RFE/RL: In his annual address to the Federal Assembly in 2005, Russian President Vladimir Putin called the collapse of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century.” Do you agree with such an interpretation of our recent history?

Mikhail Gorbachev:
I have said this on many occasions, and I will say it again: I agree. When, during a period of widespread reform, glasnost came along and lit up the darker corners of the situation in our country, it seemed as though all of society started moving and talking. It turned out that the people had something to say and that they had someone to speak to. At this time I had already been saying that the way of democracy, glasnost, and economic reform was the way to go.

Yet I also warned against the destructive nature of what was happening. Things certainly needed to change, but we did not need to destroy that which had been built by previous generations. We had to deprive ourselves of some things, yes, but this was the unfortunate cost. After the putsch, when the real danger of the country coming apart arose, I continued to speak out in the same vein. I emphasized that the dissolution of a country that was not only powerful, but that, during perestroika, demonstrated that it was peaceful and that it accepted the basic principles of democracy, would be a tragedy. The end of the Cold War presented us with an unprecedented opportunity to pursue a new, peaceful policy.

RFE/RL: Some observers think that the State Committee for the Emergency Situation (GKChP) was the natural result of events then going on in the country, an effort to restrain the destructive processes that had arisen as a result of a systemic crisis of state management that, in turn, was created by ill-considered and sporadic reforms. Many of the participants of the so-called GKChP insist that this was the case. In you opinion, how fair is this point of view?

Gorbachev: It is nonsense. The natural result of events was the well-tuned process that was already under way in the spring of 1991. There was already the crisis that arose when people had to wait in long lines to purchase basic everyday goods. But in the big picture, after a long period of deliberation and debate, the anti-crisis program had finally started to materialize. Interestingly, it started out as a program initiated by the cabinet ministers, but then it was joined by all the republics and even the Baltic states, with their own special views on certain questions. The Baltic states didn’t actually sign the document, but they decided to implement it anyway. By this time, we had found new solutions and ways of dealing with the situation, and we were ready to move forward.

This was natural for the democratization of the Soviet Union, and it was also natural for correcting the mistakes we had made earlier, particularly our delay in reforming the Communist Party and the federated union. The goal of the putsch was to interrupt this process. The putschists were at the top of the reactionary nomenklatura — remember, many in the nomenklatura went ahead and worked with us, struggled with us. So this is my response to the common cliche that you were referring to. These people were unable to publicly overthrow the government, so they took a clandestine route, which they failed in, because difficult as the times were, nobody wanted to return to Stalinism.

RFE/RL: According to many public opinion polls, perestroika remains more popular abroad — particularly in Europe and the United States — than in the overwhelming majority of countries of the former Soviet Union. How would you, as the author of that initiative, explain such a difference in its reputation?

Gorbachev: The difference between the reputation perestroika has in Russia and abroad is explainable. Central and Eastern Europe gained independence. All of Europe got rid of the nightmare of potential confrontation — moreover, a confrontation that could have developed into nuclear war in which Europe would suffer the most damage.

Your question mentioned the CIS countries. Without going into detail, I can tell you that neither the majority of their people nor their political elite desire a return to the way things were, or have any regrets about exiting the union. Recent polls have shown that the percentage of the population in these countries in favor of a return to the Soviet Union is only about 5-7 percent.

Russia is a special case. The reason I say this is because Russia lost the most as a result of the break-up, in terms of geopolitical stature, in terms of historical merit, in terms of political power it had by virtue of controlling other republics, and finally in terms of economic strength, having ceased to be the center of a major economic complex with a population of nearly a quarter-billion people. [Former Russian President Boris] Yeltsin and [former acting Russian Prime Minister Yegor] Gaidar’s reforms destroyed the industrial potential of the country and reduced millions of people to poverty. Privatization was carried out in such a way that instead of contributing to a growing private sector, it only resulted in corruption and mass theft. The country was in shock, so people naturally looked back to the Soviet Union and the social guarantees that it offered. The guarantees were modest, but at least they were guarantees. Now, even though things are improving under Putin, I would still estimate that about 50 percent of our people live in poverty.

RFE/RL: In Russia, it is popular to argue — and you hear this at the highest political levels — that the end of the Cold War destabilized the modern world order; the solid bipolar international system was replaced by an unstable monopolar domination. Do you agree with this view?

Gorbachev: I’ve heard this view before — that the Cold War supposedly offered a level of stability. I’m not sure where this view comes from — whether it is part of someone’s agenda or simply rooted in ignorance of the situation that developed in the mid-1980s. I was touring the country at the time and from all sides I heard the same question: “Will there be war? Please, do anything you can to not let it happen. Do anything, we’ll live through whatever it takes, but just don’t let it happen.” Of course, many people forgot about this when the fear of war subsided.

The stability of the Cold War was a false one. It was tricky and dangerous. We in the Russian and U.S. governments knew better than anybody what the true situation was and what it could develop into, because we knew what point we were at in the arms race. We knew that the kind of technology that we were operating was powerful enough to put the fate of civilization in question should there be some sort of slip-up. We also knew that the arms race was leading to an unprecedented depletion of national resources.

RFE/RL: How do you assess the state of democracy and freedom of speech in Russia today?

Gorbachev: There are frequent accusations that democracy is being suppressed and that freedom of press is being stifled. The truth is, most Russians disagree with this viewpoint. We find ourselves at a difficult historical juncture. Our transition to democracy has not been a smooth one, and we must assess our successes and failures not in the context of some ideal, but in the context of our history. When Putin first came to power, I think his first priority was keeping the country from falling apart, and this required certain measures that wouldn’t exactly be referred to as textbook democracy.

Yes, there are certain worrying tendencies. We still have certain stipulations and restrictions that cannot be explained by real dangers, or by the realities of life in Russia. However, I would not dramatize the situation. In the past 20 years, Russia has changed to such an extent that going back is now impossible.

RFE/RL: Let’s turn the clock back 15 years. You suffered a horrible betrayal on the part of the people you considered your comrades-in-arms, as well as, perhaps, your personal friends. Not many people have experienced this. What personal lessons have you learned?

Gorbachev: We need to follow the path of democracy. We need to respect the people, and not turn them back into the herd that was bullied for decades and centuries in our country. We cannot resolve problems through coups. We need the people to participate in the changes that are being enacted in the country. Democracy needs to be effective. The law needs to be efficient. Thieves and corrupt officials should not feel safe. We need to follow the path of democracy toward a free, open, and prosperous country.

Copyright (c) 2006. RFE/RL, Inc. Reprinted with the permission of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave., N.W. Washington DC 20036. www.rferl.org

The rally has started in several places of the capital today. The democratic forces have planned to start the march on October Square in Minsk and to march to the Academy of Science and hold a meeting there. However the city authorities have banned this route and offered the participants of the rally to gather by the Academy of Science to follow to a remote square of Bangalore and hold a meeting there. As a result of this ban announced only a week before the protest, many participants planned to gather on October Square.

At 5 p.m. October Square of Minsk was encircled by special barriers. All entrances of metro stations were cordoned off by policemen in mufti and riot policemen, big stores by the square were closed. It was impossible to approach the square, and participants of the protest started to gather by Yanka Kupala Park. The leader of the Belarusian opposition Alyaksandr Milinkevich came there. He said that to bring people to the Academy of Science and prevent arrests was his moral obligation.

However, a truck came nearer to the people peacefully standing by the park. Via megaphones policemen started to urge people to disband, as the “rally on October Square was unsanctioned”. The participants of the rally started for the Academy of Science along Frantsysk Skaryna (Independence) Avenue in an organized column.

The demonstration under national flags moved along the avenue accompanied by armoured trucks. Policemen via megaphone were threatening the “participants of the unsanctioned protest” by criminal liability. However the number of people was growing all the time. People were scanning “Long live Belarus!”, “Freedom!” Protesters had white-red-white and jeans ribbons, blue kerchiefs, badges “For Freedom!”

Thousands of people have been waiting for the demonstration by the Academy of Science. The column headed by Alyaksandr Milinkevich was welcomed with applaud. People scanned: “Milinkevich!” Demonstrators were holding streamers with slogans: “For Freedom!”, “Belarus has two disasters: Chernobyl and Lukashenka”, “Radiation and dictatorship are killing us”, “Stop dictatorship!”

By the Academy of Science a meeting started. Well-known politicians, scientists, public leaders, liquidators of the nuclear power station accident addressed the listeners. They spoke about the real scale of the catastrophe’s aftermaths. Participants of the meeting demanded the authorities to say the truth about the aftermaths of the disaster, to relocate people from contaminated areas, to provide affected by Chernobyl disaster with medicines and treatment, to return allowances to liquidators, to stop growing crops and producing of foodstuffs in contaminated areas, to lift restrictions for humanitarian aid from abroad for Chernobyl sufferers, to stop compulsory job assignment of university graduates to contaminated regions.

All speakers noted that these problems are impossible to solve under the current regime. “20 year ago Chernobyl power station catastrophe has taken place. 10 years ago a political Chernobyl has taken place. When the legally elected parliament was disbanded, people relying on violence and not on the law came to power,” the head of Alyaksandr Milinkevich’s headquarters Syarhei Kalyakin said.

Participants of the rally “Charnobylski Shlyakh” have unanimously voted for holding a public trial over Alyaksandr Lukashenka. It is known that the United Civil Party has proposed this initiative. A deputy chairman of the United Civil Party Ludmila Hraznova at today’s meeting by the Academy of science reminded of victims of Lukashenka’s regime: abducted and assassinated opposition leaders, a journalist D. Zavadski, political prisoners, thousands of people beaten up and arrested during peaceful protests. The meeting continues.

The speech of Alyaksandr Milinkevich, the leader of the Belarusian opposition, was in the final part of the meeting. He had urged the Belarusian citizens to join the people’s liberation movement “For Freedom!” and said that the dictatorship of Alyaksandr Lukashenka is sure to collapse in the two years. “We have taken part in the presidential elections in order to wake people up, to convey truth to them. If we stay united, we shall bring down the dictatorship that had deprived the Belarusian nation the right for choice, and robbed the chance to elect a president of our country in a legal way. We can win if we stay united. I call upon everybody to join the people’s liberation movement “For Freedom!” The truth is on our side, and the truth is the strongest weapon. The whole democratic world is at our side. We won’t wait five years. We will be able to defeat the dictatorship in the two years immediately ahead,” Alyaksandr Milinkevich said.

After the meeting by the Academy of Science participants of the Charnobylski Shlyakh headed for Bangalore Square to Chernobyl chapel to honour the victims of the catastrophe. The number of demonstrators have grown considerably and reached 10,000. A meeting was held near the chapel as well. Alyaksandr Milinkevich addressed the meeting again. He said that the Belarusians are to continue peaceful protests until the overthrow of dictatorship and victory of democracy.

The next democratic forces’ rally is planned on May 1. Representatives of pro-democracy movement are set to come out for cancellation of the contract system, which, according to many comments, seriously derogates from workers’ rights.

www.charter97.org

Today in Belarus opponents of Alyaksandr Lukashenka’s regime abduct people. Unknown representatives of law-enforcing agencies in mufti seize people in the streets, without producing any documents, and take them to police departments, and then in courts, where obedient judges pass sentences on wrongful charges. For instance, yesterday in Minsk Zubr activists Alyaksei Lyaukovich, Paval Yukhnevich and Maxim Vinyarski were seized. Yesterday another activist of resistance movement, an underage Barysau dweller Anton Akulich was seized in Minsk. Unknown people seized him in the center of Minsk, packed in a car, red Peugeot, and taken in unknown direction. There is no information about his whereabouts. Today the international community practically does not react to the events. For many years habitual statements are made, and they are of no effect.

Other oppositionists are detained according to the same scenario. The leader of the Belarusian Popular Party, an electioneering agent of the single democratic candidate for presidency Vintsuk Vyachorka, and six other activists of the headquarters of Alyaksandr Milinkevich were seized on March 8 right after the meeting of the candidate with voters. Later it was informed that oppositionists were detained by riot policemen. For six hours nobody knew the whereabouts of the candidate’s agent. The mobile phone of V. Vyachorka didn’t answer. Later, at the trial, were he was taken on the next day, it was found out that the mobile phone of the BPF leader was confiscated, his arms were twisted, he was threatened bodily harm.

The candidate for presidency Alyaksandr Kazulin and his supporters were beaten up by SWAT policemen on March 2. Only the commander, charged with abductions and assassinations of people, Dzmitry Paulichenka, was in uniform. In his full dress lieutenant colonel Paulichenka was beating and kicking Kazulin, while his officers were beating well-known politicians and journalists.

The same people staged a nasty fistfight in front of the police department of Kastrychnitski district of Minsk. They were seizing people peacefully standing by the police department, who had come to support Kazulin. The nose of the “Komsomolskaya Pravda in Belarus” reporter Aleh Ulevich was fractured for an attempt to picture this total lawlessness. They were shooting at the car of Kazulin team for trying to videotape their criminal acts.

The deputy of the Supreme Soviet of the 12th convocation Syarhei Antonchyk was apprehended right in front of his house, when he wanted to accompany his son to his office. An elderly man with heart troubles was detained by riot policemen in plainclothes, who had not presented their IDs and were clothes in black. In the court Antonchyk and his son were charged with insubordination to policemen’s demands. Only in the court Syarhei Antonchyk and his son found out that the scoundrels that acted like bandits were policemen.

Zubr resistance movement coordinator Aleh Myatselitsa was arrested on the Day of Solidarity on February 16 by unknown people in black. Youth leader was sentences to 15 days of arrest for “petty hooliganism”, though he was simply standing on Skaryna Avenue in Minsk with a burning candle in memory of repressed Belarusians. After 15 days of arrest he was transported from the remand prison by the KGB officers and leadership of Byalynichy police department. In Byalynichy these people with shoulder straps and documents of law-enforcing agencies’ officers, acted like gangsters. In front of Byalynichy police department a provocation against Myatselitsa was staged by them. When he was taken out of the police car, two drunken men came up to him and suddenly intentionally fell down. Then they cynically said that Aleh had beaten them up. People who witnessed that were indignant; they tried to defend Aleh Myatselitsa. Then the guys in plainclothes had to reveal the service they represented. Provocators were officers of the KGB.

In Kalinkavichy (Homel region) On March 9 two activists of the headquarters of Alyaksandr Milinkevich, Dzyanis Rabinka and Alyaksei Manevich, were sentenced to 15 days of arrest for alleged swearing. Not far from the house of the activists unknown people started flinging snowballs into them. They cursed, and two men in plainclothes approached them. They have not presented their credentials, but said they are law-enforcing agencies representatives. In a patrol car activists were taken to the police department.

Such cases are plentiful. Now these bandits in black are seizing people right in the streets, in the face of witnesses. They brutally beat up a presidential candidate, oppositionists and journalists in front of TV cameras. They kill. And they commit these appalling crimes with impunity, as the dictators’ regime of Alyaksandr Lukashenka stands behind them.

The Charter’97 addresses all international human rights organizations and journalists and asks to direct attention to the total lawlessness in the center of Europe! Show solidarity with the Belarusians. Make your governments to react expeditiously and effectively to criminal actions of Lukashenka’s regime, that has launched a terror against his own nation.

Original source Charter’97

Belarus KGB Says Thwarted Opposition’s Bloody Coup Attempt

Created: 01.03.2006 18:31 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 18:31 MSK

MosNews
(the original news source is www.mosnews.com)

The head of the Belarus State Security Service, the KGB, said on Wednesday that his agency had prevented a planned coup attempt by pro-western opposition that included riots in the capital and terrorist attacks aimed to provoke mass uprising.

KGB chairman Stepan Sukhorenko said that the opposition intended to accuse the authorities of falsifying the results of the upcoming presidential elections in the country, according to Interfax. They planned to execute the plan after the official announcement of the poll results on March 19.

He said that security officers had seized ready forged protocols of exit polls from the four leaders of the Partnership NGO who had been recently detained in Minsk. The forged protocols showed that 53.7 percent of the voters supported opposition candidate Aleksander Milinkevich and only 41.3 percent of the voters supported incumbent president Aleksander Lukashenko.

The security chief went on to say that the oppositionists’ scenario contained a thousands-strong rally in the Belarus capital during which explosive devices were to be detonated in the crowd. After the first blood was to be spilled, the organizers of the protests were to start seizing government offices and railway stations aiming to fully stop the state facilities, he added.

Sukhorenko also said that Belarus oppositionists planned to use troops from Georgia, Ukraine and countries of the former republic of Yugoslavia to launch mass riots.

I understand that the NSA aims to prevent acts of terror inside of the USA; however, they should also obtain legal orders that allow them to do so. Maybe, it will help to prevent comparisons with the famous “1984” novel.

Our world is not perfect and we probably do not know even 10 percent of what is going on “behind the government scenes”. But at first we talk about 500 people, than 600, 700 and so on and forth…Even some NSA officials were so concerned about the legality of the program that they refused to participate, the Times said.

Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the

American Civil Liberties Union, said the group’s initial reaction to the disclosure was “shock that the administration has gone so far in violating American civil liberties to the extent where it seems to be a violation of federal law.”

Questions about the legality of the program led the administration to temporarily suspend it last year and impose new restrictions. But still nobody knows what kind of restrictions we are talking about here. Fredrickson said the ACLU couldn’t comment more on this issue until it sees some evidence. “They’ve veiled these powers in secrecy so there’s no way for Congress or any independent organizations to exercise any oversight.”

No way for Congress to oversee it…No way to check all this information…No way to be sure that a Big Brother does not watch you… It seems that “1984” might get a sequel named “2005”

Why contoversial? Read how Michael K.Smith describes this incident in his book “Portraits of Empire: Unmasking Imperial Illusions from ‘American Century’ to the ‘War on Terror’”

Set on expelling unwanted Arabs from the soon-to-be Jewish state, the terrorist Irgun attacks the Palestinian village on the Muslim sabbath, shattering quiet routine with a nightmare of shouts, explosions, gunpowder, blood and smoke.
The unarmed villagers are ordered into a community square, lined up against the wall, and summarily shot. A nine-months-pregnant woman takes a bullet in the neck and her belly sliced open with a butcher knife. Another woman tries to rescue the baby from dead woman’s womb but is killed on the spot. A sixteen-year-old girl watches horrified as a man with a sword slices her neighbor from head to toe.
The trapped villagers try to flee, but the Irgun commanders track them down, attacking with Sten guns and hand grenades, finishing them off with knives. When the blood curdling screams finally fade away, Deir Yassin is a smoldering ruin, with 254 dead, among them 35 pregnant women. Corpses are thrown down a well.

That is how Michael K.Smith describes it and at the same time many vehemently deny such historical account. For example, some argue that the village of Deir Yassin was a hot spot for Arab insurgents. Official Israeli sources of that time claimed that

Deir Yassin was an integral inseparable episode in the battle for Jerusalem… [Arab forces] were attempting to cut the only highway linking Jerusalem with Tel Aviv and the outside world. It had cut the pipeline upon which the defenders depended for water. Palestinian Arab contingents, stiffened by men of the regular Iraqi army, had seized vantage points overlooking the Jerusalem road and from them were firing on trucks that tried to reach the beleaguered city with vital food-stuffs and supplies. Dir Yassin, like the strategic hill and village of Kastel, was one of these vantage points. In fact, the two villages were interconnected militarily, reinforcements passing from Dir Yassin to Kastel during the fierce engagement for [Kastel] hill.
(Information from Abba Eban in “Background Notes on Current Themes” – No.6: Dir Yassin (Jerusalem: Ministry for Foreign Affairs, Information Division, 16 March 1969).

These words are echoed by Emanuel A.Winston, a middle East Analyst and commentator.

… This Arab village in 1948 sat in a key position high on the hill controlling passage on the Tel Aviv-Jerusalem road. Those villagers were no different than other nearby Arab villagers who were heavily armed, hostile and aggressive. They also hosted a battle group from the Iraqi army. They had incessantly attacked Jewish convoys trying to supply food and medical supplies to Jerusalem which was under siege and cut-off by Arab armies in linkage with those same villagers. They were killing many Jews. Deir Yassin was a staging area for the villagers and regular army from various Arab armies. They were not innocents as proclaimed by the Arab nations or the Jewish Revisionists.
(Information from “Jewish Historical Revisionists”, by Emanuel A. Winston, a Middle East Analyst & commentator.)

Who is right in this situation? Where is the truth?
Hard to answer since official Israeli archives are still sealed from the public alongside with photos taken right after the battle of Deir Yassin. Without them it would hard to say for sure what really happened there. Both sides provide witness accounts that condradict each other in one or another way. Some claim that loudspeakers were used to warn civilian population about an incoming attack, other witnesses claim otherwise. An official sources state eye witness accounts:

Meir Pa’il’s eyewitness account is one of the most detailed single eye witness accounts of the massacre, as he was at the scene while it happened. Pa’il was a spy for the mainstream Jewish organizations in Palestine monitoring the activities of the right-wing or “dissident” groups:

Meir Pa’il stated that he “started hearing shooting in the village. The fighting was over, yet there was the sound of firing of all kinds from different houses … Sporadic firing, not like you would [normally] hear when they clean a house.”. He also stated that no commanders directed the actions, just groups of guerillas running about “full of lust for murder”.”.

(Information from Meir Pa’il’s Eyewitness Account, Pa’il and Isseroff)
His more contemporary report and on-scene photographs remain classified.

Here, we might argue that Meir Pa’il’s account was biased and incorrect since he worked for the Israeli side. However, there is no way to prove or disapprove his words since his full report and photos are still classified. Israeli opponents, in their turn, provide completely different account that comes from Israeli officer

Eliahu Arbel arrived at the scene April 10. He was an Operations Officer B of the Haganah’s Etzioni Brigade. He reported:-

“I saw the horrors that the fighters had created. I saw bodies of women and children, who were murdered in their houses in cold blood by gunfire, with no signs of battle and not as the result of blowing up the houses. From my experience I know well, that there is no war without killing, and that not only combatants get killed. I have seen a great deal of war, but I never saw a sight like Deir Yassin.”
(Information from Yediot Ahronot, 1972-02-05)

The list of so-called eyewitness acounts and facts can go on, yet one fact stays the same, official archives that could shed some light on this event still remain classified. Why? It is open for discussion, so if someone possess any information about it, feel free to share it with us.
As it was expected, the Deir Yassin incident served as ground for retaliation attacks from an Arab side and further ideological fighting from the both, Israeli and Palestininan side.Deir Yassin very quickly became an ideological bait in the propaganda war between Israel and the Arab states. Arab League chief Azzam Pasha said for example: “The massacre of Deir Yassin was to a great extent the cause of the wrath of the Arab nations and the most important factor for sending [in] the Arab armies**

After the war Deir Yassin was settled by Israelis and named Givat Schaul Beth, today belonging to the city of Jerusalem (at the top end of Har Nof). Much of the western side of the village is part of the Kfar Shaul mental health center.

The debate over what happened on that day in Deir Yassin is still open.One detailed account of what happened at Deir Yassin was published by Israeli military historian Uri Milstein. Milstein describes many examples of atrocities committed by the Irgun and Lehi forces, and agrees that most of the dead were “old people, women and children. Only a modest number were young men classifiable as fighters.” However, Milstein concluded that most of these events occurred while the fighting was in progress, rather than afterwards. He doubts that Meir Pa’il was present early enough to see everything he claims to have seen (which Pa’il hotly denies). Finally he is reluctant to call it a “massacre”, claiming that such occurrences are typical of war and that the Haganah did similar things on many occasions, even if not on such a scale.Several articles (including one by Sid Zion below) discuss the incident as a pitched battle around which no massacre took place. These reports allege that the battle’s description as a massacre has been exaggerated in media for propagandistic purposes. This reflects the fact that discussion of the events of Deir Yassin has become an information war of its own.