|
A law allowing for the import of nuclear waste was adopted recently.
In view of this fact the newspapers and TV stations have been
discussing the issue as to whether our legislative authorities
are completely subordinate to the executive authorities. But the
issue is far more serious. This is not simply an episode when
the State Duma has completely fulfilled the will of the government.
The adoption of this law provides a striking example of the nature
of relations between the authorities and the people. They have
remained virtually unchanged for the past 15 years. The government
and the deputies of almost all the factions, except for Yabloko,
openly declared and insisted that the opinion of 90 per cent of
the people was not important. The people "do not understand
where their happiness lies".
This is a well-known scheme. The authorities think that they
can simply teach and educate the citizens of Russia, via "a
lecture on the political situation” and directives that admit
no objections, merely stating that "the people have not worked
it out yet", rather than engaging in a discussion or dialogue.
One hundred million Russian citizens (as indicated by the polls)
object to the import of nuclear waste into Russia, and 500 people
in Moscow - 300 deputies and 200 bureaucrats - oppose this will
by enforcing their decision.
Therefore in our opinion the main challenge, main problem and
threat is provided by the intensification of trends towards building
a make-believe democratic system in Russia, another "Potyomkin's
village" (Ed. fake villages specially built by Prince Potyomkin
to demonstrate to Catherine II how well her people were living),
with bureaucratic authoritarian rule at the core.
Over the past ten years Russia has made considerable progress
and changed a lot in life – it has abolished communist ideology
and formulated the democratic principles of the Constitution.
However, the reformers for the past ten years have failed to create
a reliable democratic foundation either in the state system, social
order or in the form of a market economy. In reality Russia has
not moved beyond a formal, extremely unstable democracy. Authoritarian-bureaucratic
moods and trends are evolving, while make-believe democratic systems
that are very manipulable are emerging as a replacement for civic
organisations that cannot be so easily controlled.
In general this is the result of incompetent decisions, a cynical,
mercenary and ideologically vulgar approach to reforms. The most
important components of democracy are transformed into a caricature
in Russia. A parliament exists, that immediately executes every
single order that it receives. The winner-party was created a
month before the elections. Federalism is more redolent of
feudalism, where relations between the centre and regions are
built on the basis of private relations between the governors
and the president of the country. The law-governed state acts
selectively, finds its opponents and resolves its disputes with
them through legal instruments in such a way that any citizen
of the country may be subjected to criminal proceedings at any
moment. The dependent judicial system annuls the registration
of a candidate disagreeable to the authorities a day before the
election.
And what is the result? Only the minority won from the reforms.
The vast majority were disappointed. The country obtained an unstable
democracy.
What are the variants of development for unstable democracy?
There are three variants. A defective democracy. A so-called authoritative
modernisation. And the third, but not so easily achieved goal:
the steady path of democratic development.
The defective democracy does not require extensive description.
It is right before our very eyes.
The authoritarian temptation is also clearly prominent as one
possible direction. This is confirmed by the example of imports
of spent nuclear fuel and many recent events. This scenario is
whispered in the President's ear by adventurers and silly plagiarist
political scientists. The essence of their mumblings can be summed
up as follows: democratic and civic institutions should not be
eliminated as before, but adjusted to the needs of the police-oligarchic
ruling clan. And if they cannot be adjusted, then they should
be replaced, ousted and imitated by obedient and artificially
created parties, journalist unions, civic organisations, controlled
and paid mass media, etc. Such moves will inevitably lead to the
creation of a police state in Russia.
This will certainly not lead to the installation of order. There
will be only a huge bureaucratic construction, where one group
of bureaucrats will control the other, and one group of representatives
will give rise to another group of representatives. This structure
will evolve in even in the smallest villages. Corruption will
increase and the degeneration of state machinery will intensify.
The way of building an authoritarian-bureaucratic system feigning
to be something else represents the path of irreversible backwardness
for our country. A hapless people in chains who are being manipulated
cannot create a competitive economy of the 21st century.
The stable democratic liberal and therefore socially oriented
development of our country is the only goal that is worth fighting
for. All other scenarios will develop independently without our
efforts.
To achieve these goals we require a new course that differs
from the one conducted over the past ten years. We should finally
learn lessons from the bad mistakes of the past ten years, dump
the ravings of the advocates of the Pinochet regime and implement
a new liberal-democratic course of the reforms for the majority.
All our actions should be tested to ascertain whether they are
favourable for the majority of our compatriots, whether they provide
them an opportunity to be free and simply conduct their daily
business without having to undergo heroic deeds every time.
I would like to propose the four main components of this course:
First. Uncompromising protection of human rights, an aspiration
for justice and subordination of the state to the interests of
the citizens.
A man is born free and equal to all the other people. He is
able to think and act independently and differentiate the truth
from a lie.
We proceed from the premise that respect for the individual
and respect for the family constitute the real foundations of
society.
The personal freedom of an individual should by guaranteed by
the independence of the legislative and judicial authorities from
the administration, and political freedom by free and fair elections
with due respect for the rights and opinions of the minority.
Freedom of speech, conscience, choice of unions and profession,
equal rights for men and women, as well as respect for a language,
faith, the laws and traditions of national minorities constitute
an absolute moral and political imperative for us.
We also understand the word freedom to mean the right to private
ownership and the right to engage in private entrepreneurial activity
and derive potential profits from such activity.
An important element of our understanding of freedom is that
the state should serve the citizens as it is only a tool and should
in no case prevent their independent and free development.
We do not believe in absolute might and power. We think that
[public] accord is the basis for lawful and stable power. However,
the excess concentration of unlimited power in the hands of one
man stifles and suppresses an accord. To make it real, power should
be dispersed through different responsible democratic institutions.
We are convinced that the values of freedom and independence
can lead to a moral revival of Russian society, if we can demonstrate
that freedom for the sake of an individual is not identical to
egoism, that it is freedom in the social context, meaning responsibility
and solidarity.
We understand freedom to mean both the defence of the rights
of citizens to a timely and varied education in accordance with
his capabilities, independent of his material well-being; defence
and insurance of everyone against sickness, unemployment, loss
of the ability to work and old age; the right to quality housing
and constant improvements in the environment.
Second. A free market economy constitutes an integral principle
of building a stable democracy in Russia. This implies private
property and private property guarantees; open transparent and
equal competition; minimum state intervention in the economy;
guarantees to investors; strictly set and observed rules of civil
turnover of land, demonopolisation of the markets, free trade,
reduction in taxes and their simplification, elimination of currency
restrictions and real deregulation. We insist on a liberal concept
of the market, but none of its principles have been realised today.
We pay special attention to the liberalisation of access to
income distribution, in a way that is fairer to society as a whole,
that was accumulated as rent from the extraction and sale of natural
resources; abolishing the economic policies of the past 30 years
based almost exclusively on their export.
Speaking about a new course we declare: freedom is undermined
and violated when a huge number of people suffer from destitution,
diseases, poverty, unemployment and unqualified labour. The functioning
of a market economy should be assessed, proceeding from its ability
to provide more welfare than any other system and fairer market
distribution.
How does our market economy resolve this task? An incompetent
attempt to control the economy exclusively through monetary instruments
led to a situation when economic policy is separated from the
interests of society in general, and its poorest members in particular.
Third. It is obvious to us that Russia is a European country.
The European vector in Russia’s development in terms of practical
policy implies orientation to a European socio-economicš structure.
The European way indicates to us how we can overcome social
inequality between regions and population groups and achieve stable
development of the country and how we can create the social state
envisaged by our Constitution.
In addition to the geographical location and socio-economic
orientation, there is a geopolitical aspect. Russia has the longest
borders with the most unstable regions in the world, and, probably,
with half of the poorest population of the planet; at the same
time it disposes of about 60 percent of the world’s natural resources
that are economically profitable. This means that we should pay
special attention to our relations with Europe, including issues
of strategic security.
In my opinion in the 21st century there will be two major centres
of economic power in the world: North America and Asia. If Europe
intends to compete with them as an equal, and not end up on the
outskirts of economic development, there is only one way out –
economic and political integration with Russia.
For Russia this provides a way to preserve its integrity, independence
and national identity and to flourish. For Europe – this is the
way to competitiveness, if you want, to economic survival in the
future. Here our interests coincide and we will propose definite
economic, military and political projects.
Fourth. Our All-Russia Democratic Movement. The tasks that we
put forward here can be implemented through the active consolidation
of Russia’s democrats. Why has this become possible today?
We have adopted a very tough position over a number of years.
Yabloko rejected the economic policies of the past ten years,
as it considered them to be incompetent and to merely facilitate
the implementation of the scenario of a criminal market run by
bandits. There were many theoretical disputes here. But on August
17, 1998, life itself drew a line under this discussion. The untalented
and mercenary implementation of economic reforms in Russia led
to a major debt crisis. This day buried the position that our
economic opponents had been defending.
We are ready to cooperate with everybody who can learn lessons
from the past. We have been working practically in this direction.
The permanent democratic assembly may become the first step here.
Representatives of all democratic political organisations, non-state
organisations, civil human rights and ecological organisations.
For the first time in ten years they will be able to discuss on
an equal basis without any subordination the key issues of the
country’s development.
The principal difference of the New Democratic Course is based
primarily on an understanding that the democratic institutions
in Russian cannot be stable and productive without the support
of these institutions by the majority of the population. All Russian
democrats should finally understand that the implementation of
reforms for a narrow circle of persons leads to reaction and irreversible
backwardness and they should turn back now and face the majority.
The New Democratic Course is the course that protects not only
people who have already profited from the reforms, but, first
of all, those who have not received any benefit to date.
In practical terms this means that attention should be focused
on housing and communal services reform, pension reform, the referendum
on [imports of] spent nuclear fuel, liquidation of excess bureaucratic
regulation and development of small and medium-sized businesses.
Yabloko does not consider liberal democracy to be a perfect
and irreproachable system. However, it is most suitable and convenient
for normal life, freedom, creative work, human dignity and social
justice.Yabloko does not think that a liberal democracy can resolve
all the problems in Russia. But we are convinced that this way
is the only one that can help to resolve the four main tasks faced
by our Fatherland in the 21st century:
- radical improvement of the demographic situation;
- development of Siberia;
- protection of our borders and preservation of the integrity
of our country;
- fully-fledged membership in the European Union.
Once again we confirm here that our values remain unchanged.
They are: freedom, responsibility, tolerance, social justice and
equal opportunities. Once again we stress our conviction that
is confirmed by European experience, that the creation of a prosperous
state in Russia is a democratic, liberal task. Together we will
need to be extremely patient, industrious, freely cooperate, display
overt understanding of the pains and troubles of citizens and
meet their real needs.
See also:
Nuclear
waste bill section of the web-site
Grigory Yavlinsky
does not see any alternative to the development of a new liberal
democratic course for reforms in Russia
Press release, 09.06.2001
Rusia
es una democracia de imitacion
El Pais, 29
de mayo de 2001
| 