Konstantin Borovoy: Everything is Interconnected

- Konstantin Natanovich, what attracts you, a man with two technical educations, a successful entrepreneur? Aren't you tired of 25 years?

- Indeed, I have been engaged in politics since 1987, and, unfortunately, I must admit that living conditions in Russia were and remain abnormal, including for business development. So it's all connected. At one time, I created the Party of Economic Freedom, and to this day many entrepreneurs turn to me, considering them as their representatives, and I hear one thing from everyone: it is impossible to work normally. Small and medium-sized businesses cannot develop in Russia precisely because of its overwhelming corruption system.

- It is not only those who love power that enter politics.

- There are some people who can’t just watch what’s happening. They are trying to be involved in history, to change something, to correct it. For example, if the sewerage is clogged in the house, you can, of course, call the master and wait for him to come, or you can try to fix yourself.

- And flood the whole house?

- I am talking about professional political activity. Although I saw many who tried to engage in politics not only without success, but also to the detriment of the cause. I knew an entrepreneur from Murom who, at a difficult time for the country, in 1993, gave money to the Communists, the nationalists, the left, the right. Then he gathered a rally and called on all of them, as citizens of Russia, to unite and do everything possible for the development of the country. He was applauded, and then everyone dispersed and each continued to pursue his activities. This is an example of unprofessionalism in politics, which I cited for good reason. Now there is a very dangerous situation when many people hate Putin so much that they are ready to unite with fascists and communists, without thinking about how this could end.

- How could this end?

- If you remember history, in 1917, after the February Revolution, the Bolsheviks began to create Soviets. They gave several seats to both liberals and democrats, but they did so only to gain power through illegitimate means. Remember the slogan, "All power to the councils"? And then those councils cleaned everyone up, including their allies. It's dangerous. This is professionalism in politics – and there is knowledge of history and the ability to look a few steps ahead.

- In other words, you think that it is not proper for the democrats to rally, let alone unite with the communists and nationalists. On this issue, you and Valeria Ilyinichna Novodvorskaya disagree with the opinion of the late Elena Bonner, who in her last interview warned that dividing protesters into parties would be the biggest strategic mistake. Do you not fear that inter-party strife will benefit the existing government? If you are not on your side, then you may not be on your side.

– I have always had great respect for Elena Georgievna. We have met many times and talked. Sometimes we used to swear kindly. I'd say she felt like a man over the fight. But for me, Elena Georgievna was not an absolute authority in politics. Today, her idea is voiced by Garry Kasparov: first, let’s “take down” Putin’s regime, and then we’ll figure it out.

- Well, it's hard to blame Garry Kasparov for not knowing how to think through moves.

- However, this does not work in politics. Regional protest committees are beginning to be formed, but they are already being controlled by the Nazis, who are a minority.

I am not going to support them, if only because I understand too well that their coming to power is no better than the current government of the Chekist group.

- Let's be clear. Speaking of the Nazis, do you mean Alexei Navalny?

- Exactly. He is supported by anti-Semites like Mironov, as well as various parties from moderate nationalists to quite brown Nazis. In any case, when people come to a rally with the slogan “Glory to Russia”, it is clear to a normal person that this is the slogan of the fascist party.

–  In one of your radio broadcasts, you said that the participation of nationalists in the rally on December 24 was planned in advance by the Kremlin. What gives you reason to say that?

- A few facts. First, the main party on which Navalny relies is the DPNI (movement against illegal immigration – Z.M.) – led by D. Rogozin and created with the money of the Kremlin in coordination with Surkov. No one's hiding that. Navalny, as a blogger, was very actively promoted by "unknown" sources. I know that the Kremlin was one of them. Navalny was "leaked" dirt. In fact, we are talking about a very common scheme. Similarly, the politician Alexander Khinshtein, a former journalist of the Moskovsky Komsomolets, was created by the FSB, which provided information such as telephone conversations and other things. Navalny’s main exposing activity is the compromising material of one power group on another. Perhaps you know that now different groups are “competing” with each other, that is, they are arranging “disassembly” among themselves: the Prosecutor’s Office with the Investigative Committee, the FSB with the Interior Ministry, and Navalny is a kind of artificial project created according to a well-known scheme. Moreover, it is clear that the Kremlin’s task is to discredit the protest movement. And what could be better than people going to a rally with swastikas or posters “Moscow for Muscovites”, “Russia is Russian power”, or “Jews out!”? This is what the Nazis and Navalny in particular do.

- Many of those who live outside Russia and follow events there on television or on the Internet have noticed a clear inconsistency in the actions of supporters of the change of political power. Initially, on December 10, on Bolotnaya Square, the main slogan of the protesters was the cancellation of the results of the parliamentary elections and the recount of votes. Then, on December 24, on Sakharov Avenue, protesters added demands: dissolve the parliament and adopt laws that improve the electoral process. But if, in the opinion of the protesters, the parliament is illegitimate, is it reasonable to demand new laws from it?

- Yes, it is no secret that the elections were held unfairly, not only because the votes were miscalculated, but also because no party that did not want to cooperate with the Kremlin was allowed to participate. The protest movement arose out of apparent election fraud. Think about it, even creating its own conditions of the game, the ruling party could not do without it. And now we are facing the presidential elections, and in light of this, Medvedev’s statement that if there were violations in the parliamentary elections, then the presidential elections will certainly be honest looks ridiculous.

- Because...

- Because they already Unfair if opposition candidates are not registered. Because conditions have been created that prevent Nemtsov and Kasyanov from participating in the elections. So to answer your question, I will say that there were no demands to change the laws at the rally. There was a demand for real political parties to be able to register, to which Medvedev quickly responded by promising to consider whether 500 people, not two million, would be eligible to register the party.

- The issue will be considered by the new Duma.

Illegal new Duma and after the election of the President.

- Nikita Khrushchev was right when he said: “Politicians are always the same: they promise to build a bridge where there is no river.”

- Precisely because the new parliament is illegal, the opposition did not call for anything but its dissolution.

- Boris Akunin very accurately identified a common opponent of democracy in Russia. fraudulent authoritarianism.

 In this situation, what do you see as your personal task, as well as the task of people who call themselves Democrats? Ksenia Sobchak said that “the task of the thinking part of society is to find contact with the authorities and make them hear.”

- Ksenia Sobchak is very fond of “Uncle Volodya”, who helps her and her mother. Therefore, she comes up with different ideas, which all boil down to the fact that “Uncle Volodya is good.” Recently, she also talked about how wonderful Glory is. Ksenia Sobchak is certainly a free person. Sometimes she even manages to turn on her genetic memory and remember that she is the daughter of a famous Democrat. But she is a supporter of Putin. Sobchak is very popular on the Internet, but, like Navalny, it is a popular stalk. These people are very good at turning it into money. But these are not politicians. I think if some well-known humorist wanted to play politics, he would also have support. But I'm not particularly interested in these people because they don't have a productive idea. And now we see our task as preventing communists and nationalists, who are very actively striving for power.

- In order to achieve a change of power, it is not enough to collect thousands of rallies, wear posters, read satirical poems and distribute white ribbons, which Putin has compared to the means of fighting AIDS, i.e. condoms – this requires very serious money. Do you agree?

- Agreed. And we're doing that.

- How much money do you need to raise a rally?

- Three million rubles. We collect funds from sponsors. It is important not only financial but also human resources. By the way, I recently watched a video of Milosevic being ousted from power and found that Western countries had invested quite a lot in building democratic institutions there. The situation is different in Russia. The KGB is in power here, and that is why such assistance is not possible from the outset.

- Do you think that if Putin had not been in the Kremlin for the past four years under the law of denial, the people would have invited him to lead the country again?

- I don't think. The protests began with a decline in Putin’s popularity because people are tired of his endless anti-Western propaganda campaigns, promises to fight corruption, and claims of a special role for Russia that end in either a new war or confrontation with the West. He came to power on this wave, and everyone got tired of it. Putin was forced to falsify the election not out of a love of forgery or lies, but because United Russia’s real rating was below 15 percent. This is despite the fact that he has the opportunity to promote his ideas on television 24 hours a day. But a recent live broadcast, which has been widely commented on online, suggests that people don't believe him. So I guess no, you wouldn't.

- In America, the election campaign is well underway. Every week, the entire country watches the Republican presidential debate. Everything is civilized, at least outwardly. It is difficult to imagine swearing, hysterical screams a la Zhirinovsky, insults, because all this would automatically reduce the chances of such a contender to nothing. Similarly, if Obama had compared his constituents to the banderlogues, he would not have remained president until the end of his term. Why is the model of election campaigns common in all developed countries not practiced in Russia?

- First, Putin refused to participate in the debate, and that is understandable. After all, in a real debate, he would not be asked prepared questions, as happened in a meeting with journalists. In Russia, TV is an instrument of propaganda campaigns.

          - Like the rest of the world.

- Only in Russia, as in the Soviet era, certain politicians are allowed into information television programs. For others, entry is forbidden. I mean the so-called stop lists. I am not allowed to appear on Channel One or Channel Two. And when journalists, by chance, call me to some program, it turns out that they, unfortunately, made a mistake. Sometimes on federal channels I am allowed to speak on economic issues, but they are clearly warned that I should not touch politics. As for the debates between the presidential candidates, they are staged at the most unrated time, when no one will watch them. Even in the discussion programs that go on NTV, there are a number of strict restrictions on who can and who can not be called.

- I will try to draw parallels with the situation three years ago, which we saw here in the United States, when a huge number of voters voted not so much for Obama as against Bush. Unfortunately, this did not lead to anything good. Is the same happening in Russia? Who do you see as an alternative to Putin?

The alternative to Putin is the democratic opposition. I am personally ideologically close to the unregistered People’s Freedom Party, led by Nemtsov and Kasyanov. By the way, the Economic Freedom Party, of which I am chairman, has been denied registration twice.

- Why does Nemtsov have such a low rating from election to election? Does his intelligent appearance work against him?

- I am sure that if Nemtsov is allowed on TV, his ideas will be as popular and will find no less response than Putin’s press conferences with bribed journalists. Why is Nemtsov unpopular? Because he is forbidden to engage in politics. The only information that spreads about him is overheard telephone conversations. We live in a state run by the FSB and it is ridiculous to demand their democratic orientation. Nemtsov’s popularity is still sufficient to participate in the elections and even win them. This is shown by sociological surveys. That is why neither he nor Kasyanov was allowed to the elections.

You know, I go to Italy a lot. And one day, speaking about the lawlessness that is happening in our country, I heard in response: You now have democracy. There will be elections, you will re-elect the parliament, the president. You see, this is the view of such well-fed people living in a democracy on the lives of people who are deprived of it. What they fail to understand is that it’s not about funding – there will be money – but about the absence of independent media. The way to TV for ideological opponents of the government is closed.

- Many were surprised by the pathos of Putin’s speech at the United Russia Congress, in particular, the painfully familiar “...so that life was better and more beautiful” or “The truth is with us!” Victory will be ours!

Do you think this is an accidental or deliberate adoption of Stalinist style?

- I think it's an appeal to genetic memory. After all, 75 years of Soviet power and the stereotypes created over the years would be a sin not to use. Putin is a populist because he likes to use nationalist slogans. The very scheme of his coming to power is the consolidation of society around a strong leader. If you know about the explosions in Moscow...

          - In '99?

- Yes, I was a deputy at the time, and I received very serious information about these explosions. When I was in America, I told her that the bombings were organized by the FSB.

- I'm sorry, but this reminds me of the accusations made against George W. Bush that the September 11 attack was at his instigation.

- Then, in '99, I received information that Bin Laden was preparing to ram the skyscrapers of Manhattan. I gave it to the FBI, but then, two years before the attack, it seemed absurd. So, when he came to power, Putin brought with him the idea of a strong country, which does not exclude the possibility of seizing foreign territories if necessary for business. That's what happened to Georgia. And in this regard, since this is an interview for an American publication, I must say that Obama’s recent statements about the need to reset against the background of the current regime are perceived here as betrayal. The government will eliminate all free media, political prisoners are measured in the thousands, and at the same time the stronghold of world democracy announces the beginning of friendship with Putin.

 - What did you expect from a complete Marxist?

- He may be gay, but he makes statements on behalf of the country.

- What qualities do you think the Russian president should have?

          - He must be able to restore the instrument of democracy under which the Russian Constitution would operate. The President must be a man of democratic conviction. And this is not Zyuganov or Limonov, nor the Nazis, whose victory will cause civil war. Today, democratic values are demanded by society. If anything, it has become clear that populists like Putin and Navalny will eventually create even worse corruption.

- Well, Prokhorov, who advocates reducing the number of officials, protecting private property and changing the system of selection of judges. What can you say about him?

- Prokhorov is a mob. This is a man hired to pose as a politician, and he agreed to do so in order to protect his capital. Otherwise, his fifteen billion will turn into fifteen rubles. He's acting like a jester.

And treat him like a buffoon who entertains Putin.

- And yet, when people talk only badly about a person, it is alarming, because quite often it indicates bias, and bias is the enemy of objectivity. Is there anything you can take credit for Putin?

– It has preserved, albeit in a very distorted or damaged form, the market economy. He turned a tool of the market economy into a pump that fills his empire with dollars.

And he did it not because he was a good man, but because he benefited from it. And that's disgusting. So I think I'll stop by listing his merits. Do you expect me to praise him for being able to speak up in the country? No, it is impossible to express it, because, as I said, information channels are closed. Togo will be shut down. The main task of the media is anti-democratic, anti-Western and especially anti-American propaganda. Yes, Putin personally does not cut off the heads of his opponents. Well, let's give him credit so we don't get accused of bias. In addition, Putin is not very healthy mentally, and this is what many people say.

- Something strange in your eyes?

- More like speeches. He constantly talks about enemies and, like Gaddafi or Hussein, repeats with maniacal tenacity that these enemies were bought with Western money.

- How do you see further developments?

- Protest sentiment is growing, and Putin is in a state of zugzwang. Z.M.: Every move he makes plays against him: if he makes concessions, he loses; if he doesn't, he's going to lose even more.

Zoe Master was talking.