Interview with Grigory Yavlinsky, leader of the YABLOKO
party election list, by Andrei Lipsky and Andrei Kolesnikov,
under the rubric "Number One on the List".
In mid-October Novaya Gazeta sent out letters to the politicians
heading the federal party lists for the State Duma elections
coming up on 4 December, inviting them to give an interview
to the newspaper. ("No sweeteners, no advertising.")
The first to respond was Grigory Yavlinsky -- YABLOKO's "number
one."
Novaya Gazeta: Grigory Alexeyevich, there is an obvious contradiction
in your recent remarks. On the one hand you say that since
approximately 2007 the Russian system of power has become
"set in concrete" and nothing fundamentally new
is happening within it. At the same time you say that right
now, on the eve of the 2011-2012 elections, some kind of unique
situation has taken shape in Russia, which YABLOKO and the
entire "democratic public" should exploit. Please
explain in what way the situation is unique and what kind
of opportunities are opening up.
Yavlinsky: There are many people who are unhappy about many
things. And practically no one is asking: "Who is Mr
Putin?" And now the situation is taking shape whereby
these people can display their views. Not on the Internet,
not in their own kitchens or in jokes with their friends --
they can come out and declare their political existence. That
is to say -- vote for the alternative: the YABLOKO party.
There is United Russia. That is the party of business and
officialdom and therefore it has no ideology of its own other
than personal self-interest. It has two ideological wings,
a mixture of which makes up the party's ideology -- Zhirinovsky
and the Communists.
And then there are the democrats. They provide an opportunity
for everyone who has even so much as a sense of disagreement
with what is happening or who would like to change something,
to show that there are many such people in the country.
Another peculiarity of the situation lies in the fact that
if a great many people come out to vote the scale of the vote-rigging
will be considerably smaller than if very few people turn
out. That is the first thing. And second, if a lot of people
come out and vote for YABLOKO, three months before the presidential
election the authorities will not want to provoke a scandal
that carries the risk of the emergence of a large number of
dissatisfied people.
So what might this mean? Literally: that in Russia and its
capital there are, for instance, 30% of people who really
disagree with the existing policy.
Novaya Gazeta: But by no means everyone who disagrees is
willing to turn out in the elections.
Yavlinsky: That is their problem. Later they will be told
-- by Putin, among others: You are simply not here, you do
not exist.
If you do not want to turn out in the elections, that is
your business. My business is to give you the opportunity
-- here it is. You may argue with YABLOKO over minor points,
that is not the issue here. What is YABLOKO saying? One law
for all, the separation of powers, independent courts not
susceptible to money or orders, inviolability of private property
-- that is what our party says. It also says a great many
other things, but that is the crux of it. You can argue later,
there will be a special place for you. But right now -- vote.
Novaya Gazeta: So those few points are capable of bringing
together the protest-democratic electorate?
Yavlinsky: More than that, they are actually for everyone.
Even for the non-democrats. Because it is impossible to live
in modern-day society without them. We are not talking here
about YABLOKO's traditional electorate. This is an entirely
different story.
Novaya Gazeta: But will the non-democratic protest electorate
not vote for the Communists and the LDPR (Liberal Democratic
Party of Russia)?
Yavlinsky: Yes, they will. They certainly will, and that
is the problem. Open the Radio Liberty website. There is a
poll: "Whom would you vote for next Sunday?" It
goes approximately like this: 30% for YABLOKO, 28% "I
will not vote," but 20% for the Communists.
Novaya Gazeta: The picture is approximately the same on our
website.
Yavlinsky: That is the way it is going...
Novaya Gazeta: What is the nucleus of YABLOKO's electorate
today and what additions can you count on from among other
political forces?
Yavlinsky: We can count on all those who are really against
what is being done in the country. Apart from the nationalists
and the Communists, because they certainly will not vote for
YABLOKO, that is obvious and normal. Conversely, unfortunately,
you can find people who are really democrats but will vote
for the Communists. Or for the party of power. As someone
said to me once: "Let them elect you first, and then
we will vote for you." I heard that at Sverdlovsk University...
But after 7 May it will be payback time -- for laziness,
for reluctance, for stupidity, for self-indulgence, for being
comfortable, for Nakh-Nakh ("vote against all" movement)...
Novaya Gazeta: Will it be even worse than now?
Yavlinsky: Remember the year 2000. NTV, then Yukos...
Novaya Gazeta: And so it began...
Yavlinsky: What else? It is nothing, yet: A month ago the
whole of Rublyovka (elite residential area of Moscow) was
decked with billboards advertising "Citizen Poet"
(a satirical poetry project by poet Dmitry Bykov and actor
Mikhail Yefremov) at Barvikha Luxury Village (theatre). Do
you think that will continue? I very much doubt it.
Novaya Gazeta: We will have just one poet.
Yavlinsky: (Smiling) And a writer. And a composer. And only
a month is left.
Novaya Gazeta: Actually, after those remarks it is ridiculous
to ask this question: Why should people turn out to vote?
Yavlinsky: Because they will say that you simply renounced
everything yourself. Period.
Novaya Gazeta: But possibly the main topic of discussion
about the elections is how not to turn out.
Yavlinsky: That is a mistake. People should turn out in the
elections and vote for YABLOKO! And not for just anyone as
long as it is not United Russia.
Novaya Gazeta: That is to say, not following Navalnyy's formula
(referring to oppositionist blogger Navalnyy's call to vote
for anyone except United Russia)?
Yavlinsky: Look, Zyuganov (leader of the CPRF, Communist
Party of the Russian Federation) describes the idea of de-Stalinization
as madness. What is that about? Why is this phrase so important?
This phrase is important because he senses that everyone will
be behind him now -- everyone who is not behind Putin. And
he is gaining courage. He is not shamefully concealing this
subject, he is using it as a threat. What does he say? "This
madness was stopped following the mass intervention of practically
all the citizens of the country, who showed that the country's
citizens categorically reject this idea." And now, most
important: "Although there was an attempt by the authorities."
So now he is prosecutor, now he is saying: They raised their
hands against something sacred!
That is where I began: Those two parties constitute the ideological
content of United Russia. And if their rating rises, if these
two wings are sublimated, their influence on what will happen
in the country will become even greater.
Novaya Gazeta: The following logic operates in Russia: We
vote for those who are sure to get in. Do you think there
is a significant number of people who might vote for YABLOKO
but, in this situation, will vote for United Russia?
Yavlinsky: Look at what Channel One does when it shows the
parties' ratings and you will see that this is an effective
instrument. YABLOKO has 0.56%. What kind of research this
is, who did it, is not known. But it answers the question
of what the authorities think about you. How many of you there
should be. W e think, the authorities say, that you should
be fewer than 1%, so go and sit in that niche. Maybe you think
differently, but you should be afraid or ashamed. People write
to me: We are afraid to vote for YABLOKO, we do not believe
that nobody knows who votes for whom, and where we live we
are frightened. And people are even more afraid to provide
signatures (in support of would-be candidates). After all,
then you have to show your passport and give your name.
Novaya Gazeta: There is a view that to take part in such
elections is to legitimize the regime.
Yavlinsky: That view had a certain meaning in Soviet times.
It was a closed country and the regime had a principled way
of putting the question: You must not only support us and
be loyal, you must love us. Legitimacy consisted in our loving
the regime.
The present-day regime is not in the least interested in
this. You need not love it at all, the main thing is that
you do not get in its way. That is the first thing. Second.
The Soviet Union was a closed country. It could be assumed
that there was a need to show certain foreigners that everyone,
as one man, turned out to vote in the elections. But Russia
is an open country. Everything you write can be read anywhere
on the planet, in every language. Everyone knows everything,
at any moment any journalist could come to Novaya Gazeta and
ask you anything they like.
So what is more important? Simply not to turn out in these
conditions? Or to turn out and vote for those who say frankly:
"We are against this policy"?
Politics begins when an alternative appears. When there is
no alternative there is no politics. Four weeks remain until
the elections. If no alternative is realized during those
four weeks, then everything you have been writing all these
years has gone down the drain.
Novaya Gazeta: About the middle-class electorate. There is
a thing called the Lipsett hypothesis, formulated in the late
1950s: With the growth of income and education, the demand
for democracy grows. In an interview for Novaya Gazeta Mikhail
Dmitriyev, president of the Centre for Strategic Developments,
said, drawing on important work by the sociologists Inglehart
and Welzel, that in the next few years the demand for democracy
will also be displayed by young people for whom all channels
of fulfilment are closed. And he compared the situation with
late Soviet times. What do you think about that?
Yavlinsky: I do not need to tell you what the Soviet middle
class, which accomplished changes, grew up with. I will not
tell you what the theatre was like, I will not tell you what
the movies were like, but there was Solzhenitsyn, there was
Sakharov, there was samizdat, tamizdat (typing and circulation
of prohibited books). My family was very poor, we had children
very early, we earned very little, and my wife made a little
extra by typing. And then, one time, she received a 500-page
manuscript to type for someone. She typed 200 pages, she came
to me and she said: "I will have to send it back, I am
not going to type that kind of thing for any money."
And she threw out what she had already typed.
What am I trying to say? You and I, our generation, grew
up in those conditions. But the generation that Mikhail Dmitriyev
is talking about grew up in today's conditions, with a different
system of criteria, with different ideas as to what is good
and what is bad, with different opinions, different idols.
What they read -- excuse me. What they watched -- again, excuse
me. The education is of a different nature, the evaluations
of prestige or success are different.
For instance, I deliver lectures at the university. There
are 200 people sitting there, third-year students in the economics
faculty. I ask a question: "Which of you kids is going
to set up your own business?" Two hands go up. "What
about the rest of you?" "We want to work in the
government." Not in the state sector, note, but in the
government. There are three main options -- the government,
Gazprom, and foreign companies. So there will be no demand
for democracy from them.
So you want to be involved in politics? No problem. Go to
Nashi (pro-Kremlin youth group) -- there are your social elevators.
You can go into politics if you want, you can go into business
if you want. We are dealing with a serious opponent, a serious
adversary, not a joke.
After 2012 there will be a great many economic problems,
since they were not resolved before. The situation will be
like this: If nothing is done, everyone will be dissatisfied
because everything is collapsing. But if they start to really
do something, everyone will be dissatisfied because it is
too tough. And they will begin with those who get in their
way.
Novaya Gazeta: It is hopeless.
Yavlinsky: No, why? In the next four weeks there is a ray
of hope. Let us play for it. Why do you want to bury everything
beforehand?
Novaya Gazeta: What can we do to try to get rid of the sense
of hopelessness?
Yavlinsky: This is not the time for anything else, but if,
by voting for YABLOKO, you show that people like you account
for 30% or 20% of the country, the entire atmosphere will
change. Think what will happen. By voting for YABLOKO you
will give the party's candidates for deputy the opportunity
for five years, in every region of the country, to participate
in various elections without having to collect signatures,
which is impossible. You will create the opportunity to convene
a congress in December this year and decide the question of
nominating a candidate for president.
Novaya Gazeta: But what if it is not 20% but "just enough"
to get in (to the Duma)?
Yavlinsky: Then it means 37-40 people in the Duma, 40 people
like Mitrokhin. Well, all 40 will not be like Mitrokhin, but
they will be like Arbatov or Yablokov. What is wrong with
that? You will be represented there -- you and us, your readers.
Incidentally, about the mood. Six months ago, in the spring,
there were regional elections. Picture to yourself -- Vladimir
Oblast. They exclude us from the elections in Vladimir city
but let us stay in Kolchuginsky Area in Vladimir Oblast, and
we get 22% -- 25% in the city and 13% in the countryside.
On the average, 22%. And our man is elected head of the administration.
The same in Pskov, where we have the same percentage. That
is where we are starting from. So these things are perfectly
possible.
Yet we are in an information ghetto and we cannot do anything
about it. All that fuss that they are discussing about how
to go into the elections -- it is not a question of going,
it is a question of putting your cross. What else is to be
done?
Surely you have noticed that the so-called international
community has already recognized Putin's elections. Many big
businessmen have already taken the oath. Admittedly companies
that are seeking IPOs write about the political risks in a
very different way from what they say at meetings. Because
if they fail to describe those risks and they later come true,
they will have to pay big money to the investors. That is
where you should read the political predictions.
Abramovich, for instance. His Evraz Group is currently changing
its jurisdiction and he is writing a new share prospectus.
He has written in detail about what things will be like after
2012. Everyone is asking him: "Roma, friend, what are
you writing?" He replies: "This is not what I think,
but just suppose!"
Novaya Gazeta: During the next presidential and parliamentary
term, what are the main economic risks, in your view as an
economist?
Yavlinsky: Let me innumerate them. Urbanistics. Everything
connected with big cities. Look at Moscow. The cities are
simply not prepared for what is happening to them.
Second -- the environment. Nothing is being done.
Transport. After last summer, what can we say about transport?
The in formation-communication space. Surprising as it may
seem, the quality of cell phone communications even in Moscow
is getting worse all the time. The same is true of the information
space in broad terms: how the news is structured, how information
is structured.
Medicine. The quality of medicine, the quality of medical
services.
Housing and utilities -- no comment, it has all been said
long ago.
Pensions. At the moment there are 600 pensioners per 1,000
workers. And labor productivity is four times lower than in
the United States. Like in Soviet times.
And why does the pensions saving system not work? Distrust.
And the distrust goes far beyond the bounds of what you call
these funds. Nobody believes that you can put money in and
make use of it in 20-30 years' time.
Novaya Gazeta: But that applies not only to the pension system,
it applies to any project connected with the state.
Yavlinsky: You must understand, in the modern world, in modern
economics, no problem can be resolved without what is called
"society," and therefore without confidence mechanisms.
Because now I will move on from this problem to investments,
and I do not think I even need to explain that in these conditions
nobody wants to invest in anything. There is no confidence
in the institution of property.
What will be the main problem for all countries? The quality
of brains and ideas. If it is true, as people are currently
writing, that everyone is planning to leave, what do we do?
Is this not a challenge? Even if a person is simply thinking
about where to go. And incidentally, thinking is not safe.
If a person is thinking about leaving, he is thinking even
less about doing something good here.
Some 2-3% of GDP should be spent annually on each of the
above problems. Nobody has done anything about this.
The crux of the matter is that the gulf between people and
the state is gradually becoming insuperable. And in Russia
that is the sole cause of revolution and collapse. Not hunger,
not difficulties, not life problems. That was the case in
1917, it was the case in 1991. And in 1917 the talk was very
similar to today's and the Russian intelligentsia did not
support the Whites. Why did it not support them? It said:
Russia must outgrow the suffering. Well, it suffered for 80
years and is still suffering.
But today what is the middle class, reckoned by income? Instead
of engineers, doctors, teachers, journalists, skilled workers,
officers -- it is restaurants, taxis, girls, the service sphere.
And the information service staff try to tell people that
they should not turn out in the elections! This is an entire
culture that is growing. They do not say to them: "You
must struggle." No, an entire culture is growing that
says there is no need to bother with this. No need to bother
with your own state, no need to bother with your own life,
your own country. Take Mr Freeman -- are you familiar with
this hero of Internet movies? What he says? Eat -- the opposite
-- and onto the Internet, eat -- the opposite -- and onto
the Internet. That is all. The entire lifecycle. And he is
pleased with himself. This suits everyone. Because nowadays
nobody needs you to go to the construction sites of communism,
to dig the White Sea Canal. There is no need -- we will manage
without you.
Novaya Gazeta: We will arrange to discredit the elections...
Yavlinsky: Absolutely. They do not want a lot of people to
turn out for the elections, they want everything to be measured,
there should be no exaltation, no agitation, everything under
control.
Novaya Gazeta: And "a lot" of voters -- that really
changes the picture?
Yavlinsky: "A lot" -- that will be an entirely
different story. When we vote, we show how many there are
of us, whose position we are expressing. But if we do not
express anything, it means: That's all, the game is up. And
this, my friends, is for 12 years...
Previously there were children's games: Who is better --
the SPS (Union of Right-Wing Forces) or YABLOKO. I don't like
Yavlinsky, say. But this is not about love. There was Mikhail
Prokhorov -- they opened the faucet then they closed it. But
nobody created YABLOKO, we made it ourselves.
I have seen a great many people who regretted that they voted
for Yeltsin in 1996. But nobody regretted voting for him in
1991, because voting has to have a historic meaning. There
was no historical meaning when Medvedev was elected, it was
more of the same. But now a moment is coming that will have
historic meaning. And, to be frank, I am very glad that I
have done my work and done it in such a way that there is
something in politics for which one can and should vote. I
do not know whether or not I will be able to convince you.
But this election has historical meaning.
See also:
Elections
to the State Duma 2011
|
