Navalny VS Romanova

Go or not go to the anti -crisis march "Spring" on March 1, planned by the opposition? Will the next street action bring the results or will it end with the detention of the participants, with new repressions and disappointment?

The head of the Corruption Fund Alexei Navalny and the leader of the Rus Sitting organization Olga Romanova argued about this in the editorial office of The New Times - they argued exactly on the eve of how the Presnensky court of Moscow sent Navalny once again for bars - for 15 days

NT: There are two quite defined and discussed in the public space of the point of view both in relation to the march on March 1, and street protest as a whole. One: demonstrations do not give anything, and people are behind bars and criminal cases. The second: exactly because the regime is tightened, repressions are exposing, and it is necessary to go out into the street - so that both the power and the fellow citizens know: the opposition is alive, the resistances have not yet transferred. I would like to listen to the arguments of both parties. Alexey Navalny: We need to go for a very simple reason: we do not want to read the news that comes every day anymore. If they once outraged, angry, now it is already an avalanche of delirium like that it is necessary to reduce the study of foreign languages. And this is against the background of the war that Russia actually wages. We have no other country, there is no other people, and we, it seems to me, responsible people, the task of calling all the others to confront what is happening.

Olga Romanova: I always went and will go to protest marches. March 1 is the first march that I will not go to. I won’t go completely consciously, although, of course, I will be somewhere nearby, and we, together with the “May 6th” committee, with the Union of support for political prisoners, as usual, will be on duty with lawyers at the police department, mitigating, possibly, consequences. But I will not go because I do not understand the goals formulated by the organizers. I do not understand what the anti -crisis march "Spring" is. I am ready to go out for freedom. I am not ready to get to ensure that the oppositions are given an hour on the federal channel. I am against giving up the abolition of counter -sanctions as anti -crisis measure. Because this will not affect prices. The whole wording of the points of the anti -crisis march “Vesna” is: “Crisis - go away! Winter - go away! " Reminds the trade union march in Portugal. Very good, but we are not Portugal.

For what? NT: You are against the economic requirements that are an integral part of 12 points of the march requirements, or, in principle, against any demonstration on March 1! Romanova: I am for a conscious and meaningful street activity that will have an effect and have an action.

NT: What is - "have action"? Take the Kremlin, demolish the Lubyanka? Please, a vivid example. Here are two marches - a march against the scoundrels on January 13, 2013 (a march against the “Law of Dima Yakovlev”, which forbade the adoption of orphans by US citizens. - NT ), when everything was clear ...

Navalny: By your logic, it was a march that did not lead to anything.

... And a very large and important anti -war march in the fall of 2014. Firstly, people who did not go out before. We saw many Ukrainian flags, many came in embroidered shirts, in Ukrainian wreaths, and we did not understand who it was Russians, Ukrainians? We saw each other, saw that we were a lot. And they showed Ukraine: not all Russians, Russian people have gone crazy, there are those who are against the war. And they told the world about the same.

Navalny: I look at the requirements and see that this march is about what you are talking about. We say that the country has come to a standstill. We - this is recorded in the requirements of the march - demand an immediate end to the war and any aggressive actions against Ukraine, for this very many will be released on March 1; We demand an unconditional admission of opposition parties and their candidates to participate in the elections. About the elections - a key point, nothing will happen without this, because now the opposition is not represented in the authorities, that is, no alternative point of view does not sound. Further-socio-economic requirements: reduction of inflated military-police expenses (this is a third of the federal budget)-2 times and the direction of funds for the development of human capital; The abolition of useless grocery counter -sanctions, which caused the growth of food prices. Perhaps you do not trust my examination in this matter, but Konstantin Sonin, a professor of HSE, also in the list of his already three immediate steps necessary to combat the crisis, also writes: “The abolition of grocery counter -sanctions”. Further-to redistribute funds in favor of regions and local self-government to finance socio-communal infrastructure. Stop pouring hundreds of billions in the state -owned company Rosneft, VTB, VEB, etc. To cancel decisions on the confiscation of pension savings, which affects, as we know, 25 million people. For each of these requirements, I am ready to go to a rally, for the sake of everyone! And I am sure that a huge number of people for the sake of these requirements are ready to go to a rally. But even if we remain with you together, and everyone else will decide that they are satisfied with what is happening is still our task - to go outside and stand, thereby demonstrating that we do not like that the authorities can plant anyone, trample anyone, close any media, etc. We do not agree.

You want changes within the framework of the system, and do not urge to change the system. I can't go to the anti -crisis march ...

NT: Then under what slogan should you go? No war. Dot. And do not "give us an hour of ether, please."

The war in Ukraine Putin achieves internal political goals. In order to maintain corruption, so as not to let the parties to the elections, to have censorship and a bad judicial system - for this he unleashed the war. “There is no war” - a slogan under which most people will come, but you need to see the picture wider. Who is waging the war? The authorities are waging a war. Why? Because they have a political and economic crisis - with the help of war, they are trying to resolve the political crisis.

The risks and responsibility of NT: agree, but also the argument of those who believe that street actions only produce more and more repressions have grounds. Isn't it? It seems to me that people who are not the first time know these risks. The problem is not that. And the fact that the action on December 30 last year on Manezhnaya Square (after the conviction was sentenced to the Navalny brothers. - NT) showed a very bad tendency. Namely, the fact that there are a lot of people, more than two hundred, got into the police department, and they were engaged in various lawyers and different organizations - except for Navalny's supporters.

It's a shame that you are saying that is simply not true. All employees of the Corruption Fund were either on the square or participated differently ... Lawyers were engaged in legal support. We had a separate number in the Foundation for the fight against corruption. All our legal capacities worked on the 30th. All that we could do, we did with everyone.

NT: On social networks, the issue was posed wider. Namely: protest leaders must be responsible for those ordinary activists who are arrested by 15, or even 30 days with the subsequent institution against them, as happened in relation to Mark Halperin and Vladimir Ionov. I can answer to this that all activists who are associated with me, with the Party of Progress and the Fund for Combating Corruption, do what they always did. They either get into the police department, or help those who have been in the police department. Naturally, our capabilities and capabilities of the state repressive machine are not comparable. Exactly for this everything is done - to plant random people, and then tell fairy tales that the leaders abandoned them. I do not remove responsibility from myself. Political leaders or people who claim to become, of course, are responsible for everything. And this is a majority of my moral cargo. Because my brother was imprisoned, I am also answering.

Yes, people are truly risking, especially those who have been detained several times and who are now in an article up to five years. But when in 1968, in August, a handful of people went to Red Square, they perfectly understood that they would sit in prison. They came out with the only requirement: there is no input of tanks into Czechoslovakia! Although they had a lot of reasons to say: and we also want to have jeans in the store, so that there are imported drinks and products and that we can go to London and Paris - give an increase in salaries, give meat without bones, etc. But they came out with one main requirement and sat down. And now, after the march of March 1, if people sit down - what will they sit for?

NT: Still, Olga, Olga, is not satisfied with the formulation of the slogans of the march or you are worried that many people can suffer? Romanova: both. But the most important thing is the absence of the main message, essence, nerve. What are we going out?

For freedom. For dignity. For us to be richer. So that in a wonderful rich country in Russia we get national wealth.

NT: We understand correctly that the discussion between the parties is about what words should be on the banners of the march? Or is there something essential? Of course, essential.

Let's just to complete the topic of risks, I will tell you, it seems to me, an important thing. The regime is specifically, defiantly, indicative and, of course, unfairly represses different people. But in general, according to statistics, the probability of being detained at the rally is much less than the probability of getting into an accident on a regular automobile trip in Moscow. This action will be agreed, and no one will detain anyone, everything will be normal in this regard. But, returning to the point, what is happening in the country to the street. It is not the Navalny, but Putin - because he does such things that we do not want to let him do with our country.

New reality NT: If you say that the question is in changing the regime, then how can street promotions affect this? After all, they already went out - on Bolotnaya, on Sakharov, again to Bolotnaya, marched in the boulevards. AND - ? The exit of people to the street should create a new political reality. Many are convinced: in 2011-2012, there was a protest movement, but now it is not. But this is not at all like that: from an institutional point of view, the opposition has become stronger, more powerful and even richer in a sense-because we supports us much more people. But exactly because the rally activity has come to naught, people think that there is no more protest. We must demonstrate to society that there is an opposition, that there is a serious force that does not agree with what is happening. Understand: those who go outside are just a spear point. If you-

200 thousand people went outside, which means that in Moscow several million dissatisfied. And in the country? With the help of his television, Putin constructed a reality in which everyone supports his foreign policy, the opposition is only continuous marginals, and only Ramzan Kadyrov, or “Antimaydan”, some kind of surgeon, or the Orthodox Church, can attract real, living people. Here we must say: this is not true.

But as many people will not come out as it came out in the 11th year, and it turned out to be new political reality, as it turned out now, because the tops can, and the bottoms so far want to live in the old way. And what kind of competition with Ramzan Kadyrov or surgeon? Even if we get the same amount - Putin still has more opportunities. This is not the point.

NT: Do you think that now human rights activity is more important than political activity? No, I think that you need to do everything: street activity, and human rights and civilian. Absolutely all points need to be beaten.

The political crisis is due to the fact that all who would like to participate in it are squeezed out of politics. Therefore, the most important political requirement now is admission to the election of all. Until there are free elections, the authorities will not change, so we are talking, of course, about the change of power.

And about the change of Putin.

The requirements of the march says: Putin and the government must leave.

And early elections? Do you understand that Igor Ivanovich Sechin will win in early elections?

In the elections in which the Party of Progress will participate, we will take out Igor Ivanovich Sechin to the street in three seconds. In any case, I am ready to try. I think that when I talk with the workers of the Uralvagonzavod and tell them about its salary and what the party of progress offers, the workers of this plant will not vote for Igor Ivanovich, but for me. I am not afraid of competition from Sechin or Putin. They are afraid of competition, and that is why it is forbidden to participate in the election until 2020. That is why they adopted the law according to which they threw me out of the elections, Khodorkovsky and a huge number of other people.

I do not see the meaning and effectiveness in the march of March 1.

NT: One of the political scientists, formulating his arguments against the march on March 1, wrote: the opposition goes out to count himself once again. For this, he believes, it makes no sense to go out. Of course, I would like many people to come to march on March 1. But, in fact, the number is not of fundamental importance-this rivalry is imposed on us by Kurginyans. But even if I understood that either everyone is passive or afraid, I will go out anyway, because this is my civil position, for which I live and claim the self -esteem and respect of my children.

Is it possible to ask for power? Sergey Sharov-Delone, member of the May 6 committee (Olga Romanova's second): Do I understand correctly that the march’s requirements are addressed to power: so that the authorities give airtime, allowed it to the elections, and did this and that. Do you consider it possible to talk with this authority, asking for something?

If you look at the text of the requirements carefully, then you will see that he cannot be turned to power, because we demand that Putin and his government leave. This is a manifesto, it is addressed to himself and to our current and potential supporters. There is no interaction with the authorities here, and cannot be. This is a statement about how we see a way out of the crisis. This is an appeal to the people.

Sharov-Delone: ​​This is not a program of exit from the crisis. This is such a set of Wishlist, a set of appeals to the authorities: let's take the most odious things somehow, and then everything will not be so bad.

A lot of things need to be done in order for the country to get out of the political and economic crisis. There is a set of steps, without which this will definitely not happen. No one asks for nothing in power. We declare that we demand this, this is our vision of what should happen.

Roman Nekhoroshev, a banking employee (second of Alexei Navalny): On December 30, I was on the arena, and it was some kind of movement in a circle. There were few people. If this goes on, five, ten, fifteen thousand will go out, and so a year, three, five ... maybe it is worth changing the format?

A good question that we ask ourselves constantly. The 30th was a action of despair, they participate in them because they want to demonstrate solidarity. But you touched on an important thing: if in the 11th, 12th years there was enthusiasm, now there is no enthusiasm, and you need to use much more technologies, much more to clarify. If Romanova doubts ... the lack of enthusiasm needs to be compensated: with its perseverance, explanatory work; You should think about format. Now we want to divide the procession into several columns, so that each column on one thing focuses on one. For example, there are people, Olya, from them, who say: it is important for us against the war, and we will not be about Mozarella. It is necessary to enable people within the general procession to unite around those slogans for which they went to march.

Nekhoroshev: I like the idea of ​​different columns. But we are probably united by any one story? We believe in freedom of speech, market freedom, these things, it seems to me, are important to everyone. Why don't you want to unite and discuss more global things? It seems to me that you should not argue on the little things.

I do not think that these are trifles. Of course, it is necessary to unite, but there should be a meaning in the unification. Why did everyone go out? My argument: there must be much more stringent requirements.

It seems to me that we do not need to unite with Romanova, because we are already united. I am sure that she will go to the rally on March 1. Discussion is a feature of not only liberal party, but in general politicians. People who come to politics endlessly argue, because they have a clear system of views, it cannot be identical. This conversation is useful, and I am sure that on March 1 we will go together.

NT: Alexei Navalny will sit in a temporary detention center on March 1 - for this reason he will not be able to go on a march. When on February 19, the judge of the Presnensky court sentenced him to, in the courtroom next to Navalny was Olga Romanova (in the photo on the left). Photo: Konstantin Salomatin, Alexey Kozlov