FULL video version of

Elena Rykovtseva: I present to you our guest today — Grigory Yavlinsky. Happy New Year.

Grigory Yavlinsky: Thank you, and you. Congratulate everyone a Happy New Year, Merry Christmas.

Elena Rykovtseva: And could you want?

Grigory Yavlinsky: I wish the world to be. I wish a peaceful sky, peaceful life — the most important thing you can desire. In general, the situation is that what my parents said, probably not even parents, grandmother, grandfather: only there was no war. Who is to say nothing more.

Elena Rykovtseva: Survived. The ultimate dream — a world, of course.

Grigory Yavlinsky: So I wish you all peace and all.

Elena Rykovtseva: Speaking of the peace talks, which ended in nothing today in Minsk. They could hypothetically be any result or a completely pointless story?

Grigory Yavlinsky: Of course, if there was the political will in Moscow and Kiev, then they would have resulted in positive results. Relatively Kiev I fully can not say, but in Moscow, I will not see such and such interest to make it all stopped, except for some declarations and statements that let’s live together, everything will be fine, meaningless propaganda statements of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I do not see anything serious, anything meaningful.

Elena Rykovtseva: What will be in Kiev, which he may choose from these talks? What’s he from these people who call themselves the DNI and the LC can peacefully choose?

Grigory Yavlinsky: You know that for Ukraine, I think it would be more correct if they say about Ukraine Ukrainian politics. I think I’d better talk about Russia. It is so serious that we should not be gossip and absentee politician, some do correspondence assumptions, analyzes, to me it does not seem serious. Ukraine has repeatedly said that she was asked not to give her advice. With this we can agree, albeit Ukrainian politicians themselves say. I think that Poroshenko interested in that there was peace and territorial integrity of Ukraine. That is, I think the starting point. What they will pursue a policy — a special theme, a separate and better that it was discussed by politicians who take decisions in Kiev or, at least, there are close to where the decisions are made.

Elena Rykovtseva: We are now able to cut a lot of those, because decisions are made by others on these topics, and not to discuss them. I just said that this power Kiev with these people, Zakharchenko and so on, can really peaceful about something to negotiate, in your opinion?

Grigory Yavlinsky: In my opinion, these people say, on behalf of the position occupied by Moscow. Therefore, I believe that the key to a positive development of the situation or the starting point of the positive developments are ultimately direct talks between Putin and Poroshenko. Not for nothing is present here Zurabov as Russian ambassador. Therefore conversations should go between Moscow and Kiev.

Elena Rykovtseva: About what?

Grigory Yavlinsky: There is a very simple thing, they are written in Minsk solutions. Their essence is that there must be withdrawn from the territory of Ukraine all illegal armed groups should be withdrawn from the territory of Ukraine by foreign armed forces, heavy military equipment, as well as fighters and mercenaries. It was written and signed in September agreements in Minsk. That’s the right thing to do. In addition there are other solutions on the challenge technique prisoner exchange. But the most important thing and archived decision. To solve this problem can only two presidents, it can not solve someone else.

Elena Rykovtseva: It is very difficult to imagine how Vladimir Putin will decide this issue, if it all stands speaking, says that there is no one there, we have nothing to pull out.

Grigory Yavlinsky: This is the whole point, is the essence of the situation. Therefore, what they can agree there? God forbid, if they agree at least that the exchange of prisoners, to avoid attacks to avoid people were killed — the most important thing at the moment, at a particular moment. In addition, it is necessary for people to survive the winter, that they are not in the blockade, so they do not die of hunger and cold. That’s the minimum. As for the major steps forward, the most important thing — that’s what I said, the withdrawal of illegal armed groups, the withdrawal of all militias, the output of heavy equipment.

Elena Rykovtseva: This should be Putin’s decision that he ever will?

Grigory Yavlinsky: I think so, I think it will be a decision that will take Moscow and Kiev.

Elena Rykovtseva: President of the Russian Federation, and some of the Presidents of the Russian Federation, we will see further. Many questions came, I was surprised about what will happen without Putin. For example, write: «Do you have any plan for what to do with security forces, efesbeshnikov after Putin? This stratum of society criminogenic dangerous. What to do with them when they are no longer in need?». Another wrote: «The resignation of the president, the interim government, lustration, the Constituent Assembly, a new federal agreement, the new constitution, the new Russia. What will be, will not pass?». Responds to him the other person: «Following the resignation of President Putin will not be anything but the collapse of Russia.» For some reason, people spoke about the resignation of President Putin, predict the Constituent Assembly, the collapse of Russia, access to the criminogenic population security forces. That the people decided? Where did he go?

Grigory Yavlinsky: Thank you, Lena, is a serious matter, let’s discuss them on the merits. Where are these questions? These questions are taken from the fact that we are now, and will do, say, to sum up the year. These are some final questions. A year ago, there were no such issues, even six months ago. The main result of the year is that the policies pursued in Russia in 2012, in 2014 has already led to the fact that the result of the year is a real danger of war, a great war. The second threat, which is a direct result of this policy — a threat to economic collapse. That’s why people are asking these questions because they feel that the result of the policy is the real threat of war, not just the war as a local conflict, and the great war, and the threat of economic collapse, which also largely occurs. If this is the outcome, it is not surprising that people ask such questions. Another serious question, you see, there it is on the Constituent Assembly, on reforms, because we are witnessing not only in the results of the year, but that the results of the post-Soviet period, the results of this reform. If reforms were successful, none of this would have never happened. What is happening now is a consequence of the failure of the reform — that it is now obvious. Therefore, people ask questions that now need to carry out these reforms again, all need to do over again, pereosnovyvat country, so we are talking about the Constituent Assembly. This is very serious. And as always, a lot of people who think seriously about the fate of our country, they directly talk about the most important and serious issues. But even more so, why people talk about it? I’ll tell you more — it’s even the results of the century. Exactly one hundred years ago Russia got involved in the war, which led to its collapse. Three years later, in 1917, it led her to collapse. Europe, too, then got into the war, she initiated it even if I may say so. Then, without removing from this lesson, she fell into another war — World War II, and only after that Europe has learned and created the European Union. But from this European Union, the idea, not from Brussels, not to join — from European lifestyle after World War II, the last three years categorically refuses to Russia. And given that the time now is very fast, its anti-European or, as is sometimes like to say Eurasian path quickly led her straight to this trait. So this year, the results of a very large scale, they simply show where Russia has come with his anti-European policy with a policy against the rule of law, against European integration, transparency against borders, against all this, here is what we have come as a result.

Elena Rykovtseva: In the end, we came up with an unshakable rated head of state. Location mood of the people that he suddenly somewhere to go?

Grigory Yavlinsky: I’m not a sociologist, I can not say. I do not think that sociologists now something properly understand or know. To answer your question, I can not. Actually this form of relations between the head of state and the citizens caused by absence of alternatives, because there is no alternative, there is no alternative figures in general, and to the extent relevant to him.

Elena Rykovtseva: And the fact that people think one of our authors wrote that if, for God forbid, not Putin, the chaos, the collapse of Russia. What do you say to him personally?

Grigory Yavlinsky: I did not tell him. I can say that and so can go to events and such can be developed. Here depends on the form in which it will occur. Generally speaking, I think that the issue that you raised, it is somewhat premature as it is not necessary to rush things. Currently there are no such grounds. There are reasonable grounds to say today that, firstly, Russia was in a situation of political isolation in the world, there is a second, that it is possible to say that Russia has lost all confidence — it is also the result of this policy. There are reasons to say that in the economic sense are no longer available credit resources, financial markets for the Russian economy — this is very serious. There are grounds to say that Russia made an attempt to get out of globalization. Of course, it is obvious in the last two or three years, you could not feel it, the theme of Russia’s modernization, modernization of the Russian economy has gone completely. This is very serious. All the opportunities that are Russian, which is reflected in the financial possibilities and political opportunities that are Russia, in the sense that it was a real party, the opportunities that were in Russia as in major geopolitical units, they wasted this year.

Elena Rykovtseva: They are, first, did not use, and secondly, they just lost, they are no more. That is all from scratch, it turns out?

Grigory Yavlinsky: I think that’s a difficult question to put. Because in the same capacity with the same oligarchic system, the same system that is based on the rules of life arising from the criminal privatization, these rules of life nothing will be impossible to rebuild.

Elena Rykovtseva: Who are these people who will do it?

Grigory Yavlinsky: We, as a closer fit to the case, will meet with you, discuss specifically. Today I am most concerned about the specific things related to the exit from the situation in which we are located.

Elena Rykovtseva: Peter of Moscow, hello.

Student: Poroshenko and Putin allegedly can solve all the problems of Russia and Ukraine, including internal Ukrainian problem. The question is: Bialowieza agreement is about to be the anniversary of the Alma-Ata agreements. Grigory, these agreements are legitimate? In my opinion, no. Our people did not ask me as a citizen of Russia.

Grigory Yavlinsky: Peter says the right thing and very important. He says that adventurism which has been shown, a huge political adventurism and ugliness, which was then in the form of Bialowieza agreements today oozing blood. And it’s true, it is. What I told you that today we see the results of these reforms. So I say that we summarize for me, for example, that the outcome of these reforms has been extremely bad. And Bialowieza Forest, as it was carried out, all these agreements today have led to such a very disastrous consequences.

Elena Rykovtseva: We now hear from every platform: it is necessary to increase the military-industrial complex, the home in danger, surrounded by enemies, it is necessary to increase military spending. In the country crisis, thus falls Ruble. Please evaluate the measures that have been taken, you agree with them, you feel them short measure or in the right direction comrades lead the country and the economy?

Grigory Yavlinsky: As for military spending, it’s all right now will be reviewed. I think these costs in the form in which they are written, is simply impossible, especially in the absolute form. However, I want to draw your attention to the fact that almost daily propaganda deliberately speaks about some military matters, you are going to build a rocket, then run some extra-large rocket, then spent some meeting. All the while indirect form of threats, planes almost collide with other military aircraft. It’s all serious things, they are absolutely, in my view, counterproductive in the following sense — continues the policy of intimidation. It goes something like this: yes, we are alone, no one is with us, we do not even allies, because, as we have seen, neither Belarus nor Kazakhstan is a reliable ally, we were all alone, there is no ally. But we have such ways that we can all. This leads to the fact that Russia is regarded as unpredictable and extremely dangerous. This leads to the fact that there can be a consensus. When discussing sanctions why European agree? Behold, the United States pressed on them, — Lavrov something dreams. No. This intimidation, unpredictability, foul life, crossed the line. There is a line that is considered below, which do not. For example, this feature — the annexation. 70 years in Europe this was not, and the world was almost no, it’s impossible to do. Moreover, that the rules of life were established jointly Allies after World War II, these rules do not need to break, no it is not allowed. In addition, all contracts have been signed, all agreements concerning the inviolability of borders, security guarantees, and suddenly it’s all broken unilaterally, completely arbitrary, volyuntaristki, without the slightest shred of legal grounds or on the Russian legislation or international. This led to what was seen as unpredictable and dangerous entity in international relations. The consequences of this can be very serious, they begin with the fact that the case goes to isolation and then the case goes to put the country of primary participant in all international affairs, to care for the third, fourth, fifth, tenth roles. It’s not even «cold war» — this is another political thing. If there is a consensus on this issue in all developed countries, this country is a very dangerous prospect. That is what we face as a result of all these events and as a result of the anti-European, antisovremennoy policy that Russia has spent the last three years.

Elena Rykovtseva: That is, they will still rattle this weapon muscles shake, but the budget will have to cut the military?

Grigory Yavlinsky: The budget will be reduced, but the structure may be quite military, major expenses may be made for military needs, all the time to prove that we do not need no import. Here I do not even want to waste airtime, because everyone who knows what happened to the arms race in the Soviet era, everyone knows what it ends. We must remember that we decided to break the rules, with 2-3% of global GDP. Our opponents in this matter are the countries in which 42% of world GDP. 2% to 42%. We have for the next year the most modest, the most optimistic forecast — a 5% drop in GDP, and in the third quarter of this year in the United States, 5% of GDP growth. Clearly, where it all leads. In order to deal with geopolitical adventures, in order to engage in geopolitics, you need to be a superpower. Wow it be necessary to have economic superpower, but it is not so. We are a country with commodity currency, we have the type of currency is its commodity currency, it is directly linked to oil prices. Therefore, to say that here? Government actions to evaluate very easily — they do not, there is only the meeting and nothing else. With regard to the Central Bank, he is doing everything he can. He upped the ante. However, I must say that if the rate rises in the morning, the only one of that you can scare all. In the morning you can not do it, because it means that the government panic or something.

Elena Rykovtseva: Black Tuesday happened exactly after that night increase.

Grigory Yavlinsky: First, do not scare anyone. Second, the rate increase was accompanied by currency intervention of the Central Bank, and Putin banned, according to his press conference, spend a currency exchange reserves. Consequently, the rates will rise, and foreign exchange intervention was not, so there was a black Tuesday. Now the rate is increased, but he was summoned by the oligarchs, or as they call it, and told them to sell the currency. Since the rate is very high, and appeared on the market currency, sell it, so the ruble began to strengthen. He now corresponds to a level that is more or less connected with the fact that would have to happen to him without the intervention of the Central Bank.