Soviet collapse was a setback for kids

IN HER column “Putin is brilliantly wicked” (Op-ed, Jan. 7), Juliette Kayyem missed one important point: the increasingly prosperous Russia may be capable of taking care of its own children. By forbidding Americans to adopt Russian children, Vladimir Putin not only continued a political tit-for-tat with the United States, but he also sent a message to his compatriots: let’s take care of our own.

Paradoxically, both the Magnitsky Act — legislation that forbids Russia’s violators of human rights to travel to the US — and the plight of the homeless Russian children stem from the same disastrous event: the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Prior to that event, Russia had a statewide safety net for children, and no traveling oligarchs buying properties in the United States.


Certainly, there were violations of human rights in the Soviet era, and the Jackson-Vanick Amendment successfully confronted that, but Russian children were not a part of geopolitical games.

The collapse of the Soviet Union did not improve Russia’s human rights, but it did ruin its social safety nets, steady employment, and morale — and the biggest losers were children. Let’s hope that Putin’s government will be able to repair that ruin.

Anatol Zukerman


Loading comments...
Real journalists. Real journalism. Subscribe to The Boston Globe today.