Congresses and Docs

Memorandum of Political Alternative, an updated version of 1.03.2019

Memorandum of Political Alternative

YABLOKO's Ten Key Programme Issues


YABLOKO's Political Platform Adopted by the 15th Congress, June 21, 2008

The 18th Congress of YABLOKO

RUSSIA DEMANDS CHANGES! Electoral Program for 2011 Parliamentary Elections.

Key resolutions by the Congress:

On Stalinism and Bolshevism
Resolution. December 21, 2009

On Anti-Ecological Policies of Russia’s Authorities. Resolution of the 15th congress of the YABLOKO party No 253, December 24, 2009

On the Situation in the Northern Caucasus. Resolution of the 15th congress of the YABLOKO party No 252, December 24, 2009


YABLOKO’s Political Committee: Russian state acts like an irresponsible business corporation conducting anti-environmental policies


Overcoming bolshevism and stalinism as a key factor for Russia¦µ™s transformation in the 21st century


On Russia's Foreign Policies. Political Committee of hte YABLOKO party. Statement, June 26, 2009


On Iran’s Nuclear Problem Resolution by the Political Committee of the YABLOKO party. October 6, 2009


Anti-Crisis Proposals (Housing-Roads-Land) of the Russian United Democratic Party YABLOKO. Handed to President Medvedev by Sergei Mitrokhin on June 11, 2009

Brief Outline of Sergei Mitrokhin’s Report at the State Council meeting. January 22, 2010


Assessment of Russia’s Present Political System and the Principles of Its Development. Brief note for the State Council meeting (January 22, 2010) by Dr.Grigory Yavlinsky, member of YABLOKO’s Political Committee. January 22, 2010


Address of the YABLOKO party to President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev. Political Committee of the YABLOKO party. October 9, 2009


The 17th Congress of YABLOKO




The 16th Congress of Yabloko

Photo by Sergei Loktionov

The 12th congress of Yabloko

The 11th congress of Yabloko

The 10th congress of Yabloko

Moscow Yabloko
Yabloko for Students
St. Petersburg Yabloko
Khabarovsk Yabloko
Irkutsk Yabloko
Kaliningrad Yabloko(eng)
Novosibirsk Yabloko
Rostov Yabloko
Yekaterinburg Yabloko
(Sverdlovsk Region)

Krasnoyarsk Yabloko
Ulyanovsk Yabloko
Tomsk Yabloko
Tver Yabloko(eng)
Penza Yabloko
Stavropol Yabloko

Action of Support





Programme by candidate for the post of Russian President Grigory Yavlinsky. Brief Overview

My Truth

Grigory Yavlinsky at Forum 2000, Prague, 2014

YABLOKO-ALDE conference 2014

Grigory Yavlinsky : “If you show the white feather, you will get fascism”

Grigory Yavlinsky: a coup is started by idealists and controlled by rascals

The Road to Good Governance

Risks of Transitions. The Russian Experience

Grigory Yavlinsky on the Russian coup of August 1991

A Male’s Face of Russia’s Politics

Black Sea Palaces of the New Russian Nomenklatura


The Hidden Cause of the Great Recession (And How to Avert the Nest One)

by Dr. Grigory Yavlinsky

On the results of the Conference “Migration: International Experience and Russia’s Problems” conducted by the Russian United Democratic Party YABLOKO and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (the ALDE party)

Moscow, April 6, 2013

International Conference "Youth under Threat of Extremism and Xenophobia. A Liberal Response"
conducted jointly by ELDR and YABLOKO. Moscow, April 21, 2012. Speeches, videos, presentations

What does the opposition want: to win or die heroically?
Moskovsky Komsomolets web-site, July 11, 2012. Interview with Grigory Yavlinsky by Yulia Kalinina.

Building a Liberal Europe - the ALDE Project

By Sir Graham Watson

Lies and legitimacy
The founder of the Yabloko Party analyses the political situation. Article by Grigory Yavlinsky on radio Svoboda. April 6, 2011

Algorithms for Opposing Gender Discrimination: the International and the Russian Experience

YABLOKO and ELDR joint conference

Moscow, March 12, 2011

Reform or Revolution

by Vladimir Kara-Murza

Is Modernisation in Russia Possible? Interview with Grigory Yavlinsky and Boris Titov by Yury Pronko, "The Real Time" programme, Radio Finam, May 12, 2010

Grigory Yavlinsky's interview to Vladimir Pozner. The First Channel, programme "Pozner", April 20, 2010 (video and transcript)

Overcoming the Totalitarian Past: Foreign Experience and Russian Problems by Galina Mikhaleva. Research Centre for the East European Studies, Bremen, February 2010.

Grigory Yavlinsky: Vote for the people you know, people you can turn for help. Grigory Yavlinsky’s interview to the Moskovsky Komsomolets newspaper, October 8, 2009

Grigory Yavlinsky: no discords in the tandem. Grigory Yavlinsky’s interview to the Radio Liberty
September 22, 2009

A Credit for Half a Century. Interview with Grigory Yavlinsky by Natalia Bekhtereva, Radio Russia, June 15, 2009

Sergei Mitrokhin's Speech at the meeting with US Preseident Barack Obama. Key Notes, Moscow, July 7, 2009

Mitrokhin proposed a visa-free regime between Russia and EU at the European liberal leaders meeting
June 18, 2009

by Grigory Yavlinsky

European Union chooses Grigory Yavlinsky!
Your vote counts!

Reforms that corrupted Russia
By Grigory Yavlinsky, Financial Times (UK), September 3, 2003

Grigory Yavlinsky: "It is impossible to create a real opposition in Russia today."
Moskovsky Komsomolets, September 2, 2003

Alexei Arbatov: What Should We Do About Chechnya?
Interview with Alexei Arbatov by Mikhail Falaleev
Komsomolskaya Pravda, November 9, 2002

Grigory Yavlinsky: Our State Does Not Need People
Novaya Gazeta,
No. 54, July 29, 2002

Grigory Yavlinsky: The Door to Europe is in Washington
Obschaya Gazeta, May 16, 2002

Grigory Yavlinsky's speech.
March 11, 2002

Grigory Yavlinsky's Lecture at the Nobel Institute
Oslo, May 30, 2000



Yabloko: Liberals in Russia

By Alexander Shishlov, July 6, 2009

Position on Some Important Strategic Issues of Russian-American Relations

Moscow, July 7, 2009

The Embrace of Stalinism

By Arseny Roginsky, 16 December 2008

Nuclear Umbrellas and the Need for Understanding: IC Interview With Ambassador Lukin
September 25, 1997

Would the West’s Billions Pay Off?
Los Angeles Times
By Grigory Yavlinsky and Graham Allison
June 3, 1991

“A Way to the Future” with Grigory Yavlinsky: A Different World

Grigory Yavlinsky’s web-site, 2.05.2024


April 2024

“What should be done to prevent a large-scale war? The very first steps to be taken to prevent a big war should include: a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine and the signing of a respective agreement; the creation of a demilitarised zone on both sides of the fault line; the resolution of humanitarian issues — an exchange of prisoners; the creation of acceptable living standards for people on the territories in the zone of the military actions.

It should be acknowledged here that diplomatic dialogue will have to start against the backdrop of total distrust. The necessary communications channels must be created immediately, the rhetoric needs to be changed, special representatives for negotiations must be appointed. No amount of military aid can ensure Ukraine’s security in the long term and even in the short term. It is a mistake to proceed from the premise that there is no alternative to “victory on the battlefield”. A ceasefire is the only possible prospect in such confrontation.”

(From the article “New World Disorder” published in April 2024)


The collapse of the world order that emerged after World War II and the danger of a major war were discussed in the new release of “A Way to the Future”.

Ksenia Sverdlova: Hello! This is “The Road to the Future,” a series of conversations with politician and economist Grigory Yavlinsky. My name is Ksenia Sverdlova, my co-host is Grigory Grishin. Grigory Alekseyevich, good day!


Grigory Yavlinsky: Good day!


Ksenia Sverdlova: In April 2024, you published a large article “New World Disorder”. There is an explanation in the subtitle: about the collapse of the world order that emerged after the Second World War and the danger of a big war. What events prompted you to write this article? Why now?


Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, first of all, this is what is happening between Russia and Ukraine. The situation is becoming more and more dangerous. Various, I would say, accomplices are trying to increasingly get into it. The President of France Emmanuel Macron says, “I will send troops there,” European leaders say, “We must prepare for war”. The newly elected Prime Minister of Poland emphasises that everyone must be prepared for the fact that they will have to participate in the war today or tomorrow. The situation at the front between Ukraine and Russia is getting worse. In addition, there is a very tense conflict in the Middle East, it has stretched to the Red Sea already. The situation between the United States and China continues to be tense.


History shows that a very big conflict can occur. No one expected and no one understood that the World War I was about to begin. All the politicians missed this, and then the events in Sarajevo happened. They played the role of, as they often say now, a “Black Swan” – that is, as a trigger. But everyone expected that this would not last long, that all these conflicts would end soon. And you know very well how bloody the World War I was. The World War I resulted in declaring a victory over Germany. Germany was humiliated by reparations, and many other things. Well, and the German people, as a people humiliated in that war, elected Hitler.


And even before the start of World War II, no one in the Soviet Union could imagine that a war with Germany could break out. And in Europe they tried to come to an agreement, made concessions, and adopted decisions that led to the continuous expansion of the conflict zone. This applied both to Czechoslovakia, and Austria. In other words, the preconditions that we see today (that have established in the world, in particular in Europe, moreover, on the border of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine), in sum, all this suggests that the danger of a large-scale war is real.


But this is the side that refers to to-day. That is, today – in short and from a various points of view – is very similar to the period of time after which, the World War I, in particular, began. Or very similar to the period of time which may develop into a major war. This could be a big war along a large front line, or it could be a focal war. It can be in one place, or another, or in a third place. We now have a huge border with NATO: it stretches from Finland all the way to Moldova. In general, this line of confrontation is even larger: it goes from there, from Finland, almost to the Red Sea – through Iraq, Iran, through Yemen – it goes further there. There are still Houthis and all that stuff. A very alarming situation.


Well, this is where the main thesis about the need for a ceasefire comes from. That is, you need to stop, you need to slow down. We must stop! Otherwise, we could end up with a very big war. Well, so that to close this topic, including a clash in which nuclear weapons could be used. And all the nice, naive people who don’t believe in this are just nice and naive. Sometimes they start fantasising and arguing whether it is “a blackmail or not a blackmail”. What does blackmail have to do with it? It is a fact.


Well, this is if we talk about a specific danger, the most immediate. But the fact that world disorder is coming is a broader topic than just these armed conflicts. It is connected with the fact that the order that emerged after 1945 is collapsing. But it has been very effective for a long time. But it is disappearing: the Security Council has stopped working, the UN has stopped working, and structures such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are increasingly complaining about the prospects. Fragmentation is increasing, globalisation is curtailing, and protectionism in the economy is becoming a leading, simply a leading, trend.


This is partly due to what began to happen after COVID, after the pandemic. However, these trends have already emerged before, and these problems also exist. The role of the countries of Latin America and Southeast Asia is changing, and India is acquiring a new meaning. By the way, there will be elections there soon, and a very tough authoritarian regime will be formed there, as I understand. In African countries, disasters also occur and tragedies occur – look what is happening now in Sudan. And no one can influence this. And the influence of the United States is limited.


After their defeat in Iraq, in Afghanistan (and I would also add Libya here), after these defeats their role and influence became very, very limited. And in such conditions, when there are different centres of power with different ideas about life, this is how the preconditions for world disorder arise. Why is this happening? This is particularly due to the fact that when the Cold War ended, the arms race stopped. Additional funds have become available. Instead of sending them to the third world: to help people level out their living standards, raise, improve their living standards, healthcare, education, what did they do? They sent the money to financial pyramids. And the financial pyramids collapsed in 2007-2008-2009.


What is the answer? The answer is 11 September. The answer was 11 September – the terrorist attack in the United States. After that a new era began. So it led to today’s situation. And that’s not all. Another factor of changes in the world is the Internet and social media. Which means populism, which means ochlocracy. This means, as a consequence, that political institutions have lost the influence they had and the meaning they had. We don’t know yet what the impact of artificial intelligence will be now. This is another topic that will be added here. Anything can come out of it. Partly this is the storming of the Capitol, the primaries, in which random people of a populist nature suddenly become political leaders, and no one will know then what to do with them. And this has also led to the fact that the choice of presidents in the United States is very specific today. And the split and the rift there are also very serious. And the contradictions within the parties – both the Democrats and the Republicans – are very large.


That is, these institutions stopped working quite effectively. The situation has changed in the third world, in Latin American countries: they now want to take their own place. China’s policies partly compete with and undermine the monopoly position of the International Monetary Fund. They give loans without any conditions. True, they cannot get them repaid, but they can still give them, because they have such a system. Well, in general, these factors are very significant. And, I would say, there are many of them. Their citation can take a long, long time. But to sum it up, I would like to say two things.


Indeed, the likelihood of a major war in the world is growing. That is one thing. And the second. This is happening in the context of the cessation of the work of the world system, the world order, that was created after 1945. The combination of these two things is very alarming.


Grigory Grishin: And here is a topic related to Iran’s unprecedented attack on Israel. How much does this attack and this – the most acute escalation of the situation in the Middle East in the past few decades – affect the assessment of this new world disorder? How is the balance of political power in the world changing due to this conflict?


Grigory Yavlinsky: I must tell you that this is a rather symbolic event. Because, look, before, within the framework of the previous world order, Iran has never directly attacked Israel. Despite the fact that it always criticised it and so on and so on. You see? But now, in new conditions, it decided to do it. And this is already such an attack that… the weakness of, say, the United States: they cannot influence it to prevent this from happening. And they are almost forced to negotiate on this. This is it… this is it – a new world. Here you are.


And there are already reproaches from Iran against Russia. Why didn’t Russia help Iran under these conditions?


Grigory Grishin: To attack Israel?!


Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. And Iran needed to do this, because this was an exhibition event for the Iranian public.


Grigory Grishin: Naturally, yes.


Grigory Yavlinsky: That it was indeed a very large attack, very large-scale. But it ended with almost no casualties, thank God. By the way, they spent, according to publications, a billion dollars.


Grigory Grishin: To repel this attack?


Grigory Yavlinsky: To protect themselves.


Grigory Grishin: Just one attack?!


Grigory Yavlinsky: It took a billion to repel the attack. But the United States was still involved. And France participated, and Great Britain participated, and Jordan participated. And Saudi Arabia, as I understand, participated. Who didn’t participate there? It was all of them who created this kind of protection. If you look at the Russian-Ukrainian conflict from this point of view, then now there is a very big emotional… serious emotional reaction in Ukraine. Because they say, “Why don’t you protect us like that? If you can do it from such a large number of missiles – all of this. And we… why don’t you protect us?”


And they are told with a smart look ,“But this won’t work out like that, we can’t do that”. This is what we have… You see, there are no rules here – that’s it. No one can predict anything, no one can determine anything. This is why, this is why the danger of war is significant. Because these are the developments that can turn in any direction.


Now let us go back to the very beginning. What depends on us? Ceasefire. Let us stop. You see, there are no rules. But we can… All this is going very far. And the examples that I gave you with France, and others, and the supply of weapons and so on – these are very serious things. We need to stop. And then negotiate ad infinitum. Ad infinitum if needed. Moreover, there are examples. After all, it is true that a lot of things were done when there were agreements in Istanbul, in March-April 2022. But then they were abandoned.


Ksenia Sverdlova: Grigory Alekseyevich, let’s talk about global problems and tools for solving them. You wrote in the article, and now we have managed to talk a little about one of the reasons for what is happening. This is about the mistake that was made by politicians in the 1980-1990s, when the colossal freed up funds were not directed towards development…


Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes.


Ksenia Sverdlova: To the countries that really needed this money. Does it come out that time is lost and  we can no longer return to this issue? We have the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon, and entire states in Africa are ruled by gangs. What can we do in this situation and are there any tools left to counter this evil?


Grigory Yavlinsky: In order to look for a solution, you need to highlight the main thing for which everything is being done. In my opinion, this main thing is a person, his/her life and future. In the conditions we are in now. If this is the core, then everything can be arranged around it. Because all the problems that you mentioned, they are all around… around this… this is the main, the core part. It we manage to transform the most important values – a person’s life, his children, his health, his opportunities… For example, I think the most important thing is equality of opportunity. So that any person, regardless of what part of our country he was born in, who his parents are, so that all citizens have equal opportunities.


In the sense of education, in the sense of business, in the sense of owning land, in the sense of owning property, in the sense of participation in the economy, in the sense of participation in politics, in the sense of participation in the life of the country. Everyone should have equal starting opportunities. Then it depends on talent, natural abilities, circumstances, and on many other things. But the system should be organised in such a way that the main thing is the person, not the state. The state serves the development of a person, it serves his/her future, it seeks those forms in which a person can develop and realise himself/herself to the maximum extent. Then those questions, those dangers that you ask about, in my opinion, will gradually get solved. But this is about a new world. It is just a new world – new and different. This partly referred to the period after 1945. But then, for various reasons, it went away. It went away thanks to two factors in particular: money (it seemed to become a more important priority) and the Internet and social media. These two factors played such a role that those priorities and those values on which they built… or tried to build a human world system, they went to the second, third, fourth, and fifth plane.


And they were gone altogether.


Ksenia Sverdlova: It is terrible to say this, but does humanity really need a new big war in order to realise and return to the value of human life as a fundamental value?


Grigory Yavlinsky: At the beginning of the 2000s or at the end of the 1990s – well, at the very end of the 1990s – I submitted such a project to the United Nations, together with Václav Havel, about the need for this money, that was generated from savings, be spent on education. To create [mandatory] three-year education throughout the world. Because what I think is extremely important is to reach people, so that people hear it. People in this crazy Internet space, they quarrel, make peace, fight, but the main things remain on the periphery, they remain on the sidelines.


Sometimes this is done deliberately, because politicians are interested in this, so they retain their power. But can we develop further in such a way?


Populism is becoming mainstream, the main trend. Then it turns out that when populists come to power, they cannot do anything that they promised. So what happens then? Then they look for enemies, those who are in the way. As soon as the enemies are discovered, fascism begins – the fight against those who prevent the populists from realising what they cannot do. What they promised, but what they cannot do.


This is the danger of politics, given that this year a huge number of people in the world – in my opinion, more than half of humanity – will in one way or another participate in what is called elections. There will be elections India too…


Grigory Grishin: The European Union, the United States.


Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, both in the European Union and in the United States. Therefore, these topics are very relevant now. I share your concern, but I just want to say that the situation is so serious that it requires a lot of attention among people. Will it be possible to reach out, will it be possible to make people hear it – this question remains open. Today there is no answer to this question.


Grigory Grishin: The importance of the UN is fading away before our eyes. As you write in your article, “the world seems to have been disappointed in the United Nations Organisation”. It is the same with all other political structures in the world – European and international. And also – you also write about this – international economic organisations are weakening. This includes the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. And the United States is also weakening. As a consequence of this entire process of weakening, won’t there be a weakening of the main world currency – the dollar? If this is so, if this happens, what consequences will it have for the global economy and people?


Grigory Yavlinsky: Today, when we talk about weakening of the United States, we are talking, first of all, about weakening of its influence. Today, I do not see any processes that would really be indicative of the weakening of the economy or the dollar as a world currency. There are no such processes today. We are talking about weakening of their political influence, and the dollar continues to be a world currency, very influential, and so on. Another thing is that there is a growing desire in, say, India, and even more so in China and the BRICS countries, to have a competing currency, their own currency.


This is another matter. But this is only at the very beginning, and there has not been much success in this regard so far. And the Americans will certainly oppose this matter quite significantly. But today there are other problems happening in the economy. For example, the number of various restrictions on free trade is growing sharply. For example, according to the IMF, as of 2020, for example, or 2019, there were a thousand, literally a thousand different restrictions. But in 2022-2023 there were already three thousand restrictions.


That is, the number of restrictions on free trade has tripled.


Grigory Grishin: Rising costs.


Grigory Yavlinsky: And this is a very serious question, because it leads to migration, because it leads to poverty, because it slows down the development of third world countries and at the same time it is a consequence of increased migration processes. The number of migrants is increasing, and not only that. Firstly, the number of migrants is increasing, and Europe is facing this. And Europe, when faced with this, changes its policies. Because in not all countries people perceive the arrival of migrants in a positive way.


Some countries, such as Great Britain, are doing something completely incomprehensible. Just the other day they were trying to pass a law to send all migrants who came to the UK – well, those who came illegally – to Rwanda. So that they are dealt with in Rwanda, and not in the UK. The same processes – very complex – are taking place in Greece. Well, they are decided differently, but there too, there are things up to the disasters that happen at sea. Now look at this new party – the Alternative for Germany, AfD – which also has these anti-emigration processes as its fulcrum. And this means that these trends are the factor changing politics.


Why did Russia stop grain supplies to Ukraine through the Black Sea?


Grigory Grishin: To increase global poverty.


Grigory Yavlinsky: To create a certain problem with grain supplies. Which exactly? Scarcity plus prices. And both shortages and prices lead to migration. That’s it. So that is part of it. The other part is that the population that finds itself in this situation turns into ISIS. And the third part, it remains there, suffers, and  there happens what happens in African countries, what we have already talked about. Nobody knows how to stop, for example, this conflict in Sudan. These factors play a very significant role. And in this sense, the United States cannot do anything. They just can’t do anything about it.


They tried to solve this, as they understood this, but they could not do anything. And so the world is developing in exactly this direction. Therefore, we can here, say, from Russia, “A multipolar world. You live there as you like, and we will live as we like”. And someone else will live… let him live as he wants. Not everyone understands: in principle, the world can and should be multipolar, but it must have something in common. What we have just talked about. In my opinion, this common thing should be a person. A person, his/her future, his/her possibilities, his/her virtues, his/her right, and his/her faith. This is the most important thing.


Well, if you look at what is happening in the world right now, you will see how far away we are from that.


Ksenia Sverdlova: Grigory Alekseyevich, another significant factor in economic policy is energy resources. As far as I remember, ten years ago there was talk all over the world that we were entering a new stage of energy development, we were moving to other energy sources. The price of oil and gas would fall and thus weaken the influence of the countries selling hydrocarbons. But as we see now, this did not happen. Why?


Grigory Yavlinsky: It didn’t happen because priorities changed very sharply. Priorities changed very sharply because gas supplies to Europe stopped. Well, on a massive scale. They actually still continue in one way or another, but that is a slightly different conversation. There are big problems with oil rates, a fairly significant increase in oil prices is expected. Now oil prices amount to USD 85-88, but if a big conflict breaks out in the Middle East, then they expect an increase in oil prices to more than USD 200 – up to USD 250. Well, this is fantasy, probably, but they expect a very high rise in prices.


These changes in the world that we have talked about have led to states turning to previous energy sources. They are simply not ready to rebuild them in a new way. The destruction of previous supply structures leads to rising prices, which is beneficial for some, by the way. And to this, I would say, shadow method of delivering energy resources. This creates some kind of ambiguity – working there. Because you can see how Russian oil, again, comes to Europe through India. You can see how Russia continues to export uranium to Europe and the United States too. They have just found some gas supplies to that same Europe and France. Well, here is a new world disorder for you. We are almost about to send troops there now, and at the same time they continue to buy resources from Russia and pay Russia quite a lot of money. Here is how it all actually happens.


In this regard, the demand for a new world order is becoming increasingly great. The point of our conversation with you, as I would like to convey with your help, is that a person should be at the centre. This is a very serious thing. This is a different social environment, this is not social policy at all, but the social structure is different. These are very serious things because the previous institutions suffered serious failures. Christine Lagarde – she was the head of the IMF, and now she heads the European Central Bank – says, “You cannot do this to the Russian resources that they have, because this is a violation of all the rules and all the laws.


Then you will all cry that you broke the laws and rules. And this, again, will be a precedent. And then the conversation will begin: “Why, if it is possible there, then why cannot we do it here like that?”


Grigory Grishin: Well, continuing on this topic. It has now been two years since the sanctions campaign against Russia began. Everyone expected two years ago that the Russian economy, would collapse under the avalanche of these sanctions if not tomorrow, then within a few months. But that did not happen. And, moreover, the Russian economy is showing relatively good results. What is the reason that sanctions did not work?


Grigory Yavlinsky: But you just need to understand that Russia is part of the world economy. The world economy cannot live without Russia. Well, what other example do you need, what kind of sanctions? Gas transportation continues through Ukraine.


Grigory Grishin: All these two years – without fail.


Grigory Yavlinsky: There is a war going on, many people are dying, and gas is being transported – in particular to Austria – through pipelines. No one touches them, no one blows them up, and no one does anything to them. They are discussing with Gazprom how much they need to pay: and now they need a little more, because it rained there, or something else. But all this goes on.


Grigory Grishin: Nord Stream exploded thousands of kilometers from Ukraine.


Grigory Yavlinsky: And here all is allowed, that’s it… gas transportation through Ukraine continues, inviolable for all… Why? Well, because it is needed there. This is the answer to your question. Russia is part of the world economy. Russian resources have been integrated into the world economy for a very long time. Therefore, one way or another – through China, through India, through some shadow methods with some shadow fleet, or with some shadow supplies – all this will be going on. In addition, just look how much, say, exports to Russia from such country as Kyrgyzstan have grown.


Grigory Grishin: This is the centre of the world trade now!


Grigory Yavlinsky: You see, you even laugh. From a country like Armenia. It is hundreds, hundreds of percent, hundreds. So what does this mean? What is this? And the same companies that produce something there in Europe, they suddenly increased supplies of something to Armenia or somewhere else by 300 times. Well, is not it clear what it is? Is not it  clear what will happen? Well, everything is clear. That is why all these sanctions are still working the way they have had.


But this does not mean that the Russian economy will not have problems. They will come, and very serious, and they already exist. I will tell you about just one problem. There are people who went to this special military operation, they are paid 200,000 – 300,000 – 400,000 roubles. While here the salary is 60,000 – 70,000 roubles. What will happen, when they return? What will it all be like? How will all this work?


Now there is already deficit, it is already necessary to increase wage plans. But that is just one question. However, generally speaking, this certainly represents falling into such a new state, and it is a big challenge for the Russian economy and for the future. Only it is not short-term, it is medium-term. It will take five or six or seven years, and then we will begin to feel all this very acutely.


Therefore, the sooner we stop and all this stops, and we will start returning… Our economy is becoming different. This is no longer the economy of market competition, this is already the economy of a state-monopoly structure in wartime conditions. This is how our economy is now. This is a completely different economy. And the issues of consumption, issues of consumer goods will be very acute. True, supplies, let us say, from China will be very significant. This is such a significant U-turn.


Grigory Grishin: Should we then talk about the prospects of degradation of the Russian economy, at least in some of its sectors?


Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, it has never been beautiful and great. It has never turned into such. It has always been a commodity-based economy. The key fundamental things in the Russian economy were raw materials. After 2012, they began destroying the middle class. In other words, the reform that began in the 1990s ended in nothing. And now, even the external manifestations of what was done then, now it is all closing. What are the foundations of Russia? Its foundation is the enormous poverty of the population. And natural resources. This is a combination of enormous poverty of the population and natural resources. And you can see this even in cities. If you go to some city, for example, to Saratov or somewhere else, or to Voronezh, you will see: everything there is approximately like this.


Grigory Grishin: Poor population can endure anything.


Grigory Yavlinsky: Such poverty, it demonstrates… this leads to the fact that economic changes will not affect them very soon, because they never have had access to it. This is in several cities… except Moscow, which is such a special place in Russia, but the rest is a big question.


Ksenia Sverdlova: The theme of the danger of a new world war is central to your article “New World Disorder”. By the way, we will definitely post a link to the article under this video. And among the possible trouble spots you indicate both the Middle East and Asia, but still pay special attention to Europe and, in particular, to the military clash between Russia and Ukraine. Why do you think that peace in Ukraine and normalisation of relations between Russia and Europe can prevent this big world war?


Grigory Yavlinsky: I would say that this is a step towards its prevention, because escalation, on the contrary, – an increase in the scale of this conflict, this war – this will lead in the opposite direction, it will increase the risks very significantly. It will just be a different direction. In addition, a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine saves lives, and this is perhaps the most important thing. This direction – freezing this conflict or a ceasefire, as the very first step, the very first – does not guarantee anything, but it is still a step in that direction, towards preventing such a conflict.


Well, besides, I will just tell you again that steps in the other direction are steps associated with a clash with a state with nuclear weapons – that’s it.


Grigory Grishin: The last question, Grigory Alekseyevich. In these conditions of a world that is moving towards disintegration, towards a disruption of the usual stability, what should a simple ordinary person do under these conditions? How can we help ensure that, in a global sense, the world does not slide towards the violation of everything with which we are familiar? And how to preserve one’s own peace of mind, how to preserve the space of your own life? What to do?


Grigory Yavlinsky: To be human. Saving people, understanding that nothing is more valuable than the lives of your children, nothing more valuable than the lives of those around you, the lives given by God. And you are obliged to preserve them all, take care of them. This is the most important thing. This is what the individual must do. Well, then we can start thinking about what needs to be done in our life, in the organisation of politics, organisation of the state, organisation of government and local self-government, and so on. One should have a core. There must be something the most important, there must be something the most valuable.


Let us not allow dehumanization, relentlessness and hardness of hearts. That’s what a person should do. And – this is the second thing – to understand the reasons. Why has it happened? Why did this happen? And the point is not that one person makes all this. The question is: why did this person get so much power? How is it that he can make any such decisions? How did it happen that this particular person is located here or there? These are the questions every person needs to look for answers to. For what? In order to create conditions for a different life for children and grandchildren. That’s it. There is nothing more important in life, that is how life works.


Grigory Grishin: Thank you!


Ksenia Sverdlova: Thank you, Grigory Alekseyevich!


Grigory Yavlinsky: Thank YOU!