nterview with, Ivan Rybkin.

Interview with Lebed's replacement as secretary of the Security Council, Ivan Rybkin.

Two interviews with Lebed's replacement as secretary of the Security Council, Ivan Rybkin. (A Communist--really?-- but one of those former "bad" guys, like ex-Soviet bureaucrat Chernomyrdin, who somehow become respectable with time.)

One of the basic principles of JRL is the superiority of knowledge based on direct reading (in this case) of the views of others over the filtered/edited opinions of assorted commentators and even reporters. Thus we do like to bring you extended interviews with important Russian figures. This is not the way that "busy" and "important" people form their opinions because it takes too long. So much the worse for the rest of us.)

Rybkin on Reforms, Chechnya, His New Appointments .

Moscow Mayak Radio Network
October 20, 1996
(This is not an official translation)

(Announcer) Here is Ivan Petrovich Rybkin in the studio. As you know, he has been appointed secretary of the Security Council and the president's special envoy to Chechnya and this is the most important news of the week. (passage omitted) People said that the president had given you a present for your birthday. I can't help asking myself: what do they call a present? It's the heaviest of burdens.

(Rybkin) Everyone sees things differently, according to one's disposition. One might think it is a present, but of course it is a very difficult job. And I wish that all the members of the Security Council feel as members of a single team. To unite -- dare I say it -- the defense minister, the foreign minister, the Foreign Intelligence Service, the Federal Security Service, the emergencies ministry, and many others -- the prime minister himself is there too, as well as the justice minister. Coordinating the efforts of people of such calibre requires great skills.

I think we should combine our efforts. Our efforts should not be a matter for public showdowns or indeed a public political fight. It must not be tolerated. Politics must of course be open and transparent for people. We can succeed only if we combine our efforts.

People living next door to us have begun reforms. Just look at the level of people's solidarity and accord. They all have different views and they act differently, but at the same time they are moving in the same general direction. Just look at Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Slovakia. Are we too daft to reach this level of solidarity, to move forward together, and improve the life of our people? The Russian word nachalnik (chief) derives from nachalo (beginning). If you are at the beginning, you must look two or three steps ahead. And tell people about this in such a way so that a poor Russian citizen is not inundated with a raging flood of scandalous news pouring on his head. Every day -- and I am not blaming radio and television for that, for they are just reflecting the state of affairs -- must be a success of the reforms, improve life, and bring about prosperity.

I would like to work on this together with those mentioned before. I have already met many of them. Meetings and discussions with others will follow soon. I take heart from my two years of working at the Security Council and the State Duma. I believe we will succeed in ensuring the personal safety of people and the security of the state in general. But the situation is far from simple.

(Announcer) Ivan Petrovich, you said once that Chechnya is the most urgent question at the moment and you are facing a very difficult job which will require compromises. Talking about compromises, how far are you prepared to compromise? (Rybkin) As far as I need to, to ensure a truly lasting peace in the Chechen Republic, preferably forever. I do not think there is now a more urgent task. I would not just single out the Chechen Republic. Things do not happen in a vacuum, the fates of people are involved, neighbors of the Chechen Republic are involved. It concerns the interests of many provinces, I mean constituent parts of the Russian Federation. In hundreds of telegrams and phone calls I receive I can see clearly that people are striving for peace.

Different people call me and they tell me different things. I receive very unexpected calls sometimes. People who studied with Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev at the literature institute call me; people who worked with Aslan Maskhadov; my former fellow students call me. My students call me, because I worked in the northern Caucasus for many years, near the Caucasus in Volgograd Region, and our academy was preparing specialists for Dagestan, Kalmykia, and the then Chechnya-Ingushetia. This encourages me. And everywhere I can see just one thought: peace. I would very much like that the hopes people are pinning on me come true. For my part, I will do everything, together with the president and the government, in my power to achieve this, absolutely everything. That's what I am telling my friends, my students and unknown people who are willing to help.

In our conversation yesterday the president was firm: the main thing is to maintain the momentum of peace, to work on the matter constantly. He signed the decree appointing me his special envoy to the Chechen Republic. I am fully aware of the terrible weight of the task. Well, I have already said that 50 years is not an age, it is a state of mind. I can understand the whole complexity. But at the same time I am firmly convinced that all the good results that have been achieved, especially recently by the signing of the peace agreement by Aleksandr Ivanovich Lebed, will be continued without fail. I will continue the work of the secretaries of the Security Council, who put so much effort into an organization so unusual for Russia.

(Announcer) God help you. Thank you, Ivan Petrovich, for taking part in our program.

Rybkin Interviewed on Security Issues.

Moscow Radiostantsiya Ekho Moskvy
October 20, 1996.

Interview with Russian Federation Security Council Secretary Ivan Rybkin by unidentified announcer -- live by telephone.

(Announcer) It's 16:31 in Moscow now, we wish you good afternoon and with us at Ekho Moskvy, live on air, is Ivan Petrovich Rybkin, secretary of the Security Council and the president's plenipotentiary representative to the Chechen Republic. Good afternoon, Ivan Petrovich.

(Rybkin) Good afternoon.

(Announcer) Before saying "Happy 50th Birthday," which is today ...

(Rybkin, interrupting) Thank you.

(Announcer, continuing) Can we congratulate you on your appointment?

(Rybkin) Well yes, but I know what you're thinking but not saying.

(Announcer) Tell us what that is.

(Rybkin) No, I won't do that.

(Announcer) Okay. About yesterday's meeting with the president. Since the Security Council looks after security in the broad sense of the word, the president has probably outlined priorities. Could you tell us what priorities Boris Nikolayevich Yeltsin set out for you yesterday as secretary of the Security Council and his representative to Chechnya during the meeting?

(Rybkin) I don't think I can tell you anything new about that. What I can say is how the president spoke about this in a very logical and moderate way, with total clarity of thought. He said it was essential to strengthen all aspects of security: defense and military security, economic security, food, and other aspects of security. But the most important is what is written in the very first articles of the constitution, on the personal security of citizens. That is the foundation stone of the security of the state. And unfortunately at the moment we are virtually without security. We've been unable to achieve this personal security for citizens. And, to be open about this, the president said to maintain the momentum of the peace settlement in the Chechen Republic, not to lose time or tempo. We should maintain the continuity of the good work done by the Security Council, government and presidential offices in this respect and in others.

Many people have worked hard for many years in an entirely new body in the Russian state, namely the Security Council, and their efforts must be maintained. Continuity is the thing, and that's what we talked about.

(Announcer) You discussed with the president the Khasavyurt agreements and your opinion of them?

(Rybkin) Boris Nikolayevich knows my view of them, and I've aired it at the State Duma during public and private sessions. I'm a convinced supporter of the peace process in Chechnya and a convinced supporter of the peace accords. And I think they should be scrupulously put into effect. We simply have no other option. This wound, still bleeding, inflicted on the Russian state should be healed by harnessing the efforts of many people and all the peoples of Russia.

(Announcer) Ivan Petrovich, We know that the president is preparing for an operation. How did he seem to you? We only see him on television. Tell us a bit about your impressions. I think it is important for the listeners to hear about this not only from journalists but from eye- witnesses too.

(Rybkin) Let me say the following. Many people have already spoken to me about this, and I can only confirm that, when we met, the president was like the president of the summer of 1996 before the first round, when he had not been beset by illness. The president was smart, cheerful and preparing for his operation. The situation for him is of course quite difficult. Nevertheless he is not losing his optimism. I can say that quite firmly. I can only confirm that he is focussed and has a resolute and courageous attitude. As a human being, I would say, I am simply filled with admiration.

(Announcer) News analysts have noted that when the president announced Lebed's dismissal on television and when he met you it was like there were two different presidents. In the first case he was tense, grave, and sullen, in the second he was smiling and joking. That could be seen. What did he joke about, Ivan Petrovich?

(Rybkin) I can even say that he also laughed out loud on one occasion. His minders even looked into the room. We spoke together and he recalled our work together. Then he cited a number of his own convincing arguments in favor of the appointment. He recalled one of our first conversations, when I was chairman of the State Duma and a member of the State Duma's Security Committee. He recalled that I had been vice president of the OSCE, which I still am. I shall have to give up these duties. He said that the work was therefore not new to me and it seemed to him that I would be able to handle precisely this very complex type of work when one has to organize the organizers. What organizers are these?

Well, it is the defense minister, the interior minister, the Foreign Intelligence Service chief, the head of the Federal Security Service, the foreign minister, the justice minister, the minister for emergencies in the country, and the prime minister himself. All of this is not so simple, but I think that without replacing them -- on the contrary I emphasize their responsibility for the area of work that they handle -- it is possible to organize the work of the Security Council in the necessary way.

It will of course be necessary to combine the efforts of all branches of power, including the executive, legislative and judicial branches. I can say that I remain a convinced supporter of the viewpoint that the leaders of legislative power, namely, the leaders of the two chambers, the State Duma and the Federation Council, should be members of the Security Council.

The constitutional article that obliges the president to coordinate all the arms of authority stresses this. I would of course like the Security Council to operate not on the basis of standing orders but of a law, perhaps, which is now being shaped within the State Duma. I would like to play a part in that process, so that we are within the law and the Constitution.

(Announcer) Ivan Petrovich Rybkin is our guest on the air. Ivan Petrovich, when the president was on television announcing Lebed's dismissal he said Lebed was unable to get on with people. How do you get on with Generals Igor Rodionov (defense minister) and Anatoliy Kulikov (interior minister)?

(Rybkin) I had numerous detailed discussions with them when I was still chairman of the State Duma. That was when Igor Nikolayevich Rodionov was head of the General Staff Academy. We met twice and held very detailed discussions, precisely on security and military reform issues. He is an excellent specialist in his field and I know his views. With Anatoliy Sergeyevich (Kulikov) likewise. We had several conversations, especially after he took office and when I was no longer Duma chairman. We discussed a wide range of issues. So my views on the situation are known, and I made no effort to hide them. I have also spoken out in public. Their views are also known to me. I am convinced that we face a far from easy reform, while retaining the effectiveness of men under arms. That there are very large numbers of armed people in Russia right now is entirely obvious. I think we should gradually create a system whereby the heads of all the ministries and government agencies that I have mentioned here should report to the supreme commander, and I stress that, to the supreme commander, in the presence of one man, who is the coordinator. Nikolay II often -- too often -- crops up in this respect, but when he was in power it was all done in a very rational fashion. All reports were delivered to the supreme commander in the presence of the head of the general staff. Whether it was the director of the border guards at the time, or the defense minister or anyone else reporting, the procedure was clear to all. The logistical supply of all agencies with armed people, armaments, and mobilization procedures should all, of course, be supervised and coordinated from a single point. Who or what that single point should be and what it should be called is a matter of time. But I think that this viewpoint that I put forward...

(Announcer) Did you say that to the president?

(Rybkin) I said it during a Security Council meeting back in 1995, and I said it again in a press article. I am pleased to say that this viewpoint is gathering support. It is very important, because we cannot carry on with so many people under arms. We need to find a rational system. I am not saying that we need to do it, for example, like so. Not at all. But we do have to do it, definitely, because we have no other option.

(Announcer) Apart from Chechnya, another of the Security Council's priorities is (military) reform? (Rybkin) There is a defense council, of which I will be a member ex-officio, and which is overseen by Yuriy Mikhaylovich Baturin. I have worked with him for a number of years as well, as with the others I mentioned earlier. I have already had an opportunity to talk to him.

(Announcer) In these past two days?

(Rybkin) In these past two days, yes. That was one of the conversations I have had and there are more ahead after this interview. I think we won't need to waste time on getting to know each other, we are already quite well acquainted through our work. I can say this: Politics has to be open and we have been aiming for that for many years. We have suffered a lot from secretive politics. Politics should be transparent to the public. But public slanging matches, which could be sorted out professionally and by reference to the rules and regulations are, of course, unacceptable. Television and radio are sometimes blamed for the flow of bad news. But are they really to blame? Of course not, because these things happen. When it comes to senior politicians openly squabbling, well, that is simply unacceptable.

(Announcer) Ivan Petrovich Rybkin is our guest on the air. As far as I understand, you have suggested a get- together with your predecessors Yuriy Skokov, Oleg Lobov, and (Lebed) so that you can discuss security issues. Have you received any response from them?

(Rybkin) I did suggest that, as you say. I do expect there to be conversations. It is no secret that I have met with Yuriy Vladimirovich Skokov on numerous occasions and discussed the whole range of issues with him. I have worked quite recently with Oleg Ivanovich Lobov on many issues, when I was writing Security Council notes and reports. We covered the whole range of issues from Kamchatka and the Kurils to Severomorsk. It is also no secret this week that I have met with Aleksandr Ivanovich (Lebed). We met in late July after the Duma session had ended and also held discussions then. All this is well enough known. I just want to say that this is a sensible move for all incoming Security Council secretaries. Definitely. Anyone who was in the past brought in by anyone because of what they can offer should of course have an input. These are effective and competent people, many of whom I know from previous jobs and through other channels.

(Announcer) What about Sergey Glazyev?

(Rybkin) I haven't yet met Sergey Yuryevich Glazyev for a preliminary chat. (?I have had some early contacts with his people about Saturday, maybe), but it is really up to him.

I do value his potential, I have a high opinion of it. On the other hand, I once talked to him and said it was very important not to lose face, to be your own man, not to put your head on the line when some politicians trample freely on those heads, plunging them into a puddle of muddy water - - this should not be allowed to happen. You have to stay your own man.

(Announcer) Ivan Petrovich, one more question. State Duma Chairman Gennadiy Seleznev, interviewed by our radio station yesterday, mentioned a meeting with the president he is due to have on Monday (21 October). He said he was going to propose to the president -- this is his personal opinion - - that the president should impose temporary presidential rule in the Chechen Republic, since he could see no other option at this stage. Have you an opinion on this matter?

(Rybkin) You see, I do not like grand-sounding word combinations. I know nothing about Gennadiy Nikolayevich's plan -- maybe it has been thoroughly thought out -- but the fact remains that we do have a detailed peace settlement plan for the Chechen Republic.

We have just heard in your news bulletin that the systematic withdrawal of troops is continuing, that forces are being pulled out from there. Those that were stationed there before, they should stay there. Those that have to withdraw, they do have to be pulled out. All the forces of the Chechen Republic, including those outside it, have to be involved in the process. Who am I referring to? Well, it so happened that I lived in the northern Caucasus for dozens of years. I lived in Volgograd, where there are not just tens, but hundreds of thousands of people hailing from Dagestan, Chechnya, and Ingushetia. These people are my friends, my fellow students, and now even students whom I lectured -- and I receive a lot of telephone calls from them. They let me know that they are safe and sound. We regularly meet at the Volgograd Academy old boys' reunions. That is the first point.

There are also many Chechens living in Krasnodar, in Stavropol. Moreover, I went to Yaroslavl recently, and here is what I discovered when I met the leaders of sociopolitical associations and parties. A handsome, fair- haired man with a highlander's profile stood up and asked if I wanted to meet the representatives of the Vaynakh society. I said, it probably cannot be arranged at short notice, while my stay here will be limited -- but he replied, never fear, in two hours' time a thousand Chechens will gather here. And that in Yaroslavl region!

I think that the interests of all people, of the entire Chechen diaspora -- especially those in Russia and also those in the former Soviet republics and abroad -- all their interests should be taken into account, of course. I get telephone calls from (Chechen rebel leader) Zelimkhan Yandarbiyev's colleagues who studied literature together with him at an institute of literature and calls from (Chechen chief-of-staff) Aslan Maskhadov's colleagues, and from my friends, too. They all want to help the peace settlement process. I have had telephone calls from representatives of various confessions, too, quite unexpected calls. Professors from St. Petersburg have also called me. They asked me what they and their friends could do to help. I have also had telephone calls from representatives of parties and movements, who, for example, have contacts with the Vaynakh People's Democratic party chaired by Yandarbiyev. They agreed to cooperate. All this brings hope, faith, and confidence that together we will be able to complete what we have begun. This is the most important thing for me. I will go into this matter with high hopes. The fact that Lebed completed many people's efforts by signing the peace agreements, is great and very important. I would like to warn those trying to adjust those agreements in some way, or reject them, or even turn them upside down. I am warning these people against it, and I am doing so on behalf of the president.

(Announcer) Ivan Petrovich Rybkin is our guest today. Now over to another subject. Ivan Petrovich, journalists noticed that you did not look very happy when (U.S.) Defense Secretary William Perry was addressing the Duma, or to be more precise, not during his speech but when State Duma deputies were speaking in response to his speech. Can you tell us what you think about NATO's eastward expansion and about the possibility of ratifying the START II Treaty now?

(Rybkin) I have had a chance to meet Perry on at least three occasions when we had a detailed conversation. Our latest conversation with him was also attended by the deputy chairmen of the Duma international committee and prior to this three of us were engaged in a conversation. The first time it was with Vladimir Petrovich Lukin, the then chairman of the Duma international committee and afterward with Sergey Nikolayevich Yushenkov, the chairman of the defense committee. We made it absolutely clear to him that this hasty push to expand NATO eastward regardless, without any kind of explanation why, is weakening the position of pro- reform forces in Russia.

That was before the parliamentary elections, held on 17 December 1995. I put it straight to Professor Perry, who is a superb analyst and a man known in research circles for his brilliant analytical abilities, that in this case the analysis is out of step with the situation in Russia. I think that people who really do sympathize with the reforms in Russia will regret it, after the 1995 elections are over. Unfortunately, I turned out to be right. This may have explained my gloomy expression, and Perry's expression, when we looked at each other. It was clear to us without any words what had happened and what possible consequences all this might have.

I am absolutely convinced, for example, that it is possible to create a belt of European collective security embracing Canada and the United States and reaching from Vancouver to Vladivostok. As far as the buckle on this peace belt is concerned, however, this should be Russia, without any doubt. Without such a buckle, or in the event of it not being fixed properly, I believe everyone would feel uncomfortable if an important item of dress keeps falling down to their knees. This is the point I am trying to make, and please forgive me for such a frivolous example. Since you ask about this, I think that in the given situation we could learn from the French example a little. France quit the NATO military structure but she has remained part of the political structure. We could join the political structure by concluding a treaty, a treaty to the effect that we are a member of the political structure. The next step after that would be to readjust our communication systems. This is the least expensive task. We could establish mutual cooperation in the way we have been doing by participating in various peacekeeping missions. We are perfectly capable of doing so, it is enough to look at our missions in Bosnia and in Yugoslavia as a whole. This would be the first step. From there we could move further and start readjusting our positions on other issues. I cannot imagine Europe without a collective security system. Participation of the United States should be a necessary component of such a security system. Everyone familiar with this problem understands me perfectly well.

(Announcer) What about the START II Treaty? What are the prospects for the ratification of START II by the Russian Parliament? What is your opinion, Ivan Petrovich?

(Rybkin)I have spent the last two evenings, that is to say Friday evening and...

(Announcer interrupting) You mean Friday night?

(Rybkin)Yes, and Saturday night too -- I spent those two evenings in talks with the so-called Aspin group. I am actually one of the two co-chairmen of this Aspin group. On the American side it is chaired by Senator Sam Nunn. On the Russian side the chairman is your interviewee today. We discussed all these problems, and not for the first time. The conclusion we are reaching is that START II is, basically, already getting somewhat out of date. We need a START III as well. We also agree on this. If we start drafting the outlines of START III right away, START II can probably also be ratified. But even though the U.S. Congress ratified this treaty in January, such hopes are, perhaps, becoming illusory, given the present composition of the State Duma and the new realities that are emerging. Above all, this may also be because of the stubbornness of certain short-sighted politicians in the West. I want to be quite frank about this. I spoke about it with the then Secretary General of NATO Willy Claes, and also with Javier Solana, at the time when he was the Spanish foreign minister -- he is the present secretary general of NATO. But gradually, the realization that this is not Russia's whim, but a matter of vital interest for it, in which we just cannot give in, this realization is emerging -- and this is encouraging. A treaty with NATO on Russia's accession to its political organization and gradual merger of forces -- because the challenges of the times are very difficult. (sentence as heard) Just look at what is happening in the south. No need to ask what these challenges are. It is a challenge not just for us. It may well be that we will simply not be able to withstand it, and then it will all come crashing down on Western Europe -- and I am certainly not saying this to intimidate.

(Announcer) Our guest today is Ivan Petrovich Rybkin. Ivan Petrovich, one more question -- probably the last one, or rather the last topic. It is the budget and military spending in the budget. The interior minister, the defense minister, Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin have all said that military spending in the budget -- well, not just military, but, generally speaking, the spending on security, which is your area -- is insufficient, but what can one do? What are your views on this subject?

(Rybkin) You see, any man, and a politician especially, should not use the subjunctive. But I have to say that a lot of time has been lost. I have sometimes been harshly criticized for saying this by my former colleagues, who even almost reproach me for embarrassing the State Duma. But this is not so.

I am simply convinced that the tax code -- whose general provisions have been submitted to the Duma -- should have been adopted because it was submitted early in the year. But it was postponed because of political battles. The tax code should have special clauses. Tax collection should have a different success rate. Then the quantile itself or percentage...(pauses) The budget would look different and the quantile would be smaller whereas the sum total of absolute expenditure could even have been greater, everything considered. Since you have raised this subject, 50 percent, or even more of the economy operates in the shadow. Neither physical nor legal persons are paying taxes. Is it tolerable? It is a luxury that we cannot afford. Some people argue that today it makes our economy more elastic and enables people to get through hardship when wages account for 45 percent of the total income while 55 percent are accounted for something else. But I believe that every law-abiding citizen should pay his taxes in full and the state should do everything for this. In this case the budget will be fulfilled.

There are other points. I am glad to see that the government is thinking about this. At the Political Consultative Council yesterday -- which I chaired for the last time, for another chairman will take over, Gennadiy Georgiyevich Melikyan, minister for labor and social policy, whom I regard as a brilliant specialist in his field -- made a report on social policy for the next three years. Unfortunately, he does not always find support, and I would like to support him strongly on the redistribution of income. He gave a simple example, among others. Take the price of electricity, which is the same for those who are very well-off and those who live in poverty. A rich man who lives in a huge apartment with numerous electrical and other appliances pays for electricity, 40 percent of which is subsidized from the budget in all the constituent members of the Russian Federation and in some territories and regions the subsidy accounts for almost a third of the entire budgetary expense. This man is capable of paying the full price for electricity, without subsidies, and this will pay a subsidy for those who really need it.

(Announcer) But time is required for that, a tax code and hundreds of laws should be adopted.

(Rybkin) What I have just mentioned can be adopted fairly quickly by a government decision, whereas time for the tax code has been lost and it cannot be completed quickly. Now we are in fact talking about the 1998 budget. So I have described one side and others can be described too.

(Announcer)Ivan Petrovich, the time is running out and I was hoping that at the end of the program you will tell us of how you feel about your dual function: The secretary of the Security Council and the president's plenipotententiary representative for Chechnya. What does this mean personally to you: Is this a career, is this a movement upward or downward or laterally? What does this mean to you?

(Rybkin) If we speak in terms of space -- the step described by you as a movement upward, downward, or laterally -- such thoughts do not exist. But, the thoughts are not simple. I reflect upon the fact that I will have to work in an area that is complicated enough, an area that is contradictory, where we will have to reconcile interests that at first sight look incompatible today. These complex thoughts are there. But I want to stress once again that my previous talks, the knowledge of the people with whom I will have to work -- today's and yesterday's talks and detailed discussions with heads of ministries and departments who are included in the Security Council and who responded so willingly to my invitation -- give me hope. Naturally, we will take interests into account and there will be stricter accountability for performance of duties. I think that splendid professionals, highly professional people, are at the head of each ministry and department. I don't want to replace them. The president and the prime minister don't want to do this. Each should do his work and do it properly and professionally for the sake of Russia. Then we will get somewhere. We should work as a team. This is the principle, we should not be squabbling.

(Announcer) A team man, Ivan Petrovich Rybkin. Thank you and good bye.