|
|
 |
| SCO Has Already Taken Its Place in World Architectonics |
| 23.04.2009 15:31 |
|
|
|
The Special Representative of the President of Russia for the Shanghai Cooperation Organization affairs and the national coordinator of SCO from Russia, ambassador atheist Leonid Moiseev gave an interview to the Editor-in-Chief of InfoSCO Tatiana Sinitsyna.
- Within our sight a new world image is being created – the political and economic one. What place in this architectonics can the Shanghai Cooperation Organization take?
L.M. – SCO is a quite young international structure, it was created eight years ago, but I am sure, it has already taken its place both in the regional and world architecture. First of all, on the strength of its uniqueness. The organization consolidates the two big countries, Russia and China, and at the same time – four Central Asian countries – Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. And SCO propagates at that the philosophy of which the main point is the following: all countries, regardless of spatial quantity, economic power, political culture, traditional peculiarities, should have absolutely equal constituent power in world affairs and to participate fully and equally in discussion of paramount questions of the present.
This philosophy is inevitably perceived as a challenge to the tendencies that have lately especially distinctly appeared, when there were attempts to model all out-of-doors by templates of a certain standard, by subjective yardsticks, when the only someone's value systems were imposed. And SCO upholds the principle of parity when all the countries can fully cooperate not only on absolutely equal terms, in spite of differences, but herewith also develop cultural traditions in cooperation with other states. It is this philosophy that imparts uniqueness to the organization, serves as the main attractive moment.
- Intergovernmental alliances do not appear for no particular reason; everything has its causal relationship. What passionaire forces have promoted SCO’s idea, what objective conditions have predetermined the organization appearance?
L.M. – The point of SCO’s departure was an intensive cooperation with China near the common border that was in progress in last years of the Soviet Union. Then the two states took the lead of working out unique for the Asian Continent measures of military confidence and reduction in force near the common border. There was no similar precedent in Asia’s history (by the way, our example was later used by China and India at their borders). This absolutely new for Asia process had an important result – it was the start of creating an atmosphere of mutual trust. And this atmosphere did not disappear at that following the breakup of the Soviet Union. In Central Asia new sovereign states arose that also turned out to be aimed at cooperating and trusting. This positive process contributed to creation of intergovernmental relations of new quality in the post-Soviet political realities in this part of world.
- Was not it a challenge to the same unipolar policy imposing its standards, a desire to harmonize forces in the Global area? The nature of things, as is known, seeks equilibrium.
L.M. - Maybe, subconsciously, hiddenly, it advanced the states as well. However none of the participants of the first new format meetings did not aim any opposition. That is, there was no task to create an anti-western coalition, as was no aim to create some sort of “antiNATO” instead of the broken Warsaw Pact. Unfortunately, exactly these motifs are often ascribed to SCO. The main task was different, quite pragmatic. At that date in the Central-Asian region a disturbing entity was formed: terrorism and extremism forces made a move. The regional situation in whole turned out to be very fragile. This is precisely why it was necessary to concentrate on some joint steps, foremost on opposition to these forces. It was these tasks that were made the corner-stone. It was not without reason that the first elaborated documents underlined the need for joint struggle against these dangerous tendencies. The organization initially showed a new, unique for the unipolar international practice example of communication, when the countries of various civilization traditions and cultures were conducting equitable dialogue on a wide range of questions. Apart from security problems primordially brought to a focus, a theme of cooperation development in other areas naturally arose too. In this way an Economic dimension and a comprehensive humanitarian component part appeared. The organization was harmonized, became universal.
- It would seem, the SCO countries are not valent by their territorial dimension, historical experience, economic potential, integration possibilities, and finally, by their mentality, and cultural traditions. How is possible to count all that, to fairly order? Apparently, it is the most difficult task for the organization. What do You think?
L.M. – Yes, indeed. It is not so easy to combine everything in a single fabric. At the very beginning of its existence SCO enunciated quite ambitious goals: say, a mission was officially set to create economic conditions towards 2020 for capital, services, and investment free flow. Actually the matter was about a serious full-fledged economic integration. However the reality showed that these missions are not so easy to solve. And now, in conditions of global financial crisis, they can even become more complicated. Gradually what could be solved rather easily at the first stage was singled out, whereas outstanding problems were adjourned. New topics and unexpected points of contact appeared. Things went naturally, with application of various countries' efforts. That is, it was not the situation when one or two countries were imposing others a certain instruction. It was a free and plain exchange of opinions. Thereby both positive and negative experience of other regional associations was taken into account, say, that of EurAsEC. We did not seek after excessively ambitious things, but we tried to do what was in the organization’s power at a particular stage of existence. If the economic integration is not today’s and even not tomorrow’s mission, perhaps, then infrastructure projects implementation, in the first place – auto-roads and railroads construction – is a feasible task. And the matter is about an important thing at that – establishment of a communication element connecting all the SCO states in a single economic organism. Except China, other countries in the times of the Soviet Union were integrated in one system. However in view of new realities it was necessary to create a new fabric of a common space, intergovernmental relations in the region. Certainly, without denying what had existed before.
- SCO’s way is pioneer, and it is quite natural that it is covered by trial and error. Not all of the declared projects are equally successful, some of them are pending, and others, on the contrary, have got a good perspective. What areas of cooperation would You single out as successful?
L.M. – Things are good enough in the anti-terrorist direction. We have created a special structure engaged in quite specific things. The anti-narcotic cooperation is being actively developed - a burning issue because it concerns everybody. Cooperation between the ministries of emergency situations is worked out not bad, headquarters are being created to coordinate actions in this field; an emergency diplomatic response mechanism is being established. A new area has appeared - an opposition to epidemiological situation. It is paid more and more attention, so long as all the SCO member states are interested in it. Disaster medicine can also pronounce on, program of struggle against the outbreak of the odious diseases such avian influenza, non-typical pneumonia, enterovirus diseases etc. is being actively filled with specifics. Specialist contacts in this field have been considerably intensified.
Several big areas of cooperation within the framework of SCO were initiated by the Russian party. The question is, in the first place, about creation of the SCO Youth association and University. The sense of the educational project is to create a network of leading higher education institutions of the organization member states that should coordinate educational programs for students, train various specialists on behalf of SCO.
Certainly, not all the organization member states are enthusiastic about particular projects; there are times when they are assessed differently, which is quite natural. In the meantime, cooperation can be developed with a velocity of unequal significance – the countries ready for cooperation can join one project or another, while others can abstain and join in later.
- And yet, it is no secret that at the SCO roundtable there is disagreement, different points of view, and particular opinions. How is possible here to reach a consensus, the ideal SCO is striving for?
L.M. – There are different ways to do it. Remember that on March 27 a conference on Afghanistan took place in Moscow initiated by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and turned out to be very successful – 34 countries and international organizations participated in it. Uzbekistan was not presented at this conference. On the strength of special approaches to the Afghan problem Tashkent considered it unreasonable to take part in this SCO initiative. In the meantime, the convocation of a conference coordinated with it. One of the documents that became the result of this special conference is the further SCO’s plan of actions in the Afghan area. I think that many things provided in this plan will be implemented with the participation of Uzbekistan as well.
- It may be said that SCO is a covered friendly table, but some of the presents, for some reason or another, do not perceive, say, a spicy or a sweet dish. Is this image acceptable?
L.M. - Perfectly. I think the organization must take into account each member’s specifics of the approach to one problem or another, a peculiarity of international organizations lies here. The consensus principle – a single approach elaboration - certainly, should be used, but at the same time it is not improbable that various countries have a different speed of motion in a particular direction. If one of the parties is not ready to participate in one common goal or another (the SCO documents admit it), the interested countries can participate in it. And here is no need to seek contradictions or any element of confrontation inside the organization. This is the essence of everyday life where not everything can be ideal. And when the organization is increased, I do not exclude these “discrepancies” the more so. However different positions should not impede work in those directions where the substantial part of countries does whish to cooperate. To stop and wait until others mature is not allowed. It follows from SCO’s philosophy propagating the respect to each member of the organization, attention to each country’s voice and at the same time – calling not to stop, but move towards promising areas.
- What role, in Your opinion, can SCO play in the member states safe overcoming the financial and economic crisis? It is clear that everybody would like to minimize his personal losses, but do the SCO states have any common approaches to the assessment of actions?
L.M. - Within the framework of SCO the theme of crisis is ranked rather high. We have a structure that consolidates the SCO countries’ economic authorities – the Business Council. It was it first of all that designated the “crisis problems” at its meetings, and they are regularly discussed. By the way, at the St. Petersburg international economic forum early June, where SCO traditionally works as a separate section, a special session at a rather high presentation level of the SCO Business Council is planned to be held where looking for ways to harmonize economic relations in conditions of crisis will be considered. The question will be also about what exactly business community can offer to enable the SCO countries to overcome the crisis with minimal loss.
- But the situation in the SCO space is not definite: some was affected by the crisis more, some less...
L.M. – I would say as follows: within the framework of SCO there are countries, the crisis affected more than others. They are, first of all, the countries, the most actively involved in the international differentiation of labor. On the other hand, in conditions of crisis the international aid will be inevitably reduced for those countries that in recent years have got accustomed to receive it. That is why there need to be found solutions in order that consequences may not have a dramatic impact on the level of living in these countries. Another important moment: it is no secret that in conditions of crisis demand for labor migrants’ services slumped, and Russia and Kazakhstan are just the countries that had very actively involved labor migrants, in particular from Kirghizia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, i.e. its SCO colleagues.
This subject is serious and major for discussion. On the initiative of Russia we have specially created a group of experts including all the migration-related departments’ representatives. The scope of discussion in this group is very wide – from struggle against illegal migration – till creation of conditions for a normal civilized migration, first of all the labor one. This theme is now becoming one of the major items on the economic agenda. We have created an inter-departmental group, where not only the FMS representatives participate but also those of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, Business Council. This group will formulate conceptual approaches to the problem solution. By the way, SCO deals with the migration problem as a pioneer; we felt the problem inevitable in the SCO countries relationships just in time.
- Not simple question – about the SCO extension, new states joining, all the more so there are interested countries. What is SCO’s position here?
L.M. - As far back as two years ago, after the first SCO membership applications, at the summit in Dushanbe it was decided to weigh and discuss this question very thoroughly. Last year we created a special group that began to consider all aspects. Certainly, the issue of the Organization extension is, first of all, a political question. But technical moments also require a serious attention. For example, as regards the Organization budget and contributions. The SCO budget is formed on the principle of economic weight. In compliance with the contribution rate each country has a quota for the representation in the continuing structures. The question arises of working languages. Today it is Russian and Chinese. When accepting new members SCO would have to pass to other working languages as well.
Here also emerges even the question we have never thought about before. When SCO was created, in its Charter the following was enunciated: the Organization is open for other countries admittance; it is not an exclusive bloc. Only two admittance criteria were designated. The fist one – a new member must recognize matters of principle of the SCO activity, agree with them and on this ground to work within the framework of the Organization. The second criterion is to belong to the region. But, when we began to think over what the SCO region is, we faced the difficulties with definition of this term.
The point is that the SCO region can be presented differently. In the narrow geographical “key” it is the Central Asia region. Then it turns out that besides the current members, only Turkmenia belongs to this region. When presenting the SCO possible space to the widest extent, then it would include all the Eurasian territory, i.e. any Asian or European country could pretend to this organization membership under such interpretation.
There is another criterion we have tried to apply; it is the availability of common borders. However it can incredibly extend the SCO geography as well. Thus, we faced a problem of definition of a fundamental meaning of the “SCO region” term. Some members of the organization immediately offered to tighten criteria, to make their set in such a way that only “unstained” countries should meet them. It was hardly correct, but if to refer to other international organizations’ example, say NATO or EC, it is clear how much admittance procedure is complicated there. There is a strict rule set, a chain of preparatory stages, it is necessary to undergo. So, the work on admittance criteria in SCO that we had considered technical turned out to be more serious.
However it must be done and we shall continue to work. If SCO enunciated the Organization openness, then it is impossible to be closed for ever in the existing frames. The first results of the experts’ efforts are already available, and they will, apparently, be reported to the heads of state, that will give the further impetus.
- De facto SCO is already an important part of the Central Asian security system; UN, NATO and other organizations now have to accept the established reality, communicate with SCO, take into consideration its opinion and even jointly work out a common strategy in the area of common interests, I mean Afghanistan.
L. M. – I would say that the conference on Afghanistan SCO organized on March in Moscow has become a matter of principle. For the first time in SCO's history NATO, the USA, the Group of Eight countries, Turkey, OSCE that had taken SCO not very seriously until recently, participated in the forum organized by SCO. And OSCE secretary general, NATO Deputy Secretary General even spoke at the conference. The SCO ground is very convenient for the Afghan subject discussion at a regional angle.
At the conference we did not challenge to solve all the Afghan problems. The mission was quite pragmatic and rather realistic – to see what can be done in the Afghan area from a perspective of the region. And in the first place, not inside Afghanistan, but around it. And it turned out a very actual theme. CSTO Secretary General Nikolai Borduzha, speaking at the conference, absolutely correctly noted that 8 big international structures and organizations are functioning in the region in the Afghan direction, and each of them is acting in accordance with its own plans, not coordinating their efforts with other structures, other countries.
It turns out that a lot of efforts are put into the “Afghan theme”, a large amount of events are dedicated to it, the countries contribute colossal sums, but the situation only becomes worse. It suggests that maybe something is wrong. It turns out that all the parties are working by individual algorithms; international organizations do not take into consideration each other's actions. Whereas SCO has just offered to try to find some joint strategy, or at least - points of contact where possible.
We have designated the directions that seem priority to us: narcotics, terrorism, and organized crime. As concerns counter-drug actions, everybody admit that efforts are to be consolidated. There are problems both for those who act inside Afghanistan - UN, NATO, Americans, West Europeans, and those who work outside it. And everybody feels that something must be done. We suggested a plan of SCO’s actions everybody can join in, as was declared. And this found a response. By the way, at the Hague Conference on the Afghan issue that took place several days after the Moscow one, this approach received approval. It was also much said there about a regional approach and efforts coordination.
- What do You think, can one expect in that case SCO’s and other international structures’ efforts coordination in real terms?
L.M. – I am not very optimistic that SCO will begin to cooperate with NATO, EU or OSCE very soon. I think that it requires a period of prejudice and ideological parochialism overcoming. But the reality will make do it. The situation will lead to the establishment of contacts between similar anti-terrorist, anti-narcotic structures. No two ways about it: the situation in Afghanistan comes to a standstill more and more.
- This year Russia is chairing the SCO, preparing for the summit in Yekaterinburg. How Russia’s chairmanship of the SCO can be estimated?
L. M. – For the first time within the framework of the Organization a system approach was applied. Chairmanship of the Organization was relative before. In fact the term of “country’s chairing of the Organization” does not exist – there is a country holding a regular summit. That is why the state responsible for the summit does not chair all the SCO structures and bodies without exception, but it is in the chair of the main ones. As far backs as a year before the chairmanship we began to work out plans, possible directions, and conceptual approaches. Certainly, SCO is a living organism, many things outside and inside change, and often the key points had to be highlighted in a new way.
The main things, as I see it, are a success in principle. We have worked well in the area of struggle against new challenges and threats. The culmination here can be called our conference on Afghanistan that was convened not so easy. We spoke about the necessity for this conference for more than one month, and consequently – we succeeded in convening all the “players” acting in the Afghan direction. It is an absolutely indisputable achievement. I cannot help saying that a substantial contribution to this conference success was personally made by Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov.
I believe that work in the Afghan area will continue to be one of the major activities within the framework of SCO. I hope that it will be conducted systematically, and not on a case-by-case basis.
On the Russian initiative the cooperation in the field of information security has been developed. It is a unique case – none of the other international structures elaborate the information security so profoundly and seriously in practice. Today we are coming to a framework agreement that will designate really urgent activities for the SCO information security.
Our activity vector such as the SCO response to various challenges was developed successfully enough (from diplomatic till medical). Also the cooperation in the field of education has advanced not bad for the “Russian period”. In consideration of Uzbekistan’s particular position, certainly, there is no complete success here. Uzbekistan abstains from participating in the other initiative as well – in a youth association foundation. Nevertheless, one can just be glad that for the first time in the SCO space young people can participate in active communication.
I would not appreciate very much the economic area: there are more questions than answers here. It is one of the difficult problems for SCO. The organization member states have too different levels of economic development and GDP per head. Undoubtedly, our economic cooperation will be aimed at pulling up all the SCO member states to good enough economic indicators.
In the meantime, it is safe to say that business activity has already started. Before all the economic contacts within the framework of SCO developed on ministerial level, with all the ensuing bureaucratic consequences. And now business itself finds the cooperation areas it is interested in. For example, the insurance field has been designated very vividly - insurers actually create pools within the framework of SCO. Here a lot of efforts were made by the Business Council. Groups of the biggest insurance companies and banks have been already formed in all the SCO member states, and they will cooperate with each other.
I do not exclude that one more aspect of cooperation can open – that of labor migration. Migration flows between the SCO member states are very considerable, and in this field it is necessary to put things right, and ensure the defense of the rights and interests of labor migrants on other countries’ territories.
Success can be noted in the customs sphere. Up-to-date communication projects have been also well elaborated. They are two – the Chinese one (electronic main) and the Russian one (electronic signature). We believe that both projects have a right to existence and should complement each other. But so far it is necessary to find money and contractors for their implementation.
I think the overall picture of “Russia’s chairmanship of the SCO” looks favorable, though “sky's the limit”, as is known.
|
|
* Реестр иностранных средств массовой информации, выполняющих функции иностранного агента:
Голос Америки, Idel.Реалии, Кавказ.Реалии, Крым.Реалии, Телеканал Настоящее Время, Azatliq Radiosi, PCE/PC, Сибирь.Реалии, Фактограф, Север.Реалии, Радио Свобода, MEDIUM-ORIENT, Пономарев Лев Александрович, Савицкая Людмила Алексеевна, Маркелов Сергей Евгеньевич, Камалягин Денис Николаевич, Апахончич Дарья Александровна, Medusa Project, Первое антикоррупционное СМИ, VTimes.io, Баданин Роман Сергеевич, Гликин Максим Александрович, Маняхин Петр Борисович, Ярош Юлия Петровна, Чуракова Ольга Владимировна, Железнова Мария Михайловна, Лукьянова Юлия Сергеевна, Маетная Елизавета Витальевна, The Insider SIA, Рубин Михаил Аркадьевич, Гройсман Софья Романовна, Рождественский Илья Дмитриевич, Апухтина Юлия Владимировна, Постернак Алексей Евгеньевич, Общество с ограниченной ответственностью Телеканал Дождь, Петров Степан Юрьевич, Istories fonds, Шмагун Олеся Валентиновна, Мароховская Алеся Алексеевна, Долинина Ирина Николаевна, Шлейнов Роман Юрьевич, Анин Роман Александрович, Великовский Дмитрий Александрович, Альтаир 2021, Ромашки монолит, Главный редактор 2021, Вега 2021
* Сведения реестра НКО, выполняющих функции иностранного агента:
Фонд защиты прав граждан Штаб, Институт права и публичной политики, Лаборатория социальных наук, Фонд по борьбе с коррупцией, Альянс врачей, НАСИЛИЮ.НЕТ, Мы против СПИДа, Фонд защиты прав граждан, СВЕЧА, Гуманитарное действие, Открытый Петербург, Феникс ПЛЮС, Лига Избирателей, Правовая инициатива, Гражданская инициатива против экологической преступности, Фонд борьбы с коррупцией, Гражданский Союз, Российский Красный Крест, Центр Хасдей Ерушалаим, Центр поддержки и содействия развитию средств массовой информации, Горячая Линия, В защиту прав заключенных, Институт глобализации и социальных движений, Центр социально-информационных инициатив Действие, ВМЕСТЕ, Благотворительный фонд охраны здоровья и защиты прав граждан, Благотворительный фонд помощи осужденным и их семьям, Фонд Тольятти, Новое время, Серебряная тайга, Так-Так-Так, центр Сова, центр Анна, Проект Апрель, Самарская губерния, Эра здоровья, правозащитное общество Мемориал, Аналитический Центр Юрия Левады, Издательство Парк Гагарина, Фонд имени Андрея Рылькова, Сфера, Центр защиты СИБАЛЬТ, Уральская правозащитная группа, Женщины Евразии, Рязанский Мемориал, Екатеринбургское общество МЕМОРИАЛ, Институт прав человека, Фонд защиты гласности, Российский исследовательский центр по правам человека, Дальневосточный центр развития гражданских инициатив и социального партнерства, Пермский региональный правозащитный центр, Гражданское действие, Центр независимых социологических исследований, Сутяжник, АКАДЕМИЯ ПО ПРАВАМ ЧЕЛОВЕКА, Частное учреждение Совета Министров северных стран, Центр развития некоммерческих организаций, Гражданское содействие, Центр Трансперенси Интернешнл-Р, Центр Защиты Прав Средств Массовой Информации, Институт развития прессы - Сибирь, Фонд поддержки свободы прессы, Гражданский контроль, Человек и Закон, Общественная комиссия по сохранению наследия академика Сахарова, Информационное агентство МЕМО. РУ, Институт региональной прессы, Институт Развития Свободы Информации, Экозащита!-Женсовет, Общественный вердикт, Евразийская антимонопольная ассоциация, Чанышева Лилия Айратовна, Сидорович Ольга Борисовна, Таранова Юлия Николаевна, Туровский Александр Алексеевич, Васильева Анастасия Евгеньевна, Ривина Анна Валерьевна, Бурдина Юлия Владимировна, Бойко Анатолий Николаевич, Гусева Ольга Андреевна, Дугин Сергей Георгиевич, Пивоваров Андрей Сергеевич, Писемский Евгений Александрович, Аверин Виталий Евгеньевич, Барахоев Магомед Бекханович, Шевченко Дмитрий Александрович, Жданов Иван Юрьевич, Рубанов Роман Викторович, Шарипков Олег Викторович, Мальсагов Муса Асланович, Мошель Ирина Ароновна, Шведов Григорий Сергеевич, Пономарев Лев Александрович, Каргалицкий Борис Юльевич, Созаев Валерий Валерьевич, Исакова Ирина Александровна, Исламов Тимур Рифгатович, Романова Ольга Евгеньевна, Щаров Сергей Алексадрович, Цирульников Борис Альбертович, Халидова Марина Владимировна, Людевиг Марина Зариевна, Федотова Галина Анатольевна, Паутов Юрий Анатольевич, Верховский Александр Маркович, Пислакова-Паркер Марина Петровна, Кочеткова Татьяна Владимировна, Чуркина Наталья Валерьевна, Акимова Татьяна Николаевна, Золотарева Екатерина Александровна, Рачинский Ян Збигневич, Жемкова Елена Борисовна, Гудков Лев Дмитриевич, Илларионова Юлия Юрьевна, Саранг Анна Васильевна, Захарова Светлана Сергеевна, Аверин Владимир Анатольевич, Щур Татьяна Михайловна, Щур Николай Алексеевич, Блинушов Андрей Юрьевич, Мосин Алексей Геннадьевич, Гефтер Валентин Михайлович, Симонов Алексей Кириллович, Флиге Ирина Анатольевна, Мельникова Валентина Дмитриевна, Вититинова Елена Владимировна, Баженова Светлана Куприяновна, Исаев Сергей Владимирович, Максимов Сергей Владимирович, Беляев Сергей Иванович, Голубева Елена Николаевна, Ганнушкина Светлана Алексеевна, Закс Елена Владимировна, Буртина Елена Юрьевна, Гендель Людмила Залмановна, Кокорина Екатерина Алексеевна, Шуманов Илья Вячеславович, Арапова Галина Юрьевна, Пастухова Анна Яковлевна, Прохоров Вадим Юрьевич, Шахова Елена Владимировна, Подузов Сергей Васильевич, Протасова Ирина Вячеславовна, Литинский Леонид Борисович, Лукашевский Сергей Маркович, Бахмин Вячеслав Иванович, Шабад Анатолий Ефимович, Сухих Дарья Николаевна, Орлов Олег Петрович, Добровольская Анна Дмитриевна, Королева Александра Евгеньевна, Смирнов Владимир Александрович, Вицин Сергей Ефимович, Золотухин Борис Андреевич, Левинсон Лев Семенович, Локшина Татьяна Иосифовна, Орлов Олег Петрович, Полякова Мара Федоровна, Резник Генри Маркович, Захаров Герман Константинович
* Единый федеральный список организаций, в том числе иностранных и международных организаций, признанных в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации террористическими:
Высший военный Маджлисуль Шура, Конгресс народов Ичкерии и Дагестана, Аль-Каида, Асбат аль-Ансар, Священная война, Исламская группа, Братья-мусульмане, Партия исламского освобождения, Лашкар-И-Тайба, Исламская группа, Движение Талибан, Исламская партия Туркестана, Общество социальных реформ, Общество возрождения исламского наследия, Дом двух святых, Джунд аш-Шам, Исламский джихад, Аль-Каида, Имарат Кавказ, АБТО, Правый сектор, Исламское государство, Джабха аль-Нусра ли-Ахль аш-Шам, Народное ополчение имени К. Минина и Д. Пожарского, Аджр от Аллаха Субхану уа Тагьаля SHAM, АУМ Синрике, Муджахеды джамаата Ат-Тавхида Валь-Джихад, Чистопольский Джамаат, Рохнамо ба суи давлати исломи, Террористическое сообщество Сеть, Катиба Таухид валь-Джихад, Хайят Тахрир аш-Шам, Ахлю Сунна Валь Джамаа
* Перечень общественных объединений и религиозных организаций в отношении которых судом принято вступившее в законную силу решение о ликвидации или запрете деятельности:
Национал-большевистская партия, ВЕК РА, Рада земли Кубанской Духовно Родовой Державы Русь, Асгардская Славянская Община Асгардской Веси Беловодья, Славянская Община Капища Веды Перуна, Мужская Духовная Семинария Староверов-Инглингов, Нурджулар, К Богодержавию, Таблиги Джамаат, Русское национальное единство, Национал-социалистическое общество, Джамаат мувахидов, Объединенный Вилайат Кабарды, Балкарии и Карачая, Союз славян, Ат-Такфир Валь-Хиджра, Пит Буль, Национал-социалистическая рабочая партия России, Славянский союз, Формат-18, Благородный Орден Дьявола, Армия воли народа, Национальная Социалистическая Инициатива города Череповца, Духовно-Родовая Держава Русь, Русское национальное единство, Древнерусской Инглистической церкви Православных Староверов-Инглингов, Русский общенациональный союз, Движение против нелегальной иммиграции, Кровь и Честь, О свободе совести и о религиозных объединениях, Омская организация Русское национальное единство, Северное Братство, Клуб Болельщиков Футбольного Клуба Динамо, Файзрахманисты, Мусульманская религиозная организация п. Боровский, Община Коренного Русского народа Щелковского района, Правый сектор, Украинская национальная ассамблея, Украинская повстанческая армия, Тризуб им. Степана Бандеры, Украинская организация «Братство», Свидетели Иеговы, О противодействии экстремистской деятельности, РЕВТАТПОД, Артподготовка, Штольц, В честь иконы Божией Матери Державная, Сектор 16, Независимость, Организация футбольных болельщиков «Фирма», Молодежная правозащитная группа МПГ, Курсом Правды и Единения, Каракольская инициативная группа, Автоград Крю, Союз Славянских Сил Руси, Алля-Аят, Благотворительный пансионат Ак Умут, Русская республика Русь, Арестантское уголовное единство, Башкорт, Нация и свобода, W.H.С., Фалунь Дафа, Иртыш Ultras, Русский Патриотический клуб-Новокузнецк/РПК, Сибирский державный союз, Фонд борьбы с коррупцией, Фонд защиты прав граждан, Штабы Навального
|
Leave a comment