The Guardian: Cossack comeback: fur flies as 'fake' groups spark identity crisis

The subsequent dispute over what constitutes “true” Cossack identity goes beyond a simple matter of uniform. The attack on peaceful opposition activists has sparked concerns that the Cossacks’ romanticised past is being used to legitimise the actions of Kremlin-backed paramilitary groups. [...]

Inside Russia, Cossack patrols have now become a kind of volunteer morality police. In Krasnodar, the southern region where the attack on Navalny and his team took place, they were even put on the region’s payroll in 2012.

Their increased presence was widely seen as an attempt to keep in check an increasing number of migrants in the region bordering the Caucasus region. Even though they had no authority to conduct arrests or carry firearms, the message was that the Cossack figures alone would provide police with a tool of intimidation less constrained by the burden of public accountability.

read the article 

AP: Dozens in Russia imprisoned for social media likes, reposts

As the Kremlin claims unequivocal support among Russians for its policies both at home and abroad, a crackdown is underway against ordinary social media users who post things that run against the official narrative. Here the Kremlin's interests coincide with those of investigators, who are anxious to report high conviction rates for extremism. The Kremlin didn't immediately comment on the issue.

At least 54 people were sent to prison for hate speech last year, most of them for sharing and posting things online, which is almost five times as many as five years ago, according to the Moscow-based Sova group, which studies human rights, nationalism and xenophobia in Russia. The overall number of convictions for hate speech in Russia increased to 233 last year from 92 in 2010.

A 2002 Russian law defines extremism as activities that aim to undermine the nation's security or constitutional order, or glorify terrorism or racism, as well as calling for others to do so. The vagueness of the phrasing and the scope of offenses that fall under the extremism clause allow for the prosecution of a wide range of people, from those who set up an extremist cell or display Nazi symbols to anyone who writes something online that could be deemed a danger to the state. In the end, it's up to the court to decide whether a social media post poses a danger to the nation or not.

read the article 

Reuters: Merkel sees no reason to roll back Russia sanctions: spokeswoman

German Chancellor Angela Merkel sees no reason at all now to roll back sanctions against Russia in the Ukraine crisis, a government spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said on Tuesday some EU states were skeptical about extending sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine crisis and it was unclear if the 28-nation bloc would decide to renew them.

read the article 

Vox: An expert on the European far right explains the growing influence of anti-immigrant politics

The core of the ideology of the radical right includes three features: nativism, authoritarianism, and populism. [...]

So there is an aspect of color in it. But the key enemy has become Islam. That's done some good for some other minorities. If you look in the Netherlands, for example, Moroccans and Turks are perceived as Others, while Surinamese — who are black but not Muslim — have disappeared from the "Other" category. Today you can see some nonwhites among radical right parties, but they tend to be Christian or at the very least non-Muslim. [...]

And there's quite a lot of anti-Semitism in the East, even in countries that have very few Jews (like Poland). By contrast, anti-Semitism is almost absent on the radical right in Western Europe. If it comes from the right, it tends to be neo-Nazi groups, not radical right parties. [...]

I make a distinction generally between the extreme right, which opposes democracy as such, and the radical right, which accepts democracy but challenges some of the fundamentals of liberal democracy — particularly pluralism and minority rights.

read the article 

BBC4 Analysis: Protectionism in the USA

Edward Stourton examines America's long history of resistance to free trade, and asks why it has again become such a potent political force. Donald Trump's most consistent policy has been opposition to free trade agreements which he sees as unfair, particularly with China. On the Democratic side, Bernie Sanders has been equally opposed, if for different reasons, while Hillary Clinton has had to tack away from her previous support for free trade pacts. Edward looks back to debates from the 19th century to the 1990s to shed new light on these forces. And he asks whether the protectionist impulse is a natural reaction to globalisation's wrenching changes.

listen to the podcast