Alexei Navalny on the program *Full Albats* from September 12, 2016

Good evening. It is 8:05 p.m. You are listening to the radio station

Echo of Moscow. I am Yevgenia Albats,

devoted

to the politics of the coming weeks and months. Next

Sunday, September 18,

elections to the State Duma (the lower house of Russia’s parliament) will be held.

And for the first time in recent years, deputies are being elected

not only by party lists, but

half of the seats will also be filled through single-member

districts. Polling suggests that the Duma

will once again be filled by the same parties and the same faces.

Voter interest in the election, again,

if the polls are to be believed,

Alexander Kynev will correct me if I’m

putting it wrong, but for now it is not especially

high. The projected turnout is 30–40%.

However, you can see, for example, even from

Facebook, that more and more people

are asking themselves: should they go vote or not

go at all? And if they do go, whom should they vote for?

For the small parties, even though they clearly

have no chance of getting in? So is it worth giving your

vote to a horse that will finish

last?

Or should one vote only for

the single-member district candidate?

There are, in fact, a great many questions.

That is what we will be discussing today

here in the Echo of Moscow studio. This is what we call

a strategy of electoral behavior. And in

the Echo studio with us is Alexei Navalny, politician,

leader of the Progress Party, founder of the Anti-Corruption

Foundation. Alexei,

good evening.

>> Good evening.

>> Alexei Kynev, political scientist.

>> Alexander,

>> Of course, Alexander Kynev. Sorry,

Sasha,

>> Well, under the circumstances, that’s understandable. Yes. Well,

because Alexei is here, yes, Alexander Kynev,

political scientist, expert at the Committee of Civil

Initiatives. Am I introducing you correctly?

>> Mikhail Fishman, editor-in-chief of the newspaper

The Moscow Times. Mikhail, hello.

>> Good evening.

>> So, first, let us establish this so that I

understand what kind of place we are living in, and, and

what to expect from you. The first question, the basic

one: should people take part in the elections

or not, Alexei Navalny? Take part

in the elections,

>> if there is a decent

single-member district candidate in your district. Personally, I will not go to vote,

because I do not have one.

>> All right, and Alexander Kynev,

>> I think, of course, people should take part. I

have specifically brought statistics, and if I may

say so, I can give examples why

you absolutely should participate.

>> Mikhail Fishman, do you participate?

>> I

don’t know. I’m close to Alexei

Venediktov’s position on not participating in the elections. Well, I

am very close to Navalny’s

position in this sense. And I

am struck by the fact that something about these

elections is clearly wrong. If in my

district, where as an ordinary citizen I can

allow myself to say a few words, which

is known for the fact that in 2011

it voted for Yabloko (a liberal political party). And in general, well,

it is the most liberal of districts—in this district,

not one of the single-member candidates’ names

means anything to me. And if you start

digging, it turns out that voting

for these people is impossible under any

circumstances. So what am I supposed to do?

I will probably go anyway, but I cannot

say that I would confidently urge

everyone to follow my example.

>> So, we will need to answer

the question: if a person goes to vote, and

yet there is no single-member candidate

to vote for, and there is no party

one could reasonably choose, what

option does that person have? Yes, well, let us

address it right away, without going too far afield:

what should one do if a person

believes that as a citizen, as a

taxpayer, he must go to

the polls, because otherwise how can he

demand anything from the state?

But there is no single-member candidate

one can vote for, as you said,

Alexei, and there is no political party

that one could

vote for. What should one do? Well, if, let us say,

you really do not want to vote for anyone at all,

let me remind you that here

in Moscow we only have two

ballots. In many regions,

in St. Petersburg, for example, and in the Moscow

Region, there are at least four ballots,

since people are also electing

regional parliaments there, and there are

quite decent candidates. So,

if you truly have no one at all, and you do not

want someone simply to stuff a ballot

in your place, after all, because you

did not come, then you can simply come

and spoil it—that is, roughly speaking,

put check marks in every box, and

then your ballot will be

invalid. And it cannot

be used for United Russia or for any

other party, because if it is

invalid, that is the end of it. That is,

look, here we only have two

options. But the point is that

a ballot is invalid either if there is not a single

mark on it at all, or if there is more than

one mark. So do not

put a blank ballot into the box; just

put crosses in every box,

and then it will be impossible

to reassign it to any party at all. And

during a recount, when during a recount

seats, whereas this spoiled ballot

again, this spoiled ballot doesn't go anywhere

So, basically, the percentage—the percentage is a bit tricky here.

It is calculated from the total of valid and

invalid ballots, that is, that is, in this way

it will affect the percentages, it will

lower the percentage for the ruling party and for all

the others as well, but it will not

allow someone to cast a vote on your behalf. Uh-huh.

>> I see. It's not as if we have never

resorted to this, to this, to this

tool before. This is for when there is absolutely no one

to vote for, I stress, but it is an option,

and everyone sort of decides that for themselves

for everyone

parliamentary

in 2011, the result seemed quite

successful for the opposition, yes.

And at the same time

many of us voted; your humble servant

voted too.

So, looking back, was that

a successful strategy?

>> Zhenya, that's not quite how you put it.

The strategy was successful. You

voted for that A Just Russia party,

which, as you may remember, came into the State Duma with its entire faction

wearing white ribbons. And

many of them almost then

joined us at Bolotnaya (the 2011–2012 protest rallies in Moscow). That was

the main issue. And they—and the Communists—

did not join. But that was the A Just Russia of that time,

the A Just Russia that existed in that Russia, which had a

different political

system. After 2013, after the whole

Crimea story, after Ukraine, and after

after

now, in effect,

by comparison

It

the so-called systemic parties are basically United Russia,

and in practice there is no difference. That is why I

am not calling for that old strategy of mine

to be used again, because the Kremlin is

absolutely ready for it.

heads

we know,

and they are mostly Communists, in fact

they are not democrats at all. The Kremlin protects

itself by not allowing independent

players into the elections.

rate

elections. Although I am not calling for a boycott,

because, well, I was absolutely unlawfully

deprived of my voting rights. And under

the law, after all, I won at the ECHR (European Court of Human Rights) and in the Grand

Chamber of the ECHR, and in fairness my rights

should have been restored to me.

And I

to the Kremlin.

Of course, I

there has not even been any voting yet, and I already do not

recognize them, because I was not allowed to take part in them

and many other people were not

allowed either. So, well, uh, therefore

right now, voting for anyone against United

Russia is...

What?

At the very least, voting rights should be restored

immediately. But that

did not happen, and still has not happened.

The Supreme Court is simply doing nothing.

And do they reply to you at all, do you know

you send requests? Nothing. Well, that is,

why

and you say

that candidates should withdraw in favor of other

candidates so that they do not compete

against each other

a democratic or liberal candidate,

whatever you call it.

Do you have some kind of objec-

but nevertheless I try not to be

selfish. I understand that a call for

a total boycott would harm

single-member district candidates, would harm

regional campaigns and assemblies across the

country.

to try to separate out several districts,

because what we are seeing now, well,

it is simply a nightmare. In Moscow, not

a single person will be elected in this

way. And this is in a city that

is the main stronghold of democratic

the same old

uh, is headed by—well, he was in the

Central Committee of the Communist

Party of the Soviet

>> Union until 2003. Then no,

also

these

No, of course, in fact, if we

look at the same conventional polling there,

yes, somewhere around 38–40% would support

having new parties in parliament and

new faces. This system

does not let new figures, new

uh

was talking about overly complicated schemes. Yes. And

Alexei was trying to explain a very complicated

scheme. They never work in real life. For

electoral behavior, the schemes that work are

fairly

simple

the system, yes, that is, roughly speaking,

well, not abandoning the elections, yes, but

trying to play on the contradictions within it,

yes, on those forces that are ready for

some kind of change. And it must be said that

here we

got a rally

implemented.

If so, it was extremely important within the system itself

to try, as it were,

to encourage the players, yes, toward a certain

strategy of behavior, then now, under

the conditions of this, well,

regime, the rhetoric now is very

paramilitary or military.

mobilizational, aggressive, extremely

conservative. Agreed? Yesterday we

all thought.

human rights violations, there against

censorship and so on, that they are not

a minority, yes, so it is necessary

to vote there according to taste and preference, there

Yabloko

worse than me, honestly

you can, you bet on a player who

can win. There are cases when you

bet on a player who may

receive some more minoritarian

package. There are cases when you

vote to show that you exist.

Do you mean to say that PARNAS and I had

a chance to get into the State Duma?

>> The thing is that there are three versions

of a conditional victory in these elections.

At most 5%. Yes, that is very good. If

we are lucky, it depends on turnout in the cities.

The second level of victory. You may fail to get

five, but get three.

Two things.

achievements,

like Ksyusha Sobchak, she says: "I am

a blonde." I may not be a blonde, but I

want to understand this clearly for myself. So,

if a political

then

for the presidential election it does not matter anyway, so,

for the presidency there are slightly different criteria

for admission; three percent is not enough there. There

it is already about the State Duma, you have to get into the State Duma. But as for

what concerns parliam.

>> And as for

the election? So,

to nominate your own candidates. This is an attempt

in this way to open a small gate for

thousands of people to be able to go into elections

who today cannot do that

to do so.

>> I see. Thank you. That was Alexander

>> last time, when you

Yabloko.

After that, the election campaign began

and somehow we completely

stopped hearing anything about it

at all. And, well, I carefully

locally

am stunned

>> Yes, no doubt.

>> Right. Uh,

nevertheless, when I watch, uh, uh,

the videos

And

your, excuse me, your attitude has not

changed, uh, toward the Yabloko party, or

did you see something different during this

campaign? It seems to me that if

specifically swept through

for some kind of,

uh, democratic platform, uh, out of

that came out. Well, we can see what

came out. We—I will say honestly, I, uh, I, I this

attempt did see, at least, and

as a giver

may be successful in

Oksaderov.

Listen,

they allowed television, they allowed onto

television, we can see it, which means that what

is called a debate. Well, never mind, at least

none

>> we are at that stage

to play.

That really is so. Well, it is impossible. Well,

indeed, for years, so, uh, um

the athletes were kicking each other in the groin, uh, with their feet,

then they stepped back and said: "That’s it, now we play

fairly, there will be, there will be a fair, there will be

a fair match." Something does not quite

connect

and registered for them. So, here

now on a basis that is not just daily, but

I have the feeling it is hourly, I receive either

an email from Trump,

yes.

An email from Alexei

Well, I think, well, finally, all right, at least

in the last week they wanted my

vote.

In these press-service messages they do not tell me:

"Come and vot

I agree that the field here has been scorched, but

it feels as though the parties themselves

of a democratic bent were unable, did not

want to,

>> it seems to me,

nevertheless

ran the 2011 campaign. Brilliantly

ran it. Brilliantly. I will now, now I will

finish. He ran it brilliantly, uh, he ran

the Moscow mayoral campaign in

our country. Uh, no,

it is necessary

also on which

surely among all these people to whom

these politicians were appealing.

>> Alexei, very—I will be very brief. Mikhail,

if the Party of Progress had not been illegally

liquidated

seconds

but they did not

The news came on. And we went to the news.

>> Complete Albats.

They do not have

not, yes.

Russian politics, to a large extent,

has a woman’s neck. This is, by the way, an interesting

thing. In America they say that women

vote the way their husbands vote. It is

interesting in our case

finish

That’s all. So, no one will get through.

>> Well, at least there will be chances. At least

then, you understand, for voters, for

Mish’s voters will at least be there then.

some kind of

damn

billboards, for example—you see all kinds of them everywhere.

Vinograd, by the way, said that at the bottom

there was quite a lot of PARNAS in the city and

to the region

>> About Tsentralny—are you going to Tsentralny? I

not to Tsentralny, I’m in VGA.

>> Oh, so where Goncharov is,

>> Of course, I mean, that’s where I was born.

>> Goncharov—who even is Goncharov? My

friend Lyonya

28

>> that was how it was. Everyone jumped on board.

There was this feeling

that this was our cause.

>> The intrigue was whether United

Russia would get a majority or not. And what about

the ideas, do you understand?

We need to raise one million dollars in

the next 24 hours. That’s what

Trump’s campaign keeps writing to me—I love those messages.

>> Give $100, $65, $35

dollars.

It was necessary

>> but that’s

>> paid airtime.

>> But I’m not hosting it.

>> Ah, I see.

electoral behavior—about what we should ultimately do

on the eighteenth. Alexander,

Kiv, please tell us after all what

is happening in the regions.

>> Well, the situation is very uneven. That is,

there are regions

of Moscow where

mainly

A Just Russia is active.

in some places it’s the LDPR and United Russia. That’s it, basically,

no other parties, except perhaps

the Party of Growth in St. Petersburg, well, there

are a few other exceptions, did almost nothing.

did almost nothing. DIT

will win.

I can name regions where, in these

elections, where this year

there really was an active campaign—Ikutsk

there really, at a minimum, in two

districts. In general, no, no

in Altai

and there the number of LDPR advertising billboards

is only slightly lower than United Russia’s. There

was a unique region. There the main

force was the LDPR. That happens too.

So. Well, it all depends on the people, on who

who

there

is running against United Russia, basically.

Yes, the Leningrad Region. There are

competitive districts in the Vologda Region

and so on. So there are, there are these

competitive pockets, if you can call them that.

Overall, the average temperature in the ward

is low in terms of competitiveness, but there are

individual hotspots. The forecast is hard to make.

>> So,

in all of Russia’s history. Absolutely. And

it must be said that there is one such point

that is very important.

by the way, about low turnout.

The logic is simple.

then the seat goes to the region where there is

one vote more. Therefore, in the regions,

when governors want to get their lobbyists into the Duma

their own lobbyists, yes, certain useful

people, and so on, formally speaking

in the process, they will try to

raise turnout. But the authorities are suppressing turnout, and they

do everything to make people spit in disgust, yes,

so that they say, "Oh, how fascinating

and boring, there’s no one to vote for, and the others are unknown

and so on." But in fact

what emerged was an interesting

situation: candidates are short on money, naturally,

so campaign expenses are being cut, and so on.

So of course many are running their campaigns

on their own. We haven’t seen this much trash

in election campaigning for a long time, from the standpoint

of just how low-quality the agitation has been.

So naturally the level

of professionalism in organizing campaigns has dropped sharply.

The third point, the third point, is fixed matches.

That is, in conditions where the authorities

tried with all the main players

in advance

and thirdly

there are the same three and a half months

legally, but in practice, since

the elections are in September, campaigning happens in summer,

so accordingly those who intend

to run seriously understand that

they need to start campaigning before

the official start of the campaign, preliminarily,

in spring—in April, May, even February. Only then

does it make sense, because otherwise there is no chance

at all, because who are you going to

campaign to in the summer? And as a result

it turns out that, legally speaking,

the campaign is three months, but because of the shift

in the date it actually lasts half a year. And here

primaries are important as a formal

news hook. It doesn’t matter whether there is

real competition or not—it is a reason to go out

to the people and say something. But there is less money now.

So it turns out that the reduced

amount of money is spread not over three months but

over six. That is why this kind of

situation emerged. In spring, in many regions, there was

an active campaign around notional

primaries—that is, billboards there,

leaflets, newspapers there in March, in April,

and in May. Then June comes, and all of this

gradually disappears; over the summer nothing happens.

And now it’s the end of August and

the beginning of September, and people are simply overwhelmed by

all of this informational, so to speak,

madness, quite often. And since

staged arrangements, since there are plenty of them

hemmed in by things that must not be touched. And

we, we see waves of political campaigning.

That is, people are not talking about what

candidates are not talking about what matters

to people. They talk, they, well,

post recipes, you know, for how to, how to

marinate this or that, you know, how to

fry this or that, I mean

some slogans just to

get a laugh, have a chuckle, take pictures with

cats, dogs. So this is the kind of thing we get

as campaigning, even though we are electing

a federal parliament, and the campaigning is such

that it feels like we are choosing some kind of, I don't know,

best cook or someone else. Right. And

against this backdrop, of this

dullness, tedium, yes, these staged arrangements

the one who wins is the one who becomes a bright

spot. Because those very 40%

of those who want sharp attacks from a candidate,

have not gone anywhere. Accordingly, the one who

has enough courage against this backdrop to

say, "Well, I think that

there are problems no one is talking about, yes,

and then this bright spot

will expose this whole picture, and then

the others will be forced to respond.

>> Thank you. Thank you, Alexei.

September.

>> Yes, first of all, ours was an election campaign,

and an early one at that, so we did not

have time either to raise money or to

prepare campaign headquarters, or for anything else.

Now, if you had

On Monday, well, our Yabloko and

PARNAS will issue a statement, demand

the resignation of the interior minister,

demand an investigation, go out to

the debates, and really hit hard in the debates.

consequences

video.

>> Well, explain why

also because, unfortunately, they do not

know how. Well, the last time they all

cleared the five-percent threshold was long ago.

Funding. Wonderful. You know,

for example, the Yabloko party, the poorest of

them, how much it received in budget money since 2011?

How much, in your

opinion?

>> How would I know?

>> 745 million rubles.

There is no money. No money at all.

the last two.

I do not know where they got it from, but

Yabloko, absolutely and quite definitely, in terms of

the volume of private funds, for example, in

2014, was among the

top four. So, I wish them

all good luck. It's just that I

five later. Sasha, wait.

>> In that sense, it really does not matter what

this party is called. Whether it is called

Yabloko or PARNAS. It could even

be called something else entirely.

and

earlier, because today, well, really

it is already unclear how they differ; I, honestly, cannot

say, even though I am an engaged

observer, I don't know, an analyst,

whatever you want to call it.

there is absolute

whether the LDPR (Liberal Democratic Party of Russia) comes in second place or not

does not matter. What difference does it make? No difference. It is

not important how, inside this vessel,

things shift around; from a political point of view, it is

insignificant. If even a single

one appears, and

breaks open

naturally

we see this in these elections. Unfortunately,

that is a fact. Not a fact. In reality, we

saw even in professional sociology

that at the end of the campaign there was a rise in

the number of undecided voters. And the latest

even

so to speak, well,

yes, he shook up the campaign. He

radicalized Yabloko, because Yabloko

only after that really began

to do something. And decent

Yabloko videos appeared, and Yavlinsky became more

clear and articulate in the debates after that.

There

people need something new. People need

something—this whole grayness, this tedi

in a week? Sorry for interrupting. So

do you think they can manage it in a week? I mean,

the election is in a week

a week

normal

should exist.

>> It does not exist. We can see that it does not.

>> I'm afraid it

>> that even if you receive this mailing,

it will not convince you.

No, well, at least this brings me back to

my own, well, my own point

I would gladly vote for

Yabloko, or for PARNAS, for any party,

if they somehow manage to motivate

someone. I would even

toward victory.

And

do you think United Russia will get a

constitutional majority? I think

not. I think it does not itself

want that, because in that case it becomes

a matter of political responsibility,

which, to put it mildly, will also be very

to carry out almost two

hardly

I think they could get, in the single-member districts,

somewhere around, let's say,

185 seats or so. Yes. Or 180. And

as for the party lists

yes, by

Well, I’m going to vote. I’m going to the

polls. You know, once again, there are a lot of

arguments being made about why and what for

this needs to be done. I have

only one reason. This time, I know for sure

that

my vote, no matter how I use it,

in every instance, every time, to whatever extent

for myself, in every single case. But

right now I am absolutely certain

that my vote will affect nothing. I

cannot change this situation. I

I do not see that op-

this wall today. It’s not, it’s not

possible. What is left for me? I

have no choice in that sense.

Uh, I think let these elections at least be

a kind of reminder to some people,

well, I don’t know, someday, after a long time, uh, you need to

train your hand, you need something, something

you still have to do something so that

something happens, so that something takes place, you still

have to do something. Out of the

conviction that action is better than

inaction, I’ll go anyway.

And also the thought that it would be better if once again, in my

memory, there were an imprint of what

this ballot looks like, for some future day

when ballots become important, and this

memory will be

at least somewhat of an important factor. But

those are probably the only more or less

considerations that will actually lead me

to the polls this, this, this time. It’s hard for me

to tell myself that

no, I’m not going to vote. I have always

gone, though I did skip the elections to the

Moscow City Duma (Moscow’s city parliament), and I didn’t go to those.

Uh, and in fact, along the same

model, those very

federal elections we are talking about today

are developing. But, mm, but in terms of, in

parliamentary elections, I still can’t make myself do it

yet, not yet.

>> Still,

the booth

cast my vo-

how I, how, how I, how I vote. I

know that it won’t affect anything.

>> I want to make a very important point. The thing is,

over the last, say,

10 to 15 years, the democratic parties

have basically destroyed their

regional activist base. In the regions today,

democratic parties effectively do not

exist. There are people with official stamps,

who sometimes go to the Ministry of Justice and hand in

some paperwork. If one or two, I don’t

know how many democratic parties

receive a kind of conditional license, those 3%,

and people will be able to run for office,

then at least some chance will appear

for people to take part in local

elections. Because even when

people come to them—I know many examples when

some local

civic activists, bloggers, fighters for

some cause, right, some political party

just brushes them off. It says: "Well,

we’ll nominate you, sure, now go collect signatures,

but we’re not giving you any money today,

okay?" So that would at least be some kind of

small, very small chance to start

building something locally, because we have

a fundamental problem. We have

nothing but scorched earth, and nobody cares

that it’s scorched. All the struggle is boiling away in

Moscow, on the internet, on social media.

So the leaders there are fighting with

each other. But what about, what about everything around them?

There’s no interest

and there won’t be any,

not right away,

you know, uh, maximalism, yes, it

is of course good, yes, it mobilizes, yes,

it gives energy, maybe, but we need to be

political realists. That’s what I’m for,

to be realistic and to try, yes,

to take at least what exists, yes, to try

to create some footholds and to try

to help specific people on the ground

there, because otherwise absolutely nothing

will ever happen.

>> Alexei, and

September 18 has already happened, and we got what

we got.

So what do we do next? The strategy

for winning elections, both presidential and

parliamentary, has to be tied to

the demand that genuine

players be registered. Until then, elections begin not

at the moment the campaign starts,

but at the moment when real participants are either registered or

not registered.

Therefore, that is exactly what the

strategy is connected with. We need to demand that before

presidential elections, before parliamentary

elections, before any regional elections,

those who are ready to fight for

victory, ready to fight for their

voters, must be allowed to run. The Party of Progress is

one such party. That is what we must fight for.

>> Alexei, I’ve heard you say this several times.

You’ve repeated it.

Right, right. But once again we saw everyone

beating each other up. The democrats once again

failed to unite.

>> We were not the ones who initiated the breakup. We

refused

failure. We’ll see that on the nineteenth

despite all my great sympathy for

that party. This goes back to the discussion of that

general depression with which I, in fact,

with which I actually began.

>> Is that what you mean by general depression?

>> Well, of course, if, if, if

this coalition had been expected to succeed in any, in any

form, then would Alexei really have left?

>> And listen, as for the coalition: I

spent all of 2015 on traveling

around the regions and, for the PARNAS party,

building a coalition in different

regions. We ran in four regions, and in

three of them we were not allowed to participate. Right now,

all the leaders of the democratic parties combined

have not held as many meetings

with voters as I

held in 2015, even without

running for office. But, excuse me, I am ready

to work harder than any campaigner.

It really is a shame,

for those who listened to us, who came. And

next time I will not be here, but in

a week, I hope, we will hear from each other again.

All the best, goodbye.