So if what journalists and bloggers have come up with so far about the WikiLeaks-Russian connection isn't really a smoking gun. All of it is of the sort of thing that has enormous "plausible deniability" to it. A show on the Kremlin-sponsored RT Internet TV (on cable in some areas) isn't proof that you're a Russian intelligence agent, you could just have anti-American/anti-Western/leftist views. Intersection with the provocateur Israel Shamir looks pretty bad, but it's not like anybody has a a photo of his work booklet proving anything. And so on. It's a very hard case to make. I believe it to be true, but these things have to be shown better than they are being shown or it is too easy to disclaim (and maybe that's the idea all along).
What other directions can we go in?
FRONTLINE CLUB
Well, let's take another look at the Frontline Club. This is the place where both Sarah Harrison gave her duplicitious presentation of the great Syrian regime email hack, and where just a few months later, Jacob Appelbaum came to wax eloquent about cybersecurity and the threat to privacy. My, he travels a lot to Europe. Who pays for all that? I can't believe donations and grants for Tor these days are really that much. It seems he no longer works at that job trying to hack into driverless cars at the University of Washington — that was odd, eh? I mean, he can't be still working there if you see him travel so much and now he's saying he'll stay in Germany.
The Frontline Club has tons of events and it isn't really clear that it has a "line" — but it does, most likely. The owner is wealthy enough to sustain a press club, which is a loss-making operation anywhere, unless he gets big corporations pay him for press conferences on their products or panels on prefabricated topics, and he doesn't seem to do that. This owner — Vaughn Smith — is the same fellow who arranged to have Assange live in a mansion while he decided to remain with his ankle bracelet in the UK but not return to Sweden to face questioning. So Vaughn Smith is a big supporter of WikiLeaks, well past the sell-by date, when others have given up, giving a venue and visibility to the few remaining WL supporters like Harrison.
Frontline Club has a somewhat odd list of partners — Serbia, Georgia, Russia, etc. In other words, not like Paris, New York, Tokyo or something, but all in the "East bloc," if you will. What's that about? I would answer it most simply this way: "Somebody got a grant." Is there a "line" on Russia? Well, possibly in order to dispel doubts for anyone asking that question, there are events recently that seems critical of Russia, or at least some aspects of its past and its "nationalities policy".
Misha Glenna and Edward Lucas have talked about censorship in Russia. (Although as often happens with these meetings "focusing on Russia," the real, easier focus became Western companies like Microsoft.) Soldatov and Borogan issued a report on surveillance. There was an event recently with Oliver Bullough, who writes on Russia and wrote a piece on the Tsarnaevs and Chechnya that many (including me) criticized for being too patronizing, and Irina Prokhorova, sister of the Russian oligarich, hosted by Anne Applebaum, who is the neo-con writer for the Washington Post, author of an important work on the Soviet GULAG, and wife of the Polish Foreign Minister, Radek Sikorski, who was one of the few top Polish officials who survived that air crash in Smolensk on the anniversary of the Katyn massacre that killed many in the top leadership.
The Frontline Club in Russia seems like rather the tusovka and vague on events descriptions and I'm not sure it's still functioning as it talks about suspending activities — it seems to have been a sub-project of Oleg Panfilov's "Center for Extreme Journalism" as we always used to translate literally. He long since left Moscow and moved to Georgia. Maybe someone can interpret this better than me.
More can be studied there, but the Frontline Club is not where I think we will find the most surface area of interaction with Russia — in the serious big leagues — and where there is a point of pressure on WikiLeaks by the Kremlin. That's likely elsewhere.
GARZON, CRUSADING LEFTIST SPANISH JUDGE BECOMES WIKILEAKS LEGAL ADVISOR
And that is in the figure of Baltazar Garzon, the Spanish prosecutor who is described by Colin Randall of the Nation as "a legal eagle with singed sings"? It is Garzon who is pictured helping Assange at the Ecuadoran Embassy.
Garzon may be remembered by some as the man who issued a warrant for Pinochet's arrest, using the concept of "universal jurisdiction," a move widely greeted by human rights groups and the relatives of the disappeared in Chile at the time. It was a bold move because normally, heads of state are given immunity by other states. Of course, he also lurched off chasing Bush and Kissinger, which is the far left's favourite passtime, but then, I've always thought it would be good to have a truth commission or "Warren Commission" on Bush and Cheney, in part to teach the hard left and the progs what real evidence has to be to support claims of war crimes.
Garzon is described as having a "checkered" past, because he decided to pursue the prosecution of Franco and other rebels who rebelled against the Stalinist government during the Spanish Civil War, rather than to allow sleeping dogs lie. This got conservatives mad, naturally and their point was that both sides committed atrocities in the Spanish Civil War. This essay claims that some say Garzon was acting consistent with his leftwing beliefs; others say he was pursuing personal interests and had served right-wing interests when it suited. I don't know.
But basically he's on the left and he's become a champion of WikiLeaks, but he's not one of those fellow travelers of the Kremlin, or so it seems. That is, he is happy to appear on RT denouncing Western governments on Assange but he is a more complicated figure than some of the symps you see on RT as he has resisted the Kremlin on several occasions.
GARZON REFUSES TO EXTRADIATE GUSINSKY
Indeed, he stood up to Moscow when he refused to return Pavel Gusinsky of NTV when the Russians wanted him extradited from Spain.
Yes, Gusinsky is basically a fartsovshchik, and the whole story of the independent TV is of course a mixed bag. But even so, returning people to the Russian criminal justice system means systematic torture, and no country should do that. And NTV under Gusinsky was a lot more independent than the Surkovskaya propaganda outlet that it is today.
GARZON PROSECUTES THE TAMBOV GANG, BUT LETS SOME GO
But here's something that really stood out for me: Garzon had to release 7 members of the Tambov gang who were arrested. Yikes!
The Tambov gang is not to be trifled with, and indeed, the story of Litvinenko basically revolves around his work for British and Spanish intelligence on the Tambov gang's antics in Spain. He was then murdered with polonium 210.
The rumafia site (of course, not trusted source but a compendium of all sorts of stuff from soup to nuts), describes a lot about Garzon — but it's basically a scrapbook of Russian media sources. Here's gazeta.ru on March 11, 2009 and April 20, 2009:
On June 13, 2008 20 Russian citizens were arrested in Madrid, Barcelona,
Malaga, Valencia, Alicante, and the Balearic Islands on suspicion of
money laundering, arms trafficking and contract killings. Allegedly they
were members of the so-called Tambovskaya group. Law enforcers seized
from them about 200 thousand euros in cash, 23 luxury car, a boat,
firearms, and works of art, including painting by Salvador
Dali. Authorities also froze 12 million euros in the accounts of the
detainees. Later, Garson, who was investigating the case, had to release
seven of the detainees.In autumn 2008 Garson took part in the case related to the final matches
of the UEFA Cup. On October 1, 2008 Spanish media suggested that the
scores in the games of football club Zenit (St. Petersburg, Russia) against Rangers (Glasgow, Scotland) and Bayern
(Munich, Germany) could have been pre-planned. Spanish police,
wiretapping the telephone conversations between "the leaders of the
Tambovskaya group, Gennady Petrov and Leonid Khristoforov, received
information about bribing players and leaders of Bavaria and Rangers. The
articles, however, reported that Spanish police were not sure of the
credibility of the information. Nevertheless, Garzon who investigated
the case handed materials of the case over to prosecutors and
investigators in Germany.
That case got nicknamed "Gertel".
Then there's this, from inopressa.ru from August 18 2009:
On October 11, 2008 Garson authorized a search in a house owned by
Vladislav Reznik, chairman of the Committee on Financial Markets of the
State Duma. The reason for the search was that Reznik was familiar with
Gennady Petrov.
Garson sure seems to be a magnet for Russian cases! Or maybe it's because Spain is a magnet for the corrupt and criminalized Russian nouveau riches and mafia types….
GARZON TAKEN DOWN
Funny how after prosecuting all these Russians, in part successfully it seems, he gets nailed in 2010 on some old charge related to the Spanish Civil War when he pardoned suspects. And also prosecuted for a tax charge related to a $200,000 lecture fee from New York University (doesn't that sound like a Russian story?) Did somebody from Russia set these up? I just don't know enough about all this.
But here's a guy who has taken on Berlusconi, Guantanamo, the juntas of Chile and Argentina, Bush, and Kissinger, and stumped everywhere for WikiLeaks. Why would the Russians ding him? Over a few mafia cases?
He is finally removed from the bench when he is convicted of using illegal wiretapping of suspects. Then he goes over to become WikiLeaks legal director. Funny, huh? Here's WikiLeaks, running this big caper banging on the NSA for supposedly eavesdropping on citizens, and their legal director is convicted of illegal wiretapping. Oh, well.
RUSSIAN MAFIA AND KGB
To be sure, the Tambov gang is said to be run by/paying off/infiltrated by/whatever the KGB and its successors…. Well, Kavkazcenter reports that, but they are run by the Chechen rebels, and they have an axe to grind.
Actually, they cite El Pais, so perhaps there's something to the story:
El Pais reported that Petrov made his first financial investments in
Spain with the money received from the KGB and the Communist Party of
the Soviet Union. The edition writes that various sources of the
investigation confirmed that the ringleaders of the criminal groups and
corrupted Russian secret agents were doing business under the guise of
PTK oil company. Upon conspiring with the Russian officials, the group's
ringleaders were convinced that they would never be facing any
prosecution in Russia: whether political or criminal. These are the
reasons why Spanish authorities had a hard time fighting the Russian
mafia.The newspaper stresses: it is indicative that the Kremlin's
informational service was not among those whom Spain expressed gratitude
for cooperation. The history of Petrov's business in Spain started back
in 1990, when his group bought the Palmira Beach Hotel in Pegera for
the equivalent of today's 15 million euros during the economic crisis.
After the collapse of the USSR the operation failed due to constant
nonpayment, and as a result of the court proceedings Petrov's group lost
the hotel. The papers that expose Petrov's links to Russian secret
services were discovered from a KGB colonel who lost those papers when
he got drunk
You can read the rest of the lurid story about the raids in Malaga and all the loot, worthy of a mini-series.
But where are those 7 guys who Garzon had to let go? Probably better not to ask.
Anyway, it strikes me that that people who don't like Garzon's prosecution of some Russian mobsters, or conversely, who don't like that he let some of the go, or any combination therein, could be a pressure point on WikiLeaks for the Kremlin.
RESENTMENT AGAINST US? PRESSURE FROM MOSCOW?
And conversely, Garzon may be motivated by his frustration at his failed cases against the Bush Administration, as well as a case involving a Spanish journalist who was shelled in an attack by American troops in Iraq, and pressure said to be put on him by the Obama Administration, as Nikolas Kozloff surmises from other WikiLeaks cables in the Huffington Post, to stick it to the US.
So…WikiLeaks may have had to go along with this Snowden thing as a payback by unhappy Russians somewhere in the loop. Or maybe Garzon was happy to go along with it as payback of his own.
Whatever you want to say about Garzon — if he has had a distinguished career in exposing and prosecuting torture and disappearances and assassinations; if he is brought down by a lecture fee tax issue which seems minor, and a charge related to the Spanish Civil War , maybe someone has it in for him — it seems it is right-wing forces in Spain, unrelated to Russians who might be settling scores. Or maybe he simply deserved it, because you aren't exempt from the law even if you are a human rights hero.
So why doesn't he in fact take up Snowden's defense and stick it to the Americans as he is said to want to do? Maybe he doesn't because it's unlike any other cases he has taken — all the other cases of this nature involve clear-cut human rights violations (Pinochet) or corruption (Berliosconi) or claims of war crimes that are misplaced, but within the norm of the left's theology (Bush, Kissinger). Maybe he's a gentleman. Or maybe he's just a complicated character with his venalities like any hero.
LITVINENKO, SPAIN, AND TAMBOV
As we know from WikiLeaks (of all places!), Litvinenko was the one who tipped off the Spanish authorities to the roles and activities of the Tambov gang. PS the cable contains a mistake in the Russian term which should be "vor v zakone" — "thief-in-law" which is something like a mafia kingpin in a system where the criminals have their own internal code of conduct.
Says this cable:
As reported in Ref A, conservative daily ABC in July 2008 reported
that the GOS security services tapped "thousands" of conversations in
its two-year investigation. Unnamed sources told the newspaper that 230
of those intercepts "will make your hair stand on end" for their
revelations on the Troika defendants' – especially Petrov's – immense
power and political connections, as well as the range of criminal
activity in Russia that the Troika defendants directed from Spain.
According to the article, Troika mafia leaders invoked the names of
senior GOR officials to assure partners that their illicit deals would proceed as planned.The press suggests this "sensitive" evidence could impact bilateral
relations and adds that the "extremely delicate" details of Op Troika
are so close-hold that barely 10 GOS officials are aware of them all. In
the context of the clout that Petrov's network enjoyed and the
political connections it had, multiple Spanish media outlets reported
that one of Petrov's intercepted phone conversation suggests the Russian
XXXXXXXXXXXX reportedly was sailing on Petrov's yacht on September 6,
2007, an allegation that Russia's Ambassador to Spain publicly denied as
"completely false.5. (U) In October 2008, GOS authorities raided the Mallorca vacation
mansion of Vladislav Reznik, chair of the Duma's financial markets
committee and a Putin ally within the United Russia party (See Ref B).
XXXXXXXXXXXX There is some debate about whether Reznik bought the house
from Petrov or whether it was a gift. In any event, the two were
regularly seen together on the island, according to press reports.
Garzon reportedly has ordered Reznik's arrest for money-laundering and
for belonging to a criminal organization. Reznik enjoys immunity in
Russia, but Garzon's extradition request is valid throughout the EU-27.
In August 2009, the Spanish press reported that Garzon is investigating
claims that Reznik and the Tambov crime family were involved in a 2008
plot to kidnap the eldest son of Spanish construction magnate Francisco
Hernando del Saz (aka Paco el Pocero), one of the richest men in Spain.
The plot, disrupted in April 2008, was to ask for a ransom of $30
million dollars. The leader of the would-be kidnappers reportedly
alleges that he received his orders from Reznik.
And so on, read it all in the cable at the Guardian. Some of the suspects were tipped off and able to flee. Others in Russia were not extradited because the Russian government didn't want to cooperate. This is a hugely big and nasty case in which at least one lawyer was assassinated for his involvement.
So while the Tambov case is "over," it seems there are loose ends and perhaps scores to settle, and maybe someone is saying to Garzon that he has to put WikiLeaks to work helping to get and keep Snowden — and he says, alright, as long as I myself don't have to defend this punk. Or something.
The web site of the Russian prime minister has a news story in the archives.
GARZON DECLINES TO DEFEND SNOWDEN
Randall also reports that Garzon declined to defend Edward Snowden. That is, he's WikiLeaks legal director and he advisors on this, but he would not have his law firm take up Snowden's case.:
In his first comments on the Snowden affair, Garzón appeared duly
sympathetic, talking of the "persecution" of those behind disclosures in
the public interest and of "an assault against the people".In a
statement issued in Port-au-Prince, the Haitian capital where he was
filming a documentary for his human rights foundation, Garzón wrote: "Mr
Edward Snowden has requested my legal advice. However, before making
any decision in this regard I have requested more information that will
allow me to study and assess the case in depth as well as to speak to Mr
Snowden."Therefore, I do not currently represent Mr Edward
Snowden. I do defend the right of freedom of expression and freedom of
information. The same rights I defend in the Assange and WikiLeaks cases
and in other cases where the release of information that reveals
criminality is met with the persecution of those who expose it."Then
came the setback for Snowden's hopes. Without explanation, Garzón was
reported to have announced that his firm, ILOCAD, would not, after all,
be acting for him. He reaffirmed his commitment to Assange "as senior
legal counsel in the defence of the fundamental right to freedom of
information and expression" and expressed satisfaction with a draft
resolution from the legal affairs and human rights committee of the
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly, asserting that people who
disclosed criminal acts in the public interest should be protected from
retaliation and persecution from those who commit them.
Leave a Reply