Crashes, meaning accidents with significant number of fatalities, are so rare, even in places with least attention to safety, that it is not possible to conclude the risk is higher in some countries with statistics.
And if you wanted to judge from the number of incidents, that is including events that were dangerous, but ended well, you would be stopped by the fact that quality of incident reporting varies wildly. In this interview Simon Hradecky, the editor of The Aviation Herald, explains that Canadian TSB reports many, many incidents, but that is is not because the safety would be poor in Canada – quite to the contrary – but because they have particularly good system of reporting them. So many incident reports can actually be taken as a sign of good safety in that country, but you can't make any statistics from that.
Regarding the countries you mention:
Indonesia is widely believed to have poor safety. The EU Air Safety List says:
All air carriers certified by
the authorities with
responsibility for regulatory
oversight of Indonesia, with
the exception of Garuda
Indonesia, Airfast Indonesia,
Antarbenua, Indonesia Air
Asia, Citilink, Lion Air and
Batik Air, including …
clearly indicating that EASA does not believe the aviation authority of Indonesia oversees operators registered under them sufficiently.
Together with high incidence of severe weather and a lot of mountainous terrain this creates environment where the risk might be elevated. As mentioned above, even there accidents are not that common to allow firm statistical conclusion.
The excepted airlines however proved to EASA that they have a safety management system in place and that it works according to industry best practice. With them, the risk probably isn't significantly higher than with any other decent airline.
Malaysia and Russia: I have not noticed any specific concerns about safety in those two countries. If you seem to have noticed accidents in those two countries in particular, it is likely just bad luck.