What the treaty guarantees

The treaty allows adopted children to have dual citizenship. It also obliges prospective adoptive parents to undergo appropriate training in raising orphaned children, as well as in the religion, culture, family and societal concerns of the country from which the child is being adopted. Moreover, those wishing to adopt a child must submit a socio-psychological report prepared by the appropriate agencies.

The agreement further offers the possibility of reporting on the life and upbringing of the adopted children. And, if the child’s stay in the adoptive family does not meet their expectations, the host country shall ensure the child’s transfer to another family. The country also allows for the child to return to his native country, if it is in his interest to do so.

According to the chairman of the State Duma Committee for Family, Women and Children, Elena Mizulina, the agreement is important for children in the case of international marriages, in particular, if one parent becomes imprisoned.

In Italy, 10 organizations are hoping for the right to assist in adoptions: one state and nine non-profit organizations. Valentina Oknyanskaya, representative of the Italian organization, Bambini dell’Arcobaleno-Bambarco Onlus, told Trud-7 that the agreement will help solve legal problems that often arise in the adoption process and after the child has settled with an adoptive family. “In the coming days, a Russo-Italian seminar will be held for agencies that have been authorized to assist in adoptions,” she said, “during which the implementation of this agreement will be discussed, as well as how future adoptive parents can be prepared, and problems that arise during the adoption process.”

The list will expand

Seven more countries have shown interest in similar agreements. Already this year, talks will be held with Britain, Israel, France and Spain. According to the State Secretary – Ministry of Education and Science, Yuri Sentyurin, the adoption treaty was discussed between Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. For many years, America has had the highest number of adoptions from Russia. That is still true, despite the fact that, in recent years, slightly fewer Russian children have left for the United States.

“What’s important is not what will change for foreign or Russian adoptive parents, but what will change for our children,” State Duma deputy Elena Afanasyeva, who took part in authoring the agreement, explained to Trud. “If, previously, the Russian state could no longer intervene in the life of an adopted child then, with the ratification of this document, we will be able to have some control over our children.”

Today, one of the main problems in international adoptions is the abuse of children, which often leads to death. According to the U.S. National Council for Adoption, from 1996 to 2008, 15 Russian children who had been adopted by U.S. citizens were killed. In 14 cases the adoptive parents were brought to justice. In the case of two-year-old Dima Yakovlev, whose adoptive father left him in a car when temperatures reached 30 degrees Celsius, the American justice system sided with the adoptive father, 50-year-old Miles Harrison. Despite protests from Russia, he was acquitted.

Approving, but not adopting

A survey, conducted this year by the ROMIR research center showed that Russian families are not in a rush to adopt. Almost half of respondents have a positive attitude toward adoption, but only 3% are ready to bring an adopted child into their family. According to Ministry of Education statistics, in the last year Russian citizens have adopted 142,000 children; at the same time, foreign nationals adopted 42,000. Meanwhile, 670,000 children in the country remain without parental care.

STATISTICS:

St. Petersburg 407
Kemerovo Oblast 355
Moscow 310
Moscow Oblast 282
Nizhny Novgorod Oblast 197
Novosibirsk Oblast 194
Leningrad Oblast 187

Source: Ministry of Education and Science

TOP-10

Who is adopting Russian children (number of children), 2008

USA 1,773
Spain 904
Italy 496
France 325
Germany 188
Ireland 113
Israel 92
Finland 36
United Kingdom 24
Belgium 21

Source: Ministry of Education and Science

Read the article on the newspaper's site

“Because the Russian Constitution prohibits deprivation of citizenship, I appealed to Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev to renounce my Russian citizenship based on personal reasons,” Grigol Vashadze told Kommersant yesterday. “I enclosed my Russian passport with the letter and sent it to Moscow through Swiss intermediaries.” According to the Georgian Foreign Minister, he made this decision after the question of depriving him of his Russian citizenship was raised in the State Duma on Tuesday.

This initiative was introduced by a member of the Just Russia party, Semen Bagdasarov, who was aggravated by the fact that, in addition to his Georgian citizenship, Minister Vashadze also holds a Russian passport. “He is using this to freely travel while trying to create an anti-Russian charter,” said Mr. Bagdasarov. “He is not only the head of the Foreign Ministry, but is one of the closest members of President Mikhail Saakashvili’s team. Vashadze has been repeatedly noted in harsh and insulting speeches about our country. The fact that such a person is a citizen of the Russian Federation is nonsense. And we must do everything to deprive him of his citizenship.”

However, Mr. Bagdasarov’s proposal did not pass due to the fact that the Russian Constitution does not provide any procedures for forced deprivation of Russian citizenship. Chairman of the State Duma Committee for Constitutional Legislation, Vladimir Pligin, reminded his colleague that “an institution that deprives of, or excludes from Russian citizenship, does not exist, even for those individuals who possess dual citizenship.” Mr. Bagdasarov’s initiative had also been denied by the Chairman of the State Duma International Affairs Committee, Konstantin Kosachev. “The head of the Georgian Foreign Ministry is an official who holds a national position. There is no need to further widen the gap between Russia and Georgia,” he explained.

When the Georgian Foreign Ministry learned about the discourse that had been taking place in the State Duma regarding Mr. Vashadze’s citizenship, Director of the Press and Information Department of the Georgian Foreign Ministry, Ia Makharashvili, said that her boss had no plans to renounce his Russian citizenship. Nevertheless, Grigol Vashadze deemed it necessary to part with his Russian citizenship yesterday.

“Both present and former Russian nationals know just what the Russian Duma is. And, as soon as this issue was raised, I could safely say that it would not have been the last time. In this situation, I made the only possible decision,” Mr. Vashadze explained to Kommersant.

Grigol Vashadze became Georgia’s Foreign Minister in December of last year and has never concealed the fact that he had a dual citizenship. (He graduated from MGIMO-University in 1981, after which he worked for the Soviet Foreign Ministry until 1988). On the day of his appointment as the head of Georgian diplomacy, in an interview with Kommersant, Mr. Vashadze said that he became a Russian citizen after the fall of the Soviet Union, and Georgian citizenship was granted to him in accordance with the 2007 special decree of the Georgian president. His having a Russian passport has many times been the subject of criticism by the Georgian opposition.

Mr. Vashadze told Kommersant that he kept his Russian passport in the hopes that “the current abnormal state of Russo-Georgian relations will improve, after all. Regardless of whether I have a Russian passport in my pocket or not, my Russia will always remain with me, and no one can take that away from me,” the Foreign Minister of Georgia told Kommersant.

An investigation, which was organized by local authorities, led to the dissolution of the nursing home and dismissal of its director. Its residents were transferred to a place with better living arrangements. Volunteers, who did not expect such a reaction, are now taking dozens of calls daily from people offering their help.

In this story, skeptics will probably see the level at which problems may be resolved in Russia, today – a minor, small-town official may be dismissed due to extraordinary efforts of all of Russia's blogosphere. Some would say that civic engagement without support from the top would not lead to anything; meanwhile, those who are able to get support from the top are only the ones who do not threaten the regime. Even if both statements are partially true, one cannot dismiss an important distinction between assistance to the elderly and participation in elections. The main difference lies in the fact that the elderly – are real, and elections – are not; that the goal of the “Starost v Radost” is real and tangible: to save the elderly and dismiss the incompetent director. On the other hand, the goal of participating in elections, if ballot-riggers are to be caught, would be getting the representation from those parliamentarians who were graciously allowed to run for office. In gratitude for the undeserved support, the voters will either receive a farce in the form of a one-day demarche of State Duma parties, or a statement by Sergei Mitrokhin blaming the people – “passive-protesting majority that allowed the authorities to believe that they have decided everything for them” – in the fraudulent elections.

On election day, “Starost v Radost” volunteers were visiting veterans in Ramenskoye, and for this reason did not go to vote. The volunteers are insisting that they are not politically motivated. It is important to them that the public believes them. “We are absolutely apolitical,” says Marina Kochevalova, the group’s organizer. “The main thing is that our efforts are not hindered. We don’t need help – we can manage on our own.”

The movement had only recently received its name, and only due to the fact that a title was needed in order to participate in grant competitions. Then they won 250,000 rubles, with which they purchased mattresses and wheelchairs. In average societies, representative bodies help the society to control power. In our society, it seems that people have chosen other forms of control. The incident in the village of Yamm proves that other methods may also be effective.

“We were surprised by how many good people there are,” says Liza, author of the Internet post that caused an outcry. “People being indifferent is simply not true.”

Perhaps those who, on October 11, instead of going to the polling stations chose to visit the nursing home, chose a more efficient way to serve democracy and civil society.

The author is a freelance journalist and the director of programs to support independent media at the New Eurasia Foundation.

Read the article on the newspaper's site