[lbo-talk] Interview with Mikhail Gorbachev

[" Chris Doss "]

I snipped a lot.

TITLE:  RADIO INTERVIEW WITH MIKHAIL GORBACHEV
         [EKHO MOSKVY RADIO, 15:16, MARCH 1, 2004]
SOURCE: FEDERAL NEWS SERVICE (http://www.fednews.ru/)

     Anchor: It's 15:16 Moscow time, hello and welcome to Ekho
Moskvy. I am Marina Korolyova and as we have promised, our guest is
Mikhail Gorbachev, the first and only President of the Soviet Union.
Good afternoon, Mikhail Sergeyevich.

     Gorbachev: Good day.

     Anchor: You can phone your questions to our pager: 961-2222.
Any questions that interest you in connection with the upcoming
elections and any question you feel like putting to Mikhail
Sergeyevich Gorbachev. He will be live on the air until 15:30.
---



     Gorbachev: ... Still, it was to a large extent
movement by inertia. Now we should put the stake on bringing in
resources. Most importantly, one can't afford such heavy oil
dependency... You know that the first blow fell precisely on
perestroika -- in the shape of plunging prices. In 1986 prices fell
to 12, 10 dollars per barrel... It was a staggering blow. We
couldn't quite cope with it then.
    Now such a possibility exists, but one should remember that it
can't last forever and so modernization of the manufacturing
industry and, I should say, intensive support and encouragement of
small and medium business -- without it there will be no economic
growth, no income growth and there will be no stability because
stability depends on how people feel about their country and about
themselves, because the middle class is created as a result of a lot
of medium business.
    At present it contributes only 20 percent, and some say 12
percent to the GDP. Take Germany, we have just been discussing these
problems together, and there small and medium business accounts for
70 percent. I could go on down my check list.
     I don't like the way many eager people are adapting our
education and science to the challenges of globalization and the
modern information technologies in such a way that the principles of
accessibility, of free access are challenged, and this was what
sustained the Soviet Union.
    Now all these services are already partly paid for. If things
go on like this and all these plans are not revised, if the housing
and utilities complex -- the President has already put it on hold
once when it was reported to him -- estimates had been made on his
instructions -- and it turned out that if the plans proposed by some
members of the government were to be carried out, 80 percent of the
people wouldn't be able to pay for their apartments in which they
live.
     So, this is a very serious matter. Therefore, major changes are
needed. And of course, there has to be a search for funding of all
this. And there is again the issue of natural rent. It's taking too
long. The situation is quite like shifting from one leg to another
in the morning in an apartment with many families, waiting for the
turn to the toilet.

     Anchor: So you are in favor of the natural rent, what is
proposed by Sergei Glazyev, you favor introduction of a natural
rent, don't you?

     Gorbachev: I don't known in what form does Sergei do it because
there are different variants, but it must be as a part of it, what
they don't earn but rather what they simply receive from the nation,
from nature. But we have developed these territories for so many
generations and thus it should be put at the disposal of the nation,
to the fund which is already created by the president. All this will
create possibilities to move forward.

     Anchor: Mikhail Sergeyevich, does it seem to you that the
Kasyanov government would not be equal to these tasks?

     Gorbachev: I don't think he would. He was very much linked to
the past. And for him the main heroes were people connected with
extreme liberalism. I would say that we should not in any case allow
a communist comeback, that left radicalism shall we say. Neither
should we allow the return of what we had done in the times of
Chubais -- this was a manifestation of the most dyed in the wool
right radicalism, liberal radicalism. It is these people that should
not be allowed to get into the government.

----


     Anchor: Mikhail Sergeyevich, when I say "President of the
Soviet Union" I understand that today we are precisely kind of
between two dates: firstly it is February 27 14 years ago when the
post of President of the Soviet Union was introduced.

---

     Anchor: There are different events and how would you evaluate
them: are they all good? I take it that the birth of a daughter is
happiness, and your own birthday is also good and as for the rest,
would you, incidentally, wish to change something?

     Gorbachev: No, I think that these are all dates which indicate
that the fate has decreed so and gave me the possibility and genuine
tested me and also gave me big chances to show my worth. And in this
sense, I first said -- that among reformers there are no happy ones
but now I stick to a different view: I have no reason to complain
about my fate.

     Anchor: But if it so happened that you obtained a possibility
to get back into that time, would there be something that you would
do differently?

     Gorbachev: Well, of course, much would be different, but the
choice would be the same. It is because already at that time there
was the sensation that a country of knowledge and well educated was
suffocating from lack of freedom. This was true in regard to even
the working people, even the modest Shchokinsky method, the
subcontract, and it could not be put into practice. Peasants were
suffocating, to say nothing about the intelligentsia -- who could
manifest their potential, organize some initiatives, but all the
plans were shelved. But having said that we are still living off the
ideas that were generated then.
    But in general the country needed freedom, our country. People
resented being humiliated by the unfreedom, by total thought control
when you could go to jail for telling a joke. And generally speaking
we began lagging behind and surrendering our positions from the mid-
1970s. And the whole developed world was entering a new
technological era and we remained in the old era. That is why we had
the most wasteful kind of economy.
    We expended a lot of resources and obtained two or two and a
half less in the shape of final product, because we were a wasteful
economy. Labor productivity in industry was 3-3.5 times less than in
the West and five times less in the agrarian sector. And I am not
talking about quality. It was a disgrace when people were literally
fighting for their place in the queue to buy Italian shoes. That
state could not be tolerated.

     Anchor: Mikhail Sergeyevich, our listener Dmitry asks this
question: "In what country would you like to live -- in Russia or in
the Soviet Union -- and in what kind of country are we living
today?"

     Gorbachev: Well, I think it's this way. What is the Soviet
Union -- it is the name of the greater Russia. If you take the
territorial spread and the peoples inhabiting Russia -- with the
exception of Finland and Poland, this is all Russia.
    So, for us this our perception of the greater Russia. What has
happened and this is something I did not agree with and cannot agree
with to this day is what has been done to the Soviet Union. We
struck a heavy blow. Because I can tell you that the main mistakes,
people say that one thing was done wrong and another thing and
property was not handled right and economic models were not properly
chose. All these things can be mended. But the destruction of a
country, the breakup, the destruction of the cooperation which
enabled us to effectively use all our resources -- this accounts for
50-60 percent of all our woes today.
     So, I would still adhere to the Soviet Union. But mistakes had
been made, I would try not to make the mistakes that have been made.

     Anchor: I have looked at the latest data of the Public Opinion
Fund and the results of a poll among Russians to find out how they
assessed your activities. Do you know that 47 percent of Russians
blame you for the breakup of the Soviet Union? I am sure you know
about it, you've been told.

     Gorbachev: Well, with polls it's like this... Should
perestroika have been started or not? 45 percent said it shouldn't
have been started, and 42 said yes, it should have been started.
This should give you to think. So, it should have been started.
Especially since  that question was followed by other concrete
questions: do we need democracy, freedom and glasnost and contested
elections and 60-70 percent of those polled answered yes.
    As for the disintegration of the Soviet Union, I cannot claim
that I bear no responsibility, that would have been an irresponsible
statement showing me up as a cynic. I was there, I was at the head
of the country, well, not personally, you know what our system was.
But still I was the principal player at the time and it all happened
during my time. But the blow occurred when in 1991 we were emerging
from the dire crisis of the previous years and we had an anti-crisis
program and a new Union Treaty had been prepared for signing that
would have decentralized the Union and enabled the republics and the
regions to make more decisions locally, to assume responsibility and
to solve issues.
     And in July, 1991, we agreed on reforming the party which was
already divided into several public currents, in effect, was falling
apart. And at that moment those who were against perestroika
processes and all these moves because they didn't hold out any
promise for them... The nomenklatura did not withstand the test by
democracy. In 1989 there was a serious crisis. Power was in the
hands of 35 major functionaries of the CPSU, they were the heads of
their regions, some were even members of the Politburo and they lost
the elections.
    And what had that to do with Gorbachev? They made it out that
the whole point was to get rid of Gorbachev and attempts began to
get rid of Gorbachev. But we should have continued along our course
and we were doing it because I am morally responsible for what was
taking place. I cannot agree with the statement because I fought to
preserve the Union until last.

---

     Gorbachev: You know, in all these votes and in all these polls
to me everything is clear. Putin's victory is a foregone conclusion.

     Anchor: So, you don't doubt it?

     Gorbachev: I have absolutely no doubt about it. I don't know
what should happen for things to turn out otherwise. But most of all
I was concerned in the Duma elections and now by the fact that
almost 50 million people failed to turn out to elect the Duma and in
general, it is almost half the people -- and this is very bad.

     Anchor: Maybe it expresses the fact that people fail to see an
intrigue in the elections? Indeed, it is clear who will win so why
go to the elections.

     Gorbachev: But wait there is still some competition there and
if one agrees with you, you say that it is not important how they
vote, the counting will be done later and correctly and that is why
-- why bother. Add to this also those who go to the election -- they
are the most active, they are the keenest people, with their own
position, so they go and vote against and now they have moved to the
third place. And this means that the authorities have a credibility
gap with the people.
     I think that even the fact and this is heard in the
presidential election, this means not the attitude to the President
but rather the mistrust of the entire structure of power and the
activity of the authorities. I am most of all concerned with this.
This means that not everything is in order in our state. And this
should be pondered over. I am sure that the President is thinking
about it but the main thing is that this should be looked into and
the mistrust on the part of the people should be removed because
otherwise we will not be up to such big tasks. In our country --
which is a special country, one can accomplish half the assignment
with the sole reliance on the mood but if I now feel humiliated, if
the dignity of people is involved, this strongly influences
everything.
    That is why it will be a great responsibility for President
Putin to shoulder -- I am cofident that we will be elected and I say
that with certainty -- in that period. If he act slow, if he
maneuvers, if he does not take the road of serious steps in
different directions -- and we have already touched on this topic --
it will be bad.

     Anchor: Mikhail Sergeyevich, you said that Vladimir Putin will
most likely be elected. And then you said it is important what he
does after. Now many experience such apprehensions and the
apprehensions are expressed that a return to totalitarianism, to
totalitarian power is possible in Russia.

     Gorbachev: I think this will not happen.

     Anchor: But you know Vladimir Putin and you have met with him.

     Gorbachev: Yes.

     Anchor: What can you say?

     Gorbachev: I know and we have talked much with him and we even
discussed this topic. He would listen to this question of mine with
agitation. I told him about my conversation with the former prime
minister of France and he said -- I can see that the situation in
Russia is complex and so authoritarian methods cannot be avoided in
such a situation. He is a very experienced politician. Yes, he said,
will it not so happen that a new authoritarianism will emerge. And
we discussed the topic. I shared my thinking with him and I told him
about that conversation with that man.
    He received this with great agitation. It was one of the first
conversations. But subsequently the topic would arise again -- the
attitude to democracy and in connection with the mass media and so
on. There will be no authoritarianism under Putin. Some individual
measures can be tough, but he is not a man who would get us back
to..
---
     
     Anchor: Slightly more than 20 minutes have already passed,
regrettably. You were with us on the air. I will not congratulate
you on your birthday because this is not done in advance but I will
remind listeners that Mikhail Sergeyevich has his birthday tomorrow.