Find a Question:
Koch: “Power – the inefficient waste of life ‘
Koch: “Power – the inefficient waste of life ‘
The former chairman of the State Property Committee of the Russian Federation, Alfred Koch said Ksenia Sokolova and Ksenia Sobchak, the role of oligarchs in history, his participation in the dispersal of NTV and the ideal successor to Putin.
Sobchak: Alfred Reyngoldovich, preparing for the interview, I have read many of your articles and other publications. I noticed that you have a lot of fun and talk about the Yeltsin era. In particular, the appointment of Putin and the fact that he appointed quickly realized that Putin – not Pinochet. And it is this kind of hope pinned on him. Next, you write that in general there are very few examples of successful development of a state governed by an enlightened style totalitarianism. How do you think might happen if such a precedent in Russia?
Koch: If you continue with certain thoughts Aven relatively successful authoritarian modernization (call them so), then we are not talking about authoritarianism as such, namely the authoritarian modernization. It should be noted that they are, as a rule, was possible only in small countries, such as Chile or Singapore. But it is also well recognized as a successful example of authoritarian modernization in Turkey, and it is a big country. Now many are trying to provide an example of how the Chinese authoritarian modernization, but this case is not applicable to Russia. The fact is that in Russia there are things that we have long since passed, slipped, so one or the other scenario that was possible before, is no longer possible now. Why do not we use the Chinese model? Because we do not need! The Chinese are going through industrialization, and we are her in the thirties of the last century have passed. A post-industrial development built on the principle of authoritarian modernization is impossible, because the key point of post-industrial, information society – is to create maximum opportunities for the discovery and development of all creative abilities of the individual. While any industrializatsionny project (as opposed to postindustrializatsionnogo) – above all, in the words Mr. Prokhanov, “mobilization project.”
Sokolova: So, these are two completely different approaches?
Koch: What we found on the basis of the Chinese authoritarian modernization, we just do not need, we have already passed. We have already built in the Soviet era somehow plants, railways, communications, etc.
Sobchak: Keyword – at the very least. All of this is outdated and falling apart.
Koch: I understand that. But when you say that we need to upgrade that is falling apart, and that requires innovation, the introduction of scientific and technical progress and stuff, you just talk about the post-industrial development.
Sobchak: Already at the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was obvious that his industrial complex is out of date.
Koch: That’s right! So, we then twenty-two years ago, needed to move to a model of post-industrial development. In comparison to the Chinese model, it is important that in our country this industrial complex has already been built. That is, we have passed that stage. But here’s the next step – integration into an existing industrial complex innovative component – can not be implemented by the authoritarian model of governance. Gaidar-pokoynichek often said that Deng Xiaoping realized that did not work with Stalin. I think it was because Stalin was forced to industrialize by plundering the peasantry, because by the time he wanted to carry it out, in the West, the Great Depression, and foreign investment has become impossible. But Deng Xiaoping succeeded. When he wanted to industrialize, the investment potential in the global economy and a Western business said: “Ok. We are ready to invest.”
Sobchak: But back to today’s Russia. Which scenario do you see?
Koch: I see no alternative to democracy. Although in the short term, at least in the long run. Delay the transition to it is meaningless.
Sobchak: So, in your opinion, would be “restructuring-2”?
Koch: Can it be called. One may deceive themselves and postpone the moment, but it will come. It simply means that in the world we have included competition and later in worse conditions.
Sobchak: There is a view that Russia is deprecated state over time just fall apart into smaller states
Koch: If we discuss such a perspective, it is wrong to talk about some deterministic predefined things, but we can talk about high or low risk of an event. I believe that if the government continue the course, which is held now, the risks of collapse of the country will consistently grow. While by the authorities think that they are doing everything to prevent this from happening. There is a certain logic inversion. These people really believe that every effort in order to prevent the collapse of the country, and in my opinion, their actions lead to the fact that this collapse happened.
Sokolova: how to avoid the collapse?
Koch: I think that the collapse is not inevitable. This is difficult to organize, different in terms of economic development and the composition of the country as Russia, can not exist except as a federation. And we have, in fact, under federal curtain completely different reality: a unitary state. Fiscal federalism is destroyed, the de facto governor is not elected, the legislatures of the subjects made in the scenery, local government destroyed. If you recall, I began its reforms and the introduction of democratic consciousness, Alexander II, it was the reform of local self-government. He introduced the Zemstvo, then started to judicial reform, military, etc. He moved from the bottom up, and not his fault that he did not have time to complete the system, as it is said, “to the federal level.” He was killed in a day, it seems, even for half an hour before the signing of the Constitution. We destroyed that foundation, and we all have to go through again. For example, look at the United States. They were not somehow once established. This was the completion of the whole process. Initially, there were communities, communes, which are elected by the heads. Even when these territories were British colonies, there was a democracy. It elected a judge, the mayor, the sheriff, the local city council, which approves the budget and taxes, and with their help communities to manage. And on the basis of the almost two hundred years of democratic models appeared the United States. Therefore, in Russia to do exactly the opposite of what is now doing Vladimir Vladimirovich. It destroys the local government, federalism, financial independence of regions, take their tax base, making them dependent on themselves and, therefore, a prerequisite for the emergence of regions and regions pets nelyubimchikov.
Sokolova: In his system the status of the region depends on how the region to vote.
Koch: That’s right. Anyone who voted for me, give money, and those who do not vote for me, I will not. It is clear that sooner or later, the regions in which all are taken, there will be a natural question “what the hell”. I’m not saying that it will happen. But for the collapse of such a conversation about divorce are objective prerequisites. Because oilman from Khanty-Mansiysk, sooner or later will wonder: “What the hell are there golden mosque built with my money?”
Sokolova: I have a long and very interested in the logical question: why oilman from Khanty-Mansiysk this question has not yet been asked? The most amazing thing is that we are now seeing with my own eyes in Russia is that all of this is incorrect, curve, all criticized and ridiculed management model still continues to exist. And oil workers and peasants, and the visitors are in a golden mosque lethargic peace. All this can not be, but it is! How do you explain this amazing phenomenon?
Koch: You’re asking me? I’m not an ethnographer. And do not even oilman from Khanty-Mansiysk. I find it hard to judge about why he has not protested.
Sokolova: For me it is – the main issue of our philosophy.
Koch: You take some empirical position, which is that, as with the Russian peasant nor skinned, he would not arise. And I say that if it consistently with skinned, the chances that he will rise to be higher than if the skin is not a rip off.
Sokolova: So it turns out that Vladimir Putin is doing it right? Let skinned and more fruitful?
Koch: You’re talking about, and I do not say that. I say that, other things being equal, a man’s skin does not rip off, chances are that it does not rise, will be higher than if you did not do.
Sobchak: But I wonder more. Your own role in this story.
Koch: Oh, she’s very modest.
Sobchak: The reason I’m asking you. You as a former representative of the supreme power can relate to the incredible financial careers of the people we know. They owe you much. It turns out that you are from that by today’s standards, nothing at all fucked, and fucked by those standards is very little, if at all rude and cynical to say. You is not harm the? Or, conversely, you are proud of it? How did you assess your role in the major political events of the nineties and the first formation of the oligarchs and their huge wealth?
Koch: The role of personality in my stories, I would not overestimate. As for me jealous or envious. It is in the sense that Vysotsky sang that. “By a company are chacha, by a nose – plum.”?
Sobchak: Let’s get back to the. Here you are talking to, sitting at a table with people who owe you that they now have a huge state, billion-dollar business, thanks in part to you, they have taken an important place in this system. And you yourself just a little gostinichka in Germany. You will not hurt? You think this is fair?
Koch: I feel comfortable enough in reality. I would, of course, lied, saying that in some moments for me, can not invade, say, the regret that I did not fit into any corruption schemes. Or certain services that I helped people not anticipated rigid requirement, so I was first given a share or pay the money. But when sober reflection I understand that won more than lost. Maybe it sounds lame, but believe that every dollar I earned me more than tens or hundreds of thousands, that I would have received as bribes or kickbacks.
Sokolova: And you all take bribes or kickbacks?
Koch: Well, in the nineties was a completely different atmosphere. I do not know how to explain it to you, but the fact is that no one I did not give a bribe, and I hesitate to ask. More precisely in another way: no one gave bribes that officials agree simply to do what he and so it is necessary to fulfill the law. Probably bribed, certainly given, but for the fact that the officers had violated the law. And here I had a firm position: any thing, but within the law. And during this time did not take bribes, but did not give them.
Sobchak: But if I asked you to give, then, others have been asking.
Koch: I did not ask anybody. And I was not offered. I’ll tell you more than that, the majority of them do not believe they have anything at all to me. They believe that everything in life have made themselves, and if I gave them any service, it is certainly the service is not worth any money. It’s just a friendly service, I had to have as a companion for pleasure. And if they will be able to provide me with any service, they can always get it to me, they’re just still can not be presented. Maybe she never present itself.
Koch: Well, will not be presented, therefore, not be presented. In such a dialogue is always very difficult to argue. Well I go to him and say, “You owe me”? Stupid and useless. As they say on Wall Street: “It is the service provided is worth nothing.”
Sobchak: And at what point the system changed? When such a “friendly service” appeared price?
Koch: That is when officials began to take a bribe for the fulfillment of what they need to do so for a salary? I think that at this point I was no longer a public servant.
Sokolov: But could you watch. You have committed yourself to a time when lobbying has found a clear price tag?
Koch: I would not call it lobbying. Lobbying – it’s completely legal activity. But I understand what you mean. As I said, I think that in our time, too, took bribes, just not in our circle. I know of at least about Gaidar, Nemtsov, Chubais. They did not take.
Sobchak: It is believed that this system came up with Berezovsky.
Koch: Berezovsky around me dancing a jig in full. I had been, and the great, and the outstanding, good, right, but I think his head did not even come to offer me money. However, he danced a jig around it all.
Sokolova: That is it you just motivated by flattery.
Koch: Well, in a sense.
Sobchak: So who started it, then?
Koch: I think it was like Ilf and Petrov. Remember, “Rookery” immediately caught fire from the four corners. I would say that the three main helper source. First, it is the Moscow authorities and Luzhkov. Second, it’s “Petersburg”, the second wave of the “St. Petersburg.”
Sobchak: Second Wave – who is this?
Koch: This whole tusovka KGB, a kind of co-operative “lake” in the broad sense of the word. The third component – a national republics: Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, the North Caucasus, etc. They have this tradition of rampant bribery brought to the federal level. You, by the way, did not pay attention to what people from the Caucasus and the so-called Muslim oligarchs have already more than Jewish and Russian?
Sokolova: That’s right.
Koch: That’s because they sing in unison with the current ruling elite.
Sobchak: And what, in your opinion, the species difference between the oligarchs and the current of the first wave – Rothenberg, Timchenko, Usmanov and so on?
Koch: I’m not an oligarch, to judge. Besides, I know the second generation is very bad.
Sokolova: you have now with the authorities and her “purse”?
Koch: Absolutely not, I deliberately exclude themselves from this communication. More precisely, it was a two-way process.
Sokolova: a letter of resignation?
Koch: Yes, by choice. Miller tried a couple of times to hold me in the waiting room and got a statement on the table.
Sokolova: Forgive me, but I have to ask. Why you do this thing with overclocking NTV climbed? You did not hurt that in the great history of Alfred Koch will remain only for those who broke up a “unique team of journalists’?
Koch: Eh. You know, no. In a way, I even proud of it! I do not think these people neither unique nor journalists.
Sokolova: Why? That was the good journalists.
Koch: Oh, come on!
Sokolova: Your position will argue.
Koch: Well, I’m ready. First of all I would like you to briefly explain the situation in the summer of 1997. After Yeltsin’s victory in the elections in 1996, Boris Nikolayevich efforts closely around him the impression that victory he must radically Gusinsky and Berezovsky and the credit for this victory – ninety percent, and the rest – ten.
Sokolova: It was true?
Koch: In my opinion, no. In no less a victory, he was obliged to Chubais, Chernomyrdin and a lot of other people.
Sobchak: he think?
Koch: It’s hard to say, but sometimes it seems that it is at that time very little about what he was thinking. It is important that he thought so, and he was a prince, and it was not the council. And these people, for example, I just said that they had to be to pay what they should be, now that will be just in the division, and they have “beak to help.” And this despite the fact that becoming mediaoligarhami Yeltsin allowed them to bypass all laws and rules of privatization. He just gave them the keys! The first channel was given to Berezovsky, just stupid to give away for free, but it costs billions of dollars. The same applies to the frequency channel NTV.
Sokolov: But presented with the understanding that he would work on the BN?
Koch: I understand – yes, it was necessary to speed work on Yeltsin. It was a cynical, but the contract. But they refused to carry out the agreement. Once they got the frequency, they became as it blackmail. They said, “But now gives us what is necessary.” And me personally, and Chubais Gusinsky and Berezovsky was denied. We said that we are ready to pay tribute to what they did for Yeltsin’s victory, but within reason. And of course we will not sell them any less assets than they are worth.
Sokolova: what they want to buy?Viewing:-137
Answer this Question
You must be Logged In to post an Answer.
Not a member yet? Sign Up Now »
Star Points Scale
Earn points for Asking and Answering Questions!