Фишман про переговоры, блокировку Телеграма и убийство Навального🎙 Честное слово с Михаилом Фишманом

2 Years Since Alexei Navalny's Death: Key Questions and Insights

Introduction to the Discussion

• The program "Honest Word" hosted by Alexander Makashenets features journalist Mikhail Fishman discussing significant political events.

• The conversation begins with a reflection on the assassination of Alexei Navalny, prompting questions about accountability and justice.

Accountability for Navalny's Assassination

• A primary concern is how to hold accountable those responsible for Navalny's death, including President Putin who allegedly ordered it.

• The discussion emphasizes that while Putin faces numerous accusations, this specific crime must not be overlooked amidst ongoing conflicts resulting in mass casualties.

• There is a call for investigations and legal actions against those involved in the assassination, highlighting the need for justice.

Political Landscape Without Navalny

• Fishman raises complex questions about how to continue building political resistance without Navalny’s leadership and strategies.

• He notes that Navalny was unique in effectively challenging the regime, having developed methods to inflict significant damage on it despite systemic obstacles.

Doubts About Putin's Direct Involvement

• A question arises regarding whether Vladimir Putin personally orchestrated Navalny’s assassination; Fishman dismisses this as naive speculation.

• He argues that it is implausible that such an operation could occur without Putin’s knowledge or approval, citing past attempts on Navalny’s life as evidence.

Evidence of Pre-Meditation

• Fishman points out that previous actions against Navalny indicate a pattern of intent from Putin, making it unlikely any decisions were made independently.

• He references an interview where Putin discussed conditions within Russian prisons, suggesting an awareness of potential harm coming to prisoners like Navalny.

Conclusion: A Foregone Conclusion?

• The conversation concludes with Fishman's assertion that upon returning to Russia, Navalny was already doomed due to prior attempts on his life.

The Political Persecution of Alexei Navalny

Overview of Navalny's Situation

• Discussion on the film depicting how Alexei Navalny exposed and ridiculed Putin, highlighting the dire consequences he faced upon returning with evidence against one of his alleged assassins.

• Examination of the rapid legal actions taken against Navalny, including a severe sentence for extremism that led to his transfer to a remote penal colony designed to minimize leaks and public scrutiny.

Intentions Behind Legal Actions

• Analysis of the systematic approach taken by authorities to eliminate Navalny in a manner that appears convenient for the regime, indicating premeditated intentions behind these actions.

• Assertion that Putin was closely monitoring these developments, emphasizing that eliminating Navalny was a top priority for him.

Investigating Navalny's Alleged Poisoning

• Reference to statements from five countries confirming that Navalny was poisoned, raising questions about transparency in investigations surrounding his case.

• Introduction of the argument advocating for an investigation into Navalny's poisoning as a means to provide clarity and counter skepticism regarding the circumstances surrounding his death.

Public Perception and Evidence Manipulation

• Reflection on differing opinions regarding the necessity of transparency in investigating Navalny’s death; some believe it is crucial while others remain skeptical due to lack of firsthand knowledge.

• Mention of initial doubts among even non-supporters of the regime about whether foul play was involved in Navalny’s health issues post-poisoning.

Evidence Tampering Allegations

• Highlighting reports suggesting manipulation of documents related to Navalny's death, which raised significant concerns about governmental accountability and potential cover-ups.

• Discussion on Julia Navalna’s claims regarding laboratory findings related to her husband's poisoning, stressing the need for those labs to publicly confirm their results.

Importance of Detailed Investigations

• Emphasis on wanting more clarity from laboratories involved in testing samples related to navalnys poisoning; calls for transparency are reiterated as essential for building trust in findings.

• Acknowledgment that while there is confidence in government statements from multiple nations regarding poisoning, further details would enhance credibility and understanding.

The Nature of Poison Used

• Question raised about whether it matters what specific poison was used against Navalny; suggests that regardless of its type, it signifies serious threats posed by state actors.

• Reference made by Bill Browder comparing symptoms experienced by other victims linked with similar political contexts, reinforcing concerns over state-sponsored violence.

Discussion on Navalny's Death and Political Reactions

Analysis of Symptoms and Theories

• After the details of Navalny's death emerged, experts noted that the symptoms described by Yulia Navalnaya differed from those associated with Novichok poisoning, leading to speculation about alternative poisons.

• Experts confirmed that the symptoms were indeed different this time, suggesting a possible change in the type of poison used, although they emphasized that this distinction may not hold significant importance.

Zelensky's Response at Munich Security Conference

• President Zelensky commented on his lack of concern regarding personal safety amidst ongoing threats, emphasizing his focus on daily casualties in Ukraine rather than individual cases like Navalny’s.

• He refrained from commenting directly on Navalny, likely due to political reasons and the pressing issues facing Ukraine.

Political Implications of Statements

• The statements made by Kirill Budanov regarding Navalny’s death being due to natural causes were criticized as false; it was suggested he either erred or had misleading information.

• It was highlighted that intelligence agencies often mislead or make mistakes as part of their operational nature.

Contextualizing Zelensky's Position

• Zelensky is focused on Ukraine’s war against Russia and does not prioritize commenting on internal Russian matters like Navalny’s situation. His position reflects a broader understanding of current geopolitical priorities.

• While some may view his stance as politically incorrect, it is argued that given Ukraine's circumstances, such expectations might be unrealistic.

Understanding Internal Resistance in Russia

• Early in the conflict, Zelensky expressed hope for internal resistance against Putin within Russia; however, this has proven ineffective as opposition remains weak.

• There is an acknowledgment that many Russians oppose Putin but are unable to act effectively against him; thus, support for Ukraine should be recognized beyond just Putin loyalists.

U.S. Involvement and Responses

• The discussion shifted towards U.S. Secretary Mark Rubio’s comments acknowledging awareness of Navalny’s case while clarifying non-involvement in investigations related to it.

• Rubio's statement reflects a clear separation between U.S. interests and those concerning Navalny; it emphasizes that this issue does not align with American foreign policy objectives.

Conclusion: Need for Clarity in International Relations

• The conversation concluded with questions about American laboratory involvement in analyzing samples related to Navalny’s case; clarity around these processes remains elusive.

Political Dynamics and the Role of the U.S. in Russia-Ukraine Relations

Current U.S. Stance on Political Demands to Putin

• The discussion highlights that Americans are not prepared to make political demands on Putin given the current geopolitical context, particularly under Trump's negotiation style.

• There is a clear indication from Rubio representing America that they do not dispute the positions taken by five European countries regarding Russia's actions.

Media and Judicial Actions Against Dissent

• The sentencing of journalist Ekaterina Trikadz to eight years for her comments about Bucha reflects how the Russian regime distances itself from military crimes while tightening its grip on dissent.

• The regime's efforts to maintain a façade of legitimacy are evident as they punish those who speak out against war crimes, indicating a strategy to suppress acknowledgment of their involvement.

Tactics of Suppression and Control

• The conversation suggests that using poison as a method of assassination allows the regime to attribute deaths to natural causes, avoiding direct responsibility.

• Punishing individuals who expose truths about events like Bucha serves as a warning against naming Vladimir Putin’s complicity in such incidents.

Kremlin's Narrative Construction

• The Kremlin has established narratives denying events like Bucha, framing them as fabrications, which serve as foundational elements for ongoing legal cases against dissenters.

• This narrative construction is part of a broader strategy where fabricated stories become entrenched within state propaganda, ensuring continued support for government actions.

Shifts in U.S.-Europe Relations

• Recent speeches at international conferences indicate a growing rift between the U.S. and Europe, with figures like Rubio suggesting that NATO's previous unity is no longer viable.

• Discussions around Trump's past remarks highlight unresolved tensions regarding territorial claims (e.g., Greenland), emphasizing that NATO’s Article 5 may no longer be reliable or actionable.

This structured summary captures key discussions from the transcript while providing timestamps for easy reference. Each point succinctly conveys critical insights into political dynamics surrounding Russia and Ukraine relations, media suppression tactics employed by the Russian regime, and evolving transatlantic relationships.

Security in Europe: The Future Without the U.S.?

The Role of Europe in Global Security

• Discussion on whether Europe can establish a robust security system independent of the U.S., particularly without American nuclear protection.

• Acknowledgment of significant political constraints faced by European democratic governments, leading to uncertainty about future developments.

• Reflection on the end of a world order that existed since the late Cold War, emphasizing changes highlighted during the Munich Conference.

Insights from the Munich Conference

• Analysis of Marco Rubio's pragmatic approach compared to more radical political figures, indicating a shift in Republican rhetoric regarding international relations.

• Critique of past expectations for maintaining previous global orders; it is deemed an illusion that such stability can be restored.

Reactions to Zelensky's Speech

• Overview of reactions to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's address at the conference, highlighting skepticism about peace negotiations with Russia.

• Rubio expresses doubt over finding a viable peace formula acceptable to both Ukraine and Russia, contrasting with Trump's more optimistic statements.

Military Support for Ukraine

• Confirmation that the U.S. will continue supplying arms to European nations for transfer to Ukraine, underscoring ongoing military support despite Europe's limitations in providing weaponry directly.

• Emphasis on intelligence sharing from the U.S. as crucial for Ukraine’s defense strategy amidst ongoing conflict.

Outlook on Ongoing Negotiations and Conflict

• Predictions that upcoming Geneva talks are unlikely to yield results due to lack of commitment from both Moscow and Kyiv.

• Discussion on Putin's current inability to dictate terms in negotiations and how this affects Ukraine's stance against surrendering.

Economic Impact and Future Scenarios

• Consideration of potential economic damage inflicted by war on Russia and its implications for future negotiations as well as military strategies moving forward.

• Speculation about Trump’s actions if negotiations fail again; acknowledgment that maintaining support for Ukraine may become politically challenging as elections approach.

Discussion on Political Dynamics and Telegram Blockage

Political Statements and Implications

• The speaker discusses the political landscape in the U.S. and how certain statements may lead to losses rather than gains for politicians, particularly referencing Marco Rubio's comments.

• Criticism of Telegram's blockage is highlighted, with Sergey Mironov expressing strong opposition while Vladimir Solovyov takes a softer stance. The sincerity of these statements is questioned regarding their alignment with public sentiment.

Telegram Blockage Context

• The conversation shifts to the potential final decision regarding the blocking of Telegram, indicating that this issue is not directly tied to upcoming elections.

• It is suggested that the process of blocking messaging apps like WhatsApp and Telegram has been ongoing since last year, with a predicted timeline for implementation.

Government Pressure on Messaging Apps

• The speaker notes that there seems to be a systematic approach towards eliminating both WhatsApp and Telegram from Russian society, questioning its feasibility.

• There’s an emphasis on government pressure pushing users towards alternative platforms (referred to as "Max"), which are mandated for use in schools and organizations.

User Engagement Statistics

• A statistic claiming 90 million users of "Max" is discussed; however, it’s clarified that many users only install it for compliance rather than active engagement.

• Despite governmental efforts, actual communication continues predominantly outside of "Max," indicating a disconnect between official statistics and real user behavior.

Economic Impact of Telegram

• The discussion highlights the significant role Telegram plays in organizing business and social life in Russia, suggesting it has more economic than political weight currently.

• Lobbying efforts supporting Telegram are implied to occur behind closed doors, surfacing when governmental pressure increases.

Future Outlook on Messaging Platforms

• Concerns are raised about how military operations influence public discourse around messaging apps like Telegram amidst ongoing pressures from authorities.

• The complexity of completely removing Telegram from Russian society is acknowledged due to its deep integration into daily life compared to WhatsApp.

Conclusion Remarks

• The speaker concludes by noting uncertainty over whether the government's objectives regarding messaging apps will be achieved or if they will face challenges moving forward.

• Acknowledgment of the guest's insights wraps up the discussion while encouraging audience engagement through likes and comments.