The program discussed the possibility that Vladimir Putin might fail to win the presidential election on March 4, 2012, in the first round, and the potential political consequences of such a scenario. The participants—Alexei Navalny, Sergei Udaltsov, Olga Romanova, and Sergei Guriev—agreed that Putin’s defeat would not lead to catastrophe: a coalition government, political reform, the release of political prisoners, and, eventually, early parliamentary elections were all seen as possible. At the same time, they viewed the electoral process itself as fundamentally unfree, urged voters to support any candidate except Putin, called for the closest possible monitoring of the vote count through election observers, and said people should be prepared for street protests on March 5, 2012, if a dubious first-round victory were announced. The discussion’s main conclusion was that a runoff was seen as the minimum sign of a relatively honest vote count, whereas a first-round victory for Putin, in the participants’ view, would trigger widespread distrust and protest.
Text version
0:02
RTVI television and Echo of Moscow radio
0:06
present the program Full Albats.
0:11
>> Good evening. 10:12 p.m.
0:13
On the air are Echo of Moscow radio and
0:15
RTVI television. I am Yevgenia Albats. And
0:17
as always on Mondays, I begin our
0:19
program devoted to the key events
0:21
of the week, the events that will
0:23
have an impact on politics in the coming
0:25
weeks and months. In fact, today
0:27
marks the beginning of the final, the last
0:29
week before the presidential election in
0:32
the Russian Federation. Today, in the newspaper
0:34
Moskovskiye Novosti (Moscow News), another
0:36
article by candidate Putin appeared, in which he
0:38
informed us that our friends are Iran and
0:40
Syria, and everyone else is more or less
0:44
our enemy. And today there was also a whole host
0:46
of various
0:49
of news items about the now weeks-long
0:51
cold civil war,
0:52
which, in effect, to all of his
0:54
political opponents was declared by the leading
0:56
candidate.
0:58
And today, I invited into the Echo of Moscow studio
1:02
people who have recently been very
1:04
active in opposition
1:07
politics and, in fact, probably the very people Putin
1:09
was talking about
1:11
at Luzhniki Stadium, at a meeting with his, uh,
1:15
supporters, when he said that there are
1:17
those who run abroad, yes, who,
1:20
well, uh, are ready to betray their homeland.
1:25
I’ll find the exact quote for you in a couple of minutes.
1:27
Well, in any case, it’s clear whom I
1:29
invited into the studio today. Here we have
1:32
Alexei Navalny
1:34
here, well, as you know, the creator of the website
1:38
RosPil, a man who is now already very
1:40
well known in Russian politics, a lawyer
1:42
and politician. Alexei, good evening.
1:43
>> Good evening.
1:44
>> Here is Sergei Udaltsov, leader of the Left
1:46
Front. Sergei, good evening.
1:48
>> Good evening.
1:49
>> Olga Romanova, a member of the League of Voters.
1:51
In fact, that remarkable event yesterday
1:54
on the Garden Ring was organized
1:57
first and foremost by the League of Voters, and its
1:59
representative is here with us in the studio. Olga,
2:00
good evening.
2:01
>> Good evening.
2:02
>> And as an arbitrator, almost
2:05
always I try, if Sergei Maratovich
2:08
Guriev, rector of the New Economic School of Russia
2:09
(Russian Economic School), if fortunately he is in Moscow,
2:12
I mean you, Sergei Maratovich, don’t be alarmed,
2:15
don’t be alarmed, this is not...
2:16
>> We have a big country, we have many smart,
2:18
educated people. Yes, it also seems to me
2:19
that they are all talking about one
2:21
candidate. What is it? I’m saying that we
2:23
have a big country. So, the topic of our,
2:26
today’s program, in fact, I have
2:27
formulated as follows: if Putin
2:29
loses on March 4, we cannot rule that out
2:32
because, uh, the data
2:35
from independent polls that have been conducted
2:38
show that Vladimir Putin has no chance
2:41
of being elected in the first round, according to
2:44
internet polls,
2:46
in fact. And the big,
2:49
the three major polling organizations, they,
2:51
in my view, are solely engaged in
2:52
working for
2:55
a reality, an imagined reality, in order
2:57
to convince people that
2:59
they have no alternative. But here is how
3:01
the internet responds: a poll on the social network
3:03
VKontakte, yes, 500,000 people. It is clear
3:06
that there is no, so to speak, random
3:09
sample here. All the flaws of such a poll are obvious.
3:11
Putin has 25.8%.
3:13
A poll on SBRS 212.ru.
3:18
Putin has 15.6%, and 450,000
3:22
votes were cast. A poll on blogger Rustem
3:24
Adagamov’s page. 10,000 people were surveyed, and
3:29
Putin has 8.1%.
3:32
So the leading
3:34
candidate somehow has simply
3:37
completely different numbers from VTsIOM (the state-run Russian Public Opinion Research Center).
3:39
Levada, FOM: 53.5
3:43
VTsIOM. Levada even gives 66% to 24%.
3:47
According to Levada, Putin’s rating has
3:50
risen over the last two weeks, which, in my view,
3:52
simply does not happen by definition,
3:53
while the Public Opinion Foundation gives him 50%.
3:57
So then, if Putin loses
4:00
the election, which cannot be ruled out, what comes next,
4:03
Alexei Navalny?
4:04
>> Well, there certainly will be no catastrophe.
4:06
We are being conditioned to think, to the idea,
4:08
that something terrible will happen
4:10
without Putin, and that raises the question: "
4:12
What so terrible is happening right now
4:13
as it is?" Right now, by the way,
4:14
the president is not Putin at all. And quite
4:17
recently we were being told that Putin was not even
4:19
planning to become president, and perhaps
4:20
Medvedev would even continue his
4:22
presidency. And there was no catastrophe.
4:24
Medvedev headed the United Russia party lists,
4:26
and all those Kremlin
4:29
media mouthpieces were saying: "How
4:30
wonderful: we don’t need Putin at all,
4:31
let him go off to Gelendzhik, and Medvedev
4:33
will continue to rule." Nothing terrible
4:35
will happen. We live in a state where
4:37
there are at least some institutions, there is
4:39
a government, there is the State
4:40
Duma. As the opposition, what do you
4:43
propose? Let’s say that during the night, somehow,
4:47
we learn by five a.m. that he did not get enough under the law.
4:51
If he doesn’t make it to the second round, you see,
4:53
>> maybe he won’t, judging by
4:54
the internet, he isn’t making it to the second
4:56
round. Well, let’s suppose he does make it to the second
4:58
round, or someone wins, someone, someone
5:00
wins in the first round.
5:01
>> Well, nothing terrible will happen. The
5:03
Constitution lays everything out; the scenario
5:04
is prescribed. So the candidate who
5:06
wins will form his own
5:08
government, and will face the
5:09
State Duma (the lower house of Russia’s parliament), where, apparently,
5:11
there will be serious opposition to him, and he will
5:13
have to look for support in that State
5:14
Duma. It seems he will be forced
5:16
to create a coalition government,
5:18
which will govern our country, and I’m
5:20
sure it will do so no worse than
5:22
Putin is governing it now, because,
5:23
frankly speaking, he does absolutely
5:25
nothing except, well, fishing up amphorae and
5:28
staging assassination attempts against himself. At
5:30
least at this level, certainly,
5:32
the country could perfectly well be run by any
5:34
of those currently taking part in the election.
5:36
>> Yes, I forgot to mention that today there was
5:38
a report saying that an
5:40
assassination attempt on Vladimir Putin was being prepared. There are now
5:42
all sorts of incredible stories going around about how
5:44
it was being planned somewhere in London,
5:46
then they came to Odesa, then they
5:48
blew themselves up. In short, well, there is
5:50
far too little information to make
5:53
a definite conclusion. In any case, we
5:54
journalists cannot draw a definite
5:56
conclusion about what actually
5:57
happened there. Sergei Udaltsov, Putin
5:59
loses the election. What happens next?
6:01
>> Well, first of all, I’m glad that neither we nor
6:03
I have been accused of preparing an attempt on
6:05
Putin. That in itself is encouraging.
6:07
>> Wait, not yet
6:07
>> It’s progress, but let’s knock on wood, yes, let’s knock on wood.
6:11
Well, more seriously, I think if
6:13
this happens—that is, Putin does not
6:15
win in the first round, and if he
6:17
doesn’t win at all, doesn’t make it to the second
6:18
round—I think there will be at least a week
6:21
of public celebrations. It wasn’t for nothing that we even filed an application for March 8 (International Women’s Day),
6:23
just in case, with the
6:25
mayor’s office. We understand that this kind of
6:28
outcome is possible. No matter how much they try to convince us that everything
6:30
has already been decided, I agree 100% that this is
6:33
propaganda. According to our data as well, from various
6:36
sources—not just the polls you mentioned—
6:38
no more than 35%—that’s the ceiling, from my
6:41
information. So a second round is
6:44
inevitable. Who will be in it besides
6:46
Putin?
6:48
I think Zyuganov. And that’s not
6:50
because I’m his authorized representative. I’m
6:52
just reasoning from common sense.
6:55
And after that, everything is very simple. On this point, one can agree with
6:57
Alexei, and everyone understands
6:59
it. There is no catastrophe if
7:01
there is a second round. And all the more so if
7:03
if
7:04
>> Zyuganov won’t withdraw.
7:05
>> All the more so if another candidate wins immediately
7:07
in this case; I
7:09
think that would most likely be
7:10
Zyuganov. Back at Bolotnaya Square (a major Moscow protest site),
7:12
on February 4 we formulated the minimum demands for any candidate:
7:15
the release of political prisoners,
7:18
political reform—a real one,
7:20
not the half-measure that Medvedev is
7:22
submitting to the State Duma today,
7:24
but a full-fledged one—uh, early parliamentary
7:27
elections in a year and early presidential
7:29
elections in about two years.
7:32
In principle, all the candidates agree
7:34
with this. I’m not talking about Putin, I mean
7:36
the others. So if someone else comes
7:38
to power, a coalition
7:40
government is inevitable. I’ve actually got a newspaper here with me—
7:41
well, no one will see it, but I’ll just
7:43
show it. The Communist Party of the Russian Federation already has a list
7:47
for a coalition government ready. And,
7:49
by the way, Alexei is on it too.
7:52
As for Olga, though, I think that hasn’t
7:54
been fully worked out
7:57
for the service. No, I insist—that’s my
8:01
Federal Penitentiary Service
8:03
under any government, I mean. Do you
8:05
want to head the
8:07
dream ministry? Let me just finish one thought.
8:10
In other words, whether another candidate wins or
8:12
there is a second round with another candidate,
8:14
it will amount to the same thing, because everyone
8:15
understands that a coalition needs to be formed
8:17
for such a transition
8:19
to happen. Now imagine this: the second round
8:22
takes place. Putin makes it into the second round,
8:24
and so does Zyuganov. And Zyuganov—Zyuganov
8:27
could simply withdraw in that situation. And
8:30
Mikhail Leontyev, in an interview with our
8:32
magazine, in a discussion with Olga Romanova,
8:34
actually said that if Zyuganov, God forbid,
8:36
wins, he will immediately acknowledge
8:37
his defeat.
8:39
>> You know, yes, those kinds of fears do
8:42
exist. Still, I speak quite a lot
8:44
with Zyuganov.
8:46
He would never do such a thing. I’m
8:47
sure of that, and we won’t allow it—I’m not speaking
8:50
personally just about myself, but everyone around him simply will not
8:52
let him show that kind of weakness. And I have
8:54
Still, there is a feeling, if we're talking
8:56
about Zyuganov, that he now has
8:58
an understanding that this is, perhaps,
9:00
his last chance to play seriously and go down
9:03
in history on a positive note. On a very
9:05
positive note. So, so I think
9:08
all of us together simply will not allow
9:10
Zyuganov, or anyone else, to betray us and
9:12
sell us out.
9:13
>> Olga Romanova,
9:15
>> You are with the League of Voters, you are a civic
9:16
activist. So, we've already understood that you
9:18
want the post of head of the Federal
9:20
Penitentiary Service
9:21
>> under any government.
9:22
>> Under any government. What will you do
9:25
>> with Ovsyan?
9:26
>> Yes,
9:27
>> Reform it, of course. What else would I do there?
9:29
Of course, also
9:30
>> Matrosskaya Tishina will be closed.
9:32
Butyrka will be closed first and foremost.
9:33
Matrosskaya Tishina will be closed. Out of
9:36
the center of Moscow. Out of Moscow. And Kresty
9:39
out of St. Petersburg.
9:41
By the way, just like the president out of the Kremlin.
9:42
>> Uh-huh.
9:43
>> A museum.
9:43
>> Someone will get offended now and say this goes far
9:45
beyond the scope of the program.
9:46
>> I said the president. Yes.
9:49
>> So, Putin loses. Do you, among
9:52
civic activists, have any
9:54
idea of what will happen?
9:56
>> A mass surrender? I think it's not that
9:58
he loses, but that he falls just short of
10:01
fifty percent. And I don't know how Alexei
10:03
Navalny will cope with the flood of people wanting
10:05
to tell him what, where, when, account
10:08
numbers. And of course there must be
10:13
someone to blame for Prosecutor Petrovich,
10:15
yes, and it won't be him. And
10:18
people will be trying to guess, people will be
10:21
racing each other to run and tell everything,
10:24
because they will run in any case. They
10:27
will run in any case. It's just that if he wins,
10:29
they'll run a little later, when
10:31
Count Panin, putting on a white silk scarf,
10:34
goes for an evening stroll across Palace
10:36
Square.
10:37
>> All right. But what will happen with the transfer
10:38
of power? Do you remember? Well, you don't remember, right?
10:40
And I don't remember either, but since it's written in books,
10:43
that when Stalin died—by the way, on March 5,
10:45
the anniversary of Stalin's death, right? And when
10:48
Stalin died, people cried and said, 'What will
10:50
become of us?' When Leonid
10:53
Ilyich Brezhnev died, I do remember that,
10:55
the Izvestia newspaper building was surrounded
10:57
by armored vehicles and tanks, and again everyone said:
10:59
'What will happen now?' But then began, as
11:01
is well known, the 'race on gun carriages' (a sardonic phrase for the rapid succession of Soviet leaders' funerals). We had
11:04
Andropov
11:06
and Chernenko, right? And again everyone asked what
11:09
would happen. Then Gorbachev came, and when suddenly
11:12
the question arose that this whole era was coming
11:15
to an end, everyone again asked
11:17
the question: 'What will happen?' So what will happen,
11:19
Olya?
11:20
>> Well, in any case, we definitely won't be bored.
11:22
>> Well, do you have any idea of what
11:24
will happen—how power will be formed,
11:26
what the chekists (security-service men) will do,
11:28
who, after all, now hold
11:30
enormous assets in their hands?
11:32
>> Well, one chekist is not the same as another.
11:34
>> Of course, Olya, I mean the ones who have
11:35
assets, yes. I'm talking about business. Not
11:38
the ones who have the country on the hook
11:40
or—well, never mind.
11:41
>> But no, Bortnikov has already told us
11:46
quite clearly: comrades chekists, those who haven't yet
11:48
registered things in their wives' and mothers-in-law's names, do
11:50
it quickly, as quickly as possible.
11:53
Because selling off foreign
11:55
property—well, that's amusing. It's,
11:56
of course, very, very funny. Very.
11:58
>> Olya, do I understand correctly that in the League
11:59
of Voters this isn't even being discussed—that
12:01
you aren't even discussing a scenario for a transfer
12:04
of power? No, well, the League of Voters isn't
12:06
set up for that. The League of Voters—well, there
12:09
are civic activists there, and they may be
12:11
interested in questions of what happens
12:13
if they observe the elections so successfully
12:15
that the question arises whether
12:17
Putin does not win the election.
12:20
Right now the League of Voters is more occupied
12:22
precisely with the process of monitoring
12:23
the elections. I'll tell you honestly,
12:26
for example, I spent the last two
12:27
weeks fighting with the Federal Penitentiary
12:29
Service over monitoring at Butyrka. For the
12:31
voting, I seem to have gotten permission. Uh-huh.
12:34
We'll see on Sunday how it goes.
12:36
But for now, this is what is keeping us very busy.
12:39
>> Uh-huh. All right. Thank you, Olya. I gather that
12:41
you'll be put in charge of everything, right? Maybe Putin will
12:43
hear you.
12:44
>> Sergei Guriev, you've just heard
12:47
the answers from three opposition representatives.
12:49
>> What do you say?
12:50
>> Well, I think they do not
12:52
contradict one another. I think that whoever wins,
12:56
that is the person to whom Putin will hand over power. He said so himself:
12:57
'If I'm not elected, I'll leave.'
13:01
And, it must be said, we have seen this
13:02
recently. When Primakov was
13:04
prime minister, in effect
13:07
we had a left-wing government, and
13:09
it turned out there was no catastrophe at all.
13:10
At first it seemed there would be a catastrophe,
13:12
it turned out there was no catastrophe. There is nothing
13:14
good about this, from my point of view,
13:16
if we end up with a left-wing government. But
13:19
it is probably better to have a democratically
13:21
elected government, whatever it may
13:23
be. Especially since now, apparently,
13:25
the government will be a coalition one in the
13:27
event that Putin loses either in
13:29
the first or the second vote—in the second round.
13:32
Right. And secondly, obviously, this
13:34
minimum set of demands for candidates will be required of
13:36
any winning candidate, because
13:39
this whole process is now structured in such a way
13:42
roughly like it was during perestroika (the Soviet-era reform period).
13:44
It is no longer possible to stop the process that
13:46
is underway, and it simply can no longer be turned
13:49
back. People are demanding from candidates
13:51
honest elections, and genuinely
13:54
the release of political prisoners,
13:56
and a real political
13:57
reform. Apparently, this will end with early
13:59
parliamentary elections, because,
14:02
any democratically elected
14:04
president will raise questions about
14:05
the December elections, will look into how many
14:07
videos are actually stored on
14:08
American servers, and will conduct
14:11
an investigation. If it turns out that the State Duma
14:12
is illegitimate, then they will probably have to hold
14:14
new elections at some point.
14:16
It seems to me that we saw all of this during
14:19
perestroika as well—it also happened
14:20
faster than anyone might have thought.
14:22
>> Thank you, Alexei Navalny. And yet
14:24
you
14:27
know better than anyone how much
14:29
property is concentrated in the hands of
14:31
the people who today make up
14:33
the ruling class—what we call
14:36
the collective Putin. So what will happen to that?
14:39
How can these people leave
14:41
power? How can they possibly give up
14:42
power?
14:43
>> The collective Putin will fall apart as soon as
14:45
the real, singular Putin
14:47
is gone. There is no need to exaggerate
14:49
the importance or influence of these
14:51
people. Yes, they have—well, right now they
14:53
ride around in black Mercedes cars with flashing lights,
14:55
and they have billion-dollar accounts. But
14:57
most likely, the scenario for these people
14:59
will simply be to head off to those
15:01
billion-dollar accounts until we
15:03
catch up with them somewhere and arrest them. We will
15:04
demand the extradition of these people. And on their own
15:07
they cannot organize anything
15:08
by themselves. That is precisely why they have
15:11
grabbed Putin and chained him with an iron chain to
15:13
the Kremlin,
15:14
>> the galleys.
15:15
>> To the galleys, exactly. Because they
15:17
understand that without him—that is exactly why
15:19
they are even afraid to leave Medvedev in place,
15:21
because that makes their whole structure
15:22
less stable. They are completely
15:25
dependent on Putin. No Putin, no
15:27
these people. And I do not think they have
15:29
enough—I don't know—strength, courage,
15:31
or whatever else, to somehow, I don't know, with weapons
15:33
in hand, defend their money, because
15:35
they understand perfectly well that neither the army nor
15:37
the security services will take up arms
15:39
against the population to defend their accounts in
15:41
Swiss banks. Take Sergei
15:43
Kolesnikov, for example, whom I
15:45
met, and whose materials we
15:49
published in The Times; it is called
15:52
"A Very Specific Candidate." So,
15:55
he says that, in fact,
15:58
he realized that Putin cannot really
16:01
order many of them around. For example, he
16:03
says that Putin cannot order
16:04
Chemezov, Putin cannot order
16:06
Golikova, because each of them
16:08
has their own turf.
16:10
And in fact, in this corporation
16:12
that has been built around Putin, yes, he
16:15
does not have absolute power, and very often
16:18
he has to make certain
16:21
compromises with members of this corporation.
16:23
>> Well, exactly, Putin is not Stalin; he has
16:24
a completely different system of rule. He is
16:27
a fairly flexible person. He governs
16:29
through compromises. He never fires
16:31
anyone. He takes care of his people, and so on.
16:33
But again, there is no need to exaggerate.
16:35
This whole Putin gang,
16:37
to put it crudely, consists of
16:40
at most 30 families. All these people
16:42
can simply be counted one by one
16:44
and written down in a little black notebook.
16:46
There is no need to think that these are some kind of
16:47
giant clans. This is a limited
16:50
group of people who have already
16:51
intermarried and are bound by family
16:53
ties, and so on. They have created their own
16:55
little feudal estate. And this
16:57
feudal estate will very quickly
16:58
fall apart and scatter when their
17:00
chief boss is gone.
17:02
>> One more question. And yet,
17:06
there is Vladimir Gelman, a professor
17:08
at the European University in
17:09
St. Petersburg, a specialist in
17:10
authoritarian regimes. He believes that
17:14
the current clan of siloviki (security-service hardliners) will never
17:16
give up power, because their money
17:18
depends on holding office. Yes, if they lose office,
17:23
they lose control over the pipeline, over
17:25
Gazprom, and so on and so forth.
17:26
>> But what does it mean not to give up power?
17:28
Suppose Putin vanished tomorrow,
17:30
the Martians abducted him, and then what? Patrushev and
17:32
Bortnikov walk into the Kremlin and on Channel One
17:34
say that now they are the power in
17:36
Russia. Well, everyone would laugh at that, and Sergei
17:39
Udaltsov would walk into the Kremlin the next
17:41
day. I mean, that would just be ridiculous to everyone, right? And
17:43
in any case there are, there are certain
17:45
figures who could make a claim.
17:48
For example, in this setup Medvedev is
17:50
someone who could make a bid
17:51
within the Putin system; or, well, I don't
17:53
know, Rogozin, if you see him
17:55
as part of the Putin system, he could
17:57
try to use
17:58
public politics to take away part of
18:01
>> the power. But these just sort of
18:03
gray, faceless officers can't really
18:05
do anything.
18:05
>> Alexei, thank you. We're going to
18:07
take a break now, then we'll come back to
18:08
the Moscow studio.
18:13
>> Uh-huh.
18:16
>> Subscribe—who are you, from the Kremlin?
18:19
>> No, you have to, you have to put it in the candidate minimum
18:20
that you'll be leaving the Kremlin too.
18:23
>> Let it be in a museum, and in Butyrka (a Moscow prison), in
18:25
the Kremlin.
18:25
>> I agree with you. All right, just remember
18:30
the second plane arrived somewhere today.
18:33
>> That's for all the other programs. That's all
18:35
the other programs about this, which are outside
18:41
>> we'll definitely come back to this, I
18:43
promise you. Right now I want everyone to know that, just
18:46
in case, no one should relax.
18:49
>> And if happiness
18:52
>> Zhenya? So what exactly is your question? Will he lose
18:54
in the first round, lose in the second? I don't
18:56
understand.
18:57
>> No, I understand, but the way you're asking the question,
18:59
it's very hard to answer.
19:00
>> There will be a second round, which he will win.
19:02
There will be a second round where he loses. He
19:05
won't make it to the second round. He loses.
19:07
>> What do you mean? Are we talking about the first or
19:08
the second round? The point is, the president will be
19:11
a different person. Okay. Fine.
19:13
>> If he goes to a second round, then that is
19:16
basically a referendum scenario.
19:22
It seems to me,
19:23
>> some of his staff will be
19:25
unhappy that they failed to secure
19:26
a first-round victory. He will be satisfied...
19:29
...
19:30
>> Katya, you must agree that the risks are very
19:32
high if it really turns into a referendum. This
19:35
you all know—this is Ekaterina Zhuravskaya
19:37
speaking
19:39
about Putin. No, I think he
19:41
will win. Well, in the second round, more likely.
19:47
>> I think he will win and be more
19:48
legitimate.
19:50
A mistake. The first round is a big mistake.
19:56
>> People will think: "Sure, they stole 10%
19:58
or 20%, but he still would have won anyway."
20:01
>> Putin remembers the story of Sobchak's second round.
20:03
"
20:06
He is certainly not planning to
20:08
lose in the second round.
20:11
Sobchak won 44 or 48% in the
20:16
first round and then lost in the second to Yakovlev, who
20:17
had polled 22%. Putin was the campaign chief,
20:22
so Sobchak, who was
20:24
obviously stronger than Yakovlev, still lost—that's
20:27
a serious trauma, of course.
20:34
Everyone went off to their dachas (country houses), everyone understood that
20:37
there would be popular unrest.
20:39
How interesting: in Poland, criminals
20:41
cut it into pieces and sold it for
20:43
scrap metal—a functioning bridge that belonged
20:45
to one of the mines in
20:52
Silesia.
20:59
>> Tonight in Moscow: -6 to -8°C; tomorrow daytime: -3
21:03
to -5°C, cloudy, with light snow in places. The news service
21:06
has nothing more to cut up.
21:08
If we put things in order, more will come in. Our
21:10
fight against corruption.
21:13
>> RTVI television and Echo of Moscow radio
21:17
present the program
21:19
>> Full Albats.
21:22
>> Good evening once again. It is 22:33 on the air at
21:24
Echo of Moscow radio. The television company
21:26
RTVI. In the Echo of Moscow studio are Alexei
21:28
Navalny, Sergei Udaltsov, Olga
21:30
Romanova—by now already well-known politicians,
21:33
civil activists—and Sergei Guriev,
21:35
rector of the New Economic School (a Russian university),
21:37
who, I believe, is still
21:39
the only truly sober mind in this
21:40
studio.
21:42
Interesting.
21:45
>> But definitely not a politician.
21:46
>> He is not a politician. He is not a politician. And we
21:48
are discussing, of course, a completely
21:50
remarkable topic: what will happen
21:52
if Putin loses the election? Such a chance
21:54
does exist, yes, in any frame of reference.
21:58
That chance exists. And just now my
21:59
colleagues reminded me that in 1995
22:02
in St. Petersburg, Anatoly Sobchak
22:06
did not get 50% in the first round, though he did get
22:10
more than his opponent, Mr.
22:11
Yakovlev, and in the second round he lost to that
22:13
same Yakovlev. The campaign chief
22:16
in St. Petersburg at the time,
22:18
Sobchak's campaign chief, was Vladimir
22:20
Putin.
22:21
That, of course, shows the fears that
22:25
are now, of course, occupying the minds of people
22:27
in Putin's inner circle, and Putin himself as well.
22:29
Sergei Udaltsov, and before...
22:33
Ahead of the presidential election, there were serious moves made.
22:36
Salaries were raised.
22:38
For FSB employees (Federal Security Service), the starting salary was set at 60,000 rubles,
22:42
for staff members, which means
22:45
for an army lieutenant, the starting, uh,
22:48
salary is 40,000 rubles.
22:50
And for police officers,
22:52
the starting salary is 35,000 rubles. At least
22:54
that is what was allocated
22:57
in the budget, well, in the defense
23:01
budget, yes. But tell me, please,
23:04
how do you think, in this
23:06
situation, the security and law-enforcement wing of
23:10
the current government might behave if Putin loses?
23:13
After all, for them he is a leader, for them he is
23:15
the man who all this time
23:18
has been raising their status, increasing pensions,
23:21
salaries, and so on.
23:23
>> Well, yes, I see. By a twist of fate, lately I have
23:26
been speaking quite a lot with
23:28
law-enforcement officers.
23:31
Both rank-and-file personnel and middle-level ones. Well, not the top brass,
23:33
of course, I have not spoken with.
23:34
>> Was that mainly in a SIZO (pre-trial detention center) that you spoke with them like that?
23:35
?
23:36
>> No, over the past few years I have often
23:38
had to meet with them. I will say
23:40
quite honestly, as an expert on this
23:42
issue, there is absolutely no
23:45
respect or reverence for the current
23:48
government, and specifically for the highest
23:50
officials. No, because
23:53
even these recent pay increases
23:55
of late—we have to understand that all
23:57
this is happening against the backdrop of this, so to speak,
24:00
transformation of the militsiya into the police, when
24:03
under the guise of recertification
24:06
the entire management layer stayed in place. These
24:09
well-fed gentlemen remained in their
24:12
chairs, while those being cut were, and often
24:14
on rather, shall we say, dubious
24:16
grounds, the people actually working on the ground.
24:18
Some were fired. That leaves resentment, right? They
24:21
still have friends on the ground, and, well,
24:24
those who stayed in the system are still working, but
24:26
the workload has increased many times over. Right now
24:28
there is a staffing shortage, and this increase in
24:30
pay—which, let us not forget,
24:32
is being eaten up by inflation and other, so to speak,
24:34
rises in tariffs and fees. None of that has
24:36
gone away. So this raise turns out not to be so
24:38
significant after all. On top of that, the
24:41
workload has increased, and of course the climate in
24:43
the country—the moral climate, as it is now—is
24:45
no good at all. So I am not merely
24:48
convinced, I am certain that 99%
24:51
of the personnel of our law-enforcement
24:53
agencies, if they see that
24:56
the people are truly ready to change the government, that the people are
25:00
really out in the streets, will not go against the people
25:03
—100 percent. Therefore our task is
25:06
a small one, well, but a very important one,
25:08
namely, that we all be out in the streets. Therefore
25:10
right now, when discussing the possibility that Putin
25:13
might not win, in order to monitor
25:16
the election process as thoroughly as possible, so that it is
25:18
guaranteed, we must not
25:19
relax now. On the one hand, we must not
25:22
believe this propaganda, which
25:23
insists that Putin’s victory in the
25:25
first round is inevitable, and on the other hand,
25:27
of course, we must not fall into the illusion that
25:29
everything will happen by itself and Putin
25:30
will lose. On March 4, I once again ask everyone
25:33
who has not yet signed up as an election observer,
25:35
Alexei is doing enormous work in this
25:37
area, and all the parties,
25:39
>> RosVybory and Saida,
25:40
>> yes, and the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, they are all working together here
25:43
on this. It is Observer, Golos (an election-monitoring movement),
25:44
>> yes. All polling stations in the major cities
25:46
—Muscovites especially—need to be fully staffed so that we
25:48
cover every polling station. By evening, I have already voiced this
25:51
idea: it could be a kind of
25:53
spontaneous self-organization in your own
25:55
neighborhood. Make arrangements with your neighbors, just as
25:58
during the White Ring protest, when no one was really
26:00
directing the process and people simply came out. The same should happen
26:02
here: in the evening, come to your
26:04
polling station with your neighbors; let 10 to 15
26:06
people gather there. In the last election, in
26:08
December, by evening they began
26:11
throwing observers out of polling stations en masse, simply under
26:13
various pretexts. There must be
26:15
people there who will provide moral support if
26:17
needed, and who will start drawing attention,
26:19
calling, posting online. We need to track this
26:21
situation and, in the event of any
26:23
violations, amplify it. And, of course,
26:25
then on March 5 we are continuing
26:28
negotiations with Moscow City Hall. I hope they
26:30
will ultimately end in an agreement that
26:32
we will have an officially sanctioned rally. No one
26:34
wants any sort of conflict,
26:36
bloodshed or excesses, I think. And
26:39
the Interior Ministry officers mentioned earlier also very much
26:42
do not want that.
26:43
>> And are the negotiations continuing? Yes.
26:44
>> They are, yes. For now, our application
26:46
has been filed for Lubyanka Square at 7:00 p.m. That is
26:48
our reference point for now. The only alternative
26:51
for us could only be some
26:53
central square nearby, close to
26:55
the Kremlin, close to the city center. Well, there is
26:57
Manezhnaya Square, there is Vasilyevsky
26:59
Spusk, although that is unlikely. We, I
27:01
think, will finish the negotiations within the next day or two.
27:03
In any case, on the fifth we
27:05
must be out on the streets. And that is precisely
27:07
what will guarantee that, if there are many of us,
27:10
no law enforcement agencies,
27:11
will carry out any punitive operations against
27:13
the people. I am
27:15
convinced of that.
27:16
>> Thank you, Olga Romanova. There are a great many
27:18
questions here. I have once again received an incredible
27:21
number of questions about
27:23
what strategy people should choose
27:25
for March 4. How should people
27:27
vote if they do not want
27:30
to vote for a candidate who is being
27:32
literally shoved down their throats? And
27:35
what course of action should they
27:37
choose?
27:38
>> Well, my favorite concept is called
27:40
The Pinnacles of Russian Suprematism. Four
27:43
White Squares. That is, there is one black
27:46
square, the fifth one, and there are four white ones. Well,
27:48
the black square is obvious. The Black
27:50
Square, Malevich, the end of history,
27:52
>> Fukuyama. That is Vladimir Putin. Absolutely,
27:55
yes, what is there to explain.
27:57
>> Ah, the four white squares. That is the story
27:59
of Hegel. Fukuyama stole it from him.
28:01
Never mind. Let's continue. So,
28:03
>> no, no
28:05
these are not names, these are not platforms, of which there
28:08
hardly are any.
28:08
>> So, what should people do after all? Leave all the
28:11
little boxes blank or make them all
28:13
black? What should they do? Those four
28:15
white squares are a window. You choose
28:17
any pane. What difference does it make? You need
28:19
to open it. You need to open the window. Open
28:23
any vent. There are four little vents, or
28:25
should you not mark a box?
28:26
>> Mark a box. One box. One
28:31
>> any one.
28:33
>> I would still mark any box with my eyes
28:36
closed. Alexei Navalny, when
28:38
>> Just don't miss, Olga,
28:39
>> oh, come on,
28:41
I'll cover it with my finger, just so, God forbid, I don't.
28:43
>> Olga, let me give you some advice. Toss
28:45
a coin, without closing your eyes, don't, don't mark
28:48
the box blindly. You might miss.
28:50
>> Alexei Navalny, before December 4 once
28:52
you came out with the slogan, 'Not a single vote
28:54
for the party of crooks and thieves.' And, in fact,
28:56
in my deep conviction, and Sergey Gurev and I
28:58
have discussed this, um, in
29:01
many ways it was this strategy that prevented
29:04
United Russia from securing either a constitutional
29:08
majority
29:10
or even a simple one—well, that is, they do not have a majority
29:11
if the votes are recounted, but they failed
29:13
to get one. So what strategy should people
29:18
follow now on February 4—sorry, on March 4?
29:21
Sorry,
29:21
>> this is a question of tactics. The tactics have not
29:23
changed. Our strategic
29:25
goal is honest, free elections.
29:27
If we want to achieve that now, then
29:29
the best tactical move will be to come
29:31
to the polls and vote for any
29:33
candidate against the candidate of the party
29:34
of crooks and thieves, Vladimir Putin. We know
29:36
his name. And this is not an election, it is
29:39
simply a kind of event. At this event
29:41
we need to create stress for the authorities. There was
29:43
stress on December 4. In fact, they
29:45
could not handle it. The authorities slid into
29:48
monstrous falsifications that drove
29:51
people into the streets. At first they tried
29:52
to arrest everyone—on the 5th, on the 6th
29:55
to beat them—and by the 10th they were already
29:56
offering us some vision of their
29:58
political reform. We need
29:59
to intensify that stress, and the system will not
30:01
withstand it. Increasing the stress means voting
30:04
for any person against Putin; for
30:06
whom exactly does not matter in the slightest.
30:08
If you have a preference—Zyuganov,
30:10
Prokhorov—by all means. If you have no preference,
30:13
choose completely at random. Toss
30:14
a coin.
30:15
>> But in the parliamentary elections, you yourself
30:16
wrote about this: voting 'against all' (a former option on Russian ballots)
30:19
made no sense. Remember, there was such a
30:21
strategy, because when
30:23
the votes were recalculated
30:25
And now, choosing between voting against all
30:27
and voting for any candidate except Putin, how
30:30
>> we simply have to assess, rationally once again,
30:32
the pros and cons. If I say,
30:34
'vote for anyone against Putin,'
30:37
then, for example, Communist Party activists agree with me and
30:40
will support this idea, and we get
30:42
a huge number of free
30:43
promoters of our idea. But if I say:
30:45
"Let's spoil our ballots," well, then
30:47
Sergei Udaltsov will start arguing with me and say:
30:48
"No, it's better to vote for Zyuganov
30:49
instead." And what is the point right now
30:51
for me and for all of us to argue with Udaltsov if we
30:54
want exactly the same thing as he does: new
30:56
free elections? Therefore we must
30:57
choose the strategy that will be,
31:00
organically supported by the majority of
31:02
political activists, by other
31:04
candidates, and so on. Well, there is a lot
31:07
I could say about Prokhorov, about
31:08
Zyuganov, about Mironov, but that has
31:10
not the slightest relevance right now. You are
31:12
not voting for some particular person; you are
31:14
voting against Putin, for fair
31:16
elections. Yes, apart from apart from holding
31:18
of the campaign, there was another logic at work there as well.
31:21
The logic lies in the vote count. At every
31:23
polling station, there will be observers representing the candidates.
31:25
Accordingly,
31:27
they will have an incentive to count the votes cast for
31:29
their own candidates and make sure that not
31:31
a single ballot cast in their
31:33
favor is lost.
31:33
>> Not exactly. Today I was listening,
31:35
just a second, today I was listening to Nikita
31:37
Belykh, the governor of Kirov Region.
31:40
He was saying that they will have cameras
31:44
and that roughly 15% will be without cameras
31:46
at polling stations in the remote parts of Kirov Region.
31:48
Alexei will confirm that for us now, right? And
31:51
that means that in quite a number of remote areas
31:54
of Kirov Region there is no
31:55
broadband internet at all.
31:57
Accordingly, they will need
31:58
satellite communications there. And as I understand it,
32:00
that will be the case at at least 30%.
32:03
>> Well, the numbers are roughly like that. At 20% of polling stations
32:06
the cameras will record, and at
32:08
eighty percent they really will be transmitting to the
32:10
internet.
32:10
>> How, if for that you need
32:12
broadband internet?
32:13
>> In 80% of the country there is—well, Zhenya, come on,
32:16
>> No. There isn't, there isn't, no. Well, as you say,
32:19
there isn't across the country. They will be forced to, they will need
32:22
satellite communications.
32:23
>> And what difference does it make in terms of how
32:25
to vote?
32:25
>> Zhenya, Zhenya, that’s not what I’m talking about.
32:28
Indeed, Vladimir Putin took
32:29
a big step forward and said: "I want
32:31
fair elections, let’s install
32:33
webcams." But at the same time as these
32:35
elections, municipal elections are also taking place,
32:37
where it is not necessarily in a local official’s interest
32:40
not to inflate turnout.
32:45
I’ll ask a question.
32:47
Thank you very much. So, what I’m really interested in is this:
32:50
you, uh, are well
32:52
versed in game theory. So in
32:55
this situation, when we want to achieve
32:57
fair elections, and whoever comes to
32:59
power, including Putin, yes, we
33:02
would like that to be done
33:03
honestly. What is
33:07
the strategy for a rational voter?
33:09
What I was trying, trying to tell you is that
33:11
it seems to me that if you want
33:13
more observers to count honestly,
33:16
you should vote not against everyone, but for
33:18
one of the candidates you prefer.
33:19
Vote for Putin. Then the people
33:22
who support Putin will make sure
33:23
that this ballot is not torn up or
33:25
thrown away. Vote for any other
33:27
candidate. Observers from those
33:29
candidates will also keep watch and help,
33:31
because even with these cameras, we can already see
33:33
what is being written. Let’s say,
33:36
for example, let’s do this: just in case, before
33:38
the start, we discreetly spray
33:40
the webcam with clear varnish, or cut
33:42
the electricity, or knock it over. It is clear that
33:44
webcams are not all-powerful and they are not
33:45
protected against outright fraud.
33:48
That is why an observer who is there
33:50
will help. Creating incentives for that
33:52
observer is actually very simple:
33:53
do as Alexei says.
33:55
>> But there won’t be observers everywhere.
33:57
>> That’s true. That’s true.
34:01
From what Nikita said, I understood that in all sorts of remote
34:06
parts of Russia, of which we have a great many,
34:08
>> there will be no observers at all. Given the real possibilities,
34:11
it is clear that
34:12
there won’t be any, and the results in the hinterland
34:14
will be totally falsified.
34:15
Nevertheless, most of the country lives
34:17
in large cities. Where were the main
34:19
falsifications in the last election?
34:21
In Moscow, where we have
34:23
the ability to place two observers
34:25
at every polling station at
34:26
minimum. So why should we worry
34:28
about the fact that there won’t be any in remote areas? Well, if there is no
34:30
possibility, then there is no possibility,
34:32
we need to do what we can. We have
34:34
16,000 observers registered, while there are
34:36
90,000 polling stations in the country.
34:38
They will be in Moscow and St. Petersburg. And in general, in
34:40
the big
34:41
>> well, at least in the Rosvybory project,
34:42
there will be about 5,000 observers in
34:44
Moscow. I hope all of them show up.
34:46
So we need to mobilize the resources
34:48
that we have, without worrying about what
34:50
we won’t be able to do. We need to give it
34:52
everything we’ve got.
34:53
>> So, I’d like to put this on record. You,
34:54
Sergei, believe that voting against
34:57
everyone is a possible strategy, but it is
35:00
a risky one, because in a situation where there are no
35:02
observers, then
35:04
>> if there are no observers, still, if there are
35:06
some observers, uh, who
35:08
can help you count the votes correctly,
35:10
then they are more likely to count a vote
35:11
cast for their candidate than one cast
35:14
against everyone.
35:14
>> So it is more rational, after all, to make
35:17
some kind of choice. Sergei Udaltsov, yes,
35:18
please. Yes, you know, back in
35:19
December, and I’m not afraid to say it,
35:21
I was in favor of a boycott. I believed
35:24
that people would not turn out in such numbers,
35:26
that we had to stand on principle and
35:28
at least honestly refuse to let ourselves be drawn into a game
35:30
with cardsharps, right? In other words, the position was
35:32
principled overall, but, as life has shown,
35:34
and I say this without hesitation, it was not
35:37
entirely correct. And all the more so because of these mistakes,
35:40
and now there are also voices saying,
35:42
let's boycott again. Yes,
35:43
of course, the elections are being held under
35:45
legislation that, to put it
35:47
mildly, draws a great deal of criticism. It
35:50
contradicts the Constitution. A great many
35:52
candidates simply were unable to get onto
35:55
the ballot in this election. But given recent
35:58
practice, of course, only
35:59
a voting tactic. There should be one
36:01
tactic. Ideally, the more tactics there are,
36:03
the worse. The simple action is clear: no
36:06
votes for Putin. There are four candidates.
36:09
My position is clear. I have already said whom
36:11
I think people should vote for, but I am not imposing it.
36:13
If you don't like Zyuganov, vote
36:15
for someone else, just not for Putin. Then,
36:17
given that in the major cities we will
36:19
still, I think, ensure oversight
36:21
to the greatest extent possible, uh, a second round will be inevitable.
36:24
In my view, it is inevitable. And with that
36:26
in mind, I propose that everyone on the fourth
36:28
wake up, come out, vote,
36:30
observe the process, and on the fifth come out into the
36:33
streets. And we will simply have to
36:34
record what happens, because if it turns out
36:36
otherwise, then in my view it will be obvious that
36:38
we have simply been deceived again, and after that we
36:40
will have to decide for ourselves what to do
36:42
next.
36:43
>> What would be the signal for you, for each
36:45
of us? For you personally, what would be the
36:47
signal that the election was conducted fairly and
36:49
that Putin simply honestly won
36:52
the election in the first round?
36:53
>> Alexei,
36:54
>> Let's separate these things once again. The election
36:56
is already unfair before the vote count. What we have is
36:58
only the vote count, which can
36:59
be relatively fair or unfair.
37:02
>> Because Yavlinsky has already been barred from
37:04
the election. There's your first formal
37:06
sign. Who else was there? Ivashov, Limonov
37:08
wanted to run, and so on. So we have
37:10
an unfair process,
37:12
>> Right? The process was unfair. No one else
37:14
was targeted. Excuse me, but as for
37:16
Putin, they show him on television all the time,
37:17
so there is no real election anymore. Elections
37:19
should allow, uh, everyone who wants
37:22
to run to do so through some procedure.
37:24
As for the vote count,
37:25
>> Ah, I want to put this on the record. You
37:26
believe that the electoral procedure has not
37:28
been followed, and accordingly the election is already
37:31
a priori illegitimate.
37:33
>> There is no election. The result that will
37:35
be announced on the fourth or fifth, it
37:36
will be illegitimate and unfair. And we
37:38
will not recognize it. This must be understood
37:40
absolutely clearly; one must be fully aware of it. It will not
37:42
be recognized by a significant portion
37:44
of the country's population, and categorically so.
37:46
>> And if there is
37:48
>> if there is a second round, that will give Putin
37:50
more legitimacy, because it will
37:51
mean that
37:52
>> if he wins the second round.
37:53
>> And if he wins the second round, because
37:55
that will mean there were fewer
37:56
violations in the vote count. And
37:59
therefore the person who, possibly,
38:01
wins in the second round, we will still
38:03
demand from him, uh, the holding of new
38:06
fair elections anyway. But that would probably
38:08
reduce the level of public anger in street
38:10
protests. So right now, I repeat,
38:12
we are talking only about the vote count. When
38:14
they stop
38:16
throwing observers out of polling
38:18
stations in the city of Moscow, when the procedure for, for example,
38:20
requesting recordings from those polling-station
38:22
video cameras becomes normal—then
38:24
we will believe in something. For example,
38:25
those video cameras, for me as an
38:27
observer, what are they for? So that
38:29
I can watch video recordings from polling stations in the
38:31
Chechen Republic, where we always have
38:32
100 percent turnout. And I can count heads
38:34
to see whether 2,300 people actually came to
38:36
the polling station—99.5%.
38:38
>> 99.5. Well, do you know what the current
38:40
procedure is for obtaining the footage? I have to
38:42
write a special written request
38:44
explaining exactly why my rights, uh,
38:47
were violated, and that can only be done by
38:49
the person who voted in
38:51
Chechnya at that polling station. But I,
38:52
for example, vote in Marino, Moscow. That
38:54
means that for me, with a probability of
38:56
99%, those recordings will be inaccessible.
38:59
>> But can't a candidate write such a
39:01
letter?
39:01
>> A candidate probably can write such a
39:03
letter. I don't know whether they will write those
39:05
letters. And in any case, he would have to
39:07
explain why at each of, I don't know,
39:08
tens of thousands of polling stations there were
39:11
these violations. But in any
39:14
case, we saw on December 4, quite
39:16
recently, observers being thrown out en masse
39:19
observers, a whole bunch of video recordings on
39:22
American servers showing falsifications
39:23
and so on. That is why we want
39:24
even this formal ritual to be at least
39:27
observed in some way. Alexei, am I right
39:28
in understanding that if Putin, based on the results of
39:32
the first round, is declared the winner,
39:35
the opposition will not recognize it. Am I
39:37
right, Olga Romanova?
39:38
>> Of course not.
39:39
>> Sergei Odoltsov,
39:40
>> Well, as I already said, under a more or less honest
39:42
the country's population, not just the opposition, would not
39:44
recognize a first-round victory. I am sure
39:47
it would not. I think that if the votes are
39:49
counted honestly, there will be no mass protests.
39:51
But I think that what
39:53
>> But what does that mean? Explain what
39:54
honestly means. Well, for example,
39:56
>> they show you results like these.
39:58
>> Well, for example, if suddenly
40:00
all the video recordings are published and suddenly
40:02
it becomes clear that this many people came there,
40:05
we counted them one by one,
40:06
and there turned out to be this many ballots in the box,
40:08
the ballot was filled out in front of the camera,
40:10
photographed, and copies of it were
40:13
distributed by observers.
40:13
>> Well, that is unrealistic. In our country
40:15
there are, after all, 100 million, 100,000, 100,000
40:17
webcams that have been purchased and installed.
40:19
>> There are special programs that
40:21
can automatically,
40:21
>> yes, count people. So, in
40:23
principle, all of this can be done. And
40:25
Vladimir Putin, at least verbally, seems
40:26
to say that this is exactly what he is
40:28
interested in. For you, the result would be
40:30
telling. It would show that, after all,
40:32
>> Do you want to ask me, say,
40:34
if it is 52%, then it is honest, but if it is 53% then
40:37
it is dishonest?
40:38
>> Let me put it this way. If there is no
40:40
evidence of mass violations, then I
40:42
think protest activity will be
40:44
much lower.
40:45
>> Much lower. But as for the numbers themselves, it seems to me
40:48
it is very difficult to pay much attention to them.
40:49
Let me give you a simple fact. Did you
40:51
notice that in the last December
40:53
elections, the forecasts of polling organizations
40:56
matched the results?
40:58
>> Not exactly.
40:59
>> Well, they almost matched. Even though in
41:01
some cities we can
41:03
say that 10% or 15% of the votes were stolen,
41:06
right? And that means that
41:09
the cause-and-effect relationship is the other way around. It is not that
41:11
pollsters are forecasting correctly, but rather that
41:13
the votes are counted in such a way that the pollsters appear to have guessed right.
41:15
If that is the case, then probably it is still too early
41:17
to trust the forecasts. But if
41:19
the counting procedure is followed, I
41:21
think the public will have far fewer
41:22
questions.
41:23
>> Wait. Well, the Levada Center gives, uh, Putin
41:27
>> 66%... 6%.
41:29
>> Well, you see, all these forecasts, 22%,
41:31
>> Zhenya, may I, as a non-politician,
41:34
say that all these figures are still based
41:36
on assumptions about what
41:38
undecided voters will do.
41:39
>> Uh-huh.
41:40
>> These are certain models that do not
41:42
necessarily work well.
41:43
>> They are still somewhere in the sixties there. Then it would have been
41:45
very funny. There is no 66 at all. Zero,
41:49
>> Yes, so these models are, to put it
41:51
mildly, inaccurate.
41:52
>> That is why there are many
41:54
calculations, including large
41:55
representative samples, that give
41:57
Putin 50% among 100% of respondents,
42:01
>> right? And then what will happen with those 20%
42:03
who are undecided? It is unclear.
42:04
Maybe they will all vote for Putin, or
42:06
maybe they will all vote for Zyuganov.
42:08
>> And what about internet polls? The internet is
42:11
absolutely unrepresentative.
42:13
>> No, it is clear what is representative. And
42:15
nevertheless
42:16
>> the blog of Rustam Adagamov,
42:18
is probably read by people who do not
42:20
like Vladimir Putin.
42:22
>> And the VKontakte group has 450,000 people.
42:24
>> A VKontakte group is not representative.
42:26
>> Nobody on the internet likes Vladimir
42:28
Putin. That is simply a fact.
42:31
They are not only on the internet; they are also
42:34
informed people who have
42:37
access to the internet. That means
42:39
they are informed people who get
42:41
their news from there. They do not like Vladimir Putin
42:43
because they simply know more about him
42:44
than people who do not have
42:46
bad things.
42:47
>> More truth, and that means more
42:49
bad things.
42:49
>> Zhenya, may I add something? Right now,
42:52
by the way, amendments are being introduced to
42:53
election legislation. I would honestly
42:54
simply make it law to ban
42:57
the publication of any
42:59
opinion polls during the election campaign. It puts pressure on people.
43:01
That is my deeply held personal conviction.
43:04
>> There simply need to be honest pollsters. And
43:07
they should not be getting their money from a single
43:09
pocket. No, the goal is a noble one, but I would still
43:11
stress that I am not predetermining
43:14
the outcome of the election, but by all indicators I
43:16
also talk to a great many people.
43:19
The indicator of honesty, relatively
43:21
If the vote is fair, there will be a second round. That’s how I see it.
43:23
That’s obvious to me, and I stand by that position.
43:26
A first-round victory, I’m sure, will provoke
43:30
outrage. Even if we don’t manage to gather
43:32
thousands of videos showing
43:34
violations, people on some
43:36
intuitive level understand
43:38
that a first-round victory would most likely
43:40
have been obtained dishonestly. That’s my
43:43
view.
43:44
>> Olya, you’re not a politician. Do you also have the sense
43:45
that among people, even those not
43:48
connected with any political
43:50
parties, Putin’s victory in the first
43:52
round would not be recognized?
43:53
>> Well no, of course. As for
43:55
>> No, of course not—
43:56
>> they won’t recognize it.
43:57
>> They won’t recognize it. So,
43:57
>> of course. How could anyone recognize it? Uh,
44:01
observers will quite definitely be
44:03
thrown out when the votes are counted, no question. But
44:05
if it’s a restricted facility, they’ll simply
44:07
throw us out, just as they’ll throw us out of hospitals, just as
44:09
they’ll throw us out of military, uh, all sorts of
44:13
institutions—they’ll just throw us out. If we can’t
44:15
monitor the army, the navy,
44:18
>> yes,
44:19
>> prisons, hospitals, military units. And
44:22
in a military unit can you—by the way,
44:24
Seryozha, can you at a military unit
44:25
will the Communists be able to monitor, uh, how
44:28
the military vote, the count in military
44:30
facilities at night?
44:31
>> No, that too
44:32
>> at night—how?
44:33
>> it’s unrealistic there.
44:35
>> No one will let us stay.
44:36
>> Well, look, I lived in a military town
44:37
all my life. A polling station
44:39
in a typical military town is most often
44:41
an ordinary polling station, where
44:42
soldiers simply come in like anyone else. There are,
44:43
of course, completely closed ones, with no
44:45
access, but most often ordinary
44:47
observers at a regular polling station, in
44:49
a normal settlement that happens to be
44:50
a military town, can quite plausibly
44:52
do that.
44:53
>> Uh-huh. Li—
44:54
>> But if, if, if there are, if there are
44:56
hundreds of polling stations in Moscow from which
44:58
observers are expelled, then in Moscow on March 5
45:01
tens of thousands of people will come out into the streets.
45:03
people.
45:03
>> Still, about the strategy for March 5—we heard again
45:07
about it after Vladimir
45:09
Putin said at Luzhniki Stadium: “Moscow is ours.”
45:12
And he quoted “Borodino” (Lermontov’s famous patriotic poem about the 1812 war). We
45:13
couldn’t tell whether we were with the French, or whether
45:16
the French are somehow our enemies now. I’m
45:18
completely confused by it, yes. I mean
45:20
the government’s opponents. Somehow we all ended up
45:22
together with the French on the other side.
45:24
>> No need to run off to the left, Zhenya, if
45:26
>> and look abroad. You can look to the right. You
45:29
didn’t forbid us from talking, did you? So, the strategy for March 5:
45:32
March 5. Alexei Navalny
45:33
>> to go out into the streets and protest against
45:36
these unfair elections. And if the authorities do not
45:38
grant any permits, and you understand,
45:41
>> we do not need any permits; after all,
45:42
the Constitution guarantees us the right
45:45
to assemble peacefully and without weapons. So
45:47
we will gather on the evening of the fifth, peacefully
45:49
and unarmed, in order to make clear
45:51
our position, our civic protest.
45:53
We are demanding only fair, free
45:55
elections. We are not demanding that everyone be given
45:56
chocolate, or money. We are demanding
45:59
fair elections; we have that right, and we will continue to
46:01
demand them. We do not recognize these elections, and
46:02
sooner or later we will achieve
46:04
the announcement of free
46:06
elections. Sergey, well, yesterday on the
46:08
White Ring (the protest action around Moscow’s Garden Ring), you saw there were young people
46:10
who came out with hearts: “Putin loves
46:14
you all.” As if I care at all, as though
46:16
he’s in love with everyone, not just you.
46:18
>> As if I care so much whether he
46:20
loves me. We’re about to see now whom
46:22
he really loves.
46:22
>> Very, very nice.
46:23
>> But there were very few of them
46:25
>> and there were very few of them on Revolution Square as well.
46:27
very few.
46:27
>> Well, you’re talking about possible provocations,
46:29
right,
46:29
>> you see, I know these people fairly well.
46:31
These are people who may resort to this kind of
46:34
underhanded petty nastiness, yes—like
46:36
going up to some veteran,
46:37
tearing off a ribbon, being rude—when
46:40
they know it’s all just a game. If
46:43
the issue becomes serious, these
46:45
guys won’t come anywhere near it. And
46:48
law enforcement agencies, as we have already
46:49
said, will not act against the people.
46:51
So on the fifth—and here I’m partly addressing the authorities—if
46:54
if
46:57
the rally is banned, it will be a tremendous
46:59
mistake. You will simply dig yourselves
47:01
a very deep hole, because people will come out
47:03
anyway. I talk to many people online, polls show
47:05
thousands will come out, and
47:08
you will get an uncontrollable situation
47:10
in which neither Navalny, nor Udaltsov,
47:12
nor the League of Voters, no one will be able to
47:13
control it, and no Nashi activists (pro-Kremlin youth movement) will help you.
47:16
They will either join in and put on
47:18
white ribbons, or hide away somewhere in their holes
47:21
and keep their heads down. Therefore,
47:22
>> Olga Romanova, the position of the League of Voters
47:24
the kind voiced here by Navalny and
47:25
Udaltsov, am I understanding correctly?
47:27
>> Of course. So, uh, do you believe
47:29
that your less politically engaged
47:32
members, yes, who only say: "We
47:35
don't want any politics, we're only for
47:37
fair elections," will be ready
47:39
to take to the streets if, uh, if
47:42
they come to understand that the elections, the elections
47:44
are unfair. I can only answer for
47:46
myself: I will take to the streets after
47:48
the fifth, and will most likely become a very
47:50
serious extremist, useful on
47:51
the barricades, because on the fifth my
47:53
prosecutors will hand down the verdict, sen