cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/735085
Czech President Petr Pavel says Russian citizens living abroad should be put under “strict surveillance” by intelligence services in their host countries.
“All Russians living in Western countries should be monitored much more than in the past because they are citizens of a nation that leads an aggressive war,” Pavel said in an interview with Radio Free Europe released Thursday.
I was going to say the comparison to Japanese internment was an unfair comparison but Pavel made it first himself. Widespread detainment based on nation of origin should not be a thing anywhere.
Russian citizens should be under, or at least expect to be under, some security scrutiny. How much scrutiny is an open question to me but I could see Russian citizens being a little more than usual. But anyone should be in a foreign country. If you go taking pictures of national security sensitive places you shouldn’t be surprised if you are shooed off or possibly detained depending on what exactly it is.
But anyone should be in a foreign country. If you go taking pictures of national security sensitive places you shouldn’t be surprised if you are shooed off or possibly detained depending on what exactly it is.
This is conflating two issues though. Simply existing in a foreign country should not be suspicious. Obviously taking pictures of security sensitive places is, but that would be the case for a natural-born citizen as well.
Edit to add: I didn’t bring up internment camps to imply this would lead to that, simply that the same exact sentiment is seen in both cases. How that sentiment is reacted to can be different. It’s also worth nothing the “they should be eradicated” message, which I’ve seen echoed a lot about Russia, just as it is used here against Japan(ese).
I hate that “eradicate them” sentiment I’ve seen in some places too. And I think Pavel’s initial comparison and implication of internment camps horrible.
I’ve tried to think of what increase security scrutiny would even be. A quick look at ICERD says, broadly, you can’t restrict movement, speech, or general participation in life.
I guess it depends on exactly how you interpret:
Each State Party shall take effective measures to review governmental, national and local policies, and to amend, rescind or nullify any laws and regulations which have the effect of creating or perpetuating racial discrimination wherever it exists;
I don’t think increased investigate scrutiny would be restricted here. This might include things such as increased time spent verifying visa application or other governmental procedures. I could also see investigative resources spent on criminal cases.
Those are things governments typically have very broad discretion with. But I’m not a lawyer maybe there’s something else.
