A new piece of legislation was passed by Congress recently
called the Magnitsky Act that will normalize trade with Russia while condemning
human rights violations in the Russian Federation. This act was passed without
any problems (a vote of 365 to 43) and signals the US’s continued stance on
punishing other countries that partake in human right’s abuse while still
moving forward into a new era of trade with Russia. To really understand what
this act means though it’s important to understand its predecessor, the
Jackson-Vanik Act.
The
idea behind the Jackson-Vanik Act was essentially the same as the Magnitsky
Act, in that it acted as a mechanism to punish countries that violated human
rights. Countries, like Russia, that restricted emigration were not given trade
benefits with the US. Because of this act Russia began allowing certain levels
of emigration so that they could trade with the US. This was seen as a human
rights victory and Russia was able to trade with the US. Arguably a win-win
situation for everyone involved.
Fast
forward to the recent introduction into the WTO and we run into a problem with
the Jackson-Vanik Act however. It’s against the bylaws of the WTO to have
restrictions against fellow WTO members and if the Jackson-Vanik Act was not
repelled Russia would be able to deny certain privileges to American firms and
the same American companies would be unable to use WTO mechanisms for conflict
resolution in Russia. Obviously this was a situation that the US could not
allow since we’re all about having the maximum power of trade anywhere in the
globe we can manage it. And why shouldn’t we be like that? It’s smart business
sense. But anyway…
Sergei
Magnitsky was a Russian lawyer who reported a $230 million theft from the
government by Russian police officers, Russian tax officials and organized
criminals. Clearly the man had some balls, because he must have known that he
was going to get thrown in jail, which he did, by the police officers he
testified against. It was claimed that Magnitsky himself was responsible for
the theft, and while he was detained in prison awaiting trail his health began
to fail, and it is claimed (though not confirmed) that while he lay in the
prison hospital he was handcuffed to his bed, beaten by several guards, and
left to die. Of course, he died before every receiving his trial, but with the
state of the Russian legal system, it’s unlikely he would have received a trail
with an outcome more favorable than what he received anyway.
This
is the set of circumstances that led to the Magnitsky Act.
The
US decided to pass this new act, named after Sergei Magnitsky, that would
repeal the old Jackson-Vanik Act, normalizing trade between the US and Russia
as well as continuing to have some sort of mechanism to punish Russian human
rights violations.
So
what is the Magnitsky Act? Well, it would deny US visas to the men involved in
the detainment and death of Sergei Magnitsky, none of whom stood trail after
his death, as well as freeze all their assets in the US. Along with this, all
future Russian officials who violate human rights would also be denied visas
and be unable to have assets in the US. This would continue to encourage
Russian officials to take human rights seriously as well as meet WTO
regulations for fair trade among members. This seems like a great solution to
the problem of the Jackson-Vanik Act, and some European countries are
considering enacting similar bills, but the Kremlin is far from pleased about
this development.
The
Kremlin sees it as a direct attack on Russian citizens and has threatened to
respond in kind. They have said that they could similar ban certain US citizens
from the Russian Federation, as well as freezing assets inside the RF. They
also point out that America has far from a spotless record on human rights and
they seem to feel that the pot is calling the kettle black.
I
don’t think that many Americans would be overly upset if Russia enacted similar
laws against the US, but it’s an interesting idea. Personally, I think that the
Magnitsky Act seems like a good piece of legislation, and that the Kremlin is
upset simple because it may actual force them to conduct themselves in a manner
more in accordance with the international views on human rights. At the same
time, I’m not sure what to think about Russia saying that they will do the same
thing to the US. Maybe it’s a good thing to have the international community
holding each other responsible in this manner, but I fear that this sort of
tit-for-tat reactionism might create gridlock in international cooperation.
Regardless,
there are some interesting developments going on between Russia and the US and
I think this is something worth paying attention to if you have any interest in
international relations or human rights.
As
always, feel free to comment, agree, disagree or whatever else.
Much love, Tyler