A Moratorium on Murder?

Russia and Britain are in the latest throes of their dustup over the nuclear assassination of Alexander Litvinenko in central London. The latest chapter is a TV report detailing apparent British conclusions that the Russian state -- and not just individuals or rogues -- were responsible for the poisoning. The Russians have demanded an official British "explanation," meaning a refutation, which the British have refused to provide.

What seems lost in all of this noise is a strange quiet elsewhere -- there have been no sensational murders or state-assisted slaughter involving Russia in well over a year, since Litvinenko's slaying in November 2006.

Even if one counts the mysterious death of journalist Ivan Safronov in March 2007, when he fell five floors from his apartment building, it is still a relatively long time.

Vladimir Putin and his successor Dmitri Medvedev have put up an impassive face toward international outrage toward the string of murders and deaths during Putin's time in power. Earlier this week, Medvedev is said to have rejected British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's face-to-face renewal of Britain's request for the extradition of Andrei Lugovoi, whom Britain has charged with Litvinenko's murder.

Yet, one wonders whether the persistent global opprobrium cast on Russia and the Kremlin has had some impact.

Yet it's one matter to call an effective moratorium on murder. It's another to have decisive judicial action on prior cases. Wednesday was the fourth anniversary of the murder of Paul Klebnikov, the crusading editor of Forbes Russia, who was gunned down near his office as he walked to the Metro. His family marked the date by insisting that the Russians find and try Klebnikov's assailants.

Britain's Brown said that he told Medvedev at the G-8 summit in Japan that the U.K. will not drop the Litvinenko case. Murder carried out in the U.K. must be adjudicated. So far, it's not clear that the Russians get that point.

Photo: lilibethjanuary
Rights: Creative Commons