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

Grigory Yavlinsky’s lecture “The Russian Parallels: 1917 — 2017”

On political parallels and assessment of the events of 1917

Novaya Gazeta, 03.04.2017

In the absence of a modern and honest assessment of what happened [in Russia] one hundred years ago, the Russian public consciousness is doomed to flounder between the idea of a revolution as a blessing and the only way to achieve change, and the idea of safeguarding the current government at all costs as the only possible form guaranteeing the existence in the modern world. The political parallels between 1917 and 2017, and the evaluation of the events that happened a hundred years ago are discussed by economist and politician Grigory Yavlinsky.

Video by Gleb Limansky and Kristina Prudnikova

Here comes Grigory Yalvinsky’s lecture in ten key theses:

– The era of post-Soviet modernisation has come to an end. The transformation of Soviet Russia into a modern European country has failed. The reasons are deep and serious. They are partly related to the history, the specifics of the development of the past century, and also, in a significant part they are connected with mistakes and crimes in the course of transformation, with the self-serving and deceitful politics. The annexation of Crimea, the war with Ukraine, the war in Syria and, finally, nuclear blackmail so that to return to the world order of the middle of the 20th century, became a marker of the end of the era. The new era did not grow inside the old one, neither as its continuation, nor as its opposite or alternative. There is an attempt to return to the agenda of the USSR period, but it is impossible to return there. Therefore, fringe groups came to the surface: Stalinists, admirers of Ivan the Terrible, neopagans and Orthodox fundamentalists. [The authorities] have been steadily training the Russian society to getting used to thinking about closeness and inevitability of a war.

– The change of one era and the beginning of another has been also observed on a worldwide scale. The situation resembles the one that was before and in the beginning of World War I and it is based on public disorientation and confusion. The post-war economic system, which was based on individualism and pragmatism, and which emerged in the United States in 1940s and was manifest in Thatcherism and Reaganomics, led to dramatic consequences. Over the next 20 years, all countries will finally be divided into two unequal camps: there will be the developed countries (with population of about 2 billion people) and the countries that will remain forever undeveloped. Hence the problem of migrants. Not because the countries where they leave are poor, but because there is no future for them in these countries. A change of the global economic leader has been taking place in the world – the United States is being replaced by China. A change of a leader is always connected with major economic shocks. But earlier leadership always passed to the state with a more modern political structure, now it is not so. China does not have a more modern political system. Europe is losing its leadership. Brexit, the growing popularity of nationalists in Germany, France, Poland, Hungary and other countries – all this indicates that Europe has been losing its most important feature – being the engine of development on a civilization scale. The fourth industrial revolution is coming: there emerge technologies affecting the mind, transforming it, as well as the psycho-structure of humans. These technologies far outstripped both human capabilities and human needs. People turned out to be unprepared to such changes, they are lost and lose their idea of ​​the future. Consequently, people all over the world are afraid of the future. The present is confused with the past, because the future is completely incomprehensible. And this gave rise to a new phenomenon. I call it the “again policy”, i.e. a policy targeted into the past. What policy should be pursued in order to avoid a great war, or a collapse? We need to look for evolutionary solutions, so that to be able to move forward without humiliating anyone.

– The reason for the collapse of the government in Russia in February 1917 was the unwillingness and inability of the autocracy to evolve evolutionarily, responding adequately to the demands of the time and the new threats. The Russian elite, which supported the abdication of Nicholas II, did not seek to destroy the monarchy. They wanted to replace the bad tsar with a good tsar, let off the steam of public discontent and somewhat improve the state system. They were not ready for anything else – the autocracy did not allow for the formation of a new governing elite.

– The Constituent Assembly in 1918 was supposed to legitimise the democratic form of governing. But the Bolsheviks lost the elections, overthrew the legitimate authority and pushed the country to the path of civil war. Since the power of the Bolsheviks did not have legitimate grounds, so from the very beginning they could not go without terror and lies, that became system-forming elements of the state. Since that time, there has been no legitimate state in Russia.

– In 1990s the problem of positive democratic legitimacy of government was not solved either. The new lie was added to the old one: the myth on the inevitability of precisely such kind of reforms. The state responsible for the sharp drop in the living standards of the absolute majority of the population began deliberate flirting with the “sovereign” component of the national consciousness. Cynical political expediency triumphed in politics. The state did not create legitimate private property based on mass property. People began to perceive the government not as a social function, but as an instrument of personal enrichment.

– The developments of the past fifteen years have convincingly demonstrated that if people with minds of Soviet nomenclature and acting in accordance with the unwritten rules of the underworld play a leading role on all levels of governing, modernisation is impossible in principle, just as it is impossible to create a competitive market economy. The present system is non-reformable.

– The topic of the February [bourgeois] Revolution of 1917 [preceding the October Bolshevist coup] is very important, because the present Russian government and its policies are literally, in all their manifestations, represent that autocratic-Bolshevik power. Modern Bolshevism, in particular, includes a quasi-social agreement on the non-disclosure of crimes that originated in October 1917, the oblivion of their victims, continuation of their self-serving distortion of the Russian history with complete confusion of good and evil in it, up to their complete undistinguishability. To agree with the fact that the events of February and October 1917 maybe clearly explained and crimes of the Soviet period recognized literally means the beginning of the end for the present government.

– Reconciliation without exposing the evil represents a direct justification of the evil. Justification is a sign of a conscientious readiness to take advantage of this evil again. That is why the state, the public, the legal and the moral assessment of the past century are needed. (The 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the USSR gave the inner-party, but not the state assessment of the events).

– Now we are facing the prospects of another attempt for realization, after the re-election of Putin in 2018, of the myth of returning to the quasi-USSR with the new Yalta, “spheres of influence” and the threat of a nuclear war, – that is, movement to the past, which is impossible to return to, and sooner or later this will lead to another all-Russian catastrophe. The Russian society, sooner or later, will come to an understanding of the archaic nature and unacceptability of autocracy.

– An alternative to such development is a different president, a change of power and creation of a legitimate state that would abolish lies, restore historical continuity in Russia where both the autocracy and the Bolshevik dead-end became an obstacle [for development]. We need to prepare a new Constituent Assembly. The preparation will be very difficult and time-consuming. We need a deep comprehension of the current situation in Russia, its geopolitical place in the world, and, therefore, a broad discussion of the problems of the statehood and the characteristics of the Russian economic system is inevitable.