Andrey Kortunov: The Magnitsky case is a subject of internal political haggling between Democrats and Republicans

The Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council explained to the Voice of Russia what role the Magnitsky case was playing in Russian-American relations.

The Director General of the Russian International Affairs Council explained to the Voice of Russia what role the Magnitsky case was playing in Russian-American relations.

- In her article, Hillary Clinton noted that there were obstacles towards a good and broad economic cooperation between Russia and the United States. So why, doing everything to repeal the Jackson–Vanik amendment, is the United States of America using the Magnitsky case to create a new obstacle to economic cooperation among the two countries?

- I think that in America, they will perhaps say that the Magnitsky list is not related to trade and economic ties between the two countries, that it is a political issue, that it reflects the opinion of a certain part of the American elite with respect to those violations of law, which in their opinion, exist in Russia.

This is certainly a politically motivated act. Moreover, it must be considered in the context of the election campaign. It is obvious that Obama’s presidential opponents, the Republicans, who believe that the president is too soft on what they interpret as violation of human rights in Russia, are trying to gain political capital on the Magnitsky case.

- According to Clinton and Obama, normal trade relations between countries are a necessity and one of the connecting links in the global world. Nevertheless, how can normal relations be distributed if the Magnitsky case exists and the Jackson-Vanik Amendment continues operating?

- As for the Jackson-Vanik Amendment, one should not exaggerate its importance for our trade and economic relations since it has become a tradition that every year a U.S. president announces that this amendment will be suspended. One cannot say that it affects our economic ties even today. Repealing the amendment is also a political rather than an economic gesture.

Assistance by the American side to Russia’s accession to the WTO is really important. This was done not for nothing or to just do a favor to Moscow. This is a clear reckoning of the fact that the USA will benefit from Russian markets opening up. This is not an insignificant decision for the Americans considering the serious economic problems that the USA is currently experiencing.

- Why, in your opinion, did the U.S. Congress postpone consideration of the Magnitsky list? Do you admit that in the future this document will still be adopted?

- I think that the document will be adopted in one form or the other. However, there could be options, and style is needed from this statement. This list may be more or less, short or long, and it is now rumored that part of this document will even be confidential. This is all the signals Washington is sending to Moscow. In a sense, this is a subject of internal political haggling between Democrats and Republicans.

- Can the U.S. Secretary of State make this document confidential if the action is considered as necessary for national security?

- I think so. From my point of view, confidentiality, although very small, is still a concession to the Russian side. The Americans, in this sense, would not want to very strongly expose those people who fall into this list. Anyway, this can be interpreted so.

However, it is very indicative that after the meeting between Presidents Putin and Obama, the tone of comments in the American press on the prospects of relations with Russia changed dramatically. Previously, people would say that the “reset” was over, and that Putin would review the legacy left by Medvedev, but now, the majority of commentators suggest that continuity in relations would go on.

- In your opinion, is it this meeting and Vladimir Putin’s later statement on the Magnitsky list that could have really somehow affected the decision to postpone the meeting?

- I think it certainly could. Clearly, this issue was discussed in details at the meeting between the two Presidents. Perhaps, after this meeting, the U.S. executive branch took extra efforts to try not to make this a fundamental issue in its bilateral relations with Russia. Obviously, the focus of review, clarification of the style of documents, clarification of the parameters of this list will all change and this is an evidence that Washington obviously would not want to quarrel with Moscow now.

Source - Voice of Russia radio (in russian).