Much people were remember his deep and objective utterances in the political programs of the Central Television of the Soviet time.
He is the author of works, which to this day are textbooks for politicians and journalists, owner of many state awards, ranks and titles, Academician Georgi ARBATOV.
Sadly to realize that our conversation began on pessimistic note, and was over by the same note. But for this there were and there are too many reasons.
- There is an English proverb: you can lead a horse to water but you can not make it drink, - said Giorgi Arkadievich and sorrowfully continued. - You see, I have experienced in this short period after the war, different periods of life. And I would say ... we criticize the Soviet era and the communist system. There are many reasons for this. But then, starting with Khrushchev, and especially under Brezhnev, and even more so under Gorbachev was a great demand for professional knowledge. But when came Yeltsin, all as cut off.
- That is, say, CIS, unlike against US, has the lack of continuity in policy and insufficient preparedness of solutions?
- You see, we have not normal political mechanism, when they have normal political mechanism, well-tested by centuries. Such political mechanism takes into consideration all new phenomena, analyzing of this phenomena, and so on. But I don’t know how decisions take place in our country. They were not perfect in soviet times. Many mistakes were there. But work was transparent. At last 12-15 people from politburo discuss issues. But now nobody knows how solutions take place…
- Giorgi Arkadievich, how do you think, may be lack of interest to the experience of professionals indicates about lack of professionalism among they, who must consult with professionals?
- Because I know nobody from them, it’s hard to speak for me. You see, if man work well in any sphere, he writes articles, appears in media. I don’t see those.
- With which phenomena it has relations? Why in US all is different? Why solutions there more adequate to the interests of deeds? Why there they are nearer to the result?
- Russia in general not far from absolute monarchy till now. Under other name absolute monarchy was in soviet times, and in extreme even savage forms, I would say. And in fact it takes place now, although may be in more soft forms.
- One automatically makes a question, somebody speak “we” and “they” – about American. Are we so different?
- Difference is, of course: in history, in geography, and in other aspects. This difference forms different types of people.
- May be one of causes is that US found adventurers?
- They had some part of adventurism. But in general they were brave people. It is necessary to be brave for navigation in unknown country.
But from comparison CIS and US Giorgi Arkadievich invariably returned to Russian reality, which disturbed him most of all.
- They did much that people can’t satisfy the intellectual requirements. Previously we had very cheap books, recording discs, theatre tickets, cinema tickets, concert tickets… This all were accessible. Today this all is inaccessible. Today even newspapers are very expensive. Today most of people do not subscribe to newspapers.
The level of TV become poor, then 25 – 30 years ago…
I notice that the best high school graduates leave abroad. And they are not dissidents of old days, which were not agree with political habits. Economics causalities guide them, they search best opportunities for work.
- So, we can characterize modern situation as certain crisis?
- We are in crisis.
And main anguish, which disturbed this amazing man, was that his professional knowledge not claimed. Only when he died Russian leaders were condoled.
It seems to me, if he would be claimed, he will live many fruitful years, in spite of his venerable age.
Why such people are not claim in spit of there abilities to work on the edge of political progress and progress in general? Undoubtedly cause is in lowering of the requirements in perspective tasks after confrontation of two superpowers were dropped. Rules of political game, which were over period of decades, are similar rules of any games. And if one side were catch in dishonesty, in lack of ethics norm, this was defeat. By this cause were claimed people like Arbatov, because there personal qualities were adequate professional qualities. Because of decisive argument in political discussion is ethical. Exactly therefore Georgi Arcadievich were able to pass from brave intelligent officer to unbeaten politician and extremely wise man.
But who needs in this today?
Are in need of this they, who use dishonesty and lack of ethics norm as working instruments?
Of course, they didn’t need.
We need in this.
But our understanding of new opportunities comes very late for Georgi Arcadievich.
Otherwise we could consider much together.
Vladimir TESLIN