Russian VKontakte Posts from Crimea, and the Sham that is International Treaty Compliance
- daria.locher
- Jul 20, 2020
- 7 min read
This is an article I wrote in July 2020 with a one-year follow-up I planned to write at the time.
It is difficult for the Russian government to get away with international treaties noncompliance when its soldiers post photos online refuting the official narrative. Since international journalists found evidence on social media that Russian troops illegally entered Crimea up to a year earlier than the official date, the Russian government has been trying to limit the use of social media within its armed forces. Last week a law was passed to plug leaks of “classified” material through Russian soldiers’ flippant use of social media. This domestic policy seeks to make international treaty compliance optional by restricting broadcasting unlawful military campaigns on social media sites. In a broader sense, this secrecy reflects President Putin’s gradual national priority shift turning towards self-dependence – a goal incompatible with past treaties.
An East-West Culture Clash
A 2014 paper written by Dmitri Trenin emphasizes Putin’s focus since 2012 of “winning full sovereignty for Russia.” This entails being free of foreign influence as well as having nearby states respect its special interests. The US’ repeated refusal to treat Russia as a potential ally and history of disrespecting Putin and Medvedev does not fit into this goal. Additionally, Europe’s moral and cultural relativism clashes with Putin’s embrace of the nonsecular view of Russia as the “global defender of indigenous values.” The strengthening of the relationship between the Kremlin and the Russian Orthodox Church, the ultimate protector of traditional values, justifies Putin’s interest in the other orthodox countries of Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova. (Despite these encroachments, Russia strategically tiptoes around countries in the NATO bloc, even if they were formerly Soviet republics, knowing that this would be over the line, at least at this point.)
In order to protect special interests in these states, Russia needs to be on equal footing with the Western world, making “government policies funded by foreign money...no longer tolerable.” In eliminating foreign policies in which Russia was a monetary benefactor, refusing to go to international summits hosted in the United States, and offering asylum to Edward Snowden in 2013, Putin was negotiating a more balanced relationship between Russia and the West. Another directed step Putin has taken to reduce foreign influence in Russia and ostensibly strengthen national security was to limit foreign contact with the Russian bureaucracy. In 2012 the government banned officials from owning assets abroad, in 2014 prohibited them from possessing multiple citizenships, and most recently mandated them to declare all contact with foreigners.
What treaties are under discussion?
The relevant treaties in the Ukrainian-Russian relationship include The Conference on Security and Co-Operation in Europe’s Final Act and the Charter of Paris for a New Europe. These treaties state that participating states are forbidden to use force, infringe on frontiers, or disrespect sovereignty of other states in the treaty. Additionally, the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation, signed in 1997, explicitly states that the two countries respect the other’s territorial integrity and inviolability of borders, and forbids the use of force. In September 2018, Ukraine chose to not extend this treaty; they argue that the treaty had essentially been nullified following Russia’s blatant violations in 2014.
Antithetically, Russian politician Konstantin Zatulin explained in January 2018 that Crimea was accepted as part of Russia when they signed the Friendship Treaty, so its secession was simply a formality to rectify its incorrect ownership. The country had pursued foreign policy that lined up with this interpretation of the law. Officially calling the Euromaidan Revolution of 2014 a European- and US-incited coup, Moscow’s military intervention was a necessary step “to protect its interests and the Russian-speaking population.” Take note that language, not ethnic or historical ties, was the defining justification.
The true story of Russian involvement in Ukraine
Unofficially, Russia was already in the country for a year prior to the Euromaidan Revolution, and it was only after Ukraine ousted their own president (after being incited by Russian anti-governmental forces) that Russia moved in with its armed forces and forced the desired outcome of the Crimea referendum in the name of security and legality. The lack of response from the international community served to substantiate Russia’s move. The sanctions imposed on Russia over Crimea only began after Russia was blamed for shooting down Malaysian airline MH17 and actually contributed to Russia’s aforementioned goal of freeing its elites, economy, and public favor from foreign influence.
In the use of Russian forces to support anti-governmental sentiment in Ukraine, Russia directly and illegally infringed on Ukraine’s sovereignty. The country was unable to completely hide its vast involvement. Ukrainian journalists found information about military movements through pictures and geolocations on Russian social media sites VKontakte and Odnoklassnikii, as well as Instagram, YouTube, and even Google Earth. This information is published around the world, most comprehensively on the Ukrainian site Inform Napalm. This site published a list of specific Russian brigades deployed throughout Ukraine as determined by soldiers’ social media accounts and hacked data. This electronic evidence of treaty violation is what Russia is addressing in this new internal law.
What does this new law entail?
In February 2018 a draft of the law was leaked, strongly recommending all soldiers to limit their social media use; to not publish anything about the nature of their service; and to turn off their geolocation on their phones. In November 2018 the law expanded to include a ban of social networks for current military servicemen. Currently, the ministry of defense is working on amendments to two current laws to extend this ban to five years after service. The Chairman of the State Duma Committee on Defense Vladimir Shamanov underscored in an official statement how this law applies to soldiers “especially [those who] served out of state.” The amendments will prohibit disclosing details about soldiers’ departmental affiliation and activities. Their social media accounts need to be set to the most private settings and connections limited to people they know, as well as several other safe internet use practices. Potential punishments range from disciplinary, administrative, to even criminal responsibility.
The official “Russian Newspaper” states that the complete ban of social media posts includes all ranks, soldiers in reserve, and former conscripted soldiers up to five years after their service who were involved in operational duties and/or had access to classified documents. They want to mirror internet limitations in provisions in the law called “About government secrets.” In Statute 24 of “About government secrets”, the right of the citizen to travel abroad for a prespecified amount of time is limited. As justification for the mirroring of military social media accounts with these high standards for state officials, the article in “Russian Gazette” exclaimed, “Imagine how much damage a couple of photos can cause the security of the country!” It seems more apt to wonder what government secrets can be revealed by a soldier following their government’s orders ostensibly within international law.
The backlash following the annexation of Crimea with social media posts contradicting the government’s official story proved to Russia that outward treaty compliance relies on a clean social media presence of its soldiers. However, a survey done by the newspaper “Takii Del” shows that over 50% of Russians don’t see a threat in their information being seen by a third party. The newspaper Izvestiya revealed in their article “Dislike for demobilization: the military reserve ban of social networks” that countless soldiers work around the law by carrying a separate phone or creating a fake social media account. This article points out that the government cannot track down violators of the law because “foreign social networks still don’t share information about users with Russian agencies.” The Inform Napalm article about the extent of Russian military involvement in Ukraine asserted that the Russian soldiers’ social media posts represent a group of people proud of the illegality of their country’s actions, which might be the motivation behind their countless public posts.
A recent Russian constitutional court ruling stated that the Russian Constitution is recognized over international law in cases of dispute. This might explain Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov’s belief that international law should be held to individual national standards, as described in James Coyle’s article “Will Russia Reinterpret International Law and Get Away With It?”. With a constitution court discrediting international agreements and a military forced to keep violations secret, Russia is on the path to a full rejection of the fundamental norms keeping the international arena peaceful.
-----
Update July 20, 2020
I wrote this article in March of 2019 – just over a year ago from now. At the time, Russian news was casually reporting on this new social media law passed in February 2019 that prohibited both active and reserve soldiers from using smartphones and social networks – in particular, posting geotags or photos online. The object of this ban: to hide its noncompliance with several international treaties that upheld sovereignty (and by extension, forbidding a country to place its troops into another without due cause or international sanction). I wanted to return to this story at this time to see if there have been any developments in this regard, and there has been.
In early June 2020, President Putin signed a new law further restricting its soldiers’ use of social media, including forbidding military personnel from carrying electronic gadgets with them whenever they are performing nearly any military exercises. The law also stipulates that soldiers are forbidden to even post about their military affiliation online. In the same way that the previous law seemed to be intended to hide where the soldiers are stationed, this new law pushes this a step further. Now, even if a soldier might post a selfie or geotag on social media from a place they shouldn’t be located, the Russian government has the ability to argue that this individual isn’t associated with the Russian military, given the lack of online trail. Once again, this law points to treaty noncompliance as the end goal.
At a certain point, though, I wonder how necessary these actions are – given how the international community reacted to Russia’s abrupt and unlawful annexation of Crimea, and later to Russia’s blatant and extensive meddling into the 2016 US Presidential election. The outrage following these two was short-lived and mostly came without substantial repercussions. What could be an even bigger future target for Putin that he feels he needs to prepare to hide it from the international arena?
Works Cited
-- Follow-up –
