Question: The Central Electoral Commission released the official results of the presidential election on March 23. Vladimir Putin got 71.31% of the vote, or over 49 million votes. It is widely believed that all these citizens voted for economic stability.

Yavlinsky: They voted as they did because they lacked an opposition to choose any other type of economic development – a different model of development for health care, education, the military, housing and utilities. They voted as they did due to a lack of alternatives.

Question: But you deprived them of alternatives, by deciding not to run for president. Citizens had no other candidate to vote for.

Yavlinsky: I decided against running for president because I wanted to make a statement to the effect that this event did not qualify as an election. Actually, the election doesn't matter as much as the political climate created over the past four or five years. It isn't what I'd call a democratic political climate, or a real choice.

Question: By the way, Putin says his priorities are to create a competitive political system and establish a bona fide multi-party system in Russia.

Yavlinsky: This is just an attempt to improve Russia's image, nothing more. When the national leader says that Russia is a democracy working to create a competitive society, that is precisely what journalists will report in all the newspapers. Everyone will find it to their liking - Western leaders and Russia's liberal intelligentsia. Particularly the latter, since the intelligentsia is almost weeping in gratitude that the president is saying what they want to hear from him. All the same, it's good that the president is saying it. It would have been much worse if he declared the opposite objectives. And of course, it would be just great if he actually started to implement the objectives he proclaims.

Question: The objectives stated by Putin and your party are quite similar: fighting corruption and poverty, pursuing military reforms...

Yavlinsky: The objectives like fighting corruption, poverty, strengthening the military, broader influence in international affairs, and so on - all these have been declared in our country since the start of the 20th century. In fact leaders of all countries declare objectives like that.

Question: But these are goals that can be achieved via different means, and you have withdrawn your support from President Putin because you consider his methods to be incorrect. So which methods are correct, in your opinion?

Yavlinsky: The real difference is that I believe a modern economy can only be created by free individuals. That's essential, in order for Russia to be competitive. It requires well-informed, well-educated, self-confident people - individuals who can defend themselves in court and enjoy at least a minimum of social security. Some entirely different policies should be pursued to achieve this: policies aimed at establishing a truly independent judiciary, and a system of civilian oversight for the secret services and law and enforcement agencies. These policies should permit independent national newspapers and television networks to organize public debates - for example, on the rate and methods of economic growth...
These policies should aim to dismantle the oligarchic system. I'm not talking about harassing individual oligarchs, no. I'm talking about a new attitude entirely. This is what could lead to true economic growth.

Question: But some people maintain this is exactly where Russia is heading. The Duma has even passed legislation on reforming the local government system.

Yavlinsky: All that doesn't exceed the level of empty declarations. Virtually every incident in our lives offers evidence that some entirely different principles are being used in state
policy. The gap between legislation and real life is enormous.

Question: Do you mean to say there have been no reforms at all in Russia during Putin's first four years in the Kremlin?

Yavlinsky: There have been reforms, all right. Regional representation - the Federation Council - was abolished. Independent television networks - NTV, TV-6, TVC - have disappeared. Even the Duma's relative independence is now gone. The damage done to the judicial system is incredible - it has lost every vestige of respect. The past four years have been a period of important processes that augmented the system of peripheral capitalism which first arose between 1993 and 1996. These are the results of the reforms initiated by Putin. To prevent our conversation from becoming pointless, we need to understand the standpoint from which we are discussing Russia. If we compare Russia to Argentina, Gabon, or some other country like that, then Russia is no worse than they are. It is even doing better than some of them. But if we're talking in terms of the future, if we're talking about whether Russia can ever become a First World country and a fully-fledged member of the European community... then the picture is quite different. If you ask me, Russia will inevitably encounter problems with simple survival unless it becomes a developed nation.

Question: Do you mean it could disappear from the map?

Yavlinsky: Yes, it may find the competition too much. It would be extremely difficult for Russia to remain a sovereign state - given its vast territory, and the world's longest borders with the world's least stable regions. A powerful economy is needed to protect our borders, our resources, and our state.

Question: Some say that peace will come to Iraq within two years, and oil prices will collapse - and then another economic crisis awaits Russia.

Yavlinsky: I don't think much of this forecast. It requires oil prices of under $15 a barrel, and I don't think that's possible in the near future, not when there are markets like China and India. As for the more distant future, the problem may indeed become quite serious.

Question: What about the objective of doubling the GDP?

Yavlinsky: Go ahead. Double it. But this is growth without development. It's like a person's legs, arms, and midriff growing, while the heart remains unchanged. Growth without development would enable the GDP to be doubled. The rate of growth was even higher in the Soviet Union - but where is it now? It collapsed. And its growth rates amounted to 10-12% a year, or even 15%. They relied on increased output of oil, natural gas, and other raw materials. We will encounter some serious problems when global oil consumption falls. Not even prices, just consumption. For example, when hydrogen-powered vehicles come into general use. Some major markets will remain, however - China, India, and Russia. We will have to correct the phrase that Russia is a raw materials appendage of the West. We will be an appendage of the East then.
We have high growth rates nowadays, and considerable opportunities to get additional resources, because of high oil prices. But let's take a look at the results from the standpoint of social modernization. What is the impact on the modernization of the system of health care, education, national security, the Armed Forces, housing and utilities? On all those vital areas?

Question: But this is why the government is intent on levying this natural resources rent that everyone is talking about.

Yavlinsky: But we have already made a great deal of money due to above-target export revenues over the past four years. The real issue is finding an economic mechanism to convert this revenue into the modernization of society.

Question: The government is talking about higher export duties nowadays. According to Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, the budget will get an extra $3 billion a year with oil prices above $30 a barrel. Perhaps this is just the money that will be spent on health care and education.

Yavlinsky: I don't know that for certain. And you do not know.

Question: You appear convinced that Putin and the new Cabinet will be unable to implement any reforms - but Igor Artemyev, a member of your party, has just taken up an appointment as director of the Federal Anti-Monopoly Service.

Yavlinsky: What I believe or disbelieve doesn't matter. This is not a question of faith or belief - it is a question of practical steps. Secondly, all of us - whether YABLOKO members or not - are living in this country. We lived here under Brezhnev, Andropov, and Chernenko. Everyone had a job, and everyone did his or her best to make life better. It is no different now; people are doing what they can. You, for example, believe we lack independent media in Russia - and yet you remain a journalist, right? Our position was different when we still retained some hope that everything would be different after Yeltsin. We wanted to retain the resource of confidence in us, to pursue a different policy. Economic reforms are always very effective when the citizenry trusts the reformers and doesn't see them as thieves and crooks. This is the resource we wanted to save for the nation. But as we all know, unfortunately, Yeltsin carried out a maneuver that made alternatives impossible. This state of affairs may last for some time now. We've already been told that there will be a successor to Putin...

Question: When the Cabinet was formed, there were rumours of some clandestine agreements on YABLOKO members being included – but something went awry, allegedly, so YABLOKO took legal action...

Yavlinsky: That's nonsense. How could we expect to be placed in control of the government when we didn't even get past the 5% threshold?

Question: Do you think anything at all has been done to develop a modern economy in Russia?

Yavlinsky: It is possible to invent a better taxation system, or make decisions about natural resources rent, for example. It is possible to keep on and on improving legislation, endlessly. However, there are some fundamental conditions without which a modern economy will never arise. Just two words: liberty and justice. We shall never achieve the quality of development we need without these two conditions. The rate of growth is a secondary issue.

Russkiy Fokus, April 5-11, 2004