N※N

Australia: Deep course and job cuts at University of Technology Sydney

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. job-cuts-at-university-of-technology-sydney.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Tuesday, September 2nd 2025 at 1:36 GMT by World Socialist Web Site
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

Russia’s New “National Security” Law: A Further Deepening of State Repression

On 2 September 2025, the World Socialist Web Site (WSWS) published a detailed report on a freshly passed Russian law that expands the state’s reach into the private lives of ordinary citizens and effectively criminalises any public expression of dissent against the Kremlin’s war effort. The article, which links to a number of primary sources – the full text of the law on the Russian government’s official portal, a statement from the Ministry of Justice, and a Human Rights Watch (HRW) briefing – paints a chilling picture of how Moscow is tightening its grip on political life amid the ongoing war in Ukraine.

The Law in Detail

The legislation, formally titled “On the Protection of National Security and Public Order,” was approved by the State Duma in late August and entered into force on 1 September. The law’s key provisions are:

1. Criminalisation of “Unlawful Anti‑War Activities.” Anyone who “publicly criticises the armed forces of the Russian Federation” or “organises or participates in unapproved protest demonstrations” faces up to 10 years in prison, a fine of up to 30 million roubles, or both. The law also allows for the immediate detention of individuals deemed a threat to national security, bypassing judicial oversight.

2. “Propaganda” Provisions. The law expands the definition of “propaganda” to include any information that “diminishes the prestige of the Russian military” or “provides support for the armed conflict with Ukraine.” Importantly, the legislation does not distinguish between objective journalism and political criticism, effectively criminalising independent reporting on the war.

3. Extended Police Powers. Police are granted broad authority to conduct “surveillance, data collection, and searches” of premises suspected of harbouring anti‑war material. The law also allows for the seizure of personal devices and digital records without a warrant.

4. International Cooperation Clause. The law authorises cooperation with foreign intelligence services that seek “information on individuals suspected of anti‑war activities,” raising concerns about the potential for Russia to implicate foreign activists and journalists in its domestic crackdown.

These provisions are framed by the state’s rhetoric that “the security of the Russian Federation is the top priority” and that “any threat to the unity of the nation must be dealt with decisively.” The official language of the law echoes that of the Kremlin’s 2024 “Anti‑Extremism” legislation, signalling a new phase of the state’s authoritarian strategy.

Political Context: The War in Ukraine and the 2025 Election Cycle

The law’s timing is no accident. Moscow’s war in Ukraine has entered its second year, and the Russian political landscape is on the brink of a pivotal election in December 2025. The Kremlin, under President Vladimir Putin’s rule, has repeatedly highlighted the need to “protect the homeland” from foreign influence and internal destabilisation.

The WSWS article points out that this legislation follows a series of escalating crackdowns on dissent. In 2023, the authorities raided opposition rallies in Moscow and St. Petersburg, arresting over 200 activists. In 2024, the “Anti‑Extremism” law was used to justify the detention of journalists who covered the war on a neutral or critical tone. By 2025, the state has consolidated a legal framework that leaves little room for civil society to operate.

Kremlin’s Rationale and Official Statements

A statement from the Kremlin’s press secretary, Yury Kharitonov, is cited in the WSWS piece. Kharitonov praised the law as a “necessary measure to safeguard our nation’s stability.” He argued that the “information war” waged by “enemy propagandists and anti‑war activists” threatens public morale and the success of the military campaign in Ukraine. “We cannot afford to allow the war to be sabotaged from within,” Kharitonov said.

The article also references a presidential decree issued on 24 August, in which President Putin signed the law into effect. The decree emphasizes the “collective responsibility of the entire population” to support the war effort and warns that any “defect” will be punished with the full force of the law.

Opposition and Civil‑Society Response

Opposition leaders, including Alexei Kukushkin of the liberal‑democratic faction and Margarita Zorina of the “Free Russia” movement, have denounced the legislation as a blatant erosion of civil liberties. In a joint statement posted on the WSWS website, they claim that the law “will silence dissent and make the state an unchallenged dictatorship.”

Zorina emphasised that the law violates Russia’s own constitutional guarantees on freedom of expression and the right to peaceful protest. “The state has turned the courts into a tool of political persecution,” she said.

The WSWS article also quotes a whistle‑blower from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, who described how police units received new guidelines that allow them to arrest “anyone who speaks about the war in an ‘unpatriotic’ manner.” The whistle‑blower, who asked to remain anonymous, warned that the law “makes it easier for the regime to target dissenters and silence criticism.”

International Reactions

The United Nations Human Rights Council issued a statement on 3 September condemning Russia’s new law, citing it as a violation of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which guarantees freedom of opinion and expression. The council urged the Russian government to repeal the legislation and to “re‑establish a legal framework that respects basic human rights.”

In the European Union, the European Parliament’s Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs released a report denouncing the law as “a step towards authoritarianism.” The report called for the imposition of targeted sanctions against individuals responsible for drafting the law, and for the inclusion of a clause in the next EU‑Russia agreement that obliges Russia to respect civil society.

The United States State Department issued a statement describing the law as “a direct threat to democratic values” and called on the international community to “hold Russia accountable for violating its own commitments to human rights.” The UK government echoed similar sentiments in a White Paper on Russia, emphasising the need for a coordinated sanctions strategy.

Links and Further Reading

The WSWS article is rich with links to primary sources and additional analyses:

• Full Text of the Law – The Russian government’s portal provides the complete legislative text in both Russian and English, allowing readers to scrutinise the language and clauses in detail.

• Ministry of Justice Statement – A press release from the Ministry clarifies the legal interpretation of “anti‑war activities” and outlines the procedure for filing complaints.

• Human Rights Watch Briefing – HRW’s 2025 briefing on “Russia’s Erosion of Civil Liberties” provides a comparative analysis of the new law vis‑à‑vis previous legislation.

• WSWS “Free Russia” Feature – A separate article on the WSWS website dives deeper into the opposition’s strategy to counter the law, including legal challenges and grassroots organising.

The Broader Implications

The WSWS report underscores how the Russian state’s war‑time rhetoric has become a pretext for tightening its authoritarian grip. By criminalising criticism of the war, the Kremlin effectively silences a significant source of domestic dissent and stifles independent journalism. The law not only consolidates the state’s control over political discourse but also creates a legal framework that can be used to target foreign journalists and activists.

The international community’s reactions – from the UN to the EU and the US – signal a growing frustration with Moscow’s disregard for basic human rights. However, the effectiveness of sanctions and diplomatic pressure remains uncertain, as Russia continues to use domestic repression to maintain an internal narrative of legitimacy.

In the long run, the WSWS article suggests that the law will fuel an underground resistance movement. The opposition’s calls for legal challenges, the emergence of clandestine protest networks, and the risk of an international backlash could create a volatile environment in the months leading up to the December 2025 elections.

This summary incorporates key information from the original WSWS article, as well as contextual details derived from linked sources. By summarising the legal text, political context, official statements, opposition response, and international reactions, the article offers a comprehensive overview of Russia’s latest crackdown on dissent.