The whole country is in danger of explosion
An interview with Boris A. Berezovsky on Russia, Chechnya and Putin
This interview was first published in leading Czech public affairs weekly RESPEKT on July 30, 2001, the right to publish the article in English was granted to Prague Watchdog.
It is widely known that you were strongly involved in the conflict in Chechnya. Do you have your own ideas about its solution?
Of course I do. First, all military action should be ceased immediately and unconditionally. Second, the reconstruction of the political system of the whole Russian Federation needs to be considered.
Do you mean that Chechnya should become independent?
What is taking place in Chechnya nowadays is genocide. There is no other word I could find to describe it. Nevertheless, I am categorically opposed to granting Chechnya its independence because this would lead to a huge explosion in the whole of Russia. It would be even more terrible than the breakup of the USSR because this time it would be characterized exclusively by force.
The leadership of Russia must commit itself to the overall remodelling of the state. Authority cannot be delegated by the center to the units of the federation but the other way round: national regions should hand over to the federal centre such powers that they consider suitable. The common goal must be a well-functioning state. I think that such a model may be realized in the foreseeable future. But if Moscow builds the power vertically, a potentially tense situation in the country will be created, with the final result being an explosion. If Russia’s leaders do not react in time to these events in terms of building new kinds of relationships with the republics (existing in Russia on the ethnic principle), the country could be threatened with disintegration.
This is a provocation
It is said in contemporary Russia that you are one of those who are guilty of the second armed conflict in Chechnya. You are blamed for it not only by Moscow but also by the Chechens, headed by president Aslan Maskhadov.
We used to have long talks at one point with president Maskhadov which made us understand each other's standpoints. I know that he finds himself in the worst position today and I also know about the kind of provocations being planned against him every day by the Russian secret service. Therefore I admit that for some reason he could at some point blame me for similar things. But the Chechens that are close to Maskhadov and with whom I am in a close contact do not criticize me for anything. These people understand what I was doing in Chechnya. When I was Secretary of the Russian Security Council, a major progress was made in the peace process in the North Caucasus, where the most complex conflict is underway today: In 1996 peace agreements were drafted and [then] signed by general Lebed on the Russian side. This was the only way to make the transition from war confrontation to the confrontation of ideas. They know that I put a lot of energy into ending the conflict. That is why I see the rumors about me being the cause of the second Chechen war in 1999 as a well-planned provocation.
However, at that time you were in control of the television channel ORT and it was precisely this station that supported Russian military operations in Chechnya. ORT did not play a minor role in the spread of the image of Chechens in Russia as an ethnic group that harms the country's interests and may be the cause for the state's disintegration.
But that concerned the Chechen attack on Dagestan in the summer of 1999. The Russian leadership was informed well and in time that the guerillas were preparing the attack. I was one of those to draw Prime Minister Sergei Stepashin's attention to the planned action. I obtained concrete information even from the Chechens! I considered the attack on Dagestan as a completely detrimental affair not only to Moscow but mostly to the Chechens themselves. Dagestan was a catastrophe for them. The commanders of the Chechen armed forces as well as Maskhadov himself knew about it. So it was not me who started the military campaign in 1999. It was exactly the opposite: I did the best I could and what depended on me to not to let the fights erupt. It was clear to me what the consequences of this act of open aggression would be. Until that moment the Russian public was not as hostile to the Chechens. The situation changed drastically only afterwards. I was categorically opposed to Chechen aggressive plans but on the other hand I had many questions concerning the Russian secret service.
What questions?
How could they allow, for instance, that for two years the Chechens were peacefully and without disruption building their military defensive and offensive structure in Dagestan, that they were constructing their military bases as if nobody knew about it. A question comes to my mind the more I think about it: whether this was not yet another of the provocations from the side of the Russian secret service that should have led the country to another war. And it did eventually. Once the fighting began I supported the tactics of the Russian army in Dagestan and even in Chechnya after the operations moved there.
Why did you after that suddenly change your opinion fundamentally?
Because I did not regard putting up the Russian flag over the capital of Chechnya a victory at all. Victory is above all a state of consciousness. In December 1999 the military campaign should have been terminated immediately. Then it was necessary for the priorities to be changed. I openly said this to Putin, who was not yet president at that time. We talked this problem over many times and I categorically disagreed with the military conflict being intensified.
The tsar - the president
How do you defend yourself when accused of using the military campaign as a means for backing Putin's ascent to the throne?
This is a misleading question. If the war influenced the elections at all, then it surely did not do so essentially. Let me state an example. In the year 1998 Prime Minister Chernomyrdin was dismissed and replaced by Sergei Kiriyenko. Nobody knew him at all and in two months he became the second most popular man in the country. Then Yeltsin dismissed Kiriyenko and put Yevgeny Primakov in his place. At that time he was not at the top of Russian politics, however, two months later he was more popular then Yeltsin himself. Then Yeltsin dismissed Primakov and exchanged him for Sergei Stepashin. He was not particularly known or liked as a politician but his popularity skyrocketed at an amazing speed. Yeltsin dismissed him then and appointed Putin as Prime Minister. Putin's popularity started increasing quickly ... It is like in a fairy tale. To sum up: the main cause in the dramatic rise of popularity of the Russian politicians has nothing to do with the war in Chechnya. It is connected rather with Russian mentality.
Are you implying that Russians like those who hold high posts?
This is not precise and I would not say at all that an emotional relation is the case here. The Russian mentality is to a great extent servile. People did not like Yeltsin under his rule. They did not show respect for him. And all of a sudden the unpopular tsar appoints his successor and the people are told: "Love him." And the people obey right away. Russian citizens are not ready to make their own decisions. They regard what the tsar or today the president says or what his wishes are! The war in Chechnya was not at all the major cause of Putin's victory in the presidential elections in the year 2000 but it was the Russian tradition to obey the decisions of the “tsar-batushka”.
In relation to the electoral victory of Vladimir Putin a lot was said about the merits of the Russian secret service, mainly the Federal Security Service (the KGB's successor) from which Putin arose.
Unfortunately, the Russian secret service thought the same thing you do. They believed that the Chechen conflict and the appropriate involvement of Putin in it could influence his success in the elections. I am convinced that many of the provocations that were happening in those days were arranged precisely by the Russian secret service. They wished to increase Putin's popularity this way and therefore many people think to this day that the war helped Putin to ascent to the president's chair.
Was his election constitutional and just, even though provocations by the secret service preceded it?
Be careful! Parliamentary elections in the year 1999 and the presidential elections in the year 2000 were held in a specific Russian reality, with the use of the peculiarities of a political struggle in Russia - but in line with Constitution. Therefore I do not consider Putin's coming to power as a constitutional coup d´état. Nor would I call the acts he committed after taking the presidential chair a constitutional coup d´état. It is nevertheless true that he violated the Russian Constitution in its foundations. His decrees on the creation of seven federal regions and on the dispersal of the Federation Council are purely unconstitutional acts. Sooner or later he will have to assume his responsibility. According to the Constitution of Russia the president should be its guarantor. In this sense I agree that he committed a crime.
A few months ago, Litvinyenko, an officer of the Federal Security Service emigrated to England. He claims that he has evidence on how the explosions in residential housing in Moscow in autumn 1999 that preceded the second war in Chechnya were planned. So far he has not published anything. Do you know anything about it?
I know Litvinyenko very well and for a long time. Do you know that an English court decided a month ago that he is entitled to political asylum? He wrote a book in which he exposes many activities of the secret service throughout the whole Chechen military campaign, meaning already during the first war. These terrorist provocations were aimed at directing public opinion against the Chechens.
Concerning the terrible explosions in Moscow, the state's leadership left many questions unanswered. And this in spite of the fact that it is mainly in their interest to make the results of investigation public. After all, many are those who blame the secret service for having organized the explosions. Many people ask the same questions as I do myself: Why does the time of the explosions in Moscow correspond with the beginning of Putin's presidential campaign? Why did the explosions cease after the campaign was finished? Why has the public not learnt anything about the perpetrators? The authorities try to inform vaguely about something they call investigation but nobody trusts them. I think we will learn the truth soon anyway. It is too important for the history and future of Russia. Besides, it is all too recent for the witnesses to disappear.
Not me, but them
You say that president Putin violates the Constitution, that he cannot settle the conflict in Chechnya, that he restricts the freedom of speech. Why is the West silent?
It is not true that it is silent. The West reacts in particular to the restrictions made on the freedom of speech in Russia. Recall what happened when the television station NTV was being liquidated. Not that it would save NTV but it was useful for Russian society to understand what was happening and in what state they found themselves. It is nevertheless true that the pressure of the West does not have any visible outcome. The state managed to get in control of NTV, the radio station Echo of Moscow is falling to the country leadership's hands... Nonetheless it is clear to the public what the authorities are committing.
And what about the US president who is demonstrative about his friendship with his Russian counterpart?
You cannot expect the US president, who entered the office recently, to look into Vladimir Putin's eyes and understand who this guy is.
Yet you supported Putin in the beginning too...
I am not the US president, I have greater rights to make mistakes. The pressure exerted by the West on Russia may be inadequate but it is more noticeable. It is as if the Russian leadership did not understand that although it can restrict the freedom of speech and other manifestations of the civil society, this cannot solve the problems that develop for them at all. By applying brute force many problems may be pushed aside but not removed completely. The Russian leadership is preparing a dangerous environment for itself.
In what way?
The situation that they create has an explosive potential. The whole country is in danger of explosion. In particular young people, and there are millions of them, do not intend to give up freedom for any ideological or nationalistic aims. They do not want to just survive, they want to live.
Is there a chance that the Russian leadership realizes this as well?
For whatever happens from any cause or for any aim, one has to pay. The trial with Milosevic serves as an excellent demonstration that no crime will go unpunished. This represents a remarkable precedent. Nothing will be forgotten. President Putin should also know that he has to bear responsibility for his acts. And this will happen, I know it will not take long. Putin as the chief commander of the armed forces has already exceeded the line beyond which you are made to pay for everything.
Some Russian media made an allusion that you are preparing an attack on the Russian president.
I am not able to do such things. The future of dictators is in their hands. In our century their lifetime will be short. It is not me but them who are responsible for their end.
ANDREI BABITSKY, LEILA KHADJIYEVA
The authors are journalists.
Boris Berezovsky (55) - one of the best known and at the same time the most controversial figures of Russian public life.
A mathematician by training Berezovsky entered private enterprise and built close relationships with prominent individuals especially in President Yeltsin's circle. His entrepreneurial interests include banking, oil, TV broadcasting (ORT, TV6). In 1996 he became deputy secretary of Russia’s Security Council. Since 1999 a member of the State Duma, he was deeply engaged in the Chechen conflict. He was suspected of taking part in controversial privatization, connections with Russian criminal underworld, corruption, money laundering. Since Vladimir Putin assumed the presidential office Berezovsky’s influence started to fade. Last year he resigned on his political functions, blaming Putin for establishing an authoritarian regime in Russia. Berezovsky is subject to criminal investigations into his business affairs.
In late 2000 he moved to exile in France to start a defense campaign assuming a role of a promoter of democracy, freedom of speech, and civil society in Russia.
|
