Debate “Russia–Georgia: Where Are the Purges?” — Transcript

Political Debates — VIII October 17 “Club on Brestskaya” Boris Nemtsov VS Dmitry Rogozin Topic: “Russia–Georgia: Where Are the Purges?” Round I Alexei Navalny, moderator: Hello, everyone! Sorry for the slight delay. We’re happy to welcome you to the eighth installment of the political debates organized by the “YES!” movement. Let’s have some applause! As usual, I’ll be moderating today’s debate — me, Alexei Navalny. People are walking the streets of Moscow wearing badges that say “I am Georgian.” It seems no one is bothering them, but actual Georgians are being bothered. They’re being detained, their restaurants are being shut down, some casinos have been closed — some people consider this ethnic cleansing. Others think these are excesses of an otherwise normal policy. Some people are even deliberately rooting — on principle — for Georgian tennis players at the Kremlin Cup. And others are ready to go to war with Georgia as soon as tomorrow. That’s what we’ll be talking about today. And helping us judge today’s debaters will be our distinguished Jury, whom I am very pleased to introduce: Almat Malatov — writer and journalist; Maxim Sokolov — columnist for Izvestia; Mr. Parker (Maxim Kononenko) — journalist, creator of the projects “Idiot” and “Vladimir.Vladimirovich”; Goblin Gaga — needs no introduction; And somewhere around here Arseny Fyodorov has gotten lost — Orthodox Gassenwagen and a man of no fixed occupation. We saw him, he’s somewhere here, he’ll join us in a moment. He’s sitting by the bar. Arseny, please come over. And of course, I’m delighted to introduce today’s participants. Please welcome Boris Nemtsov! Member of the political council of the Union of Right Forces! And Dmitry Rogozin! State Duma deputy, member of the Rodina faction! Please, have a seat, have a seat! If you want, take your coats off; if not, don’t. By our tradition, we ask today’s participants to briefly outline their position on this issue and, in the course of their answer, address two points: what is the real cause of this anti-Georgian campaign now taking place in Russia, and how should a normal, honest Russian — a patriot of his country — respond to it? Please, who would like to begin? Dmitry Olegovich, the floor is yours… DMITRY OLEGOVICH ROGOZIN, debater (hereafter — DOR): Should I speak into the microphone, yes? Well, I think what’s happening is what ought to be happening. What I’ve been talking about, among other things. What the Rodina party has been talking about for so long — the problems connected with ethnic crime in Russia, the unresolved “Russian question,” illegal immigration, and the insolence of Mr. Saakashvili, who keeps provoking Russia over every ridiculous pretext and is now even threatening national autonomies with force. That, essentially, is what provoked this whole conflict. And how should one react? There’s only one way: don’t put pressure on society, on people who have nothing to do with it; don’t go hunting for “Georgian boys” in Moscow schools; instead, strike at whoever is the main irritant in this situation. Ethnic crime — and not just Georgian crime, by the way, because it’s unclear why the authorities have suddenly seen the light specifically about Georgian crime, as if we don’t have Azerbaijani, Chechen, or any other kind of ethnic crime. And second — we need to make the ground burn under Mr. Saakashvili’s feet. That’s what needs to be done! Not imitate our authorities, who always find the easiest solution: stoking cheap xenophobia, thinking that this way they can solve even one of modern Russia’s problems. That’s how I see it. AN: Thank you very much! Boris Yefimovich, your turn! BORIS YEFIMOVICH NEMTSOV, debater (hereafter — BEN): Well, first of all, good evening, everyone! You know, the history of the conflict with Georgia goes back a long way. If you remember what relations were like when Shevardnadze was in power — there were many problems connected with Chechen militants taking refuge in Georgia, and Georgia not extraditing them. That was a major conflict. Then, Dmitry is right when he says that ethnic crime and the harboring in Georgia of certain criminals whom Russia wanted extradited were part of the issue… There’s also a certain subjective factor I’d like to point out: Russia’s leadership rather naively assumes that they’re all still little brothers over there and should obey orders from Moscow. I can tell you that many nations — whether Ukraine, the Baltics, Georgia, or Central Asia — do not consider themselves little brothers, and this arrogant policy greatly irritates and strains them. A very important cause of the conflict is the situation around Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Very important! As you know, there was a war in Abkhazia, there was ethnic cleansing there, and Basayev and Gelayev fought on Abkhazia’s side — keep that in mind — Chechen terrorists. So when people say it was all simple there, that’s not true. The same goes for South Ossetia: there was a struggle for independence. And many people died. These conflicts cannot be forgotten, because behind them lie the lives and deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. The population of Abkhazia maintains ties with Russia and does not want to be part of Georgia. The same applies to South Ossetia. And Russia is forced to take these things into account. What I disagree with is the idea that a blockade should be imposed there. For some reason, our bosses think that if they impose a blockade, Georgians will love us dearly afterward and Saakashvili will be overthrown. In fact, it’s exactly the opposite. The blockade was imposed, and Saakashvili won the elections. Immediately. His chief PR man was Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. And a free PR man at that — who helped him enormously. I think that if not for this conflict, Saakashvili would hardly have been able to win those elections. I believe that this imperial attitude on the one hand — the long-festering conflict around Abkhazia, the conflicts connected with previous presidents — all of this tied the knot tighter and tighter, and sooner or later it led to the hysteria we’re now witnessing. AN: Thank you very much for your opening remarks! In our first round, the participants will answer my questions. Dmitry Olegovich, you recently said on television that you were ready to go to war! So really, could something happen that would lead to militias being formed in practice? What could happen in that unfortunate Georgia that would mean we — Russian citizens — should go there and fight? What else would have to happen for you to march off to fight in Georgia with an assault rifle at the ready? DOR: As the question, so the answer. Mr. Ganapolsky was provoking me and got an answer on the merits. So, the situation is this: I don’t think there will be any war in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, because the problem is that ROUND II AN: Thank you very much for taking part in the first round! In the second round, our participants ask each other questions. Boris Yefimovich, let’s start with you in this round. Your question? BEN: I don’t understand — why has Putin taken such a dislike to you? He’s doing exactly what you told him to do. So why does he dislike you? I don’t get it. Rogozin said: wipe them all out, go to war with those miserable Georgians — crush them all completely. Putin thought about it for a long time, then decided to get to work. And now he dislikes you. He should have taken you back as an adviser, an aide, or a special envoy, for example, like he did on Kaliningrad. Why doesn’t he do that? Explain it to me. DOR: Honestly, I’m more comfortable here. BEN: No, I get that! But what happened? You were the president’s special forces, as far as I know — everything was wonderful, everything coordinated, support in elections, support everywhere; now they’re carrying out your policy. Why don’t they love you now? Where did the love go? DOR: I can say only one thing: it’s a very proper, good, pleasant feeling when you owe no one anything, and no one owes you anything. Today I owe nothing to anyone. Not the Kremlin, Boris, not you. No one. And the fact that we’re here today — what’s this place called, the “Brest Fortress,” right? “Club on Brestskaya”? The last stronghold of democracy — in fact, I’m happy that this is where I’m beginning my political future. I’m 42 years old, I’ve got everything ahead of me. But I know for sure that I now live in a completely different country. Yes, of course, maybe they managed to push politics out into “Club on Brestskaya.” Today they show only one positive news item on television — Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Everything else is negative. Well, plus two successors: one fries eggs, the other buys donkeys to create a mountain division. That’s basically it. Real people, real discussion, discussion without censorship — that’s here. Is that bad or good? For them — bad. For us — good. For them — bad, because if, in the figurative words of our speaker, parliament is “not a place for political discussions,” then Chernomyrdin put it even better: he said that “parliament is not a place where you should wag your tongue”… BEN: No, no, no! Don’t! I worked with him in the government. He said that “government is not a place where you should only wag your tongue!” DOR: It’s a pity that people like that are no longer… BEN: And by the way, we took his advice very seriously! DOR: It’s a pity! A pity there are no people like that left in the country. All that remain now are rather boring people. But! Real politics will begin from here. They won’t be able to do anything about this life — real life, street life, club politics, internet life! Because we are free. We owe nothing. And they owe us. They owe us our freedom back today, they owe us an independent judiciary, freedom for opposition activity… And if they stand in our way, we will take freedom back with our own hands! That is why yesterday I joined the Public Council of the Russian March. And on November 4, I invite all of you to come out into the streets of Moscow — the Russian March! — to show our strength! To show that we exist and that we will be respected! If they don’t respect us in parliament, they will see this mass of people declaring that we exist, that we are alive — and that we will fight! AN: I actually have a brief aside: at this very moment, at the Union of Right Forces headquarters, the organizing committee of the штаб противодействия Русскому маршу is meeting. BEN: Then how is Belykh sitting here? There he is, Belykh is sitting right here — look! AN: Schneider is running everything there, and Belykh is here to fool the public. BEN: No, nothing happens in our party without Belykh, nothing — so there’s nothing going on there. He’s here — see? AN: Your question! BEN: I’m not against different kinds of marches. What I don’t understand is this: if we’re for Russians, why does that automatically mean we’re against Georgians, Armenians, Balts, and everyone else? Why does that happen? “We’re for Russians!” — wonderful, and by the way, one of your colleagues in the patriotic camp also used to say he was “for the poor and for Russians.” Well, who’s against that? Fine, be “for” them — great! But why “against” others? Are they what — getting in your way? And why so weak? Just look: Russians are the majority, this is our country, it’s mostly Orthodox; yet it turns out that some small peoples — there are barely any of them — are somehow oppressing, destroying, humiliating, and persecuting this great nation of ours. Don’t you think it’s simply humiliating to feel that way? It’s humiliating! And why does the Russian March always end with “Beat the kikes, save Russia!”? DOR: There’s a joke about that. A mentally disabled boy asks his father: “Dad, why does an apple turn brown when I bite it?” His father says: “Listen carefully! When you bite an apple, you break through the protective оболочка, and inside there are amino acid cells that make up the flesh. When the amino acid comes into contact with oxygen, an oxidation process occurs, which is accompanied by a darkening of the color…” BEN: He says that to a disabled kid? DOR: Yes. And the boy asks: “Dad, who are you talking to right now?” So, Boris, who are you talking to right now? Huh? BEN: I was talking to a boy, apparently. Talking to a boy! The boy didn’t understand anything. I can say it again: all your Russian marches end with “Beat the kikes, save Russia!” And the same thing will happen this November 4. That’s why Nikita Belykh, our new leader, is forced to make sure everyone in Russia can live calmly and well. DOR: Guys, here’s the thing. I ask you on November 4, despite our slogans, not to leave Moscow. Please remain where you are… BEN: Who are you addressing? DOR: You. Please stay put — they’ll come for you. BEN: No, Rogozin, seriously? Dima, I can say this: I’ve never been ashamed that my mother is Jewish. But you always have to make excuses — for your eye color, for the shape of your eyes. DOR: And I’m proud of it! BEN: All the time! DOR: What, are my eyes ugly? Huh? Ladies? BEN (sing-song): H-i-s e-y-e-s are bulging, bulging out. DOR: Oh, come on, listen! AN: Judging by hair color and eyes, there’s only one Russian on this stage. BEN: It’s always like that with us! DOR: Now let me tell you about Russian nationalism. Nationalism is, above all, respect for one’s own culture, knowledge of one’s own history, respect for one’s roots, for one’s grandfathers and grandmothers. When I went to Chechnya many times, especially in ’96 and ’99, when there was practically no one there, and I was getting guys out of captivity whenever I could, I learned to understand the Chechen character. And that’s basically why I survived. Because I knew exactly how to talk to Chechen women, how to talk to old men, how to enter a house, what meredism is, national traditions, customs, and so on. I knew their culture, and, by the way, I came back from there absolutely convinced that unless Russians — unless we — know who our great-grandfathers and great-grandmothers and great-great-grandfathers and great-great-grandmothers were, we will have no future. Without knowledge of the past, of our own history, there will be no future. I came back from there and asked myself: if I went there and knew their culture and customs, why is it that when they come to me, to my home, they do not respect my customs, my culture? They say: “We are citizens of Russia! And we will travel all over Russia!” But I believe that a citizen of Russia is someone who respects and knows the culture of another people. And if he is in Russia, then first and foremost the culture of the Russian people! People can say all they want: “We are a multinational people!” But I’ll put it differently: we are not a multinational people; Russia is a country of the Russian people and national minorities. We are 85% of Russia’s population. In France, ethnic French make up 65%, yet all of France is still considered French. So why are we bending over backward to the detriment of the Russian people? So, Boris, remember this: what we represent will carry neither hatred nor hostility — we will not wound our hearts with hatred for others. But we will not let anyone touch our own. We are Russians, and we ask that our culture and our history be respected; we ask that our girls and our women be respected. We demand that our church be respected. Our right to live. This is our country! And only on the basis of this mutual respect can a truly stable and secure future for the country be built. BEN: Let me just remind you that your party wrote a sneaky antisemitic letter that all your colleagues signed. When you say, “we are for knowing and respecting our culture, remembering our past and present, and thinking about the future,” anyone could sign that — and I’d be ready to sign it too. But there are very specific actions. Documented actions. That is why you were not accepted into the Socialist International, because you are an antisemitic organization; that is why you ran into a heap of legal problems — both in our country and abroad. That’s the problem! And of course, when normal Moscow people are sitting in the audience, you have to say absolutely correct universal human words — and that’s what happens. But then there are actions. So: I want this March not to turn into the usual gathering of people who hate others. That’s what I want. DOR: Come! Just come! If you don’t want it to turn into something you dislike — come. And all of you come! And we’ll make it our Russian March! We’ll show that we exist. And instead of sitting there saying, “we don’t want this, we don’t want that!”… BEN: But you already had a march a year ago! DOR: You’ve already lost! DOR: I don’t know, I didn’t hear about any pogroms! I don’t know about any attacks! BEN: But the slogans! DOR: They were wonderful slogans. BEN: “Russia for Russians” was the main slogan! DOR: There was no such slogan! There were others. BEN: There was! Unfortunately, there was. And here we go again! The same thing all over again. I’ll be happy if they’re gone — that will mean you’ve started to reform. DOR: Well, come — I’m telling you — come! AN: Thank you very much to our participants for the second round! We move on to the third. And now questions from our competent, authoritative Jury. Please! Do you have a microphone there? MAXIM KONONENKO (hereafter — MK): Since I got the microphone first… First of all, I have a small complaint about both debaters: you seem to have forgotten the topic of our conversation a little and are conducting political campaigns here. I can understand that, but it’s still a reproach. And my question is this: in fact, the problem with all this Georgian nonsense is that it cannot be viewed in black and white. There really is a lot of Georgian crime. Georgians really do own casinos, and things are really bad in those casinos. And when the police come and shut those casinos down, then despite the fact that the police are shutting down only Georgian casinos — it’s still a good thing. I think most of the population supports that in some way. On the other hand, there’s this nonsense with children in schools and so on. FROM THE AUDIENCE: Kholmogorov? MK: What Kholmogorov? By the way, a reproach to Boris Nemtsov: as it turns out, the whole story with Akunin was a lie. Because Zakharov Publishing had been persecuted for a long time… AN: The question! BEN: It’s just that for some reason Akunin was what interested them at the publishing house. MK: Because he’s the publishing house’s main project. Akunin is published by three publishing houses, and they didn’t come to the other two. So here is my question. Why is this issue so polarized? Why are there exactly two attitudes toward what is happening with Georgia now? Attitude No. 1: all of this is terrible and bad. The fact that the police only raid Georgian casinos is bad. And in general — leave the Georgians alone. Attitude No. 2 is just as polarized and just as completely idiotic: let’s throw out all Georgians immediately, build a concrete wall there — and we’ll have a war. Why is there not a single politician in this country trying to discuss this problem in a comprehensive way? That’s my question. To both, to both esteemed… BEN: May I answer briefly? MK: Of course. BEN: The country is pregnant with hatred toward outsiders. FROM THE AUDIENCE: What month is it? BEN: Probably like an elephant — the 14th month. You see, it’s pregnant! And the slightest movement in that direction speeds up the process. I think that when Putin started fighting Saakashvili, and when he tried to bring our military men home, he did not expect schools to start receiving all sorts of letters and so on. Unfortunately, he doesn’t feel the country. The slightest careless move, or even a word spoken in this explosive country, can turn into pogroms! And given a corrupt, inactive government that is just waiting for something to happen so it can profit from it, the likelihood of such pogroms is very high. Yet these irresponsible people, who have no feel for their own country, keep provoking our unfortunate homeland. DOR: Well, I think the reason is this: the authorities simply wanted to spite Saakashvili personally, and so they started hitting his “tails” in Moscow and in Russia. The Kremlin probably thinks these casinos are a source of funding, possibly for Saakashvili and his people in Georgia, that money is being transferred to Georgia, and so on. So, they think, we’ll hit them now, they’ll scream and squeal, and they’ll blame Saakashvili for causing them to lose their business. Plus, a mass of disgruntled deported Georgian citizens arrives in Georgia — and they too will be unhappy with Saakashvili. It was an elementary miscalculation. In reality, everything turned out exactly the opposite. Saakashvili’s position in Georgia was sharply strengthened thanks to these stupid actions. So of course I cannot call these actions the beginning of a real fight against ethnic criminality. If they had started fighting, they would have fought everyone at once. Not just the Georgian criminal group. And they would have started not with people, but with the actual structures that finance them. But the current authorities are incapable of that in principle. They themselves feed off it. Where does the money from these casinos go? To Tbilisi? If it only went to Tbilisi, those casinos wouldn’t exist in Moscow. Property issues wouldn’t have been settled, access for various people wouldn’t have been arranged, our “night butterflies” wouldn’t be working there… There is protection, legal protection, and it covers 130 markets in Moscow that are under the full control of an Azerbaijani criminal group, while the casinos are under Georgian control… They have their own international, everything is divided up among them, each sector assigned to someone. So this is not a fight against illegal immigration. It is not a fight against ethnic crime. It is an attempt to spite Saakashvili personally by striking at the “tails” supposedly representing him in Moscow. AN: Thank you! Next question from the Jury! ALMAT MALATOV (hereafter — AM): Well then… I am forced to note that the flashy financiers of the 1990s have been replaced by flashy politicians <inaudible>. Still, returning to the topic: do both participants in the debate consider it possible and acceptable to fight crime on the basis of nationality, whatever the result may be? Do the participants in the debate consider it possible to single out any nationality — whether in fighting crime or in assigning priority rights? BEN: Bandits have no nationality. AM: Yes, I know. BEN: Well, that’s it. That’s the whole answer. AM: Then who are we fighting right now? BEN: If you violated the criminal code — go to jail. Doesn’t matter whether you’re dark-skinned or fair-skinned — it makes no difference. AM: And yet the trend is obvious. BEN: More than obvious! The entire government is an example of double standards and selective law enforcement. There’s Roman Abramovich, who may or may not be divorcing, may or may not be getting married — it’s all happening in London, who knows. And then there’s Khodorkovsky, who is no different from him, sitting in Krasnokamensk. One bought Chelsea, yachts, steamships, and airplanes, and at the same time serves as governor of Chukotka. The other got eight years. That’s double standards! Right now, we’re not friendly with Georgians, specifically with Saakashvili, so now we’re going to fight Georgian crime. And if we stop being friendly with Armenians, then we’ll fight Armenian crime. AM: What should be done? BEN: Move away from double standards. The Kremlin lives by criminal-style “understandings.” As long as it lives by those “understandings,” we’ll have nothing — and we must force them to live by the law. So that these Brestskaya rallies can eventually turn into voting results. I may disagree with Rogozin on many issues, but on one point I can agree with him — I was against his party being removed from elections everywhere! And against our party being removed too. They cleared the field. To such an extent that the voice of the people — or of those who represent the people, or think they represent the people — can now only be heard underground. And as long as that situation continues, they will keep performing miracles. And making mistakes — fatal ones for Russia. Look: all around us are enemies. Ukraine is an enemy, Moldova is an enemy, Georgia is an enemy, the Baltics — naturally the most terrible enemy, because they joined NATO. Everywhere we look, there are enemies. That is the result of their policy! ROUND III BEN: Putin went and gave money to a German club. A football club. I can just imagine Yeltsin in the 1990s going and giving some British club — Manchester United, say — $10 million. They would have eaten him alive! He’d have gotten it good. Right there at the airport. At Vnukovo-2. He gives money, and the country stays silent. It stays silent on every issue. Not because there’s nothing to say, but because there’s nowhere left to say it. Nowhere! Blacklists, people banned from appearing on air. Two people are sitting in the Presidium, and you two aren’t sitting there — yet. FROM THE AUDIENCE: On Brestskaya! BEN: Yes, you see — the Center of Freedom on Brestskaya. And until they start getting slapped around, until they are openly criticized, until they are held accountable for their stupidity — they will keep working miracles. Including what they’re doing now with the Georgians. DOR: Well, I’m against distortions in either direction. There is one point of view — Boris just voiced it — that crime has no nationality. I of course cannot agree with that, because every sin, every criminal has a surname, a first name, a patronymic, a nationality, and a place he came from — all of that exists. So when United Russia now says a law should be passed banning the media from mentioning a criminal’s surname and where he came from, in order to avoid certain misunderstandings and so on — I think that is absolute nonsense. On the other hand, there is another kind of extremism on this same issue, when people think: he’s Georgian, therefore he’s a criminal; Azerbaijani — a criminal a priori; Jew, Russian, doesn’t matter — all criminals; when any nationality is already perceived as belonging to some kind of criminality. There is a real problem of ethnic crime: what is it? People come from another country and enter a different cultural environment. Diasporas emerge. Naturally, they stick together. They have certain corporate ties among themselves that do not exist among the native population that received these diasporas. And each diaspora has its “thugs” — so-called ethnic criminal groups. Through language, mentality, and particular features of their culture, they create closed communities. They are closed to infiltration by law enforcement agents. There is a concept — not invented by me — of ethnic crime. It is a reality. We must acknowledge this fact, not close our eyes to it. And we must force all diasporas to dissociate themselves from their “thugs.” We are ready to engage in dialogue with any diaspora. But when I know they will never dissociate themselves from their “thugs,” and those “thugs” will keep coming, killing and robbing, using their corporate solidarity to impose their own rules, seize markets, and push out domestic producers — I simply cannot accept that. There has to be a golden mean. We must recognize that ethnic crime exists, and it must be fought. The main way to fight it is: 1) cleanse the authorities themselves of those who provide cover for ethnic crime, and 2) force the diasporas to dissociate themselves from their “thugs.” AN: Thank you! Next question from the Jury! MAXIM SOKOLOV (hereafter — MS): I have a question for Dmitry Olegovich. You said that the Russian authorities are criminal in their attitude toward diasporas because they tolerate behavior that is not always good. In that connection, my question is: are the French authorities criminal as well, since in their attitude toward diasporas they also show tolerance — and a great deal of it? Or might the explanation be more complicated? For example, not criminal, but cowardly — and so on. DOR: The French went through something terrible. We all saw what was happening in the outskirts of Paris in the autumn of last year. We saw how people there — not only foreigners, but French citizens too — smashed shops and set storefronts on fire. They rioted simply because they disliked a certain migration law and certain labor-union laws. What’s the problem? But in France there was a man — the Interior Minister, Mr. Nicolas Sarkozy — who was not afraid to raise the issue of deporting from France even French citizens if they committed crimes of that kind. Therefore, the very fact that politicians like Nicolas Sarkozy are in the French government means that the French authorities cannot be considered either weak or criminal. They found the courage to speak openly about these problems, they did not yield to blackmail from these rampaging gangs of ethnic criminals, and in the end they restored order. MS: So Sarkozy is the righteous man who saved the French authorities? DOR: I think so, yes. Sarkozy did a great deal, and I think that is precisely why the French see him as a real presidential candidate. By the way, the sentiments indulged by the current president of France largely led to the failure of the European Constitution in the French referendum. The French do not want to lose their identity, their face; they do not want to turn into generic “human beings.” They do not want a secular state to turn into an Islamic state, which North African Arabs are imposing on them today. That is why they rejected a) the European Constitution and b) supported Sarkozy. MS: If Putin appoints you interior minister tomorrow in place of Nurgaliyev, will our state stop being criminal? DOR: You would see results quite quickly. And those results would have a beneficial effect on our lives. MS: I also have a very short question for Boris Yefimovich. You condemned Putin for having all neighboring states hostile to him. In your view, can states hostile to Russia exist in nature? Or is this just the severe complexes of an ancient <inaudible> colonel? BEN: You know, Maxim, it’s remarkable that essentially everyone is against Russia. From North Korea and the United States to Ukraine and the Baltics. You’ll agree, one can take offense at the whole world, as Kim Jong Il has just done, declaring that a world war has been declared against North Korea. If in recent years practically all countries have come out against Russia, regardless of their geographic location, political system, or level of economic development, that is alarming. Maybe we should take a look at ourselves? It is well known that Vladimir Vladimirovich was a Germanophile until his last trip to Germany. There he offered the chancellor a wonderful gas deal. The main gas distribution station was now supposed to be in Germany. That deal was rejected. And now Germany too is among the unfriendly countries. I believe that when the whole world is your enemy, that is a failure of your own foreign policy. AN: Thank you! Any more questions? AM: I have one more short question. Under the Constitution, Russia is a secular state. How does Mr. Rogozin feel about introducing “Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture” in schools? DOR: I do not consider that a move toward a religious state. People need to know basic things connected with spiritual and national upbringing. Fundamentals of Orthodox Culture should be taught. And in Muslim regions — by all means, let them study the fundamentals of Islam. They do not necessarily have to become believers. But respecting religion, respecting the faith of one’s fathers — that is essential! I do not see any move toward a theocratic state in this. AN: Final question from the Jury! GOBLIN GAGA (hereafter — GG): The last one, as I understand it? I’ve just listened to a lot of this — “Georgia is not Georgia, Russia is not Russia.” Pressure on Georgia, Russia’s pressure on Georgia, strong pressure, this kind of pressure, what other kind of pressure can there be — let’s strip all that away. The question, basically… for me it’s important to hear a person say “yes” or “no.” I’m fine with you, because I see you on TV from time to time, I follow what you do. Just curious! BEN: On what TV channel do you see us? GG: I have the internet, I have a little TV — I see you there. I remember your speech in the Duma, where <inaudible> Georgia — that was cool! That was a while ago, a week ago. I want you to answer only “yes” or “no”! Look: pressure on Georgia… it’s a bit of a strange question. And don’t be surprised, I always behave like this. The question is a bit strange: do you think pressure on Georgia is akin in some way to pressure on a woman’s clitoris? “Yes” or “no” — just say it! You know what a woman’s clitoris is! You should be able to imagine it! You’re politicians, you should know what one kind of pressure or another leads to. Just say “yes” or “no”! BEN: You know, pressure on Georgia is less pleas… GG: “Yes!” or “no!” BEN: Less pleasant — that’s what I said! GG: So you don’t like pressing on a clitoris? BEN: Less pleasant than what you said. GG: Fine! Your answer? Dor: No. GG: No? Excellent! A clitoris is not Georgia! Georgia is not a clitoris! Don’t put pressure on Georgia! AN: Thank you very much! Dmitry Olegovich has just caught me violating the rules — he didn’t ask his opponent a question in the previous round. So: Dmitry Rogozin’s question to Boris Nemtsov. DOR: Boris, I recently learned that President Yushchenko fired you from your position as an adviser. Tell me, please, what did you do there, besides what you did in Russia, that got you fired there too?