17.02.2004

I would like to be mistaken…

(An interview of Elena Bonner for The Chechen Times)

Today we publish an interview with the person who needs no introduction. We shall only say, paraphrasing the well known expression, her voice sounds even when «cannons speak» and when «fanfares clang." And always outvocing them. This is Elena Bonner.

A. Batayev: Elena Georgiyevna, many people have recently opted to believe that democracy yields positions in Russia. Such opinion became especially widespread after the arrest of Mikhail Khodorkovsky. It seems that for the West democracy is, first of all, protected big business. The rest: limited freedom of expression, «fair» elections, extermination of civilian populations in Chechnya, at best, causes a light concern. What is that — a momentary pragmatism or an overall tacit complicity in deviation from democratic principles?

E. Bonner: I cannot agree with in all points. People speak about Khodorkovsky because he is an outstanding figure, the richest man, and that the unconcealed persecution of Khodorkovsky and his business is linked to his attempts to help opposition parties during the latest election. When people say that Khodorkovsky had presidential ambitions, I see no proofs of that. In fact, press, as such, likes sensations and sensational figures, and against the background of Russia’s poverty on the one hand and growing richness on the other side Khodorkovsky is also an odious figure. But I must say that in press we feel the West’s concern that Russia has turned aside from the democratic way. May be that reveals not so clearly as we want because most attempts to divert the West from its understanding that Russia is struggling against world terrorism in Chechnya have failed. Although most genuinely democratic minded people, not only politicians, but also common Russians understand that is not the same.

Press is such, as you emphasize: it pays attention to Khodorkovsky but disregards the genocide in Chechnya. It is alike all around the world, but now in connection with the tragic anniversary of the forced deportation of the Chechen people and other Caucasian nations, I believe, much more attention will be paid to it. I hope.

A. Batayev: With an active assistance of «national-patriots» criminal proceedings were instituted against Yuri Samodurov, in the best traditions of 70’s «competent bodies» summon Alexander Podrabinek «for a conversation," numerous questions from Sergei Kovalev related to inconvenient for authorities affairs, when he was a deputy of the State Duma, have been ignored. Common people are gradually suggested that the term «human rights activist» — is a synonym of «anti-patriot," «traitor of Motherland." Is there a great risk that human rights movement will be driven underground again?

E. Bonner: I do not know where or not they will manage to drive it underground, but the human rights movement is running great risks. The seizure of books, interrogations of Podrabinek (I made a statement in this respect) — is a threat to all human rights activists: «if you are not obedient — you may go to a new GULAG." The incident with our exhibition (the exhibition «Caution! Religion» — editor’s note), the persecution of Samodurov, the curator of the exhibition and artists, — is of another trend. From the one hand, there is a warning to all human rights organizations that «your activity shall not go beyond certain limits. And if you try to widen the limits, we will close you down." In this respect we shall refer to an interesting statement who appealed to Putin saying that the exhibition hurt not only their feelings. They write: the museum is not needed, the museum defends terrorists (Chechnya is meant), and in general — "… why does Moscow need such human rights institution?" This is a warning to all human rights organizations. From the other hand, persecution for the exhibition and instituting criminal proceedings are within the general tendency of Russia’s administration and the Orthodox Church to turn Russian into an Orthodox country having forgotten that almost half of it are not Orthodox. There are atheists, some 20-30% of Muslims, there are also Baptists, Adventists, Protestants, Catholics who also live among us. And this is a direct violation of the country’s Constitution, and in line with the Constitution Russia is a secular not a clerical state, and church is separated from state. The general tendency is as follows: Orthodox oriented textbooks are printed for schools; there are ideas to introduce religion classes in schools; to teach basics of Orthodoxy, Orthodox culture, (call it as you want), in state-run schools. And recently the Ecumenical Council has adopted 10 commandments for businessmen! It is unbelievable! They forgot: «drive publicans from the temple!» Church regulating business — is nonsense! This is a general trend. And in this respect the case of our museum seems very important, a key case.

A. Batayev: Democratic forces in today’s Russia, or parties and movements which are usually considered democratic, have failed to work out a common attitude towards the presidential election. It seems that the idea to boycott the upcoming election scared away all, and the Committee 2008 was established on the wave of shame for this fright, i.e. it turns out that democrats in fact recognize their defeat for the next four years. Can such position be considered correct and to what extent a boycott of the upcoming election might have been justified?

E. Bonner: To say that the Committee 2008 is a result of fear… To certain degree this is a result of the defeat of two parties, which are usually considered liberal-democratic. That’s correct. And the fact that they lost the game… I have a paradoxical opinion in this respect: I believe that they shouldn’t have participated in that election. They should have better boycotted it. True democrats must have reacted to all previous elections when falsifications took place. I mean regional elections, local elections, and the most expressive example — Chechnya’s election. After that, participation in any election, in my opinion, is a deliberated complicity in the fraud trying to make the world community believe that there are elections in Russia and therefore there is presumption of democracy because elections are real. This is the main principle of democracy, the main mechanism of passing people’s will over to government controlled by this will. If this is fiction, that means there is no democracy.

A. Batayev: Today putting an end to the war in Chechnya, as I see it, — is only a question of rating of Russia’s president. The recent monstrous terrorist act on Moscow metro and traditionally harsh statements by Putin made his popularity ratings grow again. To what extent, in your opinion, international pressure upon Putin can be efficient, and how real is such pressure today?

E. Bonner: I do not now how efficient it is and I am afraid it isn’t real. I would like to be mistaken but I am afraid — I am not. It is very important for the West, America, to be mistaken and believe that Russia — is an ally in the real struggle against terrorism. And this is a threat not to Russia, but the West… And Putin has acted, from the legal point of view, incompetently, although he is a lawyer. How can one say before the trial, investigation: «We know who committed the crime!» But he said it: «We know." This is a legal nonsense and a crime against law as such!

A. Batayev: Elena Georgiyevna, thank you very much for your interview. We wish good health to you!

Interviewer: A. Batayev, editor-in-chief of The Chechen Times

http://www.chechentimes.org/en/comments/?id=12684