Interview with Echo of St. Petersburg

3:05 PM in St. Petersburg. Good afternoon, everyone. This is the Echo of Moscow radio station in St. Petersburg. We have an unscheduled broadcast at 3 PM. Usually there isn’t one. But there is a reason. Alexei Navalny — politician, head of the Anti-Corruption Foundation — has arrived in St. Petersburg. Alexei, welcome!

Good afternoon! Very glad to finally be on your air.

There is an SMS portal +7-931-291-58-00. I’m just loading it up right now. There is also an Echo of Moscow St. Petersburg YouTube stream. You can watch us there and also ask Alexei questions. I have the first question for you. The last time you came to St. Petersburg on a political visit was two years ago, when you were starting your presidential campaign. You opened your first headquarters here. Two years have passed. It practically turns out that for two years you did not come to Russia’s second-largest city.

I strongly object! I didn’t come, despite the fact that our presidential campaign headquarters devoted the maximum amount of time to knocking out at least some kind of venue so that I could meet here with my St. Petersburg voters. Naturally, for us this is a priority city. That is exactly why I began my election campaign in the city of St. Petersburg, and that is exactly why my first trip as part of campaigning for Smart Voting was to St. Petersburg. This is the most important political city, more politicized than Moscow. We are doing very active work here. We have a very active headquarters here. You probably know about the active work of our headquarters from the news — they jailed those people, they jailed these people. And the St. Petersburg administration, in this strange and perverse way, thus rates the work of our headquarters very highly. Therefore it is hard to conduct work here, here in the literal sense of the word. In the Volga region we were knocking out a venue, in the South of Russia we were knocking out a venue for a meeting. But in St. Petersburg, in this sense, this is a political “Chechnya.”

That’s not entirely true. Perhaps in St. Petersburg it would have been possible to try to meet, for example, not in the city center but in Udelny Park. Our officials keep suggesting sending people to Udelny Park, to Polyustrovsky Park. These are not the most central places, and they are not very easy to get to. But you have a lot of supporters here, in St. Petersburg, who, I’m sure, would have come there, would have agreed to meet with you. And if officials had refused there too… Yes, there are risks in your activity, and there are many of them!

You are right, there are many risks in our activity. You choose a place, and their principled position, supported by me as well, including when they jail hundreds of people here in St. Petersburg, detain them for participating in absolutely peaceful lawful demonstrations in the city center, and I myself call on them to go there and not to Udelny Park — at the same time, for my own meeting with voters, to agree to Udelny Park, I could not act that way toward people. Who would trust me then if I said, “Come out onto Nevsky,” and then I myself arrive and say: “Well, all right! I’ll go to Udelny Park, because they’ll let me put up a stage there.” No, I think that if you are fighting for the right to participate in peaceful demonstrations, then fight for it consistently.

So that is more important than meeting with some supporters, letting them know that “guys, I remember you.”

Supporters already understand that I remember them. I can communicate with them. Our headquarters communicates with them. It seems to me that for supporters this message — that “I am consistent in my position” — is more important than everything else, because what is in demand in politics right now is HONESTY. You know very well that when the so-called “united opposition rally” was last held in St. Petersburg and they went for some strange compromise, joined a rally “against infill development,” “defrauded equity holders,” and something like that, what did it lead to? Nobody came there, and on stage those same equity holders forbade criticism of Putin! We do not want to do that. We take an honest, consistent position, and I have a clear feeling that the city of St. Petersburg demands exactly such a position.

You’re talking about the rally of equity holders. That is also a problem of the fact that in St. Petersburg the opposition is generally very fragmented. It is very disunited, and that has not just been the case in recent years. I remember when I was still a schoolboy and was interested in all the opposition stories in our city, the “March of the Dissenters” — that meant two organizers, two routes, and so on! These are difficulties. Let’s talk about why you came. You are starting the story of “Smart Voting” in St. Petersburg with municipal elections, not gubernatorial ones. Why?

First of all, the fragmentation of the St. Petersburg opposition is simply such a meme, when throughout the whole country people know that St. Petersburg is an example of how the opposition is in some fragmented state. That is precisely one of the most important reasons why we came up with “Smart Voting.” I am a person from real life, and I am not going to engage in nonsense, specifically come to St. Petersburg and say that now we will unite the opposition, that the opposition needs to be united. That will never happen, simply by definition. There are different people there and they have the right to be different people. Let’s leave them alone. Let’s better come up with something for ourselves, for voters, for St. Petersburg residents, who are simply interested in the fact that…

You just want to lure away the electorate from these citizens gnawing at each other?

No. I am not going to lure anything away from anyone at all. I’m not participating in the elections! Our party is not being registered. I want to agree on a common structure. And it has one basic premise: 90, and some say 99%, of deputy seats at the local level are controlled by United Russia. This is unacceptable and does not reflect the political preferences of St. Petersburg residents. So we will unite everyone, we will create a structure and we will unite people. When I say unite everyone — unite people so that they consolidate and vote against United Russia in such a way that the mathematical alignment is on our side. And it would be possible, if not to drive out United Russia, then at least to seriously squeeze it. That is the main idea. That is why I came, and I am persuading everyone to do this, including through your wonderful radio station.

We’ll talk more about the opposition, but here is my question. You participated in the presidential election. The fact that you would not be allowed into those elections was from the start a big possibility, and it is clear that you were running that campaign not only in order to run in that presidential election, but also so that more people would learn about you, so that you could convey your ideas to voters, raise your media profile, somehow tell people about yourself…

I did it to win the election, but also, among other things, for what you have just listed.

In St. Petersburg too it would probably have been possible to do the same thing in the gubernatorial election. Why do you support not a single candidate? Why do you not nominate a single candidate?

Could you list the candidates for me? The candidates have not yet been registered.

But you weren’t registered either! There is Boris Vishnevsky, a Yabloko member, there is Oksana Dmitrieva…

And did Oksana Dmitrieva say that she is running? Or did Boris Vishnevsky say that he is running?

Boris Vishnevsky said that he is running.

Excellent! That is very good! I send warm greetings to Boris Vishnevsky and to all the other candidates, because all the other candidates, whoever they may be, are all much dearer to me in advance than Beglov.

Why? I have a question: why can’t a big campaign be built now around the gubernatorial election with support for a candidate who can be backed?

It can’t, because 99% of seats at the local level are controlled by United Russia, the Presidential Administration, the plenipotentiaries, Beglov himself, whoever you like… Putin! Roughly speaking! They absolutely control WHO WILL BE THE CANDIDATE. And they will sit down and write a list of candidates against Beglov who will be advantageous to them.

That already happened in the presidential election! And you did not get into the presidential election.

In the presidential election they planned to do that, and we fought it. When they did it, we called for a voter strike. As for the St. Petersburg gubernatorial election, I say in advance that we will not call voters either to a strike or to a boycott, because the political situation has changed, and Putin’s ratings, and all the more so United Russia’s ratings, have fallen. Beglov is an absolutely weak candidate, and it seems to me that closer to the matter they will replace him. But one way or another, we call and will call on everyone to come and vote for all the other candidates. The task now is to work for a second round! Any candidate you want, come up with some disgusting people, and I will still say “Vote for them,” because that will be a vote against Beglov.

There was such a meme in the previous gubernatorial election — Takhir Begbaev, who is still remembered in St. Petersburg, some person nobody knew, from the Green Party, and the authorities also put him up as an opponent then to Georgy Poltavchenko. Would you also call on people to vote for such a conditional Takhir Begbaev?

We don’t care! It will lower Beglov’s rating and it will create a chance for a second round. We are now fighting a monopoly! Do you understand? We want to show that, guys, you won’t be able to just easily take and get re-elected.

I want to clarify once again. “For” literally anyone? For example, communist Bortko may run. They are now discussing that the Communist Party may nominate him. Will you also call on people to vote for him?

For Bortko too! And for Vishnevsky! I assume, Arseny, that you like Vishnevsky more than Bortko!

Yes! That’s true.

Arseny, then you probably should vote for Vishnevsky! Or Yabloko will most likely nominate Rybakov. And some communist will say, no, “I like Bortko better!” And I will say, “Then vote for Bortko!” If there is a candidate there whom I personally like, I myself will campaign for some specific candidate. But the main thing I will definitely call for is to come and choose someone. If there are only some, as you said, dreary Takhirs there, then for Takhir! Vote technically!

A. Navalny: St. Petersburg is the most important political city, more politicized than Moscow

Why don’t you want to repeat that trick, to fight for the registration of any deputy?

I do, I do! I want to repeat that trick!

But you understand that when you say you support absolutely anyone, you can achieve a much smaller effect!

I simply don’t know the alignment right now! You tell me, will Dmitrieva run, will Yabloko support Vishnevsky? Will Maxim Reznik run? St. Petersburg is a big, complicated city from the point of view of politics. I do not claim that I understand St. Petersburg politics better than you do, and I certainly am not going to come here from Moscow and command and impose order. I will follow whatever alignment emerges in your tricky and confusing St. Petersburg politics. If there is a great candidate — I will support them! If there is a great candidate who says, “I will run, but they won’t let me through and I will demand registration,” then I will walk together with him and rally, saying, “Let him through, give him registration!”

It turns out that in this case you behave as exclusively one person, Alexei Navalny, as a blogger, and not as a political phenomenon. But right now you are a political phenomenon in Russia!

And what is that bold conclusion based on?

That you are a political phenomenon in Russia?

That I am now behaving like a blogger and not like a political phenomenon!

Because you say… It seems to me that a politician — perhaps you will correct me now — who aspired to the post of president, who is interested in affairs in different regions, logically should say: “I have my candidate! There is a person whom I support. Let’s support him together! Push him forward, promote him,” and thereby, it seems to me, you would attract much more attention to the St. Petersburg elections, especially since they are combined, both municipal and gubernatorial.

Arseny, I will correct you! Politics is something real. I am not going to hang noodles on everyone’s ears here, because every listener and viewer of our program…

They watch us on YouTube too!

Now everyone just threw up their hands, because you have now drawn a hypothetical situation. We understand perfectly well that there are people who have at least some chance of being nominated and collecting municipal signatures. There are people who have no such chances. And I will act from the real situation. But as of today, we have made a decision that within the future party, unregistered but still a party, we do not have our own candidate whom we ourselves would be ready to nominate. There are a large number of likable people in St. Petersburg and politicians likable to me, for whom I would fight, but, excuse me, I am not going to run ahead of the locomotive! They themselves must put themselves forward.

But you can negotiate with them.

And I am negotiating with them!

Then tell us!

I can’t! Because those negotiations concern them, and you must agree, it would be stupid if I made statements about their nomination.

All right, what kind of negotiations? Without personalities.

The kind where I say: “Like you, I think that one should run, and there is no problem if they do not register you.” Most often I hear exactly this: “Yes, I will run, but you understand that they won’t register me!” And I answer that I understand, but go ahead, fight for it! And the worst thing you will get is that they won’t let you in. And all St. Petersburg residents will see that Beglov is specifically afraid of you. My position is that one must run. I simply cannot tell the secrets of parties and their plans. That would be ugly in relation to them.

But do you have a person whom you would support?

People.

Even several?

There are people who are not very close to me, but are popular politicians. I would still support them, because the battle that will happen in September of this year should be a battle, not a sham. In any case we will vote against Beglov, fight against Beglov. And I would like there to be not only mathematics and logic in this — Smart Voting — but also political nerve. At the municipal level there is definitely political nerve. One would like it to be there at the gubernatorial level too.

Many questions come in about the gubernatorial election in connection with one person. St. Petersburg politician Maxim Reznik, you surely know him…

Of course!

Recently he did indeed throw Beglov out of the Legislative Assembly.

That was amazing!

And Maxim Reznik, as many of our listeners write, never once said… Boris Vishnevsky said that on many things he disagrees with you. Maxim really does speak well, he is an opposition deputy who talks about such global things, about the spirit of St. Petersburg, about the West, about ethical values, about freedom. Many questions came in about why you should not cooperate with him! And make Maxim Reznik, try to reach an agreement with him, and make him the candidate and the brightest face in St. Petersburg! It is clear that this is not only your decision; Maxim Lvovich must agree.

First. I put personal issues much lower than public ones. Maxim Reznik also voted for my expulsion from Yabloko. Nevertheless, I have excellent relations with him! And I simply admire how he has been conducting himself lately, and not only in recent days in St. Petersburg. And I am outraged that Beglov goes around lying to veterans that Reznik proposed surrendering the city to the fascists. If Reznik ran, I would certainly support him! If some politician competing with him ran, I would support both, or choose. We would consider it, hold debates. Reznik as a politician is certainly likable to me. I would like him to participate in the gubernatorial election. But as you yourself say — that is his decision! What am I supposed to say on air now: “Come on, Lvovich, run!”? That is strange. He is an experienced politician. More experienced than I am. He has been in politics longer than I have. And he himself will make the right decision. We will definitely come to an agreement with him. We have already agreed on cooperation at the municipal level. And he supports our campaign related to salaries and public-sector workers. In that sense there is no lack of contact. I would once again like to emphasize this — I did not come here as a person who can sort things out or impose anything. This is St. Petersburg politics, and I am simply offering St. Petersburg politicians and voters of St. Petersburg my concept of Smart Voting.

And why do you call attempts to negotiate with someone and get some very strong supporter of your own — Reznik, Vishnevsky, or someone else, for example Alexei Kovalev, no matter whom — and get him for yourself; after all, politics is the ability to negotiate.

There is no such thing as “get him for yourself”! They are independent politicians!

A supporter, an ally?

But when Reznik goes out to protest rallies, and then they even jail him for 10 days, I can already see that he is my supporter and ally!

But they are not associated with you!

And why should they be associated with me? I have no task of making some Excel spreadsheet where I will be in first place on your computer and Reznik will be in second, third, or fourth. I would like to reduce the number of deputies from United Russia. Reznik is now in the Party of Growth, or maybe now he is closer to some other party; one way or another, it is not so important to me that they be affiliated with me. I do not need Reznik, or anyone else (we are just talking about Reznik now), to recognize me as the leader of his movement. There is no such goal at all. And taking into account what you say, and everyone knows that there is such great disunity in the St. Petersburg opposition, I discarded that idea from the start. I want everyone to remain themselves. And we would facilitate an agreement among voters.

A. Navalny: Beglov is an absolutely weak candidate, and it seems to me that closer to the matter they will replace him

Many of our listeners — I can see it on YouTube, and many told me this — have the feeling that Navalny has neglected St. Petersburg a little. There is a certain resentment among St. Petersburg residents that Muscovites think a lot about themselves, but forget about us, St. Petersburg residents, that Navalny supports all opposition figures, but seriously taking part in the main elections in St. Petersburg he does not want to do. Neither himself as a politician, nor by nominating some specific person of his own.

That is an absolutely wrong feeling! I came here in order to dispel it. And the fact that my first declared political project this year concerns elections in St. Petersburg refutes the idea that I have neglected it. I have not neglected it. And of all the elections that will take place in 2019, there are two most important ones — the Moscow City Duma elections and the St. Petersburg municipal deputy elections, and I think that the St. Petersburg municipal deputy elections are even more important. Because there are very many candidates here, while in Moscow everything will be very difficult in terms of nomination.

Still, it turns out that you are not proposing any candidate for the gubernatorial election; explain why.

Because there is no gubernatorial election! Look at how we acted all last year. I supported the communist candidate in Vladivostok. We supported in Khabarovsk. Good Lord, I supported an LDPR candidate! Can you imagine! Was it easy for me to support him? But I did support him! It’s just that gubernatorial elections are not elections! It is manipulation and deception. But we want even this manipulation and deception to be usable for the defeat of United Russia.

Then one difficult point arises. You keep talking about what you are against, but there is no thesis of what you are for.

A positive agenda means what you are for.

Everyone is for there being no United Russia?

Everyone is for the city’s residents choosing a normal candidate. I am for those not being United Russia people.

And for that you are willing to support even LDPR people, whom apparently you do not consider entirely normal candidates?

Absolutely! And here I will answer you with a positive agenda point — I am for there being no monopoly! I am for competition! Let an LDPR member replace a United Russia member; that is better than United Russia, United Russia, United Russia. I want at least something to move! There should be at least minimal rotation. Otherwise this is such rot, such degradation, that it is all becoming hard to bear.

I understand your position. About the municipal elections. Tell us about your project, what you are doing, what you are planning.

Municipal elections are in September of this year. 1,575 deputies will be elected in St. Petersburg. Most people are shocked by this number, because they do not really even understand that such a level exists — municipal deputies. Nevertheless, they will be elected. And now only United Russia people sit there. And when only United Russia people fill all the municipalities of the most opposition-minded and most European city in the country — that looks wild. And we are offering a very simple thing. We are now calling on everyone to run. Several thousand candidates are needed, taking into account that not all will make it to the election. And we already have several thousand candidates, several hundred candidates are already being put forward by Yabloko. There are United Democrats — there are United Democrats who are Yabloko, and there are United Democrats who are not Yabloko. A very St. Petersburg tradition! Accordingly, some are being nominated by A Just Russia. Dmitrieva is nominating people, Vesnik. Our idea is that we will identify the strongest candidates, include them in a single list of 1,575 names, after which all of us should vote only for this list. Taking into account low turnout, it will be no higher than 32%, fifty percent of the voters who will participate in this campaign — and such a number definitely exists if we persuade properly — will be enough for us so that in every…

Did I understand correctly, this is an important point: if you see that somewhere there is a strong, already formed opposition group, for example in Kupchino there is a strong opposition group of candidates for municipal deputies, you will include them in your list, and, for example, if some less well-known people come to your headquarters and say “we also want to run in Kupchino!”, you will say: “Sorry, Kupchino already has a strong opposition group!”

We will say: “Coordinate with each other! We will look at how it is all arranged and whom we can include and whom we cannot include.” Of course, there is no task to come here and say: “My two thousand people are the best, and therefore let’s now shove aside everyone else!”

A lot of questions — ask about Sobchak! What about Sobchak? Sobchak said that perhaps she would participate in the gubernatorial election. Moreover, as far as I know, this question is indeed being discussed. Would you support Ksenia Sobchak too?

I don’t care whether Ksenia will participate. She won’t be there alone. We support a second round in general. Vote for whomever you want. But would you personally vote for her?

Personally me? I don’t know, I’ll see!

Well, excellent! And we will tell everyone the same thing. Look at who there is, and vote for those who are there.

And if it is Beglov — Sobchak?

That is not a realistic option.

And if it is?

You want me to say something from which one can make the headline “Navalny is ready to support Ksenia Sobchak” or “Navalny is not ready to support Ksenia Sobchak”? I understand journalists have the right to ask what they like, because people ask questions, but in general this construction is certainly being imposed by the authorities and, of course, it is in Beglov’s interests to invite Sobchak or some caricatured liberal as an opponent in order to get elected more easily. But there are systemic parties; it is impossible not to let the communists into the St. Petersburg gubernatorial election. And it is also impossible not to let LDPR in, because we see that they always participate in all elections. This is the main point of the compromise reached between them and Putin. They pretend that they are the opposition, or at least do not speak too harshly on some issues, but at any rate they are always let in. In that sense I am calm. I think that of course Beglov will not let in a single strong candidate, but there will definitely be several of them.

And still about Sobchak! Why are you so unwilling to talk about her? What is the problem? A. Navalny: I am for there being no monopoly! Let an LDPR member replace a United Russia member; that is better than a United Russia member

Because there is no problem at all. I just don’t want to.

About Maxim Reznik you say: “I will support Maxim Reznik!”, but about Ksenia Sobchak you don’t want to!

Because Maxim Reznik is a politician, not a person being dragged into an election in order to make it easier to win or build some kind of setup. In that sense Sobchak is a political puppet who takes part somewhere for money. To discuss this construction is what on the internet is called feeding the troll. And what to call it on radio, I don’t even know.

Returning to the municipal elections, I remember very well the previous municipal elections in 2014. Opposition candidates simply came there. First they could not find the office where they were supposed to submit documents in order to register, then they found that office with great difficulty… And not because they were idiots.

Fantastic! I could not believe my eyes when the guys from the St. Petersburg Anti-Corruption Foundation participated in the election and those very same IKMOs (municipal election commissions — ed.), is that what they’re called? They were hiding! Candidates simply wandered around the district and did not know where to submit documents! This does not happen even in the North Caucasus. Of course, our main problem, which we will encounter closer to the elections, will not be finding candidates, not recruiting a sufficient number of voters for Smart Voting, but that they will again want not to let anyone in.

And what to do then? You can’t find the IKMO! You come, there are some security guards standing there pretending to be candidates and physically push you out of the IKMO building, don’t let you in, simply physically don’t let you hand over your papers.

We will fight! We will physically break in. We will politically create such a situation that not allowing a mass of candidates in will create such political costs for Beglov, for the federal authorities, for Putin, that they will be forced to let them in.

And how to create such a situation?

Including by telling them that “guys, if you don’t let the candidates in, there will be a rally here of such magnitude!.. And the voting as a whole, the work against the authorities, will be so strong, against Putin personally will be so strong, that you’d better not do it.” What else? That’s how politics works. We say that either you at least pretend to hold fair elections (it’s clear that you have administrative resources, it’s clear that you falsify), but at least let the candidates in! And if, en masse as last time (and it was en masse!), practically nobody was let in, if you do that, then your political costs will be so great in different directions! In the form of rallies, in the form of agitation, in the form of people hardening. Those costs will be so strong that you will regret it! That is exactly how one should speak.

Let’s try to model the situation. Suppose I am running for municipal deputy. I want to get in, I got there, they did not let me register, security guards threw me out. What is the mechanism? So that people who want to participate know.

Arseny, there is no mechanism yet! For now we are gathering candidates. We are training candidates. We are helping them register. We are doing this work of studying existing groups of activists in different districts and neighborhoods, including in Kupchino, as you said. There is a lot of that. At this stage the task is this. The concrete technology of what we will do next, when people are not let in, we will develop it. That will be a joint decision. Here we will work with all opposition politicians, because everyone will be interested.

Many more questions come in about your headquarters in St. Petersburg, and much criticism. For example, the latest video your guys from headquarters released — “Sergei Litvinenko does not accept our complaints.” He doesn’t want to do anything, there are no loud investigations that could be done in St. Petersburg; journalists do them, and somehow the headquarters is not very noticeable.

But it seems to me that our headquarters is very noticeable and plays an important political role. It’s just that in recent months, for objective reasons, it has concentrated on work connected with organizing mass actions, and it seems to me that they are doing this work quite successfully. We consider the headquarters in St. Petersburg to be strong. And I am very glad that they have started doing these investigations at all, releasing videos. These are people who do not know how to do this! They are not journalists. In general, the Anti-Corruption Foundation — like me myself — is learning anew how to do this. The St. Petersburg headquarters launched its own YouTube channel, an influential one, it already is an influential YouTube channel. We will strengthen the team. We will interact, including with journalists. And we will hire additional lawyers here, and send some people from Moscow to do investigations. This is something we are all learning, and we are very grateful to everyone who criticizes us, gives advice, because we can improve, but it would be naive to expect that tomorrow we will start doing investigations better than you. Or make a radio station. You are a professional journalist, and we never prepared for such a thing. But nevertheless, just as we managed at the federal level — sorry that I am speaking so long — to create one of the largest media outlets in the country with an audience of millions of people, so here in St. Petersburg we will manage to do it too.

About political actions. This is the leader among the questions. When will there be an action, how will it proceed, how will you build a barricade, when will you block roads, when will you attack OMON? There are a lot of such questions.

Let me answer right away. An action is not scheduled because I sit there with a calendar and think, when should I schedule an action? Or I throw a dart at a dartboard — wherever it sticks, that’s when it will happen. An action is tied to something. An action is tied to something. We hold an action because there are reasons. And people go out into the streets not because I called them out — that is one of the least significant reasons — but because they want to go out themselves. There will be such a moment when I, as a citizen, will myself feel your emotions, and the emotions of all people, in Moscow, in Novosibirsk, and in St. Petersburg, that we must go out into the streets and say something, and we will immediately go. I assure you, I am not afraid to participate in mass actions, even though each of them turns into a month or two months in jail. And as you know very well, our St. Petersburg headquarters is not afraid of that either.

By the way, if there were some candidate now whom you would support, it would be possible to hold these actions in his support.

Absolutely! Maybe he will appear! There is still time. In fact, you said that Vishnevsky has declared that he will run in the election, but so far the position of the Yabloko party has not been heard. We will start listing them with you and obvious names will immediately surface. Reznik was mentioned, Dmitrieva, Bortko. There are politicians in St. Petersburg, there are people whom townspeople trust. But they must say so. They must go, and I will gladly join an action demanding that this person be registered.

A more distant slice of the problems connected with St. Petersburg. People often say the regions feed Moscow. Just yesterday I was looking: St. Petersburg collects a trillion rubles every year and sends it to Moscow. The city budget is a little over five hundred billion.

650 billion!

Accordingly, the question is, first of all, is that right or not?

That is a rhetorical question to which everyone will answer — it is wrong. Moreover, officials say this too, that it is wrong. That is how our country is arranged, and this is one of the main principles of why Putin sits in power, why he governs the country, why he took money away from everyone and dragged it to one place. St. Petersburg is not five times smaller than Moscow, but the budget of St. Petersburg is five times smaller than Moscow’s, and there is nothing good in this for Moscow either, because it means fantastic sums of money thrown around wherever, high costs for residents, and so on. The viciousness of the budget system has been and remains one of the main foundations of political struggle. Of course, we demand redistribution of money. More money should remain.

A. Navalny: Sobchak is a political puppet who takes part somewhere for money

Do you have any concrete figures, roughly speaking, what percentage of a regional budget, say from St. Petersburg — and elsewhere it differs — should be sent to the federal center? What should federal transfers to the city be? Have you thought this through somehow?

Of course, we have worked on it; there was a very big discussion on this topic. On my very first trips to the regions, when I was opening headquarters two years ago, this was always the main question. And the farther you go, the more it is the main question. St. Petersburg is too poor a city for its size, for its status. But the other regions simply languish in poverty.

And if about concrete figures?

We made many calculations for St. Petersburg. Look in our program, but the budget of St. Petersburg cannot be less than a trillion. One way or another, enough money needs to be left in St. Petersburg so that the budget here is no less than one trillion rubles. Until there is a trillion-ruble budget here, you will keep having snowdrifts like this. I was driving here to you and was simply amazed at how much snow was lying around and nobody was removing it. And when I arrived, you told me: “This has already been cleaned up! Five days ago it was terrible!” I don’t know what it was like here five days ago, but apparently it was even worse. And it will remain so until there is a trillion. St. Petersburg needs a trillion. That money exists. That money is distributed at the federal level on all sorts of nonsense and rubbish. It should remain in the city.

Alexei, of course it sounds great — a trillion! But it sounds somewhat populist.

It is realistic. I will explain why a trillion.

You can come to almost any city and say “This city needs a hundred billion, this one five hundred!” and so on. Is there some real understanding of how to achieve this? In what time frame? Let us imagine that you came, say, to power. Naturally, under Putin this is impossible. But suppose. You came to power. Is there an understanding of what figures, what percentages?

Of course we have one, it’s just that right now I am not ready to lay out not specific figures for the city of St. Petersburg, but Vladimir Milov works on this for us, we have a fairly detailed program of how to redistribute the tax burden, that part of the mineral extraction tax should be left, that excise taxes need to be changed, and a large part of excises should be left, and so on and so forth. But this is part of a larger system of changing tax regulation and generally changing relations between the federal center and cities and regions. I am in fact a supporter of changing not only federalization, but of money going to the cities. Therefore the tax system, in a good way, should in principle be changed. And I hope it will be changed. But I say that a trillion should remain in the city because within the framework of the current system a normal governor sees how much is needed for the metro, sees how much is needed for normal street cleaning, sees that more than five million people live in the city…

Following the example of European cities.

Absolutely right! If Moscow has a budget of two and a half trillion rubles and here it is five hundred sixty, then probably a reasonable federal government should make a transfer of such size. They control parliament, they can do whatever they want with a snap of the fingers. Therefore if we are talking about “here and now,” that is exactly how it should be, and this is not a populist statement but a realistic one, because the city needs a trillion, yes.

You mentioned federalization. This is also a very acute issue, especially among, if one may say so, the St. Petersburg intelligentsia: there are many sentiments that St. Petersburg should almost be an independent state, or a region with broad powers of its own, which itself would decide more issues, including tax and legislative ones, and so on.

Absolutely right. This does not mean becoming an independent state. Let’s start with political issues. There will be a gubernatorial election. Why is Beglov now acting governor? Why did Poltavchenko resign? What other candidates were considered, and why do municipal filters exist? These are the most obvious questions. Why did Poltavchenko leave? I ask you, and you tell me that there is one version from some political scientists and another version from other political scientists, and none of the five and a half million people living here knows what happened. And if there are direct gubernatorial elections, does that mean becoming one’s own country? No! To dispose of one’s own taxes — does that mean becoming one’s own country? No! And so on and so forth. There are no large federal states on planet Earth, or even unitary states, that are governed from one city, from the center. It is simply a system that does not work.

There is one — Russia!

Well there you are, is it well governed? Look out the window and look at the snowdrifts. These are the consequences of the fact that everything absolutely must be governed from Moscow. How many shovels Beglov will make and distribute to his municipalities — that is approved by some people in Moscow. It should not be like that — it does not work. It is some kind of stupidity. Really, St. Petersburg by size is a country! By population it is a solid European country! Of course, it should be governed by its own government.

And why then can it not be a separate country, a separate state?

Because nobody needs that, and nobody wants it. Nobody in St. Petersburg itself wants there to be a State of St. Petersburg. Probably some people do, but they are a vanishingly small number. St. Petersburg residents want something reasonable: for the city to have its own government accountable to the residents, for municipal deputies to be elected, for there to be its own peculiarities. There may be its own regional laws, as theoretically exists even now, as in the United States. St. Petersburg is certainly a special city. We have a special Chechnya. We have a special St. Petersburg; it deserves special laws which people here will choose. Or rather not choose, but come up with and vote for.

Do you see some alternative model of governing Russia? Russia is a country with such a long authoritarian history; practically all of Russian history is authoritarian. Doesn’t it seem to you that in some sense you may now be like the young supporters of Yeltsin, or the people around him, who renewed things and in some sense rebooted the Soviet system into a new one. We saw that the Soviet Union collapsed, a new state appeared, but in the end there remained some idea that there must be some strong leader or one strong center, the idea that people should sacrifice themselves for some great good, as Putin says, that Russia’s uniqueness is that we can all sacrifice ourselves for the future of the country. This is some kind of misanthropic atmosphere, and that it will not change. Do you have any new humanitarian values, any proposals on how to change all this?

There is no need to reinvent the bicycle here. I am in what is essentially, in spirit, the most European city of Russia. And I do not need to say: “Guys, I have invented a new moral paradigm for us! Today we will believe in, I don’t know, Maslenitsa! And therefore this will be our new spiritual bond.” No! We have a spiritual bond called Russia. It is essentially part of European civilization. Russia can be rich, must be and will be a rich European country. But here half the city goes to Finland for groceries and everyone likes how things are arranged in Finland. And nobody wants things here to be like in China or Mongolia or North Korea. Even those people who talk nonsense about how we should rally around a great leader — and all our United Russia people — where do they buy real estate? In Italy! They also go to vacation in Finland, and Matviyenko’s son invested money in some Estonian islands, bought some islands or something like that. Therefore there is no need to invent anything here. We must develop as Russia ought to develop, being part of Europe. We must play a leading role in Europe. And we will.

In what sense a leading role?

Because we are big. We have a large economy, we have a large population.

And influence European politics?

Poland influences European politics.

How exactly?

We must participate in the European Parliament. Our party sooner or later will fight for seats in the European Parliament. We must participate in the European discussion about European security.

Do you believe that such a huge enormous country, complicated in this regard, with a small population for such size, with the fact that a large part of its population is in the East and in Asia, can be a fully European country?

Absolutely! There are no easy countries! Let’s take Belgium. Everything there is so complicated! And in Luxembourg they speak four different languages. And in Switzerland they practically all hate each other, and it is effectively a set of their own states, each of which holds referendums. France is split, and Poland is split on the issue of “Catholics vs. non-Catholics” and “abortion vs. no abortion.” The United Kingdom — you can see for yourself — cannot decide whether it has Brexit or not, and Scotland is trying to run off somewhere. All countries are complicated. And our difficulties are not so extraordinary compared with everyone else’s. Our situation is no more complicated than in Italy, where the North thinks that in the South there lives some kind of rabble, while in the South they think the North is full of arrogant swindlers. Every country has its peculiarities. And our country, with its enormous territory, albeit with a fairly large population by European standards, will live прекрасно!

And Vladivostok too?

Vladivostok too! Let’s come to Vladivostok and estimate whether it is more like a European city or more like a city in Thailand. The answer will be obvious. This is not China, not Thailand, not Cambodia, not North Korea. Vladivostok is Europe. Vladivostok is no different, it is just in bad shape, from any German city.

How do you think, should the Soviet past and legacy be rethought in some way? Do we need our own Nuremberg trial?

A. Navalny: The tax system should in principle be changed. And I hope it will be changed

We need to open the archives. The other day there was a completely wild piece of news. On the one hand, we endlessly discuss the legacy of Victory and all our propagandists, and my “favorite” Vladimir Solovyov again shouts “We are the heirs of Victory!” And once again Vladimir Putin made the decision that documents, including those concerning the Great Patriotic War, will remain secret. This is complete madness! Therefore the first thing we need to do is open all the archives and give historical science the opportunity to study everything.

And should we give any political assessments?

I do not think we should get too carried away with that. Because as soon as we begin… I do not like Stalin, I consider him an executioner of the Russian people. But if I now start discussing this from a political point of view, then we will not now remove Beglov from his post; instead I will be arguing with the Communist Party candidate Bortko, who likes Stalin very much. I do not like that in him, and that is exactly why I would like to put this discussion in brackets. But of course we must open the archives. We must find out what really happened. Look at what is happening now! Half the country now really believes that there were no repressions in the 1930s and 1940s. Here at the very least historical science can and must give clear answers. And everything should be correctly written and studied at school.

Correctly written from the point of view of historical science is always difficult!

Well yes, I said it and immediately thought that it sounded like a single history textbook! I am categorically against that, but I would like this kind of discussion, debate, publication of documents — all of that is interesting — to take place, and the state should, among other things, generously finance it.

Do you agree with those people who say that we have some imperial consciousness, some imperial spirit in Russia?

It would be silly to deny that.

Do you like this imperial consciousness, this imperial spirit?

I believe that playing with imperial consciousness, which the current authorities are now doing, is one of the most disgusting, deceitful and harmful things there can be for the country. The worst thing that could happen for us now is if we spend money not on ourselves, but again run around the globe trying to buy influence, as is happening now, for example with Venezuela, where we have already driven 18 billion dollars and which we will never get back. And we are still saving Maduro, buying his gold reserves. What the hell for! Why do we need any of this at all! For example, the countries of Central Asia. We still maintain a visa-free regime with them. Why?

And do you have it, imperial consciousness?

A. Navalny: ― I am a person from the Soviet Union. I am a Soviet person. Of course, somewhere in the backyards it exists. But I reason rationally. I want our country to be the biggest, coolest and best. But for me the answer to how it becomes that is that all our people need to become the richest. When our average salary is 600,000 rubles per person, then we will be the coolest.

What should be done with those people who think that we could smack America on the backside with nuclear missiles?

Talk to them. They are people, they live, they have the same right as you and I do to walk the streets and write on the internet “Navalny is a fool” or that we are some kind of liberals gathered here. These people need to be talked to, things need to be explained to them. Some number of people we will never persuade, but that is normal — that is parliament. Again, 1,575 deputies will be elected in St. Petersburg. Some number of deputies, by definition, should be people who think that we should throw nuclear missiles at everyone. Such people objectively exist, and they too should be represented.

Last question. There were many of them by SMS too. Tell us, what do you live on and where does the financing come from and who gives you money?

How I love and how pleasant it is for me to answer this question! The Anti-Corruption Foundation is financed by donations!

Only? People don’t believe it.

What do you mean, they don’t believe it?

Are these donations from ordinary citizens and some big businessmen?

The Kremlin doesn’t believe us either, and that is why the ACF is constantly checked! We submit reports to the Ministry of Justice and to the Prosecutor’s Office. Right now, these very days, they are again demanding some documents from us. We have been X-rayed for many years, and everyone knows, even Putin has probably read in one of his briefing notes, that the ACF has several thousand donors who for several years in a row have been sending us five hundred, three hundred thousand rubles. That is how I financed my election campaign, that is how the Anti-Corruption Foundation is financed, and that is exactly why we can afford to be the most independent political organization. We do what we want.

Thank you. This was Alexei Navalny. My name is Arseny Vesnin. Goodbye.