“There may be times,” said Elie Wiesel, the Jewish philosopher and Holocaust survivor, “when we are powerless to prevent injustice, but there must never be a time when we fail to protest.”
In Europe, Russophobia, involving animosity toward Russia, Russians and Russian culture, is as old as the hills. It was used as cover for the French and German invasions of Russia in, respectively, 1812 and 1941, when, so it was said, “barbarism” had to be purged. And, notwithstanding the multitude of human rights conventions since World War II, it remains alive and well, with ordinary Russians often facing the brunt.
In 2004, the International Gallup Organization found that anti-Russian sentiment remained fairly strong throughout Europe and the West in general, with the percentage of populations holding negative perceptions standing, for example, at 62 percent in Finland, 57 percent in Norway, and 42 percent in the Czech Republic. Whereas the YouGov Cambridge poll of 2019-20 discovered that 60 percent of people in the US held negative views toward Russia, the corresponding figure in Australia, Canada and Germany was 54 percent.
Although the West’s Russophobia was not normally flaunted, it was always bubbling away just below the surface, waiting to erupt. After NATO’s expansionism antagonized Russia and triggered conflict, the West exploded in an orgy of Russophobia, throwing its vaunted human rights to the wind. Whereas various governments have gleefully seized the property of individual Russians, non-state actors, with their encouragement, have also tried to make life hell for them.
In the Czech Republic, for example, Russians have reportedly been sworn at in the streets, their children have been abused in the schools, the universities have refused to mark their papers, they have been turned away by hotels, and native speakers have been stigmatized. Czech social media users, in a throwback to the 1930s, have even called for the marking of “Russian citizens with a red star”. Although the Czech Constitution proscribes discrimination (Art.3), the Russians living there will not have known it, and their treatment has been no less deplorable elsewhere.
It is, of course, one thing for a country to have a beef with another country, but quite another to persecute its ordinary citizens, particularly when they are not at war. Whereas the European Union delights in denouncing alleged human rights abuses, it is a different story when Russians are concerned. They are being routinely denied the elementary rights the EU claims to cherish; notably, property rights, and, in another throwback, they are even being prevented from working.
In Germany, for example, where discrimination is supposedly unlawful, the celebrated conductor, Valery Gergiev, has, because of his views, been dismissed by the Munich Philharmonic, and also as musical director of the Verbier Festival. Although both the European Convention on Human Rights and the German Constitution guarantee freedom of expression, neither the German government nor the EU has lifted a finger to protect him, and he is but one of the many victims of crude discrimination within the bloc.
Whereas, for example, one of the greatest sopranos of the age, Anna Netrebko, has had her concerts canceled in Denmark, the European Broadcasting Union prevented any Russians from participating in this year’s Eurovision song contest. Yet even though European values are being systematically trashed, the EU Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, who loves preaching to others, has not stepped in, showing once again that the EU is rotten to its core.
In Canada, meanwhile, which has an entrenched human rights regime, the Canada Council for the Arts has cut ties with Russian artists, tarring them all with the same brush. As for 20-year-old pianist Alexander Malofeev, known as the “piano prodigy”, he has, notwithstanding his criticism of Russian policy, seen his concerts canceled in both Montreal and Vancouver. He says, “The only thing I can do now is pray and cry,” and the Canadian government, instead of deploring mindless Russophobia, has happily thrown him to the wolves.
In the US, Russophobia is rampant, which should surprise nobody. In 2017, for example, the former director of national intelligence, James Clapper, declared that Russians were “almost genetically driven” to act deviously, a classic instance of the pot calling the kettle black. Whereas Democratic congressman Eric Swalwell has called for “kicking every Russian student out” of the United States, Russian businesses have been vandalized, with, for example, The Russian House restaurant in Washington, DC, being repeatedly attacked and its owner threatened. Russia’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, has described the degree of Russophobia as being “off the scale”.
In a bizarre twist, even animals have found themselves in the firing line in France because of their origins. The Federation Internationale Feline, which organizes competitions for cats, announced that Russian felines would be prevented from competing in future events, which may not distress the victims too much. It might, however, upset those who believe that France should still be taken seriously, or who are big on “liberte, egalite, fraternite” (liberty, equality, fraternity). However, ostracizing cats is better than persecuting people, which is what has been given the green light on the other side of the English Channel.
On April 20, the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC), which organizes the annual Wimbledon tennis tournaments, announced, following pressure, that players from Russia and Belarus will be banned from competing this year. The highest-ranking players to be affected are Russia’s men’s world No 2, Daniel Medvedev, and Belarus’ women’s world No 4, Aryna Sabalenka. However deplorable, the ban was rapturously applauded by both the UK’s sports minister, Nigel Huddleston, and its culture secretary, Nadine Dorries, who have clearly learned from the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, that, as individual Russians are defenseless, they make easy targets. They are, however, not having everything their own way, and the shameful persecution of innocent sportsmen has triggered an unprecedented backlash from athletes, who believe that sporting ideals should not be debased by political bigotry.
The men’s tennis body, the ATP, said the decision to ban the players “is unfair and has the potential to set a damaging precedent for the game”. For its part, the women’s tennis body, the WTA, pointed out that “individual athletes should not be penalized or prevented from competing due to where they are from, or the decisions made by the governments of their countries”. It added that “discrimination, and the decision to focus such discrimination against athletes competing on their own as individuals, is neither fair nor justified”.
To their credit, the athletes themselves have been no less vocal in support of the victims than their professional bodies. Whereas one former Wimbledon champion, Britain’s Sir Andy Murray, announced that he was “not supportive” of the AELTC’s ban, another, Spain’s Rafael Nadal, called it “very unfair”. Serbia’s tennis legend, Novak Djokovic, said the ban was “crazy”, while another former great, Czech-American Martina Navratilova, who won Wimbledon nine times, said this “was not the way to go”. As Nadal explained, “it’s very unfair on my Russian tennis mates, my colleagues”, adding that “it’s not their fault what’s happening in this moment with the war”.
In other words, Murray and the other champions are able to see the injustice of the situation, while Truss, Dorries and Huddleston, blinded by prejudice, either cannot or will not. Things like this, of course, are not supposed to happen in Britain, with its rich history of honest dealing and justice, and there are laws against discrimination, including the Equality Act (2010). Quite why the president of the UK Supreme Court, Lord (Robert) Reed, who claims to be so concerned about even the appearance of injustice that he resigned from the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal on March 30, is not screaming from the rooftops over the actual injustices being inflicted upon innocent people on his home turf is anybody’s guess.
Once collective madness grips the body politic, everybody should take a stand against it, including Reed, and the voice of reason must be heard. The bully boy must never be allowed to dictate terms to athletes, and the innocent and the weak must always be protected, particularly at times of tension. The WTA says it will continue to uphold its rules and reject discrimination, and the AELTC will hopefully pull itself together, perhaps in time for the Wimbledon tournament, which starts on June 27. Even if the likes of Huddleston, Dorries and Truss care nothing for sporting values, they cannot be allowed to drag Britain, famed for its commitment to fair play and human dignity, down into the abyss with them.
The author is a senior counsel and law professor, and was previously the director of public prosecutions of the Hong Kong SAR.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.