tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN April 7, 2016 7:00pm-8:01pm EDT
why is he not in russia? so it seems to me the whole directions in which goes the whole society and media, among them is not not perspective directions. it's not good, to me. thank you. >> thank you. anton, it's your turn. >> ladies and gentlemen, thank you. nikolai, thank you for this possibility just to address to you people such crucial topics on human rights. sorry, i'm a lawyer, so maybe some my words will not be, you know, understood by the audience, but sorry. yeah. so i'm not going to talk too much because as stanislav said, i prefer a living dialogue and
questions and answer also. but when i was going here in the metro, i just enumerated at least nine topics that i'm going to address to you. it's not the whole list of human rights problems in russia, but it came to my mind the first sight. first of all, maybe it's the recent human rights issue is, of course, a trial. and, you know, you may know that she was sentenced to 22 years of prison term and last week it was a roundtable at the cannon institute and i said that i had some doubts that they're going
to exchange her for two officers of russian intelligence because, you know, she's pretty much -- she has pretty much for russian government because she's a member of ukrainian parliament and she's a delegate to the parliament, she's a hero of russia -- of ukraine. sorry. sorry. and those police -- those officers of intelligence, they just -- it's a russian official statement that they went there just by their own. by their own will. they were not, you know, officials. and there would be no exchange, and at the same time, mr. kerry visited moscow and he had
four-hour speech with lavrov and four-hour speech with -- for our meeting with putin. and the question was also discussed in these meetings. and finally it was a proposition by russian government they say we exchange for total amnesty for all rebels, for all fighters. and yesterday i read that the american government wouldn't accept it. it's very strange because russia talks with the united states about it. not with the ukrainian government. because actually russian -- putin's position, it's my own personal opinion that putin's position that ukraine is not an abandoned state.
it's manipulated. so he prefers talk with the united states. united states officials not with ukraine. okay. that's the problem of due process because i know the judge refused all the documents and phone printings, phone number printings and so on. that's the first problem. the second problem is the recent russian constitutional courts, you know, what is more important
the judgments of the european court or the russian legislation and the constitutional court ruled that it could reverse any of the european courts judgment if it contradicts the constitution. now it's very much wide interpretation and, of course, i suppose it was made just because of the case. because of the huge amount of compensation that russia must pay. the next thing is the so-called spy cases. it's a trend now. there are plenty of them. i know personally my good friend
who deals with those cases. as i already said, plenty of them. for example, a man worked in some, you know, secret service ten years ago and then he filed a resume to some foreign company and his spy and he could be sentenced to 20 years. it's also a problem that it's a trend now in russia. next thing is expulsion of foreigners. for example, from a native town, i was in some cases a translator to some foreigners who just forced to leave the country and at least three americans from my native town were exposed and
they were in detention center with illegal immigrants for several days. and, you know, what, the most obvious thing that we have plenty of, you know, visa types, types of visa, you know, the main types are business or travel. holiday. they entered russia like business visa just to provide some lectures or something. but the court, russian court, says no, business if you, you know, do some money, so you lied about your purpose of visit. they were forced to leave and
now they couldn't enter russia for, i don't know, five or ten years. the next thing, of course, is the ngos, the so-called law on foreign agents. so my organization was announced last year. so we liquidated the organization because it's like a yellow star. we -- our official position, we shouldn't work like this. we are not foreign nations. we are an independent organization. we are an independent human rights lawyers. after that we created two organizations. one organization like receive foreign money. yes. foreign grants. u.n. grants maybe, british grants. yes. but this organization didn't make any public statements,
press releases, demonstrations and so. and the second organization didn't receive any money but, yes, we did press releases. we worked with mass media, newspapers, and so on. and those both organizations are also declared as foreign agents. so okay, we say if you don't -- we tried to play on your side by your rules. if you don't want it, we will be like independent lawyers with no open books. there's no -- we don't want to, you know, tell about our funding and so on. okay. so that's not problem for us, for example. the most important thing i would
like to say and final part of my speech is the problem of torture. so i'm a member of a committee against torture so it's my topic. you know, torture is everywhere. i mean, police brutality in the united states also, of course, in china, in europe also. but the problem is how the state reacts on these facts. i mean, investigates these facts. that's the task of our organization, for example. so we're not trying to combat torture. i mean, we try to combat torture, but we know that police brutality is absolute. it's obvious.
but we try to persuade the investigatorses to manage, to investigate effectively those cases and that's our task. the most problematic region in russia, of course, if you are talking about torture is the check republic, of course. and so the militia, the police, for example, because in our organization, 110 investigations, but none in the chechen republic. because the instigators couldn't work there effectively. they say -- i had many conversations with those federal russian investigators.
they say i couldn't question a simple chechen police officer because he will beat me, or maybe worse. that's all. so there are plenty of open criminal cases, but there are no convicted police officers. so i can speak about, for example, conditions of detention. i can enter every prison of my region, but as, you know, as you may know, with the strong economical crisis in russia, and they cut everything that is possible. for example, i had many conversations with prison authorities. they say we -- we -- we demolished every single dog in
prisons. there are no dogs now. i mean, just guarding dogs. because of the economical crisis. so it's terrible. i mean, just -- things got worse. so i think those were the main topics that i just wanted to speak about. if you have any questions, please. thank you. >> thank you, anton. and we'll start the question/answer session. i'll ask a question to all of our speakers, and you can answer the question like in the way you want. my question is, like, europe actually is a country with a long history. it's like 3,000 years of organized, formalized state.
has more prosperous, less prosperous times. people leave better lives or worse lives, but it always has vertical power. there was no other systems in russia ever. it always was the system when everything was decided by somebody on the top of the country and very much policy was based on what kind of person we have at the top. it always was russia's imperial russia, soviet russia, post-soviet russia. it was always the same system of power, vertical power. extremely hierarchical. tell me if i'm wrong. i'm a historian. it always was -- it's textbook of propaganda. it always was a country of propaganda, and it also was a country of human rights violation. so all the three statements,
what you guys are trying to avoid are, like kind of we can see the historic heritage we have and we still carry it on. so why do we have a hope it will be different? i mean, after the breakup of the soviet union, we have the dream, now it can be a democratic country. nothing changed. do we really have any arguments to believe that conflict can be changed so drastically, so there will be no, like, imperial style of internal policy? it will be respect for human freedom of media and respect for human rights? and belief in that. and how long will it take? particularly the united states and other countries, every effort so far we have tried to put there have failed. thank you. >> okay. the microphone is here.
you know what, i -- i've got at least three friends who are now in their 50s. one is in his 80s. another one is in his 50s. another one is his late 40s. they all used to be alcoholics for most of their lives. >> russia? >> yeah. no, no, one is american. anyway, i don't think it really matters. the one who's in his 80s now, by the way. and this guy who is in his 80s, he quit drinking when he was 45 so he's lived for like 35 years at least ever since, sober, absolutely clean. but when he was quitting drinking, everybody around him was saying, look, you've been drinking all your life. you don't know any other examples. you know, you don't know what
sobriety is all about. you hardly remember when you were sober, probably when you were a teenager, whatever. but so, there's no hope, there's no hope. the guy's been living 35 years clean, happy. family, everything. so of course, i mean, not every parallel works, but how i would answer -- i mean, of course there's always hope. otherwise -- otherwise what's the use of living or gathering here, arguing, trying to figure out, you know, ways of thinking of scenarios for russia, describing all the problems if nothing can be done? i think it lists -- well, i'm not a historian, but i would not completely agree with you, nikolai, as far as the history of russia is concerned. >> i don't completely agree with myself. >> i mean, if you take the entire history of russia,
meaning not the russian empire, but russia at least as long as, you know, we remember we have the name russia, then it's at least 1,200 years. and for the first, you know, 500 or 600 years before probably the 14th century, no, i mean, russia did have democratic traditions. you take the nagarov republic, even if you take the kiev russia where, i mean, there were democratic traditions even by today's standards. not only by the standards of that remote past. and the history, at least as compared to other countries. i mean, the kiev russia was pretty much a democratic state. i mean, one a lot more democratic than a lot of countries of europe at that time. yes, i mean, for the past six or seven centuries, russia has been
an example of autocratic rule with violation of human rights everywhere. but then again, well, if you take europe, yeah, it's the head of russia three, four centuries but what are the three, four centuries all about if we look, you know, at the world, at the history of the world? the roman empire was there for thousands of years, you know, and then it had to -- it collapsed and had to change. so what i'm saying is that we must -- i mean, we meaning the citizens of russia who care, and the citizens of the world who care, americans who care, because you know, you did not really care in 1917 but the consequences of what happened in 1917 in russia, i mean, you are still the worst conflicts including terrorism, in my
opinion, exactly the consequences of what happened to the world, to first russia and the world in 1917 and then the decades that followed. so definitely we got to do everything we can to find a way out. to find a better solution for the russian crisis, for what happens with russia to change russia. >> but it seems to me that my idea is not popular for russians. we always say that we are proud of living in the great country. i don't want to live in the great country. i don't want to live in the great country. i want to live in a happy country. i want to live in a normal country. i think that if i am not mistaken, after 1945, the world coalition restricted abilities of germany to have army, fleet, and some other things. i think some time will come and
russia will be forbidden to be the great country. maybe it will divide it, but the only thing our so-called patriots declare, we live in a great country, you have sanctions, whatever, but we live in a great country. i don't understand it, and my idea is to stop the greatness of this country. and i think the time -- than they do. >> well, i have a very pessimistic o ppinion on this issue, so i shouldn't talk about it, sorry. >> okay. thank you. okay. go ahead. introduce yourself, please. >> hi. i'm michael brodie. i'm an environmental guy now at au, formerly at the epa. and starting the epa some 15, 16 years ago. i started doing a lot of projects there and after retiring from there, i've done a little teaching.
i've been all over russia backpacking, camping, all sorts of stuff. but i'd like to start by saying thanks to my compatriot russian jews who moved to israel, thanks to putin, they're a lot safer. thanks to putin, the chemical weapons are out of syria and the weapons-grade uranium are out of iran. so we need to have a little perspective. now, if you look at u.s. interventions over the last 25 years, do you really want us to help you? do you see any evidence that that would change something that you guys care about? i mean, even look at bosnia and kosovo today. they're slowly but surely becoming slavic states. we cleared out the serbs, and the saudis have moved everything in. so what do you think we could do that would sort of help the general welfare in russia? thank you. >> okay. thank you. who wants to take this?
>> well, you know what, in 1991, i spent 3 1/2 months hitchhiking around this countrynd it was a great experience. and i remember speaking on c-span and i was asked the same question, like, how would you like the u.s. to help the soviet union? because it was still the soviet union. my friend and i we then said help people, not the governments because back then the u.s. was subsidizing, giving credits to the russian government and pretty much those credits, i assume, were stolen. and we believed that the best way the west could help the soviet union back then and i still think it's the best way how the west could help, is helping developing private enterprise. helping and educating people.
i understand what natella is talking about when she's talking about the patriots' position in russia. yeah, i want my country to be happy, i want my people to be happy, and i think they -- if they ask themselves really seriously, they will answer, they want to be happy, not great. in terms of size, you know, empire and so on. but i'm definitely against the situation where the u.s. would invade russia, you know, or, you know, make some restrictions against russia like russia should never have nuclear weapons or whatever weapons solely because, yeah, i don't believe this will work. i mean, if any -- there are some people in russia, i wouldn't say many, but there are people in russia who help for a popular revolt that will be supported by the west or financed by the west.
and they say the west should do anything to rid russia of putin. what i think the west should do everything to change russia, to help russia change, the initiative should still be from the russian people. if the initiative goes from the outside, russians will never forgive that. this will always remain, you know, in their historical memory and they will remember, we were changed from the outside. they will never forgive that. there is a difference. i mean, there is a difference. again, i understand the logic of natella, but there is a difference between the nazi germany after the war and japan after the war and today's russia. i mean, we may regret that, that there is such a difference, but there is such a difference. and sometimes, yes, i, too, believe that russia should
receive a very hard lesson, a very hard lesson. >> how many times? >> no, from itself. no, not from -- from themselves, you know? probably the previous lessons were not enough. i mean, having what we have right now. but i'm definitely against from any sort of intervention of the sort that you are talking about. well, i think we, without those sanctions, russia would have come to the economic crisis it is going through right now, anyway. solely because the system of governance is wrong, deeply wrong. you can't rule the country by personality this way i'm saying. it's the rule by personality.
it's the authoritarian rule that eventually brought russia to whatever wrong moves in the foreign policy russia has made, but first and foremost, it's brought russia to -- to the huge mistakes, if not crimes, in domestic policy and russian economy. so sanctions, not sanctions, russia would be there, anyway. >> i cannot agree. i think that when we speak about the lesson, what could be more than the lesson of stalinism? i remember, it was first putin elections. my father who was in prison in 1930, he went and worked for putin. i shouted at him, what are you doing? he's kgb. he's another kgb. i cannot believe that that
lesson would not be enough. >> it's different. >> why? >> i'll tell you why. if russia issues a world war, then, yes, it will be beaten, will be punished hard and then after that, we can talk of, wro you know, the west -- >> you prefer waiting? >> this fortunately hasn't happened. we don't want that to happen, i'm sure. so, i mean, what would you suggest in terms of practical steps? you would suggest for americans to do what? >> i don't think that americans should do something instead of us. you are quite right on that. >> not what i'm talking about. >> but i don't think when you talk about sanctions, we both, i think, three of us know that sanctions work not against the leaders, they work at first term against us.
because didn't you have problems with -- in moscow? i had. there are self-situations, the law, he works against -- children who died. they started dying after this law was adopted. so i think that sanctions work not against the leaders but my friend who was first russian ombudsman, he always says the very big fault of the west is they are political. i don't how to stop this. but maybe he's right. anton? >> i would speak about, you know, practical station, it's about your question, how could you help or maybe not help? since 2000, our organization received many, many grants from
ford foundation, usaid, national endowment for democracy. that was okay. nobody didn't care about it. but it all started after crimea and ukraine situation and this -- so now we are called, like fifth -- so i think if there is any liberalization, maybe just when our political leaders make a deal about ukraine, crimea, so on, and syria maybe, i think if there is any liberalization, maybe after that, the station will be like previous years. just we could receive grants and we could work. we don't execute any orders from any foreign country. we work independently.
so i think the crucial thing is to explain to people and to russian officials how the system works. i mean, just -- we have some grant for -- we write a project by ourselves and we do everything that we want to do. we don't execute any orders. so i think that's a crucial thing. and now russian government, of course, is not very tolerant to ngos who receive money from abroad, of course. so i think that that is a future issue that we could discuss later. thank you. >> well, it's a good question. just give me a second. one thing. the last question i ask all the time, why americans should be
concerned about the situation in russia, why? the reason for you guys to be concerned about the country, somewhere like 10,000 miles away. and if you're concerned it's because of something in your national interests, that's why. and if you're concerned because of your interests, why russia should change? to satisfy your interests, your vision? and this is like a closed circle. this question i asked in russia many hundreds of times. why you guys trying to change us? let us to decide. okay. i'm a threat to you? are we going to fight you in a war? we have the nukes under control. so what's your united states interest? why so much concerned about the situation in russia? unfortunately american government does not give a clear answer why. what do you want? what your objections? what your goal? to have russia as a democratic
country, okay? but why? if russians, for instance, don't want it, let's say. they don't want an american style of democracy. what's your business? why china doesn't teach russia how to live? why, like india? three times bigger than the united states. doesn't giveless lessons to put. why american president or department of state comes there and gives lecture. well, i want this -- i know it should be done this way, but still we have to answer the american side of the question -- what is our interests in russia? what do we want to see? to follow, like, white house directions? and you're right, it's not always good. so that's the question really -- not on our speaker's side, on our side. well, let's give a -- first row, a question, then we'll go back
there. >> hello. i'm elaine sirou, i'm an associate director of wiu, wisconsin international ukraine university in kiev, ukraine. and i really do appreciate this panel and the perspectives put forth. nikolai, you made a really started off with a really great point about the history and how the history is. i'd like to ask in context with that, you know, we so often thought of culture is the thickest form of binding of anything. and so whether we call it history or maybe we should be calling it culture which has been built up over hundreds of years, thousands. and so maybe the culture as has been described, or is here and other people have read about,
maybe the culture or the dynamics in russia are unique unto russia, as the culture is unique unto america or england or germany and so forth. so where we're looking at that, how would the -- within russia, the people of russia, address the issues that are important to russia and russia as larger in the world to be able to succeed successfully for russia to be a part of the world community? versus the current status, which is not necessarily in the interests of russia in its role in the community. and -- i'm actually seeing natella and stanislav speaking almost on the same page but a digit take on how to accomplish
that. so would each of you approach how could it be done within russia? it's not about the u.s. or germany or so forth to tell. how would the russian people come to make this so? thank you. >> you know what, because i mean, if we talk about culture, if we talk about psychology, this can take really hours, you know, of discussing. so let me just say this. i was staying at my friend's house in los angeles just a month ago, and he had problems with infestation of roof rats. really, that was a huge problem. you know, chasing them to the corner, trying poison or traps did not prove a helpful tactic.
solely because their bodies would rot in place and the odor would, you know, just attract new generation of rats. so he finally figured out that rather a way should be crafted for the rats to come out, you know, come down from the roof. and he should try to make it impossible for the rat to get back under there. so he made this metal thing, you know, like a metal board around the wall of the house so the rat could come down, but never come up again. so my idea is that sooner or later this will happen. the russian elites will just have together, sit at a round
table maybe, invite representatives of the opposition. and they will do this because they're so good. they'll do it in self-interests, because they will want to survive, because they will not want to repeat the destiny of their predecessors, what i talked about earlier, yeltsin era elites or soviet era elites and so on. and they'll have to work out a set of rules which would change russia into a country ruled by law rather than by personality. and this is where the u.s., i think, should help because this process will require things like guarantees from the west, from the western leaders, from american leaders, too. guarantees that a they -- i mean, the members of the russian elite will not -- their families will not be prosecuted, you know, and stuff like that. it's a long process that will
require negotiations and work of e best minds of intellectuals from both russia and the west. that's speaking how technically how this transition could be made. but, i mean, talking about culture, well, yes, we do have this historic tradition, and yes -- you know, it's like with any human being, and, again, speaking about this example of an alcoholic, it takes -- what needs to be done for him to stop drinking -- for him or her to stop drinking, right? one day they have to find themselves, you know, deep in mud on the -- on the edge of death literally. that's when the person has to face this choice. death or a new life? and this is where i agree with natalia, yes, russia probably needs to find her in a situation like that, and the fact that it
has not yet chosen the way of democracy, you know, civic freedoms and stuff is because it probably hasn't yet found itself in a situation like that. with all the stalinist past, the revolutions and everything. but we don't want this to happen in the form of a popular revolt in russia or anything because any revolt will lead to really unpredictable circumstances including finding nukes in the hands of a group of people like this committee of january 25th, for example, where it can explode anywhere. but i do believe that culture can be changed. i mean, everybody -- we can't change themselves. we can change ourselves. every person can change him or herself without betraying him or herself. and educating people, talking to people, changing their minds by
means of television, internet, lectu lecturing, everything. as a journalist, i can tell you for sure, give me or natella, we can make a dream team of russian journalists and if we make it to the russian nation television and spend there, like, several months, i can tell you, the culture will change. i mean, people will change. it's -- this -- the way how propaganda has worked in the past 15 years and we've seen how quickly it changed the minds of certain people. it can work the opposite way, too. so i absolutely believe there is a chance, and while i personally will do my best to take advantage of that chance, because like i said, any other thing, the country falling apart, the civil war in russia, everything else that can happen, this will not make the world a better place.
>> i would say something, just give me a second. it seems like you want to change, just to dramatize it, you want to change it as you think is right for russia. they think who are now in charge, this is what is right for russia, too. one way or another you see the russian people as a subject of manipulation, by good people or bad people. that was i was talking about in the beginning. we have a more democratic leader like gorbachev was. we have a less democratic leader, country is less democratic. basically depends on who has a tv channel. that's what you're talking about? >> exactly. that's why i say the major theme that needs to be done is to change the country from ruled by personal -- [ inaudible ] no, no, no, that's not what i'm saying. from ruled by personality to ruled by law. that's why i'm talking about the elites getting together and making a new set of rules.
changing the country. that's the major point. >> aren't you afraid that russians will elect somebody like lemonoff? >> i'm absolutely sure this will not happen. >> i think that ten years ago we talked on the program -- now all this channel changed a lot. so i don't remember the question. but he answered. it is not enough blood for existence of russian democracy. they punish it. >> absolutely. i was quoting yablinsky, a famous politics, saying, i mean, the three young men who died in
august of 19th, 1991. yes, that's true. that's a fact. >> i think now we can add many lives to these three, and it seems to me that awaiting -- when mr. putin will gives stas and me a channel, it's something fantastical. i'm also sure that informing people what's going on, it's also not enough because as i have told already, everyone can see it on internet any information about street action, about invasion in crimea, about anything. but people do not go to the street actions. my hope is to mr. putin, himself, because i think that there are a lot of people who are political -- who don't take care object politics but some days -- someday their car with
special sign -- to their relative, when he goes to a pedestrian crossway, sometimes somebody takes the business of somebody's husband, wi, so there are many abilities to be offended by this power, this authorities, and they attract drivers. i don't remember who wrote this article, they began to protest but they were for invasion for crimea, they were for the law of yakoff and so on and so forth. i think that these restrictive laws, they will do some kind of -- these floats will make a sea and all the people who suffer from it, they should take their neighbor to their hand. i know that it also sounds as fantastical, but i think it will come soon.
>> maybe adjust a brief commentary from my perspective view. for example, the applicants come to us and we say, we are foreign agents, and the person says, i don't care. we say, we receive money from abroad. person says, i don't care. yeah. so a person who faces police brutality, torture probably, or something, some atrocities, or a mother's son who is abducted or disappeared, they don't care about who helps them. and i think that it's in every country, in united states, germany, india, china, russia. so it's not the problem of culture. it's the issue of human dignity, i think. so everybody could face police brutality and human rights violations, detention, illegal detentions and so on. so i think the culture doesn't
mean here. thank you. >> hi. mitchell -- [ inaudible ] okay. mitchell pullman. i've been involved in russian relations in one form or another for many years, in exchanges, doing elections, monitoring, media projects. first a comment, then a question. nikolai, why do we care about russia? it's really very such. they have lots of nuclear weapons pointed at us. so long as they are nuclear weapons pointed at the united states, whoever is controlling the button, what's going on in russia is going to be concern to people here. it's really that simple.
mr. kissleyev said it, right? obviously we're going to take an interest. the complete opposite is true as well. but i wanted to gab to our conversation earlier about what happened in the '90s, and people-to-people exchanges, because stas, i remember that time very, very well. there were lots and lots of exchanges, lots of attempts to help russians on a people-to-people level. some with private funding, some with small funds, you know, american funding. but as was said, you know, now everything is foreign agents. it's gotten harder and harder and harder for americans to help russians on a people-to-people level. it didn't start just recently. lest we forget the peace corps had a very sizable program in russia, i believe it was 2000 it was closed down about 15 years ago on the grounds it was a spying operation. and as long as you have people
in charge in the governmentn russia who view with suspicion, if not hostility, everything coming out of the united states, we can only do so much and i would like to add that quite a few russians don't even seem to realize that in the 1990s, we did provide a lot of help to russians. i knew a journalist here who commented to me in a talk where he learned for the first time that americans had paid the salaries of nuclear scientists in russia in the early '90s. he had never heard that before and he's a journalist. the economic catastrophe of the early '90s, we may or may not have made a contribution, but it was going to happen, anyway, with the collapse of the soviet, and i would like to hear russian journalists like yourself talk about that rather than accept the line, oh, all the help we got in the '90s was useless and
so on and so forth. the free market system if that's what you want to call it, the economic system you have in russia today probably wouldn't even exist if it wasn't for technical experts from from the u.s. from europe. people like anders, for example. >> it defies logic that in the fight between the television set and the refrigerator in the relative freedom of internet and russia, we know that russia has the most internet users in european countries. how do you explain that, that people who have access to internet and can get any kind of information still prefer to stay
in the majority, supporters of putin. >> victoria, political assistant in u.s. consulate. i was working in my office over 20 years, i was observing our elections done in russia. when i read for the first time kremlin wants to make a truly legitimate elections in september how? even honest person, she's only warrior in a field. it's a lot. what about elections commissions in regions, in polling stations, they don't know how to hold fair elections, they know how to manipulate, how to get their
result. how it will get such elections? >> i'm not sure i am right, but my idea is they want to change brent from magician, very sensitive -- it's my idea, and maybe it means they want to change something, but i'm not sure it's possible to do. i wanted to -- i'm not american, but i wanted to answer your question what for you needed. my opinion is crimea, now the baltic countries are very nervous about them. what stop will be next? >> all right, well, as far as
why people in russia don't freely use the internet, well, they do use the internet, the problem is -- i don't know why, they mostly watch videos, nice funny videos on youtube. they use social networks to post their cats or whatever, and that's -- it takes time. that's what i believe i mean, television or refrigerator. at one point they will kind of combine, come together. if there is a good thing about the economic catastrophe if i of russia, it's pretty fast, is that soon more and more people will feel it. and more and more people will realize, will understand that it's how their state works. it's exactly this so called vertical power. that is the reason why the
refrigerators are becoming empty. and they'll understand that it's the television also, the television has played a great role in their refrigerators eventually becoming empty. so when more and more people will realize that, when more and more people will realize they have to think for themselves or use their own brains, that's when they will start reading more books, reading articles on the internet and not only posting cats and stuff. this process takes time, and i just wanted to comment -- definitely, i personally, i personally know about a lot of u.s. programs, exchange programs and educational programs, so on and so on, yes, i keep telling -- i mean, i keep sharing all that information i have with the students when i
lecture in moscow colleges when i just talk to people, well, of course. and when you're saying that it has to stop now, yes, it has stopped, and yes, it's difficult to launch exchange programs or educational programs, but then again, i'm just saying that it doesn't mean that we got to stop trying. i mean, everybody in their own place. i working as a journalist, yes, i used to have national television at my disposal when i was in my 20s. now i don't have that because i've been on the black list of national television channels for the past 10, 12 years, that doesn't mean i have to raise my hands and just switch to travel journali journalism. we all in our place, have to do something, to think of what we can do.
and i'm sure that's what i started with, the russian -- both the russian people on the one hand the so-called ordinary people, and the russian elites will really soon have to think again about their place in the fate of russia. and -- but it's the elites who eventually will just have to gather and think of a magg in a car ta or something like that. history knows something examples. people have gathered in the past to change the rules by which even if it's thanks to those rules, they have become rich. for the sake of their own survival, they'll just have to think of a major change. and this major change will have to happen. >> i would like to make a brief
comment about the question of why you guys need to interfere in our affairs, in rush ya's affairs. maybe it's very optimistic and idealistic. but i presume that there should be a balance. i mean, just -- it's after world war ii, the united nations seized them, so yes i don't suppose it's the fifths column, the ngo's founded by foreign countries it should be a balance who stops russia to open ngo's to combat police brutality in the united states. i always ask russian state officials, well, let's do comedic torture. in the united states, i would certainly work there against police brutality. we have many, many cases in the
united states and russian people. all this news about police brutality in the united states yes, they have also torture. so it should be a balance. ngo's should be independent in every country. united states sponsors the ngo's in russia, and ngo's in the united states, that's okay, there should be an independent view in every country. when an ngo sponsored by russian officials, it's not an ngo because that organization says all is okay. they just shake their hands with the state officials, the prison officials, that's all.
concerts, holidays and so on. i think that should be a balance. and maybe it's idealistic, but that's me, okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> i promised you guys -- we got our list at least, i think have you to think smarter we have to get smarter now, and to find the way to united states and russia to work together. and let's thank our speakers and thank you guys. and i hope i'll see you soon. thank you.
a signature feature of book tv on c-span2 is taking you to book fares and festivals across the country. this weekend we travel to los angeles, california. one of the most celebrated book festivals in the u.s. our live coverage features national security with sara chase. policing with joe dominick, author of blue, the lapd and the battle to redeem policing. nancy cohen, the making of america's first woman presid