Opposition plans to check Kremlin's master

Dawn ^ | March 16, 2005 | Simon Tisdall

[lizol]

Kasparov, however, is a great exception.

So he's going to have some car accident probably within several months.
Or he'll find something "unhealthy" in his soup (like Yushchenko in Ukraine).

[lizol]

What's your comment about Kasparov?

[jb6]

Russian Grandmaster Kasparov Leaves Chess for Politics Created: 11.03.2005 11:20 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 12:11 MSK

MosNews

Former world champion Garry Kasparov has announced his retirement from competition chess, Reuters reports. After winning a prestigious tournament in the southern Spanish town of Linares for the ninth time on Thursday he told reporters that he wanted to devote himself to a career in politics and as a writer.

’’I will play chess, because I like it a lot, but not professionally. I may play in simultaneous games or fast games, but nothing more,’’ he said. But the chessman stressed that he had to take this decision because he had been under enormous pressure from the World Chess Federation (FIDE) in recent years and hadn’t received any support from the organization.

At the moment he is a chairman of the liberal group Committee-2008 Free Choice, which was founded a year ago. The group’s members include journalists, opposition politicians and human rights activists.

Kasparov also added that he needs time to finish his first book “My genius predecessors” and start writing a new one, which will be called “How life becomes like chess”.

Azerbaijan-born Kasparov, 41, became the youngest world champion in chess history at the age of 22. He lost his world title in 2000 to Russian Grandmaster Vladimir Kramnik, but is still ranked number one by the World Chess Federation (FIDE). In Thursday’s final round at Linares he was beaten by Bulgarian Veselin Topalov, but he had already won the overall tournament before the game.

[jb6]

In other words, he's a lefty. If Hitlery gets elected and this guy too, hell they'll have as good a times as Gore and Chernamerdin. Just because he's opposition doesn't mean he likes America. Putin came out publically pro-Bush on live TV several times, most of the opposition came out pro-EU/Anti-Bush. Something to think about.

[sergey1973]

Well, Kasparov is definitely a grand figure in the Chess World and the World of Political Thought. However, one thing is to be in opposition to Putin and the other thing is to offer a comprehensive vision for Russia and its place in the world. Kasparov is strongly pro-American and I definitely welcome it.

However, being pro-American may work against him in Russia. Largely because of Clinton support to Yeltin and Clinton administration cozy relationship with Yeltsin outrageously corrupt and inefficient regime, anti-Americanism is now quite wide-spread in Russian society. However, if a reasonable and viable alternative to Putin policies will be formulated, it will be a huge step ahead. Kasparov logical, strategic and analytical mind can be invaluable.

[RussianBoor]

The first thing Kasparov needs if he wants to win any election in Russia is to be pro-Russian. If his pro-American position is that the U.S. and Russia have common interests and common goals and must be friends and partners, I heartily agree and so do most Russian people. However, I do have my doubts.

Following Mr. Kasparov recent series of articles in the Wall Street Journal, I have written a letter to the Editor of the WSJ. I think you may find interesting some excerpts from this letter.

Mr. Kasparov claims that Russia under Putin is heading towards despotism. I will not review his arguments. I want to ask Mr. Kasparov a somewhat different question: there have been relatively free Duma and President elections recently. Not perfect elections, yes, but anybody could come and vote. Has Mr. Kasparov or other so-called democrats in Russia produced any viable alternative to the present-day Russian political elite and Mr. Putin himself? I do have the same reservations about democratic views of Mr. Putin as does Mr. Kasparov and the WSJ. But the only way to deal with it is to win democratic elections. To do this, one needs to organize a party, create strong grass-root support across the country, create an attractive political platform and try to demonstrate the public that you can lead the country. Or, one can go and cry in Western media about how unresponsive the Russians are toward democratic values. Mr. Kasparov does not want to do what a normal democrat would do: to do whatever it takes to win popular support of his values among his voters rather than among Western journalists.

If Mr. Kasparov is interested why I will not, under any circumstances, vote for him in an election, the answer is plain and simple: Because Mr. Kasparov does not like and respect the country he intends to rule. Imagine for instance Senator Kerry going to Russian newspapers and publishing there a series of columns about how bad the situation is in the US under President Bush. If a politician elects to bash his or her country in another country’s media, he will fail any popular vote in any country.

The best thing the West can do to help Mr. Kasparov and democracy in Russia is to explain him and his likes that patriotism is not a bad word and that it is a normal, in fact, even required, quality for a politician to love the country that he wants to rule and represent. In Soviet times, loving the USSR had been a difficult exercise against one’s conscience. Unfortunately, a great majority of so-called democrats in Russia still think this way. And Russians are quite normal people. They would not put up national flags as Americans do but this does not mean they do not love their country. They do. And naturally they do not like the people who elect to bash their country all over the world.

Democracy is ultimately about winning the public opinion. Unfortunately, Mr. Kasparov and other “right” Russian politicians stand no chance of doing that if they do not change their thinking. Public opinion polls in Russia show that there is huge potential support (about 1/3 of the polled) for an opposition force that would not be related to the democrats like Yavlinskij’s Yabloko and Union of Right Forces as well as communists, all of which had discredited themselves. There is no such force now. So far. And Mr. Kasparov’s Committee 2008 stands no chance of capturing this vote unless they understand the simple truth that one cannot hope to represent the country and the people he or she despises.

[jb6]

What are his platforms vs Putins? His company is leftists, but lets hear his platforms, which are missing from all reports. It's easy to call your opposition a fascist, stalinist and Calligula and yet offer nothing of your own plans. I believe Kerry, Edwards, Dean and Sharpton did this a lot.

[jb6]

Pre-US elections, over 50% of Russians were pro-Bush. Second only to Poland. Putin was also pro-Bush.

[jb6]

But Kasparov's strategy is good for getting exclusive speaking tours and interviews in the West, which are more lucrative then being a real candidate.

[sergey1973]

Mr. Kasparov claims that Russia under Putin is heading towards despotism. I will not review his arguments. I want to ask Mr. Kasparov a somewhat different question: there have been relatively free Duma and President elections recently. Not perfect elections, yes, but anybody could come and vote.

Under Stalin there were also elections were anybody could "come and vote" and Stalin and Communist Party were always getting more than 90% of the vote. While Putin is certainly not Stalin (fortunately), the Duma is largely decorative appendix that endorses Putin Decisions and Duma is dominated by pro-Kremlin parties--essentially Kremlin creatures ("United Russia", "Motherland", etc.). During the last presidential elections, Putin opponents had practically no Access to State TV, most of the newspapers, etc. The election was essentially a democratic facade the power engages to show the world that it is legitimate. Sorry--we've already seen how the most despotic regimes can play democracy.

If Mr. Kasparov is interested why I will not, under any circumstances, vote for him in an election, the answer is plain and simple: Because Mr. Kasparov does not like and respect the country he intends to rule. Imagine for instance Senator Kerry going to Russian newspapers and publishing there a series of columns about how bad the situation is in the US under President Bush. If a politician elects to bash his or her country in another country’s media, he will fail any popular vote in any country.

The difference is that John Kerry had (and still has) a plenty of opportunity to bash Bush in the US Media. Kasparov has no opportunity to bash Putin in any major national TV (because they are all under Kremlin control) or any major newspaper except a few still functioning oppositional Internet outlets (i.e. gazeta.ru, novayagazeta.ru, Moscow News, The Moscow Times, newsru.com).

So far. And Mr. Kasparov’s Committee 2008 stands no chance of capturing this vote unless they understand the simple truth that one cannot hope to represent the country and the people he or she despises.

I do not equate attacking Putin Regime with despising Russian people. I think it's Putin Regime behavior that is the major problem for Russia. Putin regime deserves the criticism be it in Russia or abroad for its behavior first and foremost toward its own citizens and its behavior toward Russia neighbors.

[jb6]

Are you a left-wing troll? You take the damndest positions sometimes.

So by asking for the man's platform I'm a troll? Boy have you got some issues. I searched Kasparov, politics and got a bunch of articles where all he does is mouth off slogans and nothing about his stance. His allies are mostly liberals (the American version) or out right leftists.

So while you're so inspired, post some links and lets see what he really stands for. I know he's good at using the Hitler, Stalin, Caligula comparisons, right off the bat so that already says something.

[RussianBoor]

Sergey, really...

I do not know about you but I AM a Russian citizen and a voter. A voter very attached to democratic rights and freedoms. A rather conservative one, too; for instance, Yabloko is definitely too leftish to me. No supporter of Mr. Putin; never voted for him or any of his supporters like United Russia or Motherland. Neither you nor me had voted under Stalin, but I did vote under Brezhnev, Chernenko, Andropov and Gorbachev and I can tell the difference. Sorry but you do not know what you are talking about.

I am not going here into detailed analysis of the reasons why Duma (for the first time) is so supportive of Putin, but one reason is very obvious, and it is not the control of TV or newspapers. No control of TV had prevented Yuschenko from winning the Ukrainian elections. The real problem is that there is nobody to vote for who could be a better choice for me, a pro-Western and pro-democratic conservative voter, than Mr. Putin himself. And I am sorry but I cannot vote for Mr. Putin either, so I do ask, is there anybody out there?

Kasparov has no opportunity to bash Putin in any major national TV (because they are all under Kremlin control) or any major newspaper

Sergey... Again, you are poorly informed. A couple of the Internet site you have mentioned are in fact sites of major printed newspapers, but... Just for fun, I googled the site of Izvestia (which, if you may know, IS a major printed Russian newspaper). In the past 6 months Mr. Kasparov has been mentioned on the website of this newspaper 2,350 times (and I tried to filter out his chess-related appearances, otherwise the number increases to 12,900). A similar google search of nytimes.com gives 8,860 results for Senator Kerry. You call it Mr Kasparov cannot have his views reported in Russian newspapers?

I do not equate attacking Putin Regime with despising Russian people.

Well, the point remains that the best interest of Russian people is to ensure a free democratic election in 2008 of a new president instead of Mr. Putin. And this new president should serve his country and protect its interests. To do this, he should be a patriot of his country. I am really surprised I need to explain this on a site like Free Republic. I cannot find an excuse for a real patriot of Russia to express such views in foreign media as Mr. Kasparov's did in his columns in the WSJ.

[sergey1973]

I'm an American Citizen and Russian/Ukrainian or fmr. USSR Immigrant. My mother born in Russia proper, my father in Ukraine and I was born and grew up in the Ukraine, although my native language and culture is Russian, so I'm saying I'm more American of Russian rather then Ukrainian background.

My parents also know what was the life like under Kruschev, Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko. They told me that voting under either was just a little more then formality. You vote only for the one candidate if you mean voting for the top Soviet Leadership. I never heard that Central Communist Party of the Soviet Union were offering more then one candidate to the top position and asked general Public to pick one. I never heard that under pre-Gorbachev Soviet Union any party other then Soviet Communist Party (or block of Communists and non-party affiliated) could legally run for an election. If you heard otherwise, please let me know. Otherwise, me and my parents probably came from different Soviet Union then you did -:)

I'm not going to worship Kasparov--I've got to see his political program yet before making any sound judgement--but pretend that Putin is not controlling the media simply because Izvestiya mentions Kasparov is a bit denial of reality. There are outlets that Kremlin did not take over (fortunately) yet, but Kremlin controls every major TV Network (NTV and others). Fortunately the regime does not yet controls fully the access to Internet, and it allows certain outlets to work. However it does not mean that regime respects the freedom of media. It simply unable to control everything in the Information and Internet age unless regime wants to turn Russia into North Korea (where cell-phones and Internet are simply banned). Putin regime is definitely not despotic like North Korean tyranny, but pretend that it is democratic--sorry I simply don't buy this.

[RussianBoor]

Sergey, I have never said that there had been free elections and any freedom in the former USSR. Precisely because I happened to experience firsthand the difference between voting in the former USSR and new Russia, I can say that the type of elections that exists in Russia now is not ideal but not as bad as some want to describe.

State control of TV etc. would not help if there were sound opposition political leaders. Again, the state control in former USSR had been much tighter, and yet :-))

American media and through them the American public opinion tend to exaggerate the role of mass media. Generations of Russians had lived with Pravda newspaper and yet the same people had overthrown the communism. Media control is not the main problem. The main problem is the lack of leadership among the opposition.

[sergey1973]

Well--I agree that voting under Putin is different from what it was under Soviet Union, but the end result is pretty much the same. One candidate always wins.

I would say that there is both lack of leadership and lack of good vision for Russia among opposition. Well--now it's up to Kasparov to prove he can be not only chess Grand master but also political master. Let's give him a chance to move beyond ranting and to a real alternative to Putin regime.