sentence upon appeal).

Certainly, some considered Pussy Riot’s performance of the “Punk Prayer” to be offensive. The band members themselves admit this and have apologised if they caused offence. However it was clear to most observers – including Amnesty International – that the harsh punishment is emblematic of the fact that in recent years Russian authorities have become increasingly intolerant of criticism and legitimate dissent.

Journalists and human rights defenders and artists (including some punk band members) in Russia regularly face the challenge of exercising their right to freely express their opinion sometimes at the risk of their own freedom or even physical security.  The recent move by Russia’s judiciary to ban Pussy Riot videos online is another indication of Russia’s attempt to trample on freedom of expression.  

At the time of their arrest, Amnesty International described the punk protesters as “prisoners of conscience” and called for their immediate and unconditional release.  It continues to campaign for their release and the imprisoned Pussy Riot members feature prominently in its annual Write for Rights Campaign.

For the next four weeks, the New Statesman will be supporting Amnesty International’s Write for Rights Campaign which successfully connects men and women, young and old in the UK with people elsewhere who have been wrongly imprisoned, at risk of harassment and intimidation for carrying out human rights work and to family members seeking justice for their loved ones. 

As Amnesty has seen in previous years, not only does sending a letter to the authorities and the people at risk remind the recipients that thousands are aware of their plight and are standing in solidarity with them, it also sends a worrying signal to the authorities who see the number of messages being delivered to these men and women at risk that the world is standing up with them, and for them. It takes just five minutes to show your solidarity for Pussy Riot. Just visit www.amnesty.org.uk/pussyriot.   

For more information about Amnesty’s Write for Rights Campaign visit www.amnesty.org.uk/write.

Protestors shackled outside the Russian Embassy in London. Photograph: Imran Uppal/Amnesty International

Eulette Ewart is a press officer for Amnesty International UK.  Follow Amnesty's media team on Twitter @newsfromamnesty.

Getty
Show Hide image

Five things Hillary Clinton’s released emails reveal about UK politics

The latest batch of the presidential hopeful’s emails provide insight into the 2010 Labour leadership contest, and the dying days of the Labour government.

The US State Department has released thousands of Hillary Clinton’s emails. This is part of an ongoing controversy regarding the presidential hopeful’s use of a private, non-governmental server and personal email account when conducting official business as Secretary of State.

More than a quarter of Clinton’s work emails have now been released, in monthly instalments under a Freedom of Information ruling, after she handed over 30,000 pages of documents last year. So what does this most recent batch – which consists of 4,368 emails (totalling 7,121 pages) – reveal?
 

David Miliband’s pain

There’s a lot of insight into the last Labour leadership election in Clinton’s correspondence. One email from September 2010 reveals David Miliband’s pain at being defeated by his brother. He writes: “Losing is tough. When you win the party members and MPs doubly so. (When it's your brother...).”


Reaction to Ed Miliband becoming Labour leader

Clinton’s reply to the above email isn’t available in the cache, but a message from an aide about Ed Miliband’s victory in the leadership election suggests they were taken aback – or at least intrigued – by the result. Forwarding the news of Ed’s win to Clinton, it simply reads: “Wow”.


Clinton’s take on it, written in an email to her long-time adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, is: “Clearly more about Tony that [sic] David or Ed”.

Blumenthal expresses regret about the “regression” Ed’s win suggests about the Labour party. He writes to Clinton: “David Miliband lost by less than 2 percent to his brother Ed. Ed is the new leader. David was marginally hurt by Tony's book but more by Mandelson's endorsement coupled with his harsh statements about the left. This is something of a regression.”


Peter Mandelson is “mad”

In fact, team Clinton is less than enthusiastic about the influence Mandelson has over British politics. One item in a long email from Blumenthal to Clinton, labelled “Mandelson Watch”, gives her the low-down on the former Business Secretary’s machinations, in scathing language. It refers to him as being “in a snit” for missing out on the EU Commissioner position, and claims those in Europe think of him as “mad”. In another email from Blumenthal – about Labour’s “halted” coup against Gordon Brown – he says of Mandelson: “No one trusts him, yet he's indispensable.”

That whole passage about the coup is worth reading – for the clear disappointment in David Miliband, and description of his brother as a “sterling fellow”:


Obsession with “Tudor” Labour plotting

Clinton appears to have been kept in the loop on every detail of Labour party infighting. While Mandelson is a constant source of suspicion among her aides, Clinton herself clearly has a lot of time for David Miliband, replying “very sorry to read this confirmation” to an email about his rumoured demotion.

A May 2009 email from Blumenthal to Clinton, which describes Labour politicians’ plots as “like the Tudors”, details Ed Balls’ role in continuing Tony Blair and Gordon Brown’s “bitter rivalry”:


“Disingenuous” Tories “offending” Europe

The Tories don’t get off lightly either. There is intense suspicion of David Cameron’s activities in Europe, even before he is Prime Minister. Blumenthal – whose email about a prospective Cameron government being “aristocratic” and “narrowly Etonian” was released in a previous batch of Clinton’s correspondence – writes:

Without passing "Go," David Cameron has seriously damaged his relations. with the European leaders. Sending a letter to Czech leader Vaclay Klaus encouraging him not to sign the Lisbon Treaty, as though Cameron were already Prime Minister, he has offended Sarkozy., Merkel and Zapatero.

He also accuses him of a “tilt to the Tory right on Europe”.

In the same email, Blumenthal tells Clinton that William Hague (then shadow foreign secretary), “has arduously pressured for an anti-EU stance, despite his assurances to you that Tory policy toward Europe would be marked by continuity”.

In the aftermath of the 2010 UK election, Blumenthal is apprehensive about Hague’s future as Foreign Secretary, emailing Clinton: “I would doubt you’ll see David again as foreign secretary. Prepare for hauge [sic, William Hague], who is deeply anti-European and will be disingenuous with you.”

Anoosh Chakelian is deputy web editor at the New Statesman.