The well -known political expert, professor of jurisprudence of the Birkbek college (Birkbeck) University of London, the Academic Coordinator of the European Center for Human Rights, the Expert of the Council of Europe, Bill Bawing , in the commentary of Media Premotage, spoke about the situation in the Russian media, local elections, the Crimea and the USA.

- In one of your works there is such a statement: “None of the Russian politicians will be there forever, in power. There are many young people who are dissatisfied with this and, ultimately, this will change. The new generation has Internet access, and the government has no control over it. ” Can the Internet and Internet journalism really become such an instrument of freedom?

It is very popular among young people, because now most have smartphones, tablets, they do not read newspapers. Newspapers are for the older generation, for young people a huge number of different sources are in one place - this is the Internet. Personally, I will learn news on the Internet using many different news sources. This is modern reality - all information is available from a personal smartphone, you just need to pay for the Internet.

- Will the freedom and completeness of sources of information allow, in your opinion, to achieve maximum objectivity?

Objectivity is always someone's opinion. If you hear different opinions, then there is a greater chance that you will acquire your own opinion. And of course, real facts are needed.

I read that in Russia more and more people have access to the Internet, but you have places where it is not. In the 16th century, when a seal appeared in Europe, it was scary for the authorities. In England, it was the time of Henry VIII, then the Bible was prohibited in English, it was still printed contrary to the authorities and was a kind of “smuggling”. And in the 17th century, the process was no longer stopped: in Europe there was a huge surge in printed publications. It was like the Internet today. There is no doubt that the Internet is very important for business, for public life, for the state that tries to control it, but it does not work, it is very difficult. Edward Snowden and Jullian Assange became an “extreme” option for such freedom of information. These people have discovered a huge amount of secret materials to the world.

I read Vedomosti and Kommersant every day, sometimes “Moscow Komsomolets” and “arguments and facts”. I believe that you have many different print sources. There is another look through such media outlets as the “Elephant”, “iodine”, “Medusa”, the Rain TV channel.

- In our republic, did you concern the media issue?

This morning I watched Mari television. Local news is very local news.

- How are we doing with national minorities? At one time, you studied the issue of the situation of the Mari language in the region.

The head of your republic is not a Mari, this is a military prosecutor who arrived from Moscow. If the head was Mari, then you would have more Mari than Italian.

Here in Tatarstan there is Tatar language as a subject of high school. And you can hear the Tatar language on the streets of Kazan. I rarely hear Mari in the streets of cities. Everyone speaks Russian. But, by the way, even in our London there are so many Russians that the Russian language is very audible.

-Has the attitude towards the Russians in London changed somehow after the last events?

No. Because London has always been with Russia in a very good relationship. We were on the same side in the war against Napoleon and then against Hitler. There is a very warm attitude towards Russia after the Great Patriotic War. Today, London lives a large number of Russian oligarchs who own English football clubs and the media, and create an exotic “super -fighting” image of Russians. On British television, for example, there was a recently cycle of MEET RUSSIANS programs, telling about Russian rich people in London.

In the British media and society, a slightly different emphasis is that the problem of the Islamic world, the situation in Syria and Iraq, are more worried about everyone, and on Russian television constantly talk about Ukraine, the situation in the Crimea and the Donbass. Great Britain lost many of its soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. For what? Therefore, today we are against the presence of any armed conflict and do not want a repetition of the situation with Afghanistan.

- What do they think about the situation with the Crimea?

The Crimea in Britain is more known in the Crimean War of the 19th century, which is captured in verses and stories that are known to everyone from school. But if you ask someone about what this war was about and why-no one will say. In fact, no one really knows anything about the current situation with the Crimea. Indeed, in fact, Crimea was essentially a gift from the USSR to Ukraine in due time, no one won it. In general, the British “left” and even leading political experts support Russia's position. For example, a popular book of the chief British expert in Russia Richard Sakva about Ukraine, which also supported the Russian side, has recently been published. I believe that the majority of politicians in the West believe that Crimea and Sevastopol are part of Russia, this is an already held fact, but this position will be accepted in a few years.

Each country has its own problems. A month ago, I was in Ukraine and noticed that people in Kyiv are very unhappy with their government. In Ukraine, there is a struggle between commercial clans. Poroshenko resigned the governor of Kolomoisky, this is also visible in the struggle. The main drawback of the Ukrainian authorities is the enormous incompetence in what and how they do. But, I want to say that the latest parliamentary elections were honest and ultra -right did not receive support. Personally, I am 100 percent sure that every day the President Putin and Poroshenko call up on the phone to discuss the situation.

- In Mari El and in other regions this year elections of the heads of subjects will be held. How do you evaluate this process?

In Russia, this is very difficult. Now there is actually no legitimate opposition. The country needs a real Social Democratic Party, as in France, Germany, England and other countries. The problem of Russia is that there are parties that can be called artificial, and many of them of the old generation, generation of the USSR. And the opposition, which includes Kasyanov, cannot be Navalny. If there were real political parties, not the “Communist Party”, not the SSR, then there would be a normal image of the opposition socialist party. But I noticed that United Russia is not supported in different regions, which means that there is an opportunity to restore the political situation.

- In the United States there are only two leading parties, what is the opposition there?

They are very similar, and this is their problem. In the USA, which is extremely interesting to me, now the first black president, although the fastest part of the population is the Spaniards. I can argue that after a couple of generations, the Spanish -speaking citizen will become the president. Now the southern states of America are absolutely populated by the Spaniards: Arizona, Texas, New Mexico. And if there is the second American-Mexican war, Mexico will win. And California is now no longer part of the United States, but a separate world, they are now looking at Japan, at the Pacific Ocean. In my opinion, a crisis is from both the Republican and Democratic Parties. In the Republican Party, as you know, there are completely crazy people.

- John McCain?

Yes, and I'm afraid Hillary Clinton. If in the next election she will be against Jeb Bush, it will be scary, because this woman is configured against Russia, this is a fact.

- It is clear with the USA, but what problems we have?

I believe that the main problem of Russia is heredity, because Putin, one might say, is the heir to Yeltsin. Yeltsin was preparing to calmly and peacefully die in retirement, and no one knows what would happen after Putin.

Interviewed by Evgeny Dvornikov.

Source: news portal media