“Special Opinion” broadcast of December 14, 2016. Alexei Navalny’s presidential nomination.

Hello! In the Echo of Moscow studio is Alexei Navalny, a politician who yesterday announced that he is ready to run for the post of President of the Russian Federation in the next presidential election. Good evening, Alexei.

Good evening.

Alexei Anatolyevich, what is this, a false start? Or is it a political gesture? A year before the start of the campaign, you are putting forward your candidacy.

A year and 3 months before the election, and we believe that time is already pressing us. Therefore, this is not a false start, this is an announcement that we made even a little late, because we face enormous not only political but even organizational tasks. In order to achieve registration, it is necessary to collect 300 thousand signatures. No one has any doubt that we will have to collect these signatures honestly, super honestly. This is a lot of work, it needs to be done in 40 regions.

I’ll interrupt you. So you are going to run as a self-nominated candidate, and not from a party?

Yes, absolutely right.

Why? There are parties that are ready to support you. For example, PARNAS has already announced its support for you. And it is easier to run that way. Why did you decide to run as a nonpartisan, as a self-nominated candidate?

It is important for me to run on behalf of the people. I claim, as I said in my address, to become the voice of those millions of people who do not have political representation. Therefore, I would like to run precisely on behalf of the people. Let me need to collect more signatures, but these will be real signatures, real supporters who, I hope, will not only give a signature but will also help me in the campaign.

Today (or yesterday), as you know, on my Twitter I published a poll about whether the Kremlin will allow you into the election, yes or no? And you voted “Yes,” that was visible. Why? Why do you think the Kremlin will let you in?

Because I believe that we should not think in any other format at all. Will they allow it or not — that already implies some kind of illegal system. Such a strange feature of Russian elections: we think not about how many votes to get, but about how difficult it is even to get onto the ballot. Therefore, I see this campaign, I proceed from the fact that I will participate in the election, will be on that very ballot, and I do not want to think about anything else, because I have the moral, legal, and political right to participate in these elections.

Alexei Navalny is in our studio. We will return to the question of morality, legality, illegality. Nevertheless, Alexei Anatolyevich, when I asked you about the false start, I meant that in order to run for president, a campaign must be officially announced. According to the law on presidential elections. There is still a year before the announcement. Before the announcement. What do you want to do during this year? Why do you need this year?

This is one of the reasons why I participate in politics at all. Because I fundamentally disagree with the fact that election campaigns in Russia are conducted when the elections have already been announced. The last 3–4 months remain, and everyone suddenly crawls out from somewhere and runs to look for voters. Politicians must do something in the period between elections. Major campaigns should begin 2 years in advance. We saw it: in the USA now the campaign lasted 2 years, because it is big, enormous work. And so... A. Navalny: I am afraid that one day I will become scared Honestly, I do not understand. Participation in the election campaign has already been announced now by several people, several candidates from different parties. Why are they doing nothing? Here I have a year and 3 months left...

So that’s good fortune for you, that they are doing nothing.

That may be good fortune for me and a tragedy for the country, because all Russian elections are not even just a game with a pre-programmed result. Even the narrative of this game is known in advance.

Let’s not use words that perhaps one person in our audience may not understand.

The course of this campaign is traditionally: a) nobody does anything, b) debates are held in which nobody participates and nobody watches, and c) voting in which everything has already been decided. I would like the very course of the election campaign to have important political significance, for it to be a campaign about a fundamental choice made by citizens. My program differs quite strongly from the Kremlin’s program. I believe that this is the fundamental choice that I offer people and citizens.

We will talk more about your program and how it differs from the Kremlin’s. I keep remembering how 4 years ago our mutual acquaintance Ksenia Sobchak, speaking about you (and that was 2012), said that “Alexei Navalny seems to me to be Putin 2.0.”

Well, that’s Ksenia Sobchak.

No, looking back, do you understand why she, knowing you better than I do, said that? Why did it seem that way to her?

I think I know, because Ksenia likes all sorts of extravagant, flashy statements. We recently discussed this with her, and she understands that she was wrong. What matters more to me is that she understands that.

We will talk with her about this topic. How are you like Putin? Look, I just received a message from Irek from Ufa: “Do you admit that your ideas are appealing to Putin?” asks Irek from Ufa by SMS. A. Navalny: Right now it is more important to hold a primary for the opposition candidate as a whole

A significant part of the things that I really intend to do, Putin says out loud but does not implement. He has been saying for 17 years that it is necessary to give more freedom to entrepreneurs. He has been saying for 17 years that it is necessary to reduce state interference in the economy, and it only keeps constantly increasing. Therefore, from the point of view of formal rhetoric, well, Putin says reasonable things. My program is also built on reasonable things, and there are purely textual coincidences here. But in essence, of course, we see that he acts only to strengthen his personal power and not give that personal power to anyone, and to remain such an emperor of Russia for life. I categorically disagree with this, and this is one of the things I want to discuss in this election.

We will talk about that more. Alexei Navalny is in our studio. Alexei Anatolyevich, there is one more idea besides the false start — the story of that very trial that is now taking place in Kirov and as a result of which you may again be deprived of the right to run for office. And some observers, besides the idea of a false start, said that you did this now in order to take the court practically hostage. By issuing a guilty verdict, they thereby accuse themselves of politics, of removing you from the electoral process, and so on.

I understand that. What can I say here? Over the last 5 years there has probably not been a single day when I did not have one or another court proceeding. And whatever I did, observers of this kind always said: “Well, he is releasing this investigation so that they cannot do this or that to him.” Since the authorities endlessly fabricate criminal cases against me, these cases are endlessly considered. I can say the following. The announcement of the start of the campaign was planned some time ago, before the court was announced. We chose an approximate period when this would be declared. This court itself has had no significance for me since the moment...

Explain. Explain.

I will explain. From the moment the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the sentence had to be overturned, I knew for sure that the Supreme Court would overturn it. I knew for sure that they would overturn it in a way that was not comfortable for me, namely by sending it back to Kirov. And it was only a question of when they would do it. Therefore, in the schedule of my life and my activities I definitely do not orient myself around these processes. I know they exist, I know they will exist, because this is the set of tools the authorities use not only against me, but against any people (the initiation of criminal cases). One way or another they will proceed. If I plan all my activities based on these kinds of processes, then I will not be able to do anything at all.

Did I understand correctly that you decided to announce your presidential run regardless of this trial taking place in Kirov?

Absolutely right. Absolutely right. After the European Court of Human Rights made its ruling, I already had guaranteed legal grounds. Not just moral and political, but also legal ones. Therefore, from that moment I knew for sure that I would go to any debate, to any meeting with voters. And when someone from the crowd asks me, “So are you a criminal?” I will say that I won in court against this government and proved that the case was fabricated. And this shows that I have every right to participate in the campaign. That is when I began seriously discussing this decision.

So for now you are not a criminal in the legal sense of the word? If they ask in the crowd. Here, I am asking you from the crowd of correspondents here: “Are you a criminal?” Navalny: The first thing Russia will do with President Navalny is fulfill the Minsk agreements

In the legal sense of the word for Russian law, I am not just a criminal, but a repeat offender, because there are other cases in which I was tried. But I do have the right to run for office.

Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny is in our studio. We will now take a 3-minute break, but I would like to pass along those 200 questions, Alexei Anatolyevich, that came to our website.

Thank you very much.

It will be impossible to answer them now. We will answer some of them, but Alexei Anatolyevich promised to answer most of them on his own website or on ours.

I will try to do that.

We are taking a break for now. Alexei Navalny is in our studio. ADVERTISEMENT

Hello once again. Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny is in the studio of Echo of Moscow and RTVi, the program “Special Opinion.” As I already said, 200 questions, more than 200, came to our website, and Alexei Anatolyevich selected 6. That was his choice. I will ask 3 now, and then 3 more. Mikhail from St. Petersburg asks you: “What fate awaits crooks, thieves, and bandits after your victory in the 2018 presidential election?”

An honest and fair court. No campaign-style showmanship. They should all be tried by an honest court, preferably a jury court.

And by that time will you already have carried out judicial reform? Since those same judges who... A. Navalny: Putin and his family must be guaranteed immunity

Well, if I am talking about an honest court, then of course it means these will be courts after judicial reform. But carrying out the part of the reform that is connected with making the court truly independent is not that difficult. Judges need to be freed from the dictatorship of court chairpersons, from appointments by the president, and from the so-called qualification boards. This can be done. We have personnel for the courts, so I do not doubt my ability, and the government’s ability in general, to carry out a normal and high-quality judicial reform and create courts that will judge crooks and non-crooks honestly: imprison crooks and release non-crooks.

In this connection, how do you feel about the idea, if I understand it correctly, of Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovsky that in order for the transfer of power to happen without bloodshed, they simply need to be allowed to leave?

Who are “they”?

Those whom you suspect are crooks and thieves.

I think that is impossible and that it loses meaning. What does “leave” mean? Does that mean they will remain in their places? This is one of the reasons why democracy did not happen in the 1990s. Because all those people who committed crimes even under the действующий Soviet Criminal Code ended up completely unpunished. I believe that Putin and his family must be guaranteed immunity, and this must be an important condition of the transfer of power. If he is ready, after all, to give up power sooner or later, then immunity must be guaranteed and that immunity honored. But should it extend to the Sechins, the Rotenbergs, and so on? Well, of course not. And why should we change anything at all then, if we want to leave these people their illegal billions and leave them in the places where they will continue to control the economy?

Just retire them. You know, like the traffic police in Georgia: “Take your things and go, just surrender your weapons.”

What does “retire them” mean?

That’s how it was in Georgia. When Saakashvili disbanded the traffic police, he said: “All right, hand over your weapons, and we leave you everything else.”

With traffic police officers, with some kind of lower-level...

I said “like with traffic police officers.”

...corrupt officials, that can be done. But how will you do that with a person who controls oil companies, who controls infrastructure, who controls ports? They control the economy.

Retire them. A. Navalny: If I were afraid, I would not be doing what I am doing

It all belongs to them. Take it away and retire them? Or send them into retirement? Then they will keep managing it.

I don’t know. You are the presidential candidate.

That is why I say that it is impossible to retire people who have seized the entire economy. According to official data, the state and therefore specific officials already control 80% of the economy. In practice, more. No retirement will work here — there must be normal, honest trials without campaign-style showmanship, without lawlessness.

So not lustration?

Lustration implies punishing a person without guilt, simply because, well, you were all officials and we will punish you all. I am talking about something else, I am talking...

So you are against lustration? I’m clarifying.

I am for lustration, but that is a different thing, this is not lustration. This is bringing to justice people who violated the current Criminal Code. All those people, starting with those who jail activists under political articles and ending with those who conduct privatization the way they do, violate current law. They must be tried under the current laws.

Understood. Alexei Navalny is in our studio. Alexei Anatolyevich, one more question from those you selected. Kolya Safronov asks you: “What will the first decree you sign be about?”

I’ll even name 3. First, the release of all political prisoners. And this is not just some human-rights measure, it is a measure aimed at improving the investment climate. Second, the introduction of a law on combating illicit enrichment. And third, precisely the start of judicial reform, because without judicial reform no other reform will succeed.

What will you do with this State Duma, where the party you labeled “the party of crooks and thieves” has a constitutional majority? A. Navalny: Wherever I go now, some people are constantly following me

It must be... New elections must be announced. This Duma was elected illegally, under illegal rules. Important players were not allowed into the election. Falsifications were committed on a sufficient scale to declare new elections. At the same time, I do not doubt that in any Duma there will be opposition to me or to any other president. And that is normal. Any normal president needs a strong opposition, and the task of a good president who wants to govern the country well is precisely to create a parliamentary majority in the Duma so that, relying on it, through compromises, perhaps even some difficult compromises, necessary laws can nevertheless be adopted. Only that way. That is how democracy works.

Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny is in our studio. Here, on the eve of your visit to us and our interview, you are very often compared... Naturally, people always want to compare someone with someone famous. Some say that in your rhetoric you resemble Trump. Some say that in your program and rhetoric you resemble Sanders. Someone on the website (here, Elena) compares you to Hitler-lite. But everyone says that you are a populist. What is populism for you? How do you understand it? And do you agree that you are a populist?

I do not understand what a populist is in this kind of Russian political science. This broad spectrum, when I am compared with people who are absolutely diametrically opposed like Sanders and Trump, suggests that people themselves do not really understand what they are talking about. I really do put forward a number of ideas that are supported by the majority of the population, that are demanded by the majority of the population. For some reason, in this conditional political-science environment it is customary to call such people “populists.” I am not ashamed of a single one of my proposals, from introducing a visa regime to increasing the minimum wage. There is no populism in this, these are reasonable measures.

Alexei Anatolyevich, are you more Trump or Sanders? Are you more right-wing or left-wing?

Well, that’s impossible...

Well, are you more of a social democrat or more of a liberal conservative?

Well, Alexei Alexeyevich, well, it’s impossible... A. Navalny: It is important for me to run on behalf of the people

For our country.

That is all... All the terms you named mean nothing for our country.

Your position is clear.

Because Russian liberals, as you know, are American Republicans. Moreover, people who in Russia are called “liberal economists” are considered, for example, in American political science, to be some kind of hellish ultra-conservatives. In Russia everything is upside down. All these labels are inapplicable.

Well all right, Trump demands the construction of a wall, you demand the introduction of a visa regime with our Mexico. Is that similar? It is the fight against illegal immigration through prohibitions.

In that sense, this is part of my agenda. It is indeed conservative, it coincides with the Republicans. That part of the agenda which concerns (and this is the central part of my program) the fight against inequality, of course, coincides more with the American Democrats. But the things I say do not come from me seeing: “Oh, what a cool thing in Trump’s program! Let’s take it for ourselves!” It comes from my understanding of the problems that exist in Russia. I write about these problems, and I am sure that my program is the program of the majority. Which, by the way, focus groups also showed us.

Well, we will talk more about focus groups. One more question selected by you. Black72: “If you win the presidential election, will you seek to reduce the presidential term to 4 years?”

Absolutely. This is a most important thing. The presidential term must be reduced to 4 years from 6. 6 years is madness. There must be a strict limit of 2 terms. Only in this way will a normal transfer of power finally begin to work. Worked 4 years. If you worked well, you work 4 more years. Worked 8 years — goodbye. Even the finest person cannot...

And at 52 will you retire? A. Navalny: I will fight for every vote

If it happens that I am elected in 2018, I will retire. But that does not mean my life will end. It is normal when a person became president, left, and did something else. This works in democratic countries, it should work in Russia. But a system in which people sit for 17 years is wrong. Any person will deteriorate over 17 years. We have never seen a person stay in power for more than 10 years and not deteriorate. It is simply impossible. The experience of humanity says so. And Russia’s experience says so. If Putin in 2002–2003 was still doing some things... In 1999, as we know, Nemtsov went into the election with the slogan “Putin for president.” But Putin of 2016–2017 is, well, a person who thinks of nothing except enrichment and retaining power.

Last question before the news, 30 seconds. Tell me, support from the PARNAS party — is that a good thing for you or a burden?

For me, support from any political organizations is, of course, a good thing. And I am grateful to the PARNAS party for supporting me. And I am grateful to any people. There are different people. Including people with rather harsh statements with which I absolutely disagree. They support me, and I want to say to them, “Thank you for your support.” This does not mean that I fully share their ideas, but I will fight for every vote.

Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny is a guest in our studio. In literally 4 minutes we will return and continue with your questions. For now, on Echo, the news. NEWS

In the studio is Alexei Navalny, we continue. I cut off Black072’s question, but in fact he asks you: “Have you decided on the candidacy of your prime minister?”

All personnel appointments and specific names will be voiced only when the campaign reaches its final stage, I mean the legal stage. After registration.

Why?

Because then there will be debates, there will be more coverage, more attention, and it makes sense to do it then. The campaign should still proceed on an upward trajectory. At the present moment our political organizational task is to get registered for these elections.

So not Khodorkovsky.

Any names will be voiced after registration.

And not even Yavlinsky.

Alexei Alexeyevich, we are considering many names. All these names are interesting, and I have no doubt that we will form an effective team that will govern the country better than it is governed now. And the indicators, the financial and economic indicators demonstrated by both the government and the economy, are worsening every year; for the third, fourth year in a row real incomes of the population have been falling. In general, the country is rolling into an economic catastrophe. And the country’s internal problems are awkwardly patched over by constant appeals to the foreign-policy agenda. When it is impossible to answer the question “Why are the roads so bad?” they tell us about Palmyra and Aleppo. I have no doubt that we will form a team of people who will govern normally. A. Navalny: I won in court against this government and proved that the case was fabricated

Alexei Navalny is in the studio. Well, since you have moved on to the foreign policy agenda, let us return to our favorite topic with you. Crimea. What is Crimea in your program? And Ukraine? Well, separately Crimea, separately Ukraine, after all.

Our program is aimed at...

No-no-no, not in your program, I mean in the program of your team. In your program as a presidential candidate.

I understand.

It is better to say “I,” not “we.”

I devoted great attention in the program to exiting international isolation, because this is an extremely important thing for economic growth. It is extremely important for economic growth to lift sanctions, and so on. The first thing that we must do to normalize relations...

You?

What Russia must do, and what Russia will do with President Navalny, is fulfill the Minsk agreements. This is precisely one of those things we talked about: Putin constantly talks about it, but does not fulfill it. The Minsk agreements must be fulfilled, and this will be the first step toward sanctions beginning to be lifted from Russia. As for Crimea, there is no other option at all to even begin solving this problem and thinking about it, drawing up a roadmap, except holding a normal referendum. My position here has not changed. So, give everyone time to campaign as much as they want, an absolutely honest free referendum. We understand the real expression of will of Crimea’s residents, and after that we begin to do something. However, in general, regarding the speed of solving the Crimean problem and in general making peace with Ukraine, I am skeptical. I believe that the Crimea problem will not be solved in a decade. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will sit and discuss what we are going to do with Crimea. The same as what is happening with Northern Cyprus, the same as the status of Jerusalem, and so on. There are such problems that some politicians have left us and that it is not possible to solve quickly, effectively, and to mutual satisfaction. I am afraid that Crimea is one of those problems. What is such a non-healing wound and what really needs to be solved is relations with Ukraine. We have created for ourselves a large hostile state, enormous, with a population of tens of millions of people. Here it is necessary, indeed, to do a lot, I repeat, starting with the fulfillment of the Minsk agreements.

Alexei Navalny. Are you not physically afraid for yourself, for your family? Our listeners ask. Several such questions from different cities.

Well, let’s put it this way. The events of recent years and how they are investigated — attacks, murders, and so on — add little pleasure for me in thinking about these topics. I am a real person, I understand the dangers that exist. When I myself... Wherever I go now, some people are constantly following me, carrying out some petty attacks, and it is obvious that at this moment the police are coordinating them. Therefore, the transition of petty attacks into the format of major attacks is something that can easily happen. Nevertheless, I am not afraid. If I were afraid, I would not be doing what I am doing.

And what are you not afraid of?

I am afraid of nothing. I believe... I am afraid that one day I will become scared. And before releasing some exposé, I will think: “Ah, maybe I should not do this, because it is kind of scary.” I am afraid that such a moment will come. And I will do everything, and try to prove to everyone, that such a moment will never come for me.

How did your family react to your decision? Because this is a challenge. Isn’t it a challenge?

My family supports me, and I can only once again say that it is impossible to do what I do, and in general, it seems to me, it is impossible to do politics normally in this country if your family does not support you. Well, it is simply... It is a catastrophe for any person. How can you do this if you come home and your wife does not tell you that you did well and that she supports you in the fact that you exposed a certain person or said something? That is, if your wife, your family are not your like-minded people, then you do not need to get into politics, because first you need to acquire a support group there. A. Navalny: With your support we will be able to overcome both censorship in the media, slander, and everything else

My question is not just like that, because at one time in this studio you said that your brother is practically a hostage of the authorities. Maybe he is not the only hostage? And how will you solve the hostage-taking problem if someone goes for that?

How can it be solved?

I don’t know.

I will solve it in the only way possible — by appealing to people. The hostage-taking problem is not connected only with me. We have the problem that in Russia there is a huge number of political prisoners. Right now we do not even know their names; every day some people appear who put “likes” under posts. They are arrested and jailed, and we do not even know about it. The press has even stopped writing about it already — there is too much of it. Therefore I... I very much want my brother, unjustly convicted and indeed taken hostage, to be released. But the problem must be solved as a whole. The problem of unjust courts, the problem of a political regime that terrorizes people and takes them hostage. Well, right now we have a person sitting in prison who was catching Pokémon in a church. Well, this is just madness! And at the same time they release under house arrest or on bail, under travel restrictions, officials who embezzle millions. Police officers who torture someone are given suspended sentences, but people are jailed for catching Pokémon. This is a catastrophe. This is political degradation.

Are you a person inclined to think that punishment in the form of repression can correct human nature?

Of course not. I believe that the task of the penitentiary system, the criminal system, is precisely the correction of the criminal. What is happening now is that people are seized, put in prisons, and they come out of them hardened criminals; they come back sick with tuberculosis and HIV, and so on. That is, now the penitentiary system produces criminals, breaks their lives, breaks their families. It does not return them to society. Yes, in prisons, of course, there are...

Shall we say the surname Dadin?

Well, for example, Dadin. Well, Dadin is simply a glaring example, a person who is subjected to torture, plain and simple. Well, there are a huge number of people who were grabbed, well, simply for reasons that are unclear. Yes, of course, they committed some petty thefts. Or they caught some student with a small amount of marijuana. Of course, they committed an offense. But is it necessary to give him 5 years for that, break his life, so that he comes out of prison a hardened criminal and then always commits crimes? That is not the task of the state.

Alexei Anatolyevich Navalny is in our studio. Now let’s talk not about opponents, but about allies. It is known that on the eve of the State Duma elections there were long negotiations among non-parliamentary parties of, let us say, a more right-wing orientation, less left-wing. Grigory Yavlinsky said that he would run. And I looked at the election results in Moscow by Moscow districts, where your candidate supported by PARNAS was, I mean Lyaskin and Yankauskas, and where the Yabloko candidate was. Everywhere Yabloko in Moscow, in these two districts, everywhere won by 12 to 8, 12% and 8%. Are you not going to organize a primary within the non-parliamentary parties with Yavlinsky, to understand which of you will actually receive the larger share of support?

Well, first of all, comparing the results of single-mandate candidates in the State Duma simply makes no sense, because these are different people. Sergei Mitrokhin is a remarkable politician who could freely conduct an election campaign, and Lyaskin, who for 3 years since my election campaign has been under criminal prosecution and cannot even leave Moscow, and cannot work normally. As for primaries and approaches. I have always been in favor of primaries. I generally believe...

Between whom and whom, Alexei Anatolyevich?

I believe that right now it is more important to hold a primary for the opposition candidate as a whole. I would like there to be primaries with the participation of the Communists, LDPR, and A Just Russia. We must put forward...

Wait. If LDPR, if Mr. Zhirinovsky wins the primary, are you ready to support him?

If these are truly real, normal primaries, of course. If I participate in the primaries, then naturally I will respect the results of those primaries. There can be no other way.

Does that mean we are talking about anti-Putin, and not anti-Putinist (it cannot be said that Zyuganov or Zhirinovsky)...

We are talking about the fact that all of us must put forward a single candidate against...

Opposed to Putin?

Opposed to Putin. Because Putin is a person who has seized power and does not want to give it up, and wants to have it for life. And those political forces that do not agree with this must unite and try to put forward a single candidate. If such primaries are organized, I will of course participate in them and will claim victory, and I hope to become such a candidate.

Alexei Anatolyevich, how do you see the mechanism? Forgive me, for God’s sake, maybe this is not the most important question, but here there are the Communists, there is A Just Russia, there is Yabloko. Suppose everyone agreed (a little fantasy). Who participates? How to vote? The Communist apparatus, mobilized by the Zhirinovsky people, you mobilize... How???

Alexei Alexeyevich, these are the right questions. The mechanism is not yet clear. This is above all a political question.

Yes-yes-yes, that is why I am asking whether you imagine it or not?

There have never been primaries in Russia at all. The only elections we had that resembled elections within the opposition were the elections to the Coordinating Council, about which one can say that there really were elections there. In all other situations, one way or another, everyone avoids primaries. And only I have been running around for several years and talking about primaries. Therefore, I can once again say that I am for primaries, I am ready to participate in them, I will claim victory...

From Zyuganov and Zhirinovsky to Limonov and Navalny?

I am absolutely ready to participate with everyone in any primaries if the result of those primaries will be the nomination of a common candidate. If I do not win those primaries, I will not die of grief, but will do everything so that the winning candidate wins. Nothing will happen to me. That is how politics should work.

Do you think President Zhirinovsky or Zyuganov is better than President Putin?

I think that right now any of these people is better, because that would mean that in 4 years (now in 6 years) we will re-elect him. Russia now simply needs a rotation of leaders; it needs the usurpation of power to be interrupted right now. That is what we need most of all. That is what elections are for. I want to talk a lot about this. Therefore any person... Good Lord, replacing Putin with Shoigu, Medvedev, Sechin... I don’t know whom I dislike most in the government? Sechin or Shuvalov.

So?

And that would be much better!

You have 20 seconds to say something to the listeners that I did not manage to ask you about. So, Alexei Navalny, who has put forward his candidacy for the post of President of Russia.

First of all, I wanted to thank the Echo of Moscow radio station for this invitation. Dear friends, I am entering this election seriously. This is not a game, this is not some game with the elites or a game with criminal cases. These are real elections. And I urge you to participate in this election campaign together with me; I would like to be your voice in this election campaign. I am sure that with your support we will be able to overcome both censorship in the media, slander, and everything else. We will be able to do it all.

Alexei Navalny is in the Echo of Moscow studio.