From the fall of 1993 through January 1994, a number of U.S. scientific societies kept their members current on the developments of my case, and they wrote frequently to President Boris Yeltsin and to Attorney General Stepankov and then to Kazannik who replaced him and others, urging that my case be dropped. Especially vigorous among them were the American Chemical Society (ACS), the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS),[205] the Committee of Concerned Scientists,[206] and the New York Academy of Sciences (NYAS).[207] I am pointing out just some of these documents, which show the high level of solidarity of scientists who defended the right of their colleague to speak out on issues of vital global importance.
The New York Academy of Sciences, which I joined in September of 1993, put forth its full effort to make sure the U.S. press reported more actively on my case. On December 6, 1993, Nobel Prize Laureate Dr. Joshua Lederberg, who was the president of the NYAS wrote a letter to the Executive Director of The New York Times Max Frankel.[208]
Human Rights Watch and its sister organization Helsinki Watch, as well as other organizations supporting human rights wrote letters to Russian officials. I was also supported by the Andrei Sakharov Foundation in the United States, which issued a statement on September 15, 1993. They have many famous individuals and political figures and those of whom the world of culture and science is proud, in their membership and on their advisory board and Board of Directors. The statement was signed by Sakharov’s step son Aleksey Semyonov.[209]
The mass media was continuing to cover my case[210], [211], [212], [213], [214], [215], [216], [217], [218], [219], [220], [221], [222], [223], [224], [225], [226], [227], [228], [229], [230], [231], [232], [233], [234], [235], [236], [237], [238], [239], [240], [241], [242], [243], [244], [245], [246], [247], [248], [249], [250], [251], [252] sympathetically, with very few exceptions.[253], [254] Authors of those few papers were trying to compromise my articles. Surprisingly there was also a pro-Communist reporter in Kazan, who was working to mock and slander me.[255] That was in striking contrast to so many papers expressing huge support for my case in Tatarstan and Bashkortstan.[256], [257], [258], [259], [260], [261], [262], [263], [264], [265], [266]
On the eve of my trial, the Moscow media was extremely busy with the upcoming elections of the State Duma and the referendum on the new Constitution. The daily shows on all TV channels droned on about how the rebel chiefs of the failed putsch “suffered” in their cells in Lefortovo. Ruslan Khasbulatov had grown pale. Rutskoi had shaved off his moustache, and he was going to write his memoirs. These were the highlights of the press reports. Moscow News was a happy exception, when it published a statement by world-famous Russian public figures Sergei Alekseev, Georgi Arbatov, Yuri Afansiev, Vitali Goldansky, Tatiana Zaslavskaya, Len Karpinsky, Viktor Loshak, Aleksander Pumpyansky, and Grigory Yavlinsky.[267] It’s text was striking, expressing anxiety that Russia was trying to back away from democratic principles:
“During the whole period of the investigation the public was trying to stop the persecution of Vil Mirzayanov, who was saying nothing at all in the press about technical or other secrets of the new weapons, though he only spoke out about the danger posed to the world by the double standards which were involved in their development, which has continued, even after the Soviet and Russian politicians were mouthing off that work in this area had been terminated… Bitterness and bewilderment are aroused, not only by the fact of such a trial process, but also because it will be a closed one, in a country which was establishing the principles of democracy.”
My defenders in America were troubled with the developments of my case, and they energetically worked for my support at a high level. As a result, on January 4, 1994, the Chairman of the U.S. Congressional Committee on Government Operations, John Conyers, made another special statement[268] in which he stated that:
“Secret star chamber proceedings are completely inconsistent with the open democratic society that Russia claims it is in the process of building. The continuation of closed and secret trials in Russia is very disturbing, especially on the eve of the upcoming Summit. Indeed, the treatment of Dr. Mirzayanov stands in stark contrast to the most important purpose of the upcoming summit – the strengthening of Russia’s democratic institutions. I have asked Secretary of State Christopher to personally appeal for the release of Dr. Mirzayanov. Whistleblowers on both sides of the now defunct Iron Curtain deserve protection, not prosecution.”[269]
Before the New Year, I received a written summons which ordered me to appear for a hearing in the Moscow City Court as a defendant on January 6, 1994 at 11.30 A.M. However, the hearing couldn’t begin because my lawyer Aleksander Asnis couldn’t attend it. In the middle of December he was in a car accident and suffered a serious concussion. At the beginning of the year, Asnis was still on sick leave, although he was no longer in the hospital. He gave me advice over the phone regarding my strategy in court and said that I should ask to postpone the hearing because of his illness.
205
Letter of the American Association for the Advancement of Science to President Boris Yeltsin, March 30, 1993.
206
Letter of the Committee of Concerned Scientists (in the U.S) to President of Russia Boris Yeltsin, October 25, 1993.
207
Letter of the New York Academy of Sciences to President of Russia Boris Yeltsin, August 25, 1993.
208
Letter of the president of the New York Academy of Sciences, Nobel Prize Laureate Joshua Lederberg to the Executive Director of the newspaper “The New York Times” Max Frankel.
209
Statement of the Andrei Sakharov Foundation in the United States on September 15, 1993.
210
Mark Champion, “Scientist Says Russia “Dishonest” in Treaty”,
211
Olga Kienko, “Mirzayanov’s case: Scientist is confident that Chekists revealed themselves”,
212
Valeri Rudnev, “State Criminal” Still Doesn’t Know What he Violated”,
213
Olga Shlyapnikova, “Scientist Refused to Answer Questions of the Investigation”,
215
Natalya Gevorkyan, “Mirzayanov’s Case is Not Cancelled Even Though we Officially Cancelled Chemical Weapons”,
218
Svetlana Serkova, “The American Physicists are Looking for Lawyer for the Scientist”,
219
Olga Shlyapnikova, “The Scientist’s Wife refused to go to the Investigation”,
220
Vladimir Yakimets, “Mirzayanov’s Case on the Mirror of Professor Ellsberg’s Fate”,
221
Karl-Heinz Karish, “Russische Forscher nach Entüllung über C-Waffen in Bedrängs”,
224
Valeri Rudnev, “Secrets of the Chemical Weapons in the Case Materials and in the Reports to the International Conference”,
225
Will Englund, “Two Russian Papers Investigated after New Disclosures on Chemical Arms”,
227
Andrei Malykh, “The Mirzayanov Case: The Most Important Documents in the Case are Absent”,
228
S. Fomichev, A. Alekseev, V. Petrov, V. Gergel, S. Kamensky, “The Opinion: It is Impossible to Hold an International Conference in Moscow until the Authorities Stop Persecuting People who are Against Chemical Weapons”,
229
Leonard Nikishin, “Vil Mirzayanov: The Goal is to Develop New Binary Weapons”,
231
Thomas W. Lippman, “Russian Scientist Appeals for Colleague. Co-Worker Is Charged With Disclosing Chemical Weapons Secrets”,
235
Terje Langeland, “Russian Threatens to Reveal Secrets”,
237
Michael R. Gordon, “Moscow is Making Little Progress in Disposal of Chemical Weapons”,
239
“Human-Rights Support Sought for Russian Weapons Scientist”,
240
Manfred Ronzheimer, “Moskauer Chemiker droht Prozeß. Er hatte von der Entwicklung chemischer Waffen berichtet”,
241
Carey Scott, “Despite Opposition, Trial Of Chemist Pushed Ahead”,
242
Vladimir Voronov, “Destroy the Constitution with Instruction”,
243
Gale Colby, Irene Goldman, “When Will Russia Abandon its Secret Chemical Weapons Program?” Demokratizatsiya,
244
J. Michael Waller, “Post-Soviet Sakharovs: Renewed Persecution of Dissident Scientists and the American Response”,
245
Leonard Nikishin, “In the Eve of Trial on the “Case” of Mirzayanov”,
247
Von Dietmar Ostermann., “The Russian Arms Centers have Developed Highly Toxic Chemical Weapons”,
248
An open letter of the Association of German Scientists for Global Responsibility to the German Minister of Foreign Affairs, Klaus Kinkel,
249
J. Michael Waller, “U.S. may be Funding Russian Secret Weapon”,
250
J. Michael Waller, “Novichok: Russia’s Secret Weapon”,
251
J. Michael Waller, “Russia’s Terrible New “Secret Weapon”,
252
Sonni Efron, “Russian Scientist Faces Trial for Chemical-Arms Report”,
253
Michael Gusev, “State Secrets Without Protection. Sure, They Should be Protected but on the Basis of the Law”,
254
Vitali Kaysin, “Let’s Wait for the Destruction of Moscow. Reporting from a Top Secret Institute, Which Recently was Busy with the Development of Chemical Weapons and Chemical Agents”,
255
Ida Schneerson, “Scientist is Trying to Scare People”,
257
Radis Nugmanov, “Is Vil Mirzayanov a Traitor or a Patriot?”
258
Vil Mirzayanov, “I Didn’t Divulge any Secrets and Didn’t Sell the Motherland”,
259
Vil Mirzayanov, “We are Victims of what Kind of Secrets?”,
260
Vil Kazikhanov, “Interview with Mirzayanov: I Fulfilled my Patriotic Duty”,
261
Ayaz Gilyazov, “About The Chemical Secrets with a Big Secret (Interview with Vil Mirzayanov)”,
262
R. Minhazh, “Who will Fight for Tatar if not Tatar?”
265
“Review of Readers Letters (Editorial): We are Admirers, Proud, and Ready to Defend him”,
266
Vil Mirzayanov, “Maybe I Really Have to Reveal State Secrets?”
267
Sergei Alexeev, Georgi Arbatov, Yuri Afansiev, Vitali Goldansky, Tatiana Zaslavskaya, Len Karpinsky, Viktor Loshak, Alexander Pumpyansky, and Grigory Yavlinsky, “Mirzayanov will Face a Secret Trial”,.
268
Statement of the Chairman of the U.S. Congress Committee on Government Operations, John Conyers, January 4, 1994.
269
On January 12-15, 1993 US President Clinton met President of Russia Yeltsin, in Moscow.