MG: Yes, although in general it was clear enough what was coming.
We were probably insufficiently experienced. Nobody had ever made the transition from communism to capitalism before.
Metro: A lot of people blamed you for the difficulties our country had to experience. What helped you not to break under the weight of accusations from all sides?
MG: It was hard, but if a person lacks physical, intellectual and moral stamina, he is not cut out to govern a country like ours. I had the stamina both to lead the country and, subsequently, not to be broken.
Metro: How do you feel about people who criticize you?
MG: They may have a point. They are welcome to do so.
In early March, we launched a Foundation report, Breakthrough to Freedom and Democracy, which a team of the Foundation’s staff had prepared on my initiative.[6] Looking now at the photo of the launch, I recognize many journalists, but also many who paved the way for Perestroika and were active in implementing it.
In April, I had a meeting with the students at Moscow State University, my alma mater. The rector, Viktor Sadovnichy, attended, and students came from the philology, philosophy, law, political science, journalism and global processes faculties. They asked a lot of questions, which I answered for over an hour and a half.
One of the students asked whether democratization is an inevitable tendency in the development of mankind. Is the desire for political and personal freedom an aspiration common to all human beings? What is the foundation of civil society? ‘Those are good questions’, I responded.
On your first question, yes, democratization is inevitable, and essential. In the last quarter of the twentieth century, as a result of democratic processes, partly as a result of Perestroika, authoritarian regimes in dozens of states left the stage.
One must, though, particularly if you are a researcher, be honest, observant and take all the facts into account. One fact is that in many countries democracy is being severely tested, and in some of them there is already a move away from democracy again. That has been and is happening in Russia. In our country we are living through a period of transition.
I think that in terms of our present transition to democracy, we are no more than halfway there. Democratization is one thing, and democracy another. It is one thing when you have a firmly rooted democracy with functioning institutions, but a process of democratization could take 100 years. We are still far away from being able to say we have democracy.
As regards the quest for political and personal freedom, that is a wholly understandable question. A lot has happened, and recent events in our country have shown that you will have to fight for political rights and personal freedoms. These matters have not yet been fully resolved.
Another question: ‘When you began Perestroika, what result were you expecting to see? Has much of it been achieved?’ ‘A lot has been achieved’, I responded.
I am often asked whether Perestroika was defeated. I do not know whether you will agree with me, but my answer is that the process of Perestroika has not failed. I think the politicians, and primarily the main perpetrator of Perestroika (I hope that does not make me sound too arrogant), did fail personally, as politicians. Nevertheless, what Perestroika caused to happen in Russia, and is still causing to happen, is seen around the world as the most important event of recent decades.
The 25th anniversary of the beginning of Perestroika also provoked attacks on it and, of course, me, especially after I confirmed my unflattering opinion of processes currently taking place within our politics. Dmitry Muratov and I talked about this in an interview for Novaya Gazeta:
DM: Mikhail Sergeyevich, after your statements in Novaya Gazeta and on Radio Free Europe that United Russia has begun to look like an inferior copy of the CPSU, Internet trolls declared war on you: ‘Perestroika was a betrayal of the Motherland’, ‘Gorbachev danced to the tune of the CIA’. How do you react to this latest storm around your person?
MG: With full awareness that hirelings are being paid money to perform in this way. They should be grateful to me for enabling them to earn their crust of bread. This is a sign of fear. Ordinary people are increasingly becoming involved in the country’s affairs. There is a new social climate, people are coming back to normal values. That sticks in the throat of powerful monopolists.
They are scared to death of people having freedom, of a democratic press, of a society emancipated from fear and censorship. Their behaviour might come under scrutiny! The individuals who muscled in on political (which for them is the same as economic) power are defending their ill-gotten gains, in part with all this squawking on the Internet. It is worth adding that our so-called ruling elite takes all the benefits of democracy for itself (the market economy, open borders, etc.), while trying to explain what a terrible thing democracy is for ordinary people. But now people have wised up to them.
DM: In other words, you are not perturbed by these social network attacks?
MG: Well, of course they need to vilify me because they are corrupt from top to toe, and democracy is a very rigorous form of government, which requires a regular turnover of rulers and observance of the law, and does not allow anyone a monopoly on power. Democracy is a much more formidable foe of corruption than any ‘firm hand’. Corruption opens the door to all sorts of disasters, from threats to people’s personal safety to depriving Russia of any sort of normal future.
Corruption can only be overcome through democracy and an independent judiciary, through society being in a position to know everything about those governing it. That is why they are running scared and attacking anyone who stands for freedom.
DM: Our longstanding dispute: what makes you so sure ‘society’ wants freedom, that it loves democracy more than a strong hairy fist?
MG: Oh-oh! In a minute we’re going to talk ourselves round to the theory that Russia is not ready for democracy. The fact is that we never tried it properly before we started to back off. We need to defeat corruption. We need a rejuvenated electoral system, a change in how the votes are counted, to eliminate ballot-stuffing!
The state authorities at all levels are trying to fraudulently hold on to their top jobs, discrediting the very idea of elections in their own interests. Restricting democracy is restricting the right of people to exercise influence over the government and change life for the better. What other means do people have? Attending protest rallies? The authorities have made it far from easy to hold demonstrations.
DM: The chief of police in Moscow has already recently proposed imprisoning people for 15 days for participating in unsanctioned street protests.
MG: Well, yes – in the USSR when they ran out of arguments they tried to keep life cosy by allowing the security services to imprison dissidents in psychiatric hospitals. They had to stop that in the end.
You cannot allow yourself to be afraid of the people. This lot are scared of their own people and try to hem them in. Why are they scared? Because they know that if democracy starts working in this country, there is a lot they will have to answer for.
DM: And lose office.
MG: At the very least.
6