Sergey Medvedev: "We pray for oil"

- How do you generally assess the situation around you?

- As for me personally, I am not happy about what is happening. I do not want to be a herald and a banner from something. Even less I want this conflict to be presented at a personal level: the president insulted the professor, the professor answered the president ... But at the same time, I am glad for the topic of the discussion itself, this is a great reason to talk about the defense of the Arctic. Let the idea that we suddenly should refuse from some territory, the average Russian will seem completely wild. Here appeared such a bizarre professor who threw this idea. Then someone else will say, in three to five years they will begin to discuss the moratorium on oil production, and after 10-15 years everything will be so: the Arctic will become a protected zone. As an Antarctic, where economic and military activities are prohibited, and scientific activity and tourism are allowed. There are objective laws of the global environment, and no sovereign ambitions can withstand the environmental disaster, which threatens us from the Arctic. In the future, we still have to come to terms with the fact that it will be necessary to stop oil production there, but this, I'm afraid, will happen after a couple of serious accidents.

- You say, the layman does not understand why you must suddenly abandon part of his land. So why?

-Firstly, the Arctic outside the sovereign territory and territorial waters is not “our land”. We just have the right to economic activity there. It is given to us by international treaties and may also be limited to international treaties. Secondly, the Arctic is not only a pantry of natural resources, but also an ecological powder barrel, a source of all kinds of problems: for climate, for life, for the Russian economy. We are the first to experience the consequences of oil spills. If we talk about global warming, for Russia it will be absolutely catastrophic: our northern territories will turn into swamps. In a purely practical sense, we must first advocate the preservation of the environmental purity of the Arctic.

The national interests of Russia are wider than the interests of Gazprom.

And thirdly, Russia is a great power. The great power differs not only in that it allows himself to take as much as he can, but also in that it behaves responsibly in the world arena. And this is a great opportunity for Russia to show responsibility, to abandon momentary interests for the sake of long -term global benefits. The reputation winning will be incomparably more than the ridiculous money that we can get from the oil development of the Arctic ... We have a sacralization of oil today: we pray for oil, and suddenly someone suggests abandoning new deposits. We need to discover our consciousness, to understand that the national interests of Russia are wider than the interests of Gazprom and wider than territorial ambitions. All of what has been said, of course, applies to America, Canada, Norway, Denmark, which needs to be concluded a kind of packet on non -aggression and transformation of the Arctic into a reserve.

- But so far this idea, as we see, causes protests.

- Water sharpens the stone. We need to speak after a performance, over and over again to introduce this idea at least into the enlightened part of society: it is also alien to the idea that Russia should suddenly refuse something. The word "sovereignty", which I used in my first comments on Facebook, hurts very strongly. Sovereignty is a painful theme for Russian mass consciousness and for the leadership of the country. Modern Russia is a young state that has not established since 1991. We left the Soviet Union with a very weak sense of our own identity and uncertainty regarding our own boundaries. Therefore, the theme of the Kuril Islands, Kaliningrad, now the Arctic sounds so painful ... But I want to emphasize that I do not urge to violate the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, we are only talking about limiting activities in the exclusive economic zone, which equally concerns all Arctic countries.

- Greenpeisers are now sitting in the pre -trial detention center of Murmansk, that their action fell into two sore points - sovereignty and oil?

- Yes, and even in Gazprom. The reaction of our authorities is completely childish: they are like a kid in the courtyard among older boys, where it is important not to show their weakness. They are not afraid to react hard enough: on Pussy Riot , to the law of Magnitsky, on the Greenpeace ... Beat stronger to be afraid. The Russian authorities would leave this “Greenpeace” action without attention - it would be much easier for him. The Greenpeace was already hanging a banner on the “Prirazlomnaya”, and the world did not collapse! Last year they hung: then the banner was removed, activists drank tea with oil workers and sailed away, and everyone forgot about it. And now the whole world is talking about this incident.

- You are not an ecologist, you are a political scientist ...

- Yes. I mentioned the existence of such an idea in a comment on Facebook: to create an international reserved zone in the Arctic. But then, when such a crazy promotion of my coma went, I had to protect this idea seriously, since I really support it.

- How did it happen that your comment on Facebook reached Putin itself?

-It is difficult for me to judge this, there are some cascading effects of the Internet, when one pebble can cause an avalanche. Apparently, in one of the Facebook branches, some people who did not love me were sitting. They caught on my comment on sovereignty and decided to convey in instance. This fell into the structures of the LDPR, lay on the table to Zhirinovsky. He saw in this a good topic for PR and raised at a meeting of the State Duma the question of leaving me from the Higher School of Economics. United Russia joined, and already at Putin’s meeting with its activists this question was raised. He seemed to hurt Putin: he gave a detailed answer for about five minutes. So in 48 hours, comment on Facebook turns into a strategic statement by the president.

- Are you offended by the "moron"?

- Not at all. With whom it does not happen, a person said in his hearts. And then, this comment is not in the transcript on the Kremlin’s website, so there is nothing to discuss here. The essence of the matter, the struggle for the Arctic and the liberation of Greenpeace activists is much more important.

Our power is like a kid in the courtyard among older boys, where it is important not to show his weakness.

-Is the Arctic for you something personal?

- Yes, sure. For the first time I was there at the age of 17: I went to practice in my first year. I flew to Chukotka and fell in love with these spaces, in this snow, this wind. Real romance in the spirit of Jack London and Rockwell Kent. As a result, I went there for four to five months for three consecutive years. Since then, I have been returning to the Arctic all the time: I was in Greenland and in the Canadian part. Every year for eight years in a row, I have been led by HSE students to a summer school to Lapland, we have been living in biostations in the tundra, we go to hills, go to the fjords and talk about the environmental problems of civilization. Including quite calmly we discuss the issue of the transfer of the Arctic to international jurisdiction. We do projects on this subject. This idea has been discussed for many years by the world environmental and political science community. There is a similar petition of Greenpeace called Save the Arctic , it was already signed by 4 million people, of which many Russians.

- The petition is not only addressed to Russia?

- No, to all countries. What I am talking about, not only to Gazprom refers to: also to S Tatoil , Shell , Exxon M Obil . This applies to all countries and companies.

- How did the round table go in the Public Chamber with your participation?

- There were good performances from ecologists, but many government representatives were also invited, and not one of them came. As it turned out, this topic is not interesting to them. Here, Gazpromneft, Rosneft, Lukoil, employees of the Ministry of Natural Resources, the Investigative Committee, and the Prosecutor General’s Office are invited (takes out) . None of them were: Greenpeace, WWF , public environmental organizations, deputies of the State Duma and expert scientists came. So we talked among themselves.

- Do you think you will be recorded in ardent opposition?

“It doesn't bother me too much.” I don’t bother myself anyway in terms of expression of my opinion. I have many ways to do this: I am leading a column in Forbes , in the newspaper Vedomosti, sometimes there are hundreds of comments where they accuse me of Russophobia, dislike of the regime. I don't get used to it. Criticism of power is an intellectual duty of any thinking person. This is part of my love for the Motherland. If I lived in America, I would have criticized the American government, American oil policy in Alaska. I am not engaged in political activities, I just put up questions. Sometimes - uncomfortable.