Serious questions must be asked of a country whose law enforcement agencies feel compelled to hide their faces from the public. The armed men who raided the headquarters of the only media group to oppose Mr Vladimir Putin in Russia's presidential election opted to wear balaclavas. In doing so, they showed a preference for a disguise more commonly used by criminals and bandits. As this reprehensible action was taking place, the Council of Europe drew back from serious condemnation of the behaviour of Russia's forces in Chechnya. This, the last act of Ireland's presidency of the Council, is something of which neither this State nor the Council can be proud.
The climb down was, as might be expected, shrouded in diplomatic language. Measures were being taken to improve the situation. Russia had declared that it wanted a peaceful solution. Russia's contribution to the council was welcomed as was President Putin's pledge that abuses of human rights during the Chechen conflict would be investigated. While it would have been unrealistic for the Council to have expelled Russia, the absence of criticism or of calls for a searching examination of events in Chechnya is disappointing.
The allegations by human rights organisations and by the UN commissioner for human rights, Mrs Mary Robinson, merited a far more serious response than this. There have been reports of summary executions, of mass looting, of rape and of pillage. The Council, under Ireland's chairmanship, has not responded in full measure. There has at least been some consistency in the Council's actions. In 1996, during the previous Chechen war, in which tens of thousands of innocent civilians were losing their lives, it not only admitted Russia to membership but gave it a great fanfare of welcome.
By doing so, it sent a message of approval to the Kremlin. This message has now been repeated. The Council's pusillanimity with regard to Chechnya has diminished its already feeble image as a defender of human rights. It has also left human rights activists, particularly those in Russia, with a strong feeling of having been betrayed. In the meantime, a situation has been reached in Moscow itself where the authorities feel free to send masked men to raid the headquarters of a media group that disagrees with them politically. Two flimsy excuses have been put forward for the armed attacks on the Media-Most organisation. Neither of them bears serious examination.
The first, a claim that investigation for corruption of a former, unnamed Finance Minister was involved, has been quietly dropped. The second maintains that the raids were launched in order to discover electronic bugging material. This material was found, eventually. Why were the masked Tax Police involved in an operation to discover alleged bugging equipment? Surely, their remit is to do with tax rather than electronic surveillance. Why were they dressed in a way that made them almost indistinguishable from criminal gangs? Now that the Council of Europe's credibility has been diminished, who other than non-governmental organisations can stand up for the rights of the individual in Russia and elsewhere in Europe?