Not giving up on Russian civil society

Station in Mytishchi outside Moscow. Photo: Kirill Sovraskin / flickr.com

Despite the widespread opinion in expert and political discussions, civil society in the Russian Federation has not disappeared. It does not have the same visibility as before, is under unprecedented pressure, and has largely moved into closed channels of communication, but, as a recent study of the Stockholm Centre for Eastern European Studies (SCEEUS) shows, independent initiatives and organizations continue to operate in various regions of the country. Their activities are aimed at solving social problems, supporting victims of violence, providing legal assistance to those who are persecuted, protecting the rights of minorities, and developing local communities. This activity is not widespread and often goes unnoticed, but it is precisely this activity that preserves the possibility for a future revival of democratic practices.

At the same time, it is important to note that the current external measures taken against Russia often exacerbate the difficulties faced by independent initiatives. Sanctions designed to weaken the state apparatus actually create a financial trap for civil society. Organizations that did not initially have sustainable sources of income and operated on minimal resources find themselves completely deprived of access to legal channels of support. In fact, EU countries are not just not providing these people with systemic support, they are pushing them into the abyss. For those who have left, quite often they are not given permission to stay, and for those who have stayed, sanctions (and financial blockade) and corporate pressure are creating a financial vise. As the authors of the aforementioned study rightly point out, democratic activists today are caught between internal repressive pressure and external financial blockade. When developing sanctions mechanisms, European states must take into account the need for special exemptions or flexible procedures that would allow independent organizations to circumvent the negative consequences of these measures. Otherwise, there is a risk that the very structures that could become the future basis for democratic transformation will be permanently undermined.

The issue of resources deserves special attention. In a situation where the state has effectively driven independent media out of the country and human rights defenders are forced to work semi-clandestinely, the main question remains unresolved: how can they continue their work? No legal mechanisms can replace basic financial capabilities. Independent media cannot maintain editorial freedom if their expenses exceed their income, and human rights organizations cannot conduct business without the funds to pay lawyers. A lack of resources leads not only to a reduction in activity but also to a growing sense of isolation and powerlessness. To put it bluntly, the main deficit is not only political space, but also the material basis for the existence of civil society.

The problem of isolation, both physical and symbolic, remains just as acute. A significant number of employees of independent organizations do not have Schengen visas, which makes it impossible for them to leave the country in sudden emergencies and limits their participation in international events. A number of EU countries are taking steps to grant humanitarian visas, but these require long-term departure and associated commitments, which are not in line with the intentions of many activists. Their task is to continue their work within Russia, maintaining links with local communities, and the possibility of temporary travel to participate in human rights meetings and conferences is not a privilege but a matter of professional and human security. Consequently, the creation of flexible short-term visa mechanisms is becoming an integral part of civil society support policy.

Even under pressure, civil society in Russia continues to produce meaningful empirical information about what is happening inside the country. Independent human rights defenders, remaining in Russia, conduct research and publish analytical materials, an example of which is the book Anatomy of Decay, which shows the collapse of the legal system in its attempts to establish the rule of law and protect human rights. These materials are valuable precisely because they are based on direct experience of working under conditions of repression. Conducting such research and complex human rights cases involves constant risks, ranging from being labelled a “foreign agent” and subjected to searches to direct threats and violence. Despite this, the work continues, forming a body of data necessary for understanding the processes in Russian society and for future assessment of violations.

All these factors together suggest that without sustained support for independent initiatives, Russia’s democratic future remains under threat. The European Union, which has already identified modern Russia as an existential challenge in its strategic documents, must take into account that this threat cannot be eliminated without preserving and developing internal civil structures. It is these structures that can serve as a bridge in a transitional society, ensure the accountability of the authorities, form horizontal ties, and reinforce values that are incompatible with the authoritarian culture of violence. Consequently, the task of external partners is not only to counter the aggressive actions of the Russian state, but also to support the civil forces that continue to work within the country, which requires a review of sanctions policy, the creation of transparent financing channels, and new visa mechanisms.

This text was created as part of a project called “Shaping the EU’s Future Policy on Russia in the Area of People-to-People Ties”, supported by the Civil Society Forum and the European Union.

civil society, Russia