| Khodorkovsky is again looking for a way out Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who outlined a seven-point program for saving liberal values in his now famous article “The Crisis of Liberalism in Russia,” began implementing the plan. In accordance with points No. 1 (“comprehend a new strategy for interaction with the state”), No. 2 (“learn to look for the truth in Russia, and not in the West”) and No. 7 (“attract conscientious and talented people who will form the basis the new elite of Russia"), he yesterday addressed a message to the participants of the club of regional journalists. This club is one of the projects financed by the Open Russia charity foundation, and Mr. Khodorkovsky speaks to its participants every year. Regional journalists, one would think, would have forgiven the former head of YUKOS if he had abandoned the traditional appeal this year. But Mr. Khodorkovsky dictated the text to his lawyers, and the program director of the Open Russia Foundation, Irina Yasina, read it to the club participants.
According to sources close to Mr. Khodorkovsky’s visitors to “Matrosskaya Tishina,” the oligarch was very dissatisfied with the public response from the publication of “The Crisis of Liberalism in Russia.” The former head of YUKOS was counting on a serious national discussion, while many regarded the article as Khodorkovsky’s appeal not to society, but to President Putin. Apparently, now the prisoner of “Matrosskaya Tishina” will give impetus to the discussion of his ideas through new appeals.
In his new letter, Khodorkovsky dwells in detail on two theses from “The Crisis of Liberalism in Russia” - the mistakes and extent of responsibility of liberals and their attitude towards President Putin as a state institution. “Today the words “liberalism” and “democracy” are almost abusive, not because people in Russia do not want freedom, but these words in the minds of the majority of the population are strongly associated with the shock of 1991-1993 and the collapse of 1998,” writes Khodorkovsky. - And we, supporters of the liberal-democratic vector of the country’s development, have only two possibilities. The first is to say: we (I’m talking about myself and the “old liberals”) did everything right, and leave the political scene with our heads held high, taking with us the ideals of freedom and democracy from an incomprehensible people of 20 years, who for some reason still wants social guarantees, stability and wages, or to be honest: we made many mistakes out of stupidity, because of ambition, because of a lack of understanding of what is happening in the country in all the complex set of its social and regional characteristics, these are our mistakes, not the inevitable result of liberal democratic reforms. Forgive us if you can, let us atone, we know how, and if you can’t, then we must leave - people, not the ideals of freedom and democracy. And then the new Liberals have almost four years to start a lot over again.”
The message is again addressed to the President: I don’t love him, but I accept him. “And one more thing is unpleasant, but true: in the country there is the only institution of power recognized by the people - this is the president. Today this is the case, largely as a result of our mistakes, and we must be able to negotiate. This does not mean abandoning criticism or, especially, the creation of civil society structures. This means understanding our responsibility for maintaining stability in the country, which was so hard to achieve and is by no means guaranteed historically and politically,” writes the former head of YUKOS.
Mr. Khodorkovsky is unlikely to be able to create a new wave of discussion. In the end, there are practically no controversial ideas in his article, and, as already noted, Putin could well have been its author. “The content of Khodorkovsky’s second letter is similar to the content of the first, and I don’t see any political significance in it,” Vyacheslav Nikonov, president of the Politika Foundation, told the Vremya Novostei newspaper. - It is intended for a wider circle of readers, including the main reader of the country. But he probably read Khodorkovsky’s first letter and is unlikely to read the second.”
Director of the Center for Political Technologies Igor Bunin draws attention to the fact that Khodorkovsky focuses the public’s attention on two of his ideas: “Firstly, criticism of old liberalism and old liberals, secondly, the idea that it is necessary to recognize the institution of the presidency and “negotiate” with it.” - in this formulation. Here Khodorkovsky breaks with the old liberals - such as Gaidar, who has already declared that there is nothing to repent for, and Nemtsov, who denies any compromise with the president.” Mr. Bunin also sees in Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s speeches a focus on specific readers. “Inside the president’s circle, there is some kind of discussion going on between the technocratic-liberal group and the security group regarding the fate of Khodorkovsky, there is some kind of conflict. This is barely splashed out in the press, but it is noticeable. I cannot say whether Khodorkovsky’s second letter is some element of this game, but I admit it,” he says.
At the same time, co-chairman of the National Strategy Council Joseph Diskin sees new signals in Khodorkovsky’s declaration: “In the first letter, he speaks about the current system in a detached manner, although he himself was one of its creators. He was accused of calling everyone to repentance, but not going to do it himself. The central point of the second letter is the explanation that he himself is an “old liberal” and is ready to repent. Moreover, he knows how to repent actively. The idea of kneeling on Red Square and asking for forgiveness is not interesting. We need to turn the system around: create strong state institutions, stimulate the building of civil society.” Daria GUSEVA, Ivan GORDEEV |
|
