Dysfunctional protection

In the grand mosaic of the events in Kazakhstan, there is one detail that particularly stands out to me. It is the protesters’ over-the-top aggression against the journalists and media working on the ground. Reports of violence against media representatives and wreaking havoc in media offices come in like frontline updates. Notably, these attacks are clearly well-targeted and apparently meant to obstruct objective coverage of the rampant “purely peaceful protest” – as well as to intimidate journalists and exclude others from active dissemination of information.

I will give you just a few examples. On January 5, a group of unidentified perpetrators raided the Kazakhstani branch of the Mir Television and Radio Company in Almaty. This company has an international status and will marks its 30^th anniversary in 2022.

Reports from the scene are fraught with shocking details. Around 500 people were armed with axes and an autogenous cutter. We all know that peaceful protesters always bring along autogenous cutters, Molotov cocktails and axes. They knew where they were going and ‘peaceful’ is not exactly the right word to describe them.

They started by welding off window security bars. They smashed everything in sight, tearing off radiators (to make sure people couldn’t work in the freezing cold offices), literally hacking workplaces to pieces, destroying satellite equipment and all television hardware. One curious detail: the perpetrators obviously knew that communications might be cut off, so they had trunk walkie-talkies on them. A conclusion suggests itself that the intruders were well-prepared and organised, and plotted a coordinated attack.

There is more. The raiders damaged the heating system and the entire office was flooded, including the equipment room. The studio and the editing rooms were damaged. The office was later set on fire and everything burnt down. A representative office of the Mir International Television and Radio Company in Almaty was left in tatters. Meanwhile, offices of Kazakhstan, Khabar, Eurasia and KTK television channels and the Sputnik Kazakhstan news agency were also almost completely destroyed. During the attack on Mir, journalists, producers, camera operators and engineers were in the office. They were all blocked in the building for some time. Eventually, they were evacuated, although it took a great deal of effort. They are all alive and well.

A Sputnik correspondent was less lucky. Protesters kept him hostage for an hour until he managed to escape. A staff member of the Kazakhstan channel was also attacked by the rioters.

Here comes the most interesting fact. Neither the OSCE nor any international human rights organisation inquired about the fate of these journalists, let alone offered real help. It did not even occur to them to comment on this caveman vandalism.

The following evening, on January 6, a crew of the Almaty television channel came under fire in central Almaty as they were on their way to the city administration to film a video address by Almaty Akim (Mayor) Bakytzhan Sagintayev. Driver Muratkhan Bazarbayev was killed and a cameraman was wounded.

In other words, we are witnessing an outrageous violation of journalists’ rights, multiple attacks on their lives and obstruction of their professional duty to cover significant events during a crisis.

So where is a coherent response from international human rights institutions? Where is an adequate reaction from the OSCE and especially its Representative on Freedom of the Media? Ms Ribeiro has posted two tweets, no less. One was to condemn a firearm attack on the son of Saryagash Info Editor-in-Chief Amangeldy Batyrbekov. The other one was to express condolences to the family of the killed Almaty crew member. Not a word about the killers’ responsibility.

Excuse me, is that it? Is that everything they managed to make out from Vienna? Is that everything that was worth a reaction? Is that the kind of weighted response commensurate to the scale of violation, as our Western partners like to put it, a proportionate response by an international authority?

Do you think anybody from the office of the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media even contacted Mir, from Vienna or from the OSCE office in Nur-Sultan? Of course, not. Had they called, for example, Mir Chairperson Radik Batyrshin, they would have learned many interesting – and shocking – details.

Correct me if I am wrong: does a journalist have to die for Ms Ribeiro to fork up a tweet? I am tempted to ask: why do we, members of the OSCE, including Kazakhstan, pay millions of dollars to the OSCE budget, which is spent to protect the freedom of speech and journalists, among other things, if this organisation is not engaged in any of this declared activity during a critical moment for journalists in Kazakhstan?

But money is not really the issue here. States granted institutions like the OSCE Representative on Freedom of the Media the right to issue objective and impartial judgements on the state of affairs in the supervised industry in order to encourage countries to ensure the highest level of democracy. The key words here are objective and impartial. Unfortunately, neither are currently visible even as traces. OSCE representatives are known to have thrown fits over a blocked website, writing up paragraphs in their reports. But when a media office is raided, set on fire and flooded at the same time, when correspondents are taken hostage and physically attacked, there is no reaction. Still, on one of numerous media freedom dates, the OSCE Representative will hold a roundtable, hand out brochures with pretty pictures and memory sticks with the OSCE logo.

This kind of neglect of one’s direct responsibilities, dysfunction and lack of professionalism can lead to the most deplorable consequences. Not only do they undermine the authority of the OSCE and its executive bodies further; rioters and looters may as well take it to mean the international community’s silent go-ahead to continue their atrocities against the media and journalists. If there is no criticism, it must be all right.

One more thing. We constantly hear about the OSCE’s novel concept of quiet diplomacy, meaning that the complicated issues of protecting journalists and the freedom of speech must be tackled by deeds rather than microphone speeches. This quiet diplomacy, however, seems to be used selectively. I will say it like it is: when it comes to media freedom, the OSCE is not dealing with its real problems, neither at a microphone, nor behind the stage nor in the quiet of their offices. They are not doing anything at all but churning out libellous reports based on the data slipped by the Big Brother through his NGOs. Shame on you.