|
The public gathering in Moscow on the 80th anniversary of
Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov was marked by nostalgic and sentimental
tunes. This is not surprising, as it was organised by the people
who are still unable to comprehend why Acad. Sakharov's ideas
have not prevailed in Russian society. They still speculate on
the similarities between Yeltsin and Sakharov. Only Grigory Yavlinsky
spoke about Sakharov as a man whose moral presence in politics
is necessary today. Specially for Novaya Gazeta - extracts from
his speech.
I did not know Andrei Dmitrievich personally. Consequently I
cannot share personal memories. But I would like to share with
you the ideas connected with today.
Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov established the foundations of liberal-democratic
movement in Russia, identifying its main underlying concepts.
At the end of the 20th century Sakharov formulated a thesis that
was extremely important for Russia: the country will only flourish
- a future desired by the absolute majority - if Russia evolves
as a free and democratic country. This condition is key to the
modern development of our country.
If we consider developments since Sakharov's death, the following
lessons can be drawn, which are directly related to the precepts
of Andrei Sakharov that have been consigned to oblivion.
Andrei Dmitrievich was a great scientist and thinker of our day
and did not consider himself a politician. And in his role as
a key observer and not a politician, he formulated the underlying
values and rules for all politicians.
His precept on the morality of politicians ranked at the top
of this list. Sakharov realised that it was absolutely pointless
to ask or demand politicians to be moral. That is why he achieved
this goal by taking a different tack: he tried to convince people
that a moral position in politics was the most practical and advisable.
Naturally, if their goal is not only personal welfare, but, at
least to some extent, the country's prospects and the future of
our children and grand-children.
Such a practical understanding of morality in politics is extremely
important, as a society raised on lies, as Elena Georgievna Bonner
has recently wrote, will never grow up. I would add that it cannot
fully blossom like a plant without sunshine.
Such a society will never leave adolescence and will be marked
by terrible psychological complexes, grudges and aggression. The
cynicism serving as the tool of "big-shot" politicians of the
past decade is simply a form of concealing their own feeble-mindedness.
Sooner or later the plans cynically implemented by such politicians
will inevitable fail. Even a small dose of cynicism is capable
of contaminating what would appear to be comprehensible and necessary
ideas.
Contempt for the moral foundations of politics was displayed
in autumn 1999 when the anti-terrorist operation in Chechnya was
transformed into a large-scale war against all the inhabitants
of this republic. A unique situation evolved in the autumn: people
fled Khattab and Basayev - fled the people who had been mocking
and taunting them. If the people implementing the policies in
Chechnya had realised that the practical aspect of morality is
to bring all these people to the "federal" side, and provide support
and understanding and together radically reduce the scope of terrorism!
Instead they initiated mass-scale bombings and the struggle with
terrorism was transformed into a war against civilians. Exploiting
modern information technologies and classical active measures,
the authorities raised a hysterical wave of chauvinism in the
country, using their intellectual political lackeys to denounce
all dissenters as traitors. Consequently, Russia's policies in
the Northern Caucasus reached deadlock.
This was one of Andrei Dmitrievich's precepts that was clear
and obvious, but was not followed.
Academic Sakharov was not a politician, but a human rights activist.
The notions "politician" and "defender of human rights" will be
closely related in Russia for a long time. A true democratic politician
in today's Russia has to be a defender of human rights. If we
are talking about all the rights violated in our country, rather
than about the individual rights of citizens, we end up with a
political programme. Being a politician implies defending all
the rights of citizens - political freedoms, economic rights and
personal rights.
This situation will remain for a long time in a country, where
the individual is humiliated, is subjected to moral and physical
suffering in military barracks, in preliminary detention wards
in a country where a third of our compatriots live below the poverty
level and where the health care and social security systems have
been destroyed.
A defender of human rights cannot differentiate between, let
alone oppose, political and social freedoms. A prosperous society
and rich country cannot be built without political freedoms. And
a hapless population on the verge of economic survival cannot
enjoy genuine political freedoms. This is another important precept
left to us by Academician Sakharov.
This is extremely important today when the same people responsible
for the construction of the system of oligarchic capitalism in
our country propose, on the pretext of implementing a new cycle
of structural reforms required by the country, a new project to
society - a "manageable, controlled democracy".
Yes, we failed over the past ten years to establish the socio-economic
foundation for democracy and a free society. Were liberal policies
implemented in Russia over the past ten years? Yes, from the standpoint
of the vulgar liberalism of the 19th century. But if we are talking
about the liberalism at the end of the 20th - beginning of the
21st century, then the answer is no. For a genuine liberal policy
always focuses on an individual's freedom, his social and economic
prosperity. Such policies have never been implemented in Russia.
The absolute majority did not obtain anything from these reforms.
The absolute majority feel deceived by the economic and social
policies of the past ten years.
Most importantly, equal opportunities have not been created,
something which is absolutely vital for the creation of the foundations
of democracy in Russia. True liberalism is always based on equal
opportunities, equal access to the main benefits distributed in
a market economy, equal rights in the market, fair and honest
competition, the opportunity to resist the pressure of monopolies
and the pressure of a small circle of people, which we call oligarchs.
These are real liberal reforms. We have not had such reforms.
Consequently there are good grounds to consider today - even
if we don't actually formulate a programme now - what new democratic
course should be adopted to us to celebrate Academician Sakharov's
ninetieth birthday in other circumstances and in a different mood.
I would like to propose several elements of such a course. First
of all this should be an uncompromising - I repeat uncompromising
- struggle for the political rights and freedoms of all citizens
of Russia. Naturally these rights include the right to property
(including considerable property). But that right cannot replace
the right to freedom. Where there is freedom, there will be property;
if there is no freedom, there will be no property. I can imagine
a rally "For Your Freedom and Ours" but not one called "For Your
Property and Ours." This is the first lesson that must be learned
by all those who call themselves democrats.
And no pragmatic explanations can justify deviations from this
goal. Dilettante politicians who call themselves "pragmatic politicians"
should know that pragmatism in politics is a form of political
sell-out.
The second goal. All reforms to create a free market economy
in Russia, to change the structure of our economy and the social
sphere should from now on be regulated by the most important determining
rule: reforms for the majority. It is impossible to further implement
reforms aimed at the interests of a narrow group of people. We
now know that the idea that they would subsequently become the
motor pulling everyone else forward is short-sighted and flawed.
This group of people did become a motor, but only to oversee the
growth of their own wealth.
Reforms for the majority is the most important goal. This means
that we want to build a liberal, socially oriented European type
of market economy in Russia.
Therefore the European vector in Russia's development should
be the third direction of the new democratic policies. The focus
on European socio-economic structures is very important, as Russia
is a great European country. Over the past few centuries and perhaps
throughout its history, Russia brought all Eurasia with it along
the European path.
And finally the consolidation of all rational democratic forces
must be a major rule. This is now possible, because life has drawn
the line, settling many of the disputes between the democrats.
In economic policy the line was drawn on August 17, 1998, when
the policies of Chubais-Chernomyrdin ended in the collapse of
Russia's whole financial system and colossal foreign debts. Yabloko's
assessments made five years earlier proved to be accurate. In
politics and personal politics, on March 26, 2000 (Ed. the day
of the presidential elections). Now anyone who seriously wants
the creation of a really democratic, socially oriented market
economy must learn from the last ten years.
I stress that the basic direction of consolidation for the democratic
forces is based on the rapprochement of equal, independent, political
democratic subjects that are subordinate to nobody, including
each other. And I invite all of them all to collaborate with my
party. We will bring this movement to a practical realisation:
we are preparing for the convocation of a Democratic Assembly.
Our views were defined a long time ago. Yabloko will fight against
the creation of a police state in Russia. We will show every possible
resistance to the creation of a controlled democracy in Russia,
as a controlled democracy would condemn Russia to hopeless backwardness.
Hapless, manipulated, intimidated and deprived of any objective
sources of information, people cannot create a new economy of
the 21st century, cannot stand in one row with the leading industrial
countries of the world. They cannot defend the largest country
in the world with its vast resources, the country with the longest
borders with the most unstable regions in the world. Any attempt
to remove Russia from the ranks of free countries in the 21st
century would lead Russia in the 21st century to an irreversible
crash.
We will strongly resist the crawling constitutional coup d'etat
under the false slogans of a manageable, controlled and fraudulent
democracy. We will cooperate with all the political parties that
are ready to fight against the perpetuation of the conformity
of opinions, a castrated democracy and the poverty of the overwhelming
majority of the population.
We will take this path with everyone who is prepared to work
with us to implement reforms for the majority and guarantee a
free democratic socially oriented future for our country.
We do not claim to take any privileged position in this civil
resistance. Let it set forth new, more talented leaders unrelated
to the ten years of Yeltsinism and the discrediting of democratic
ideals defended so passionately by Andrei Dmitrievich till the
last minutes of his life.
See also:
the Human Rights section
of the web-site
| 