What is desperately needed now? Russia and Ukraine sign an agreement for an immediate ceasefire: troops stop at current positions and cease fire. After this, substantive negotiations are needed about the conditions and ways to achieve peaceful coexistence: about the new content of Russian-Ukrainian relations, European security architecture and its prospective geopolitical arrangement, as well as strategic stability between Russia and the United States.
The US under Donald Trump still remains a potentially influential factor in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. However, Donald Trump has no substantive position regarding what should be discussed after the ceasefire and what should be strived for. This is the problem.
Europe ostensibly supports Trump in words. However, instead of seizing the moment, forming a substantive plan for advancing towards peace in Ukraine and filling Trump’s peace initiatives with this content, European leaders are doing absolutely nothing that could contribute to a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine. Moreover, the position of ruling European politicians is directed in the opposite, destructive direction – essentially, they are implementing a foreign policy line that is contrary to a ceasefire. As German Chancellor
Friedrich Merz recently stated, “diplomacy is exhausted”. Such testimonies about intentions to continue hostilities (by proxy) are often heard in ruling European elites and in leading Western media.
As a result, today Donald Trump can do virtually nothing, Europe wants to do nothing and essentially pushes for everything to continue, whilst Russia and Ukraine still hold fundamentally different positions and do what they can and how they can: exchange war prisoners and bodies of the dead. This is undoubtedly important, but a ceasefire is vitally necessary. But this is not yet happening. In reality, everything continues with gathering force.
Meanwhile, according to the latest opinion polls, support in Russian society is growing for the initiative of a ceasefire along the front line and further negotiations between the parties. And we will continue to insist on implementing precisely this format in the name of preserving human lives and the future.
——
Grigory Yavlinsky spoke in the latest broadcast of the Zhivoi Gvozd YouTube channel about who supports the Yabloko party’s position on ceasefire, what is happening to the Russian economy and in what ways artificial intelligence is dangerous.
Alexei Venediktov: Good afternoon, everyone! It is 13:05 in Moscow, this is a live broadcast on Zhovoi Gvozd. Our guest is Grigory Yavlinsky. Grigory Alexeyevich, good afternoon.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Good afternoon. Thank you for the invitation.
Alexei Venediktov: Let’s begin, as usual, with you telling us about the situation with political prisoners. And information for our chat: I am going to mainly rely on your questions [in our discussion] today. Once again, I remind you that I will try to select those questions that are signed with your name, so it is clear that such a person exists, and it is not just a set of letters.
You are welcome, Grigory Alexeyevich.
Grigory Yavlinsky: First of all, I would lime to express condolences to relatives and loved ones [of the victims in] two major catastrophes that have occurred: the An-24 near Tynda in the Amur region, where, as I understand, 48 people died, and in Saratov [the victims of] a very strong gas explosion, where seven people and a child died…
Please accept my most sincere condolences.
But now let’s move to our main topic, as it is still the main one. As of 25 July, according to the data of the Memorial [human rights society], there are 1,022 political prisoners in Russia. On the eve of the past broadcast (we met on 13 June), there were 40 fewer political prisoners – 982.
So, on 27 June, the leader of Kamchatka Yabloko, journalist, very well-known journalist Vladimir Yefimov was placed in a settlement penal colony in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. He was sentenced to two years in a settlement penal colony for his critical publications about events in Ukraine on social media.
Yabloko Deputy Chairman Lev Shlosberg remains under house arrest on a criminal case. He is an outstanding politician and outstanding person; he has a criminal case for discrediting the army. By court decision, he is deprived of the ability to communicate with the outside world, so both on his behalf and to him personally I would like to convey the warmest words from everyone.
In St Petersburg, the trial continues of Yabloko member Vasily Neustroyev, who is accused under six (!) articles of the Criminal Code. Neustroyev has been in pre-trial detention for two years already, facing up to 15 years imprisonment. Vasily doesn’t admit guilt on any of the charges.
Since 31 January, the leader of Ryazan Yabloko, journalist and municipal deputy Konstantin Smirnov has been in pre-trial detention. On 23 July, the court extended his detention for another two months. He is accused of extortion, but we know that he is persecuted because of the municipal reform: he categorically opposed the municipal reform, simply opposed the destruction of elections at the municipal level.
Since April 2022, Yabloko member from Abakan, journalist Mikhail Afanasyev has been in detention. In 2023, he was sentenced to 5.5 years in penal colony for publication about the [regional] Khakassian OMON’s [riot police] refusal to participate in the military operations.
I would like to tell all of you that actions of writing letters to political prisoners are held in the regional party branches across the country every month. Today, literally today, they will take place in Stavropol and Ulyanovsk, tomorrow, on 27 July, – in Saratov, on 28 July – in Kemerovo, Krasnoyarsk and St Petersburg, on 29 July – in Arkhangelsk, on 30 July – in Vladivostok, on 31 July – in Veliky Novgorod and Moscow. You can easily find [exact] time [of actions in different cities] and addresses by coming to our website. I want to specifically encourage all of you to participate in what the Yabloko party is engaged in, what it does, and how through these means you can turn to us.
But now I also would like to tell you: write letters to political prisoners – this is enormous support for them. I want to read (somewhat from memory) theses of an appeal that our friend, leader of Kamchatka Yabloko Vladimir Yefimov, wrote. Very close to the text: “Dear friends, I would like to express support and call on all of you to treat with kindness, sympathy and love those many hundreds of political prisoners who found themselves behind bars but did not betray their convictions and ideals.
We are a party of peace; we are the only legal political force in the country that steadfastly defends its principles and programme goals. Now is a special time in our country, it is not easy for everyone, but this cannot go on for ever. The current freeze in Russian history will be replaced by a thaw – such are the objective laws of historical development, and we need to preserve the unity, faithfulness, and conviction in our political principles. Difficult times await us, the times will be hard,” he writes.
“Friends (this is said by a person who is in detention), I would like to address everyone who is not indifferent, everyone who understands what is happening in our beloved Russia. Political prisoners deserve your support and sympathy. Write to them, help them materially (proof of innocence [i.e. lawyers], alas, costs very dearly). We will endure, we will definitely still have the opportunity to speak openly about freedom, our ideals, and be proud of those who fight for the idea now. Truth is on our side,” this is what a person writes from prison, addressing all of you.
Thank you, Alexei, for the opportunity to tell about this loudly and say it to those people to whom he is addressing.
Alexei Venediktov: Grigory Alexeyevich, let’s still answer the questions. You mentioned Lev Shlosberg, and Maria Kham writes: “Can he somehow be evacuated or escape? Why should people die? Why does he stay? Out of principle?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: Stay where?
Alexei Venediktov: In Russia.
Grigory Yavlinsky: He is currently in prison, only under house arrest. So what?
Alexei Venediktov: Well, before this he…
Grigory Yavlinsky: That’s it, he can’t leave…
Alexei Venediktov: This is a question about why he stayed…
Grigory Yavlinsky: This is his principled position. And why do all other Yabloko members stay? It is the same thing.
Alexei Venediktov: Well, explain why. “What is the principle? To die?” our viewer asks.
Grigory Yavlinsky: No. The principle is to stand your ground, not turn into people who are somewhere out there… By the way, I should tell you in this connection… you know this perfectly well, I wanted to discuss this with you… about recognising people extremists now without any trial or investigation.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, through inclusion in the list…
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. The State Duma has adopted this serious and dangerous law…
Alexei Venediktov: It also passed through the Federation Council yesterday.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. To recognise an association as extremist, it will be sufficient to have a sentence against one participant in such an association. By now one has needed a separate court decision, but from now on, after adoption of this law, that’s it: one decision regarding one community participant is enough, so that the whole association is recognized [extremist]… At the same time, I would like to say, that informal unregistered groups will be recognised as extremists.
What does this mean in practice? This means in practice that recognition of an association as extremist occurs not as an independent judicial process, but as a consequence of a criminal [case against just one its participant]…
Alexei Venediktov: This is called an “informal association”.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. This is an absolutely broad interpretation, anyone can be included in this registry… This is a step towards recognising collective guilt without proof – that is the essence from my point of view, and this is a very serious thing. Just like the State Duma’s recognition [adoption] of the bill on fines for searching for extremist materials, as you know, through VPN.
Alexei Venediktov: Ostap from Stary Oskol, he is 60: “Is there a possibility to check through an inquiry from Yabloko deputies whether the new retrictive law adopted by the State Duma complies with the Constitution?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, we can, our deputies [from regional parliaments] will send such an inquiry. However, I should tell you that now the law enforcement system and the entire legal system of our country are organised in such a way that the answer will simply not be connected to the Constitution, or laws, or anything. This will be simply an arbitrary answer, since there is such a development, it is being implemented, consequently, the answer will be that everything is as it should be, so all is correct. But the inquiry will be sent.
Alexei Venediktov: Right, thank you.
Sergei, 23, from Rostov-on-Don: “Is there a probability of amnesty for all political prisoners after the end of the war, but with Putin in power? [I am interested in] your analysis.”
Grigory Yavlinsky: I can’t tell you, I don’t know. I simply don’t know. Firstly, I find it difficult to predict when the war will end…
Alexei Venediktov: He means the end of military actions, naturally, the end of escalation.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Ok. This will largely depend on the atmosphere, the situation, and what will happen in our country. You see, all questions are now open, they don’t have clear answers, so I can’t tell. Although the question is substantive and I thought about this, this can’t be ruled out, but I wouldn’t be confident that this will happen, because the situation in our country is not expected to be favourable to such a decision.
Alexei Venediktov: Even in case of a ceasefire?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, a ceasefire…
Alexei Venediktov: Well, it is frozen.
Grigory Yavlinsky: This is, and you understand it, today there is cessation, and tomorrow… This is possible when decisions are reached about strategic prospects, about how Russia’s relations with Ukraine, Europe and the United States will be built, but primarily with Europe and Ukraine, say, in 2040, 2035, or 2050…
Alexei Venediktov: So this is for later?
Grigory Yavlinsky: This is strategy. When strategic vision is developed and mutual understanding on this matter is achieved, then this question can certainly be resolved, but only then, as it seems to me.
Alexei Venediktov: How do you feel then… there was a question, I forgot from whom… about exchanging prisoners, not prisoners of war, but civilian prisoners? Yesterday for the first time the sides – Ukraine and Russia – exchanged lists of 20 people each.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, only no one understands how all this will be done and whom they have in mind.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, but the principle, of [exchanging] not only prisoners of war, but also…
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, the principle… This is an unclear principle, because not everyone who is [imprisoned in Russia] as civilians, those I just spoke about at the very beginning, are those who need to be sent to Ukraine. This is not at all the case.
Another matter is that in Ukraine there are very many civilians who… there are 16,000 of them, as far as I remember, and even more are being prosecuted… There are dozens of thousands of cases against citizens who are supposedly insufficiently loyal… And I have, since we work with all this, I have lists with their signatures, where they sign that they are ready to be sent to Russia.
Alexei Venediktov: Clear.
Grigory Yavlinsky: This exists in Ukraine, yes, but the reverse – I don’t know about this. The reverse I don’t have such information about, because this is a completely different matter.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, I understand.
Viktor Lishenko, 46, writes: “What would you advise in case security forces start strict control, searching for extremist materials regarding those citizens who write letters of support [to political prisoners]?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: …
Alexei Venediktov: It is a good question, yes.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, this could happen, yes. So this is the question… I can’t give you advice, because this is the case when only you yourself can make a decision, because this is connected with your future. For example, do you remember when under the guise of COVID they banned all public actions etc.?
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, of course.
Grigory Yavlinsky: I went to these public actions, but I went there alone, because I bear responsibility for myself.
Alexei Venediktov: What do you mean by “alone”, excuse me?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Just alone.
Alexei Venediktov: That is, not the party?
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, just me. The party… I am always [representing] the party, but I went there alone, without Ivanov, Sidorov, Petrov and Rabinovich – I personally, I did not invite them there.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, I remember.
Grigory Yavlinsky: So you remember this?
Alexei Venediktov: I met you there, I covered it [in the news].
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well. I stood there [in a single picket alone] personally. So they can take me, can arrest me, can do something to me, but I can bear responsibility only for myself [not endanger other people]. In this situation I can’t bear responsibility for someone else…
Therefore, making a decision about your letters [of support to political prisoners], bearing in mind such a danger, this is your personal decision – your personal decision about what the level of your readiness to risks is, how ready you are to do this. If you get scared or decide not to do this, this is your right, I can’t criticise you.
Alexei Venediktov: Is this why you don’t organise public actions, Yabloko doesn’t organise public street actions?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Including this. Because this is a call for people to get arrested, but this affects their fate. This is their future!
Alexei Venediktov: Just a question about this.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, exactly. You can go out yourself.
I can tell you that we are now preparing to conduct 56 electoral campaigns in 27 regions.
Alexei Venediktov: This is in September, right?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. In 27 regions, [we will conduct] 56 electoral campaigns with 261 candidates. These are people who signed papers that they are ready to take the risks and come out…
Alexei Venediktov: From Yabloko?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, from Yabloko. Ready to take the risks, come out with that content, and with those appeals, and with those slogans that have the main meaning for our party: we stand for freedom, peace, and immediate ceasefire etc. – this is our position. It is precisely with this position that they will come out in elections.
But, by the way, our position regarding ceasefire now has gained, one could say, public support.
Alexei Venediktov: Donald Trump’s?
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, not so much of Donald Trump, this isn’t so interesting…
Alexei Venediktov: Trump’s too.
Grigory Yavlinsky: …as polls in Russia.
Why do I draw attention to this? Because the question in polls is formulated exactly as we have discussed it with you here many times: Russia and Ukraine sign a ceasefire agreement without any conditions, troops stop at their current positions and cease fire, and only after this all negotiations are conducted. And 58% of citizens, this poll was conducted on 27 June, or 19-27 June…
Alexei Venediktov: By the Russian Field, yes.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, there were 1,600 respondents, and 58% said “rather support”. And other polls that you know, which can be more or less trusted, they show even more such people.
So we proceed from these [figures], we will address people with precisely this agenda, and precisely this is the meaning of our electoral campaign. Two campaigns will be for Legislative Assemblies of federal subjects – the Chelyabinsk and the Kurgan regions, and 15 – for the Dumas of the capital cities of federation subjects, and the rest – for local representative bodies.
Alexei Venediktov: So [your party] does not run in gubernatorial elections, does it?
Grigory Yavlinsky: In this case we are not participating.
Alexei Venediktov: You won’t be able to collect [mandatory] signatures [of municipal deputies in favour of your nominations], that’s how it is called. This is the municipal filter.
Grigory Yavlinsky: You know everything, you understand everything, and you qualify everything correctly.
Alexei Venediktov: Look, Olga, 59, she greets you from Paris: “Grigory Alexeyevich, do you sense ‘crackling’ in Russian elites?” Well, naturally, it is clear on what matter.
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, I don’t.
Alexei Venediktov: No?
Grigory Yavlinsky: No.
Alexei Venediktov: Are they still united around..?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, how are they united?
Alexei Venediktov: Well, I don’t know how…
Grigory Yavlinsky: Basing on fear. It is fear.
Alexei Venediktov: Fear of what?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Of everything.
Alexei Venediktov: This is an important question, fear of what.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, how? What fear was there when a person suddenly shot himself? What fear was there? There was such fear. Yesterday he was a minister of transport, before that he was governor, they dismissed him, and he shot himself. What is this? This is fear, I think this because of fear.
Alexei Venediktov: Right.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, consider such fear. Because they understand that in this situation, in this system, they can’t count on anything. Well, that’s it, basically, that’s the problem.
Well, should I tell you now about the system of fear?
Alexei Venediktov: Go ahead.
Grigory Yavlinsky: So, one of our most famous Moscow Yabloko members Kirill Goncharov, a very respected one…
Alexei Venediktov: Right.
Grigory Yavlinsky: He organised a real fight for pickets against Stalinism in connection with installation [in of Moscow metro stations] of a monument [glorifying Joseph Stalin].
Alexei Venediktov: This bas-relief in the metro, right?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Exactly. So the Mayor’s Office refused single pickets. Why? – because of COVID [they said].
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, I read about it.
Grigory Yavlinsky: So, the chief sanitary doctor has not answered this question [about COVID in Moscow] for 30 days already, whether there is such COVID that [prohibits] all this, so [there is no answer to the letter] with a request to clarify the epidemiological situation – simply no answer. Now we prepare a lawsuit…
Why am I telling you all this? People sign [our letter] with very great fear, people are afraid to sign – that’s the answer to this question. There are few signatures, because people say: “We are ready, but we are afraid”. People are simply afraid, so that there won’t be…
Alexei Venediktov: So that’s what the law about extremist informal associations is for.
Grigory Yavlinsky: That’s it, well, I… So that is the answer to the question of our respected viewer who asked you the question.
Alexei Venediktov: Question from Kyiv from Alexander: “Does the Yabloko party receive funding from the Russian budget?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, it doesn’t.
Alexei Venediktov: I think Alexander from Kiev, 43, will be reassured.
So… (I am just looking at questions.) Here… No, I won’t read it out, because the person doesn’t indicate the name, so I won’t.
Timofey Rybnikov asks: “Where to sign? Where to find out about them?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: Come to the Yabloko [office].
Alexei Venediktov: Or to the website?
Grigory Yavlinsky: And you can come to the website. Come to the office, these books are on the shelf right at the entrance – please, take them, we will be grateful.
Alexei Venediktov: Grigory Alexeyevich, how do you feel… unfortunately, I forgot who [asked the question]… about the Istanbul negotiations, generally about the very fact and their format? Is this what you wanted, bearing in mind the negotiation process, or this is…? Generally, I won’t list options, you will say everything yourself.
Grigory Yavlinsky: I would start with the fact that I wanted the negotiation process to proceed against the background of an accomplished ceasefire.
Alexei Venediktov: That is, ceasefire comes first.
Grigory Yavlinsky: I considered [that first there should be] ceasefire, about which 58% of respondents were in favour in the poll we have been speaking about, and then negotiations, but it developed the other way around.
Nevertheless, I consider that the negotiations in Istanbul are important, there is content in them. Exchange of 1,200 prisoners of war, about which they agreed again, and fulfilled it, completely fulfilled what was agreed before – this has enormous significance, enormous significance. Exchange of bodies of the dead, 10,000 bodies of the dead – can you imagine these scales?.. That’s it.
Now. All the time there is talk about what you asked me at the beginning: you asked me about political, civilian [prisoners].
Alexei Venediktov: Yes.
Grigory Yavlinsky: So far it is unclear how all this will be and what this is all about, but at least there is talk about this, and this is good.
Besides, I consider that the proposal about establishing three groups of negotiations, the first on military, the second on political, and the third on humanitarian issues – this is a correct proposal, this is how it should be done, and these negotiations need to be conducted. And I think that the sooner they begin in substance, the better, the more correct it is.
Especially since Donald Trump said a strange thing the other day. He said: “Well, maybe [ceasefire should take place] in 50 days, and maybe in another 50 days…”
Alexei Venediktov: Well yes. But this isn’t… Why you call it a “strange thing”? Whether you have ever read Donald Trump?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, I…
Alexei Venediktov: And maybe, vise versa, ten…
Grigory Yavlinsky: I don’t really read much of Trump… So, 50 days… Therefore such a formulation means that it doesn’t matter, 50 or 150 days, but you just need to move. Well, and negotiations – this is really [important].
What is the problem? The problem is (this is from my point of view) that there is a very low level of diplomacy from Europe’s side.
Alexei Venediktov: But Europe isn’t there at all.
Grigory Yavlinsky: It is not there, but it is behind Kyiv’s back…
Alexei Venediktov: Outside.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, it is in Kyiv, as you understand. So, this is a very serious thing. When Zaluzhny…
Alexei Venediktov: Former [Ukraine’s] Commander-in-Chief.
Grigory Yavlinsky: (Yes) … [Ukraine’s] Ambassador to the UK, says that the war will go on until 2035, well then what sense do all these negotiations have?..
So, I draw your attention to a very painful thing for me personally: both Europe and everyone who are in negotiations conduct these negotiations so that they don’t result in anything, deliberately. But what do they count on? Well, what are the prospects?
Alexei Venediktov: Apparently, they count on something, well.
Grigory Yavlinsky: And you know, I should tell you, Alexei, sincerely and from the heart: I became convinced many years ago (20 or 30 years ago) that they take a position, but there is no calculation and no content behind it. I can tell you anything. All serious military people understood that no offensive in 2023 would lead anywhere and nothing would happen, but all politicians who spoke from that side absolutely ignored all this. Politics constantly ignores the entire professional part, and European politics ignores it too.
Well, what does the present German Chancellor say: “I want to tell you something else more clearly: diplomatic means are exhausted.”
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, Friedrich Merz did say it.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, I am telling you this seriously. (Emmanuel Macron says approximately the same from time to time; he is slightly different, but…) Well, who is saying this? This is said by the richest, economically largest country in Europe. And what? It says there will be no diplomacy. Then what will there be istead? Then there will be infinite killing of people. And I consider this a very significant circumstance.
I categorically insist that Europe should have joined Donald Trump and filled all his proposals with content. Why did this entire construction break down? Because Donald Trump has had no substantive position about what to do with Ukraine. A nice person comes there, they chat endlessly, walk around, go to all sorts of different curious places, but substantively they don’t… He is also very far from this.
So what should have…? This conference in Munich, which was on security – it should have developed… not the conference itself, but experts and diplomats… and found a way to arm the US President with this content. This was not done! That’s it, simply complete, absolute conflict.
Or here’s another example, you can smile at this. Well, they went to the 25th summit in China, the EU went to China – and what? Nothing, zero.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, a failed summit…
Grigory Yavlinsky: Moreover, China cancels the second day [of the summit] – can you imagine that?
This means that all structures of the former time, the former era, are collapsing. The G7 collapsed, there was also the 57th anniversary of the G7, and nothing came out of this. NATO is reduced to saying “oh, daddy came, thank you”, that’s it, “we will increase military spending in ten years”, in ten years – this is about nothing at all. [In] the EU a big problem began with Brexit and it goes on. And so on, I can further enumerate the structural issues: the UN stopped working, the Security Council stopped working, the WTO stopped working… (I can continue enumerating.) Understanding these circumstances is a key issue, and no one nowhere has this understanding.
I am surprised, that the press, which I always treated with great respect, such as Financial Times, and The Economist, you could agree or disagree, but words can’t express how interesting they were – but absolutely nothing works in politics and geopolitics. In economics and business – this is another matter, but in politics and geopolitics nothing works. These are very significant things.
And here is the question. Often they like to compare, for example, what is happening now with the United States entering Iraq.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, and here I should remind of and our listeners recall the interview of [ex US Ambassador to Russia] Michael McFaul to Yury Dud, when Yury Dud asked him: “So the United States were allowed [to invade], but Russia not?”, and McFaul explained: “Yes, the United States were allowed [to invade], this is different”.
Grigory Yavlinsky: I didn’t watch this interview…
Alexei Venediktov: Watch it, Grigory Alexeyevich.
Grigory Yavlinsky: I don’t know anything about this. I know Michael McFaul quite well…
Alexei Venediktov: Well, spend an hour [on watching it].
Grigory Yavlinsky: …I once wrote him a reference for his work at his request…
I can tell you one important story. In February 2002 I came to the United States and had negotiations with Condoleezza Rice, who…
Alexei Venediktov: …was [then] the United States National Security Advisor. I am just reminding this to our viewers, we have young viewers too, so…
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, she was National Security Advisor. Then she became foreign minister, but that was later, and at that time she was…
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, she was an aid for national security.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. I conducted negotiations regarding…
Alexei Venediktov: Now they may ask you: “And who are you? Did Putin send you?” What was you status?
Grigory Yavlinsky: (I will tell you now.) I conducted negotiations regarding a meeting of George Bush Jr who had come [to power] then, with Vladimir Putin. And this meeting took place, although no one believed in it, it was in May 2002. You probably remember: George Bush came, and they signed the Strategic Cooperation Treaty.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, I remember this treaty.
Grigory Yavlinsky: It is still in force, look, just read it on the website…
Alexei Venediktov: It seems to me it has not been either ratified or removed.
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, they signed the treaty, they don’t even need to ratify it – as an agreement between two presidents. The only issue there was that none of this was ever done…
But I am now speaking about something else – about the fact that before this my article was published in Financial Times that Americans shouldn’t fight in Iraq, this shouldn’t be done.
Alexei Venediktov: I should remind that the was in Iraq [began] the following year, 2003. I am just reminding it for those who might forget.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, but already then the [issue] was there, all this was known.
Alexei Venediktov: Well, clear.
Grigory Yavlinsky: And Condoleezza Rice in the course of all discussions suddenly asks me, “You wrote such an article – what did you mean?”
Alexei Venediktov: She was well prepared.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. “What did you mean?” I said, “Well, you see, the problem you want to solve in Iraq, it needs to be solved differently, from my point of view, that is precisely why I published this article…”
And tried to explain it: “I can tell you in more detail. Imagine, – I told Condoleezza Rice, – that you go hunting in the jungle, you are going to hunt there… I don’t know, what… – tigers, lions, or jackals. What weapon will you take with you? You will take big traps, guns, well, maybe, handguns… But when you enter the jungle, you are attacked by deadly poisonous mosquitoes. What will you do with your aircraft carriers and space forces? And it will be like this there [in Iraq], exactly like this.”
This was in the White House, there was complete silence in the room. After thirty or forty seconds, or a minute, one of her closest assistants (I know who, but it doesn’t matter now), her closest assistant said: “We’ll strike the mosquito nests!” – “There, – I said, – that’s the point: mosquitoes don’t have nests – they live in swamps. You need to drain swamps: you need to deal with education in these regions, business, and medicine – completely different approaches are needed so that to solve this problem.”
This theme – “mosquito nests” – is the key thopic of today too – such misunderstanding the content of today’s politics, of what is happening today.
Alexei Venediktov: Grigory Yavlinsky, I return to questions to you from the chat. (You can put likes if you like this.)
From Kharkiv, Dima, 27, “When the Kremlin calls Ukrainians Nazis, do you think they really believe this, or is it just convenient rhetoric to justify their actions?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, they believe this.
Alexei Venediktov: Where does this belief come from? Well, listen…
Grigory Yavlinsky: I can’t discuss what’s happening inside Ukraine…
Alexei Venediktov: This is not inside Ukraine – why they believe this, that’s what it is about, this is inside Russia.
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, because they consider that this is happening inside Ukraine. They believe that precisely this is happening inside Ukraine. I work with this, think about this, but publicly I don’t discuss Ukraine’s internal problems, because the situation is such that it is Russia which began the special military operation, therefore I don’t have the right to discuss what’s happening inside Ukraine.
Alexei Venediktov: I think the question is different: Dmitry is trying to understand where the belief comes from. It is not… how to say… Why not rhetoric… Fine – why do you think this isn’t rhetoric, but that they believe this? Let me ask you about it following Dima from Kharkiv.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Once again: for this I need to share with you information and data well known everywhere and throughout the world about what is happening inside. I know well what is happening inside; there are sufficient grounds there for such an approach.
Alexei Venediktov: Pavel: “How does economist Yavlinsky assess the state of current Russian economy (and I will add) in July 2025?” (This is from myself, he doesn’t ask like that.) Thank you, Pavel, for indicating your name; before this you sent your question without a name, so I didn’t read out your questions.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, I wanted to note several serious things.
First, I would like to say that the Russian economy is essentially semi-feudal…
Alexei Venediktov: This needs an explanation.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Its basis consists of rent collection, and no one wants transition to a different model.
So, indeed, sanctions, slowing down of the world economy, and negative demographic trends – all these features influence [Russia’s economy], therefore I think that by results of this year growth will be 1.5-2%, and if it slows down, then to 1% compared to those 4%…
Alexei Venediktov: This isn’t a made-up story?
Grigory Yavlinsky: No one knows this, Alexei.
Alexei Venediktov: Clear.
Grigory Yavlinsky: No one knows. I rely on what the IMF recognises.
Alexei Venediktov: Good…
Grigory Yavlinsky: What figures the IMF recognises, I rely on these figures. Today the IMF recognises 4% etc.
The key problem of today for our economy is the decline in oil prices: 43-45 dollars per barrel plus supply problems – this is a very serious thing. This will be a very strained budget, especially this will be reflected in financing needs for the social sphere, housing construction in the new regions, in, say, Donbass, and will influence in such a way that main funds…
After all, how is the Russian economy arranged now? Forty percent is the military-industrial complex, and sixty percent is the social sector, that’s all. The private sector generally participates here only ‘uncaptioned’. It has some advantage because Western companies left and it replaces them, or rather tries to replace… Quality, of course, is different, but still space for this exists.
In my view, budget revenue growth, which will be now, is still below inflation. Inflation reduction is not yet visible. These are quite significant things about today’s economy.
But the most important thing I would like to say, if speaking about the financial part, is strengthening of the rouble. Since the beginning of the year the rouble rose by 45%, and world oil prices, expressed in dollars, fell by 10%. That’s it…
Alexei Venediktov: What do these cuts mean?
Grigory Yavlinsky: This is reduction of budget receipts.
Alexei Venediktov: I see.
Grigory Yavlinsky: This is significant reduction. So that you could imagine it: oil price sometimes already touches 45 [dollars per barrel], and we planned 67 [dollars per barrel] – this is significant. And the price in roubles, how it is calculated…
But if you noticed, and this is the second thopic… I have already told you about financial things: this is inflation, and it persists… I don’t believe that inflation fell to 4%; real inflation, in my opinion, is 12-13%…
Alexei Venediktov: Double-digit?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, I think so. There are difficulties with pumping up budget in connection with prices.
The third problem is strengthening, significant strengthening of the rouble, which creates very big problems.
Donald Trump, for example, deals with weakening the dollar endlessly…
Alexei Venediktov: Yes.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Actually, that’s it.
And the institutional problem is most serious – this is that authorities seize assets.
Alexei Venediktov: [This is] what happens during nationalisation.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. In Russia the number of asset seizures has been growing rapidly, you see. Property worth 3.9 trillion roubles has been confiscated since 2022 (this is 50 billion dollars), and if we’re talking about economy, the volume [of confiscations] tripled (!) in the past year.
Alexei Venediktov: Of the confiscated [assets].
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. This helps pumping up the budget, but completely undermines the private sector.
What are the reasons for confiscation? Well, imagine, nationalisation in Russia – this means 102 facilities in three years. Among reasons for confiscations they cite old privatisation, that it was illegal privatisation, and that’s it. And the Supreme Court extended [the deadlines]; the deadlines had already expired, but the Supreme Court extended them. Well, then comes corruption, which any entrepreneur can be accused of at any moment, and then extremism, that he [a businessman] whispered something wrong to his wife in bed… And so on.
The state has greatly strengthened control, redistributes property, but not even to itself – it redistributes property to loyal businessmen, i.e. this is a shift [of property] from some businessmen to others. But these new businessmen understand perfectly well that this will apply to them tomorrow too, and [their assets] can be taken away from them. In 2023 sales of such assets brought 132 billion roubles to the budget – they sell to those to whom they…
Alexei Venediktov: Well, 132 [billion] out of 3 [trillion] is about nothing at all.
Grigory Yavlinsky: So, it is fairly considered, experts say… this, it seems to me, that his will be interesting for you… that replacement of experienced entrepreneurs with those close to power reduces work efficiency, and economic efficiency decreases.
These are serious problems that result (this second part especially), as is well-known, from how we conducted reforms [in 1990s]. When we conducted criminal privatisation, we are now dealing with the results of this criminal privatisation. Besides (this is personally my point of view), I can say that the main reason for what is happening with us is how reforms were conducted. Well, just think about it, in ten years the problem of Stalinism wasn’t even raised, as well as about a state decision regarding Stalinism, plus criminal privatisation. Well, that’s it, criminal privatisation…
Alexei Venediktov: If there hadn’t been criminal privatisation, then the current Russian authorities wouldn’t know what to nationalise, do you mean that, Grigory Alexeyevich?
Grigory Yavlinsky: No. If there hadn’t been criminal privatisation, there would have been an independent court, an independent legal system, an independent parliament, and independent press on a large scale – that’s what we could have.
But when they conducted criminal privatisation, it was already impossible to create an independent court after this, because tomorrow they would ask: “How much did you pay for what you got?” – and he paid nothing: he transferred budget money, and even that only on paper, but this money was not his, this was the state budget keeping its money in this bank. And there were very many such examples, and this was criminal privatisation.
And those who invented this hoped then sincerely that there would be private property, and then all this… But it didn’t work out, because society didn’t develop and a modern democratic state didn’t develop in the conditions when the foundation turned out to be criminal privatisation. Well, there was also 2,600% inflation… Such painful things.
Why am I talking about this today? Because a moment will come when a window of opportunity opens and it will be necessary to very carefully not repeat mistakes.
Alexei Venediktov: Timofey Rybnikov, 40, from Moscow, manager, “I live in Moscow. It seems to me that everyone is for Putin and for war. I argue with relatives, and relatives consider me be a “fifth column”. Maybe I should keep silent? It is terrible that there are few of us.”
Grigory Yavlinsky: Well, only a small number of people always fight for truth…
Alexei Venediktov: With relatives, [all the fight] here is with his relatives. I understand that he feels pain for his relatives too…
Grigory Yavlinsky: Because it is essentially civil war.
Alexei Venediktov: “So maybe I should be silent? – he says. – Everyone considers me a fifth column.”
Grigory Yavlinsky: Only you can [make a decision]… What is his name?
Alexei Venediktov: Timofey, he is 40.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Timofey, I would like to tell you with all respect: this is your decision. I can’t give you advice – only you yourself can decide this.
Alexei Venediktov: Nikita reminds me that I said (I did say it) that Donald Trump wanted to break out of the conflict, sign a truce and dump everything on Europeans’ shoulders, “Does Grigory Alexeyevich’s opinion differ from yours on Donald Trump’s position?”
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, it is not much different.
Alexei Venediktov: Not much.
Grigory Yavlinsky: I think Donald Trump really wants this.
Donald Trump generally has his own vision of the future, and it is different: this is isolation of the United States; this is the US withdrawal from world politics and world geopolitics; this is…
Do you want us to share an interesting thought with you?
Alexei Venediktov: “Thank you for the answer,” – Timofey, I would like to say immediately.
Grigory Yavlinsky: And big thanks to him for the question and my warmest wishes, I value this very much.
[About] Donald Trump’s discussion… if speaking seriously, this is people who surround him… with other people. They say: “You are going to quit from everywhere, but then you will lose the role of the world policeman, you will withdraw troops…” (They have troops located throughout the world, as you know.) The answer: “Yes, we are going to withdraw troops from the entire world and stop being the world policeman.”
“Yes, but you realise (and this is interesting) that conflicts will begin, clashes will begin? You played a certain role in maintaining some peaceful coexistence etc.?” – “Yes, we understand this, but all these conflicts will start with you, not with us.” – “Well good, and you understand, – they tell them again, – that if such things begin throughout the world, then sooner or later this will come to you?” The answer… This answer would be very important for me. The answer is, “Yes, we realise it, but first you, and only then us.”
Why was this answer important for me? If they had said: “No, this will never come to us,” then this would mean that they simply don’t understand where this is moving. But they do understand; those who form Trump’s position understand where this is moving. And they understand this so much that they understand that if the world comes into crisis, the whole world, then this will sooner or later come to them too, but it will come to them after us. Remember how it was in Mikhail Sholokhov’s novel? – “First you die, and only then me.”
Alexei Venediktov: Yes.
Grigory Yavlinsky: This phrase is from there, and this is very significant.
And by the way, you have to understand – they lost everything [their military campaigns], after 1945 they lost all their campaigns: they lost Korea, they lost Vietnam, they lost Iraq, they lost Afghanistan, they lost Libya, and they lost Syria – they lost everything. You have to proceed from this, that such wars can not be won. And the Soviet Union entered Afghanistan – and what happened? Nothing.
Alexei Venediktov: Nothing.
Grigory Yavlinsky: That’s it. Ten years it was there [in Afghanistan]… Consequently, problems are not solved this way, cannot be solved in such a way in principle. And there is no even a discussion about this – how they are solved, and everyone leans precisely in this direction, and this worries me very much.
By the way… I don’t know, whether they will ask about this or not… on 23 July the White House published a document, America’s action plan in the field of artificial intelligence, a very important document.
Alexei Venediktov: I missed it.
Grigory Yavlinsky: An extremely important [document].
Alexei Venediktov: 23 July?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, 23 July.
Alexei Venediktov: Have to look it up.
Grigory Yavlinsky: The document is called “Winning the Race” – “Winning the AI Race: America’s AI Action Plan”. This is an exceptionally important paper.
What did they do? They removed all restrictions that Joe Biden previously imposed on artificial intelligence.
Alexei Venediktov: Right, yes, there were many…
Grigory Yavlinsky: They removed all restrictions from the point of view of energy supply to artificial intelligence. They absolutely created an extremely dangerous atmosphere that will develop at a very great speed. And they set the task that the entire world new artificial intelligence and innovation system should be based on US artificial intelligence.
Alexei Venediktov: Well…
Grigory Yavlinsky: You see? They set exactly such tasks.
Alexei Venediktov: I recognise JD Vance’s hand here, so to say.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes. We talked with you about this…
Alexei Venediktov: Yes.
Grigory Yavlinsky: …and this is very important, that this is the next power in the United States, the next power, and this is extremely serious. So they are doing everything to turn American technologies into a world standard.
But we need to see what exactly the world standard, the world standard of what, because talking about what Silicon Valley leaders call for is a very serious challenge. They, on one hand, guarantee that the United States will remain leader in artificial intelligence, and on the other hand, they consider that freedom is incompatible with democracy, that’s it. Peter Thiel says, “Freedom is incompatible with democracy,” – so they advocate for a completely different organisation of all society and lay this into artificial intelligence.
By the way, this artificial intelligence that they developed, and in this programme, when you read it…
Alexei Venediktov: Yes, it is very interesting, I’ll definitely… I have missed it.
Grigory Yavlinsky: (Yes.) …you will see there that they try to remove ideologisation from artificial intelligence, but this is impossible to do, this won’t work, but they already write about this.
Alexei Venediktov: You mean that they are idiots if they write what is impossible?
Grigory Yavlinsky: No, politicians put forward such demands to technologists that technologists can’t and don’t want to fulfil.
Alexei Venediktov: Right.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Therefore technologists [say]: “Well write, write what you want, but in reality it will be different,” – that’s what it is about. How much Trump and people around him understand artificial intelligence, it is hard for me to say, but considering the age of these people…
Alexei Venediktov: But there, I repeat, JD Vance and people around him…
Grigory Yavlinsky: And Vance holds different views.
Alexei Venediktov: Right.
Grigory Yavlinsky: He is precisely a representative of this group from California that promotes precisely this direction.
Why am I saying this? I am saying this because in the new world – in that world that is coming to us – the theme of technologies, artificial intelligence, developed artificial intelligence is very serious. It will change everything, because it influences how people behave, how politicians behave and how voters behave. This is ochlocracy, this is rule of the crowd through Internet networks. But this is a small piece, and artificial intelligence will simply solve all main problems.
Alexei Venediktov: There has been a question here, whether it is possible to ideologise it, artificial intelligence, in principle.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Yes, it seems possible. It is difficult for me to discuss all details, but since there is discussion on this question, then yes, it is possible to ideologise, it is possible to make it directed for solving [human tasks] until in about five years it itself begins…
Alexei Venediktov: I wanted to say…
Grigory Yavlinsky: (Yes.) …to develop its own ideology. And there is already a question there how this will be – no one knows this, what artificial intelligence will do.
Alexei Venediktov: And they are not scared, they don’t think about this, they’re not scared.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Alxei, when you are 80, then you can…
Alexei Venediktov: Vance isn’t 80 yet.
Grigory Yavlinsky: And Vance wants this!
Alexei Venediktov: Ah.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Vance is the one who promotes this, that’s the point. I am not speakig about Vance now, Vance is precisely… How did he appear there? He came there for this. I generally consider this as a possible situation when one of them (in particular and possibly JD Vance) becomes the next president.
Alexei Venediktov: The next president.
Grigory Yavlinsky: This will be a completely different story.
Alexei Venediktov: Interesting…
We have one minute left. Grigory Alexeyevich, returning to political prisoners – there was a question, it went up the chat, and you didn’t answer it then: tell me please, is it still possible that under conditions of preserving the current team in power, laws about fakes and discreditation will be cancelled, and political prisoners released?
Such a Gorbachev story of 1988. How do you see it now?
Grigory Yavlinsky: I can only hope. I have no grounds for this. There are no grounds for this, but hope – I hope, because this is a question of the life of all these people, this is very serious. I want to hope for this.
Alexei Venediktov: But maybe hope weakens..?
Grigory Yavlinsky: Whom?
Alexei Venediktov: You.
Grigory Yavlinsky: Me?
Alexei Venediktov: Yes. We sit and hope.
Grigory Yavlinsky: This is how it is arranged: with my soul I hope, but with my brain I understand that it will be different.
Alexei Venediktov: An optimistic ending, I should tell you…
Grigory Yavlinsky: I am telling you the truth.
Alexei Venediktov: Yes…
Thank you very much! Grigory Yavlinsky was our guest today.
