The Responsibility of Politicians

You were the first to use the phrase "a common European home". Today we have an unique project with continental dimension -- the European Union. However, this project is proving to be incapable of either growing or maintaining equal relations between the founding countries. How do you see the future of this project?

By promoting the idea of "a common European home" I wished to stand against divisions and conflicts in Europe. With the participation of the USA and Canada, I wanted to establish an entirely new system of international relations: a system based upon partnership and cooperation in economics, culture and politics, including even security policy.

Unfortunately, realization of the principles proclaimed in the "Charter for a New Europe" is too slow. In some areas, we seem to have even distanced ourselves from the initial parameters and goals that seemed already achieved. I believe that an all-encompassing revival of and the practical furthering of the European process is one of the fundamental duties of the present since the possibilities are enormous.

As far as the European Union is concerned, its birth and development are among the most significant historical events in Europe during recent decades and represent an expression of the objective need for interdependence. Of course, development problems exist and require time to be solved. In addition, it is logical to admit that in Europe, as well as on the wider international scene, there are forces that do not at all want strengthening of the European Union, not even in the economic sense.

I believe that deeper rethinking of the integrative processes in Europe would be in the interest of the entire continent. Nevertheless, it is necessary to strengthen the relations of equal cooperation between the European Union and all other European countries that have not yet joined it. The economic integration of all European countries and the interlinkage of all components of European culture are a fact with objective priorities. All Europeans would considerably improve their lives on this basis, now as well as in the future.

A new type of politican has arisen on today's political scene. They are people who want to establish direct relations with the people, i.e. citizens who are seen as a burden and an obstacle in the governing system by parliamentary parties and institutions of the system. Such politicians treat politics as they would any good on the market. Is the end of political parties and mediators in politics approaching?

Everywhere - not just in Europe - political systems are passing through a period of unavoidable transformation. These systems, born in the past, which long had to conform to the political climate of the "cold war", have worn out to a considerable degree. Civil society is maturing everywhere today and placing new demands on political systems, as well as on politics itself. No one has yet proposed adequate solutions to new problems, but it is often established that concrete solutions are neither simple nor cheap. The citizens in many countries are showing that they have increasingly less faith in them. In fact, can we really say that political parties represent the interest of their voters? They are an inheritance of the past and under the influence of the selfish interests of the top. Elements of corruption constantly pressure them, demanding significant changes in them.

Democratic institutions are irreplacable - they are there to serve society. It is necessary to attain a balance between them along with respect for the principle of dividing power. I believe that they all must maintain constant contact with public opinion - through elections, political parties, social organizations, self-governing bodies on all levels, directly and indirectly. I think that the most serious fault with all contemporary systems is the fragility of this direct contact and above all contact between government bodies, civil society and public opinion. I think that this problem is very real and that a solution can be reached through establishment of a system of control which would be established by the citizens themselves.

The war in former Yugoslavia is in its fourth year. Can Europe silence the guns and restore civic society and politics in this country?

It seems that this question has two related, but nevertheless different, aspects. One is the re-establishment of peace in the former Yugoslav republics. The resolution of this problem is the responsibility of the people in these republics as well as the community of European countries. The other aspect is the restoration of civic society in the former Yugoslav republics. That is the responsibility of the citizens in those republics and no one else's, because they are the ones who have the inalienable right to freely choose their own autonomous road of development.

From the very beginning of the Yugoslav crisis, I have warned that the international community, including the European countries, can only contribute to a solution on the basis of the Helsinki process, accompanied by cautious respect for the principles formulated in the Charter for a New Europe. These principles especially insist upon non-violent means and the democratic access necessary for transformation. Transformations include various forms of self-determination that can only be effected through the agreement of the people concerned and in a legal manner. Unfortunately, these principles were not respected even inside the former Yugoslavia, as well as by certain European countries.

I still firmly believe that peaceful negotiations, in the presence of international representatives, directly between the warring parties (even though this is long-lasting and difficult) is better than a continuation of the war with participation of foreign troops. Much damage has been done during the past four years, much blood and many tears have been spilled, so I know that it isn't easy to return to the negotiating table. However, if the politicians find the power to embark along the path to peace, the people will support them. And, in conditions of peace or peace negotiations, intolerance and embitterment will begin to slowly fade away. I therefore believe that the possibility of ending the war still exists. However, I stress that everything depends on the disposition of the politicians, especially those who participate in mediation. Extremism and intolerance are negative values because they can potentially turn into crimes against humanity, which is what is happening. One should resist them with calmness, strength, wisdom, tolerance and a desire to reach peace.

The media are under attack from all sides. In his last work, philosopher Karl Popper ventured to work out a behavior codex for television. At the same time, many journalists are linking themselves to independent organizations in order to defend freedom of the press and information pluralism. What do you think of this?

Above all, I believe that freedom of the press and information pluralism are indicators of a strong and democratic society. Unfortunately, these values are subject to various pressures in many countries and are completely repressed in some. This is clear to me in the case of my own country - Russia - where the means of mass communications are subject to various levels of pressure, from financial to personal threats and assassinations of journalists.

It is clear that various media exist. Some belong to state bodies and must reflect official opinions, while others represent this or that political party. In every case, the principles of freedom and pluralism of information must be respected. The role of an independent press is undoubtedly very important.

However, another stipulation must also be respected: objectivity and truthfulness of information. These principles are often neglected. Responsibility is what determines the honor of a journalist in the end.

At the end, please allow one personal question. There are predictions that you will be a candidate in the next presidential elections. Is this true? What kind of result do you expect?

Political change is necessary in Russia and it can be brought about only through free and democratic elections. I definitely advocate this type of election. As far as my candidacy is concerned, I am currently not doing anything related to the possibility. We can only wait and see what my future position will be.