Southern Europe is a dangerous zone for oligarchs?

EU speaker on international relations Viola von Kramon on the eve of removal by the French court of the decision on Mukhtar Ablyazov’s case acted with a public appeal to politicians of the countries of Europe. She compared «Ablyazov's case» to «Khodorkovsky's case» and noted that «economic crimes imputed to the oligarch Ablyazov, as well as in a case with Khodorkovsky in Russia, hardly possible to separate from political prosecution of the oppositional politician».

We will remind: since 2009 Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine demand an extradition of the former fluent Kazakh banker Mukhtar Ablyazov, accusing him of frauds with the use of means of the largest banks of these countries and financial plunders for total amount over 10 billion US dollars. The high court of London in February, 2012 sentenced the ex-banker to 22 months of imprisonment for the disrespect shown by him for orders of the court. However M. Ablyazov preferred to disappear from justice. He was arrested in July, 2013 on the French Riviera. On January 9 of this year the French court made the decision on exclusion of the oligarch from France to Russia where about ten criminal cases falling under category of serious economic crimes are opened.

At once it is necessary to designate: in this case it is a question far not only of Mukhtar Ablyazov. This case is a peculiar example and provides food for thought that changes and changed in the European Union in this sphere. One is clear: Europeans gradually depart from the mechanisms those simple and checked on years still allowing «dissidents» and «opponents of dictatorships» and in common people — thieves and swindlers of universal scale, to find a shelter in the European countries.

For example, in 2001 the French authorities refused to extradite the former owner of Novokuznetsk Aluminum Plant Mikhail Zhivilo to Russia. His case was connected with large financial frauds, plunders and economic dismantling between him and Oleg Deripaska, and it was not the policy. Nevertheless in 2005 Zhivilo received in France not any, but namely a political asylum.

«Why doesn’t occur so now? «, — many oppositionists on open spaces of the CIS ask a question. «Why the country, before recent time being guided in the policy in relation to political refugees the motto «Who reached us, that remained with us», suddenly so sharply refused it?

Really, what such compliance in questions of capture and delivery of fluent oligarchs is caused? Everything, but only not «enlightenment and understanding» … After all, if it is frank, earlier our fluent thieves who promoted the inflow of the capital and growth of welfare of Europe were purely economically favourable to the European countries. Most likely, the today’s tendency in the European Union is caused by existence on a bowl of scales larger and strategically important, well and less politically «slippery» economic projects with the CIS. Naturally, there is economic pressure at certain cases. As they say, nothing personal, it is a policy which from time immemorial was under construction on pragmatism.

Naturally, such approach frightens «oligarchs», forces them to appeal more actively to civil conscience, representing opposition, well and, of course, to prepare ways for retreat.

For example, French now are under the strongest political and information pressure. Information pressure with connection of opinion of the public, such is that Ablyazov is represented certain «sample of democracy who is furiously fighting against imperialism of Central Asia».

From the pages of the European newspapers Mukhtar Ablyazov’s supporters shout: «Spit in eyes that who shouts about the swindler Ablyazov. He is a businessman from God, managed to make the bank one of the best on the former Soviet Union! The problem is that in addition Mukhtar had imprudence to play policy and to support the Kazakhstan radical opposition. Yes, it is possible, he exceeded self-defence measures according to the European measures, having caused to the persecutors serious damage from which they can’t recover to this day. But it is not fraud, but unlawful answer to unlawful attack. It wasn’t business any more, it was the war. And war is war!».

Thus for some reason the authors of these statements don’t mention that Mr. Ablyazov «also had imprudence to organize the prevented act of terrorism in Alma-Ata, mass riots with numerous victims among the civilian population in Zhanaozen and the settlement Shetpa in the west of Kazakhstan in 2011, left many investors of banks of Kazakhstan under control to him, Russia and Ukraine with nothing, having stolen all their money from their accounts and having run away to London». Here is such «unlawful answer» according to measures of his supporters. But answer to whom?

There are many opinions and explanations on a situation round Mr. Ablyazov and his confidants. However, in my opinion, most accurately the assessment to his actions was given «by the colleague on shop», the fluent Kazakh oligarch Akezhan Kazhegeldin living in London at present.

In one of interview to the western channel he told the following: «Ablyazov had an opportunity to turn judicial system of Great Britain into fortress for himself. But after the High Court of London sentenced Ablyazov to 22 months of imprisonment for disrespect for court, he constantly was in hiding and in spite of the fact that his passport was handed over in court of London, he ran away from the country, having used the «spare» passport. Unfortunately, if Ablyazov behaved not as the international especially dangerous criminal, everything could be perfect in a different way» …