Download - Third World Network

W O R L D A F F A I R SIn fact, he says, the OSCE andthe West had made its mind up abouthow wonderfully free and fair BorisYeltsin’s election was before votingeven started.‘The OSCE parliamentary assemblyhad a separate mission who werepassionately pro-Yeltsin,’ he said. ‘Soyou had two OSCE missions for theelection, one of which arrived predisposedto say things were good.’ Theother was pressured to agree.Evidence of fraud, such as entiretowns in Chechnya voting overwhelminglyfor Yeltsin, causedMeadowcroft to liken the 1996 electionto those held in African dictatorships.‘In Chechnya they’d beenbombed out of existence, and therethey were all supposedly voting forYeltsin. It’s like what happens inCameroon,’ he said.While the Western media portraythe Russia-OSCE spat as a simplebattle between bright democracy anddark autocracy, the Russian elite havea deeply cynical view of the OSCEbased on personal experience. AsMeadowcroft was not allowed to sayat the time, Yeltsin’s victory in 1996was rife with fraud. Most importantto the outcome was the months-longblanket television support Yeltsin receivedand a ‘black PR’ campaignagainst his Communist foe, GennadyZyuganov; Russia’s print media wasalmost as bad. The election was not a‘victory for optimists’, as the HooverInstitute’s notorious Yeltsin-cheerleaderMichael McFaul wrote at thetime. Rather, the technology of thefraudulent election, blessed by theWest, served as the template for futureRussian elections. But if few inthe West know about this, it’s becausethe OSCE and the Western media onlybegan to emphasise Russia’s systemicelectoral fraud and media manipulationin 2003.‘[The West] didn’t want [preelection]criticism that the electionhad been manipulated, lest the Communistsget public mileage out of it,’said Meadowcroft. ‘And the Communistsregarded it as par for the coursethat they wouldn’t get a fair deal. Iwent to see the Zyuganov team andthey said, “Oh it’s a waste of time toThe Vienna headquarters of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe.The OSCE’s conduct in monitoring elections in Russia has undermined its credibility.give you the dossier [on electionfraud], you’re not going to do anythingabout it anyway.”’He added that the EU tried to suppressa report about media manipulationsubmitted by a Belgian colleagueworking for an EU institution. Whenhe was barred from releasing the report,he handed it over toMeadowcroft, who released it to themedia as a private citizen. Few noticedor cared at the time.Instead, here’s the kind of spinWestern publics heard after the 1996election:‘The preliminary conclusion ofthe IRI delegation is that this electionwas Russia’s best ever and reflectedthe great strides made by the Russianpeople in institutionalising their democracy.’(American observerWilliam Ball III, of the US-funded InternationalRepublican Institute NGO,July 1996)‘Voting was held… in a democratic,impartial and fair manner.’(Ernst Meulemann, an observer fromthe Council of Europe, July 1996)‘Now it’s true that PresidentYeltsin used his incumbency to his ownadvantage. It’s also true that the Communistcandidate, Mr. Zyuganov, usedthe fact that the Communist Party, theRussian Federation, has a hugegrassroots organisation, by far thebest, the biggest, and most complexorganisation in Russia, to its advantage.But a number of internationalobservers have judged this to be a freeand fair election.’ (US Deputy Secretaryof State Strobe Talbott, July 1996)‘For all the mutual distrust andsuspicion that preceded the election,there was consensus on the part of theGovernment, the Communist oppositionand international observers thatSunday’s election had been for themost part free and fair.’ (New YorkTimes, 18 June 1996)‘OSCE: ELECTION GENER-ALLY FREE AND FAIR: Even beforethe final results had been tabulated,a delegation of 500 election monitorsfrom the OSCE issued a preliminarystatement on 17 June declaring thefirst round of the Russian presidentialelection “generally free andfair”.’ (Radio Free Europe/Radio LibertyEurope, June 1996)Meadowcroft is still shocked bythe manipulation of his assessment ofthe election. ‘I never said “free andfair”. The weasel words I used weresomething like “a step forward fordemocracy”, but I certainly wouldn’tsay “free and fair” as far as I was recordingit,’ he said.The OSCE continued pumpingTHIRD WORLD RESURGENCE No 255/25660