Is Russia backing off its anti-US adoption ban?

A Putin spokesman said today that the ban on adoption of Russian orphans by Americans will not kick in until 2014. Is Putin just abiding by treaty requirements, or is he softening?

Vladimir Konstantinov/Reuters/File
Orphan children play in their bedroom at an orphanage in the southern Russian city of Rostov-on-Don last month. A Putin spokesman said today that Russia's ban on adoption of Russian children by Americans will not come into effect until next year, raising the possibility that President Vladmir Putin is rethinking the controversial law.

The Kremlin appeared to backtrack Thursday, just a little bit, on a controversial new law banning all US adoptions of Russian orphans that has triggered stormy public opposition and rare open criticism from members of Vladimir Putin's own government.

A brief announcement by Mr. Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov Thursday said that the bilateral US-Russia adoption agreement that came into force two months ago will continue to operate until next January.

"The agreement is in force at the moment," Mr. Peskov was quoted as saying by the official RIA-Novosti agency. "It will be in force over the course of the year."

That statement offers a glimmer of hope for the between 50 and 100 US-Russia adoptions that are in various stages of completion and had seemed doom by the angry rhetoric that accompanied the passage of the Dima Yakovlev Act last month by Russia's State Duma and Putin's vocal support for the immediate prohibition on US adoptions that it stipulated.

Until today Russian authorities have said the adoption ban, signed into law last month by Putin, was to take effect on Jan. 1. Russia's Foreign Ministry delivered a note to that effect to the US State Department last week, and US spokeswoman Victoria Nuland this week acknowledged its receipt.

Russian opposition leaders have planned a rally in Moscow this Sunday, which is expected to draw up to 20,000 people, to protest against the ban. Many argue that it is a cruel punishment that chiefly targets Russian orphans in retaliation for the US Magnitsky Act, which imposes sanctions against Russian officials deemed to have committed serious human rights violations.

But no one seems quite certain whether Peskov's announcement spells a breathing space for active adoptions to continue, or whether he was simply acknowledging that the US-Russia accord stipulates that each party must give one year's notice before withdrawing from the deal.

"I can't quite figure out what this means," says Gleb Pavlovsky, a former Kremlin strategist and close adviser to Putin.

"It seems possible that what Peskov meant was just don't want to formally violate the bilateral agreement, but that in practice adoptions will be halted.... It's possible that this is just a diplomatic smile, to say we're abiding by the accord, but Russian courts will not allow any adoption cases to go forward. We just have to see how that plays out," he says.

Workers at many of the almost 40 accredited US-based adoption agencies in Moscow said Thursday that they have no idea what is going on.

"I've been trying to get through to the Ministry of Education [which oversees foreign adoptions] without any success," says Olga Kechashina, of the Pennsylvania-based Adopt-A-Child agency.

"All the information we get is contradictory. We've been in the process of laying off our staff here. In Russian regions, officials have stopped going forward with all procedures since the law came into effect [last week]," she says. "I feel so sorry for the children who will be left behind."

Under Russian law, a child must be rejected three times for adoption by Russian families before he or she can be made available for foreign adoption. In practice, that has meant that mainly disabled and special-needs children have found new families abroad. Child-care professionals worry that many of those children now face the bleak prospect of lifetime institutionalization in Russia.

One Duma deputy of the pro-Kremlin United Russia party, Robert Schlegel, has introduced an amendment to the Dima Yakovlev Act that would exempt the nearly 45,000 disabled Russian orphans from the ban. His amendment notes that a total ban on US adoptions "means that some children with disabilities may not be able to find a foster home and will not receive adequate medical care" in Russia, according to the liberal Moscow daily Kommersant.

The leadership of the United Russia party has only said that it will "consider" the amendment, the paper said.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.