"Lenta.ru": In one of your interviews you said that Yeltsin ostensibly prepared revolution, parliament dispersal one year prior to events of October, 1993. On what this statement is based?
Boldyrev: Opinions can be different, but there are facts. The first attempted coup is Yeltsin's performance on AZLK in December of 1992. Then have probed soil, but have forcedly won back back. The second has taken place in March of 1993 (right after my dismissal) - the decree about a special order of a country government. That its will now above laws, Yeltsin officially on television declared all over the country, but then too has won back back: the declared decree and have not arranged. And the third attempt already implemented, - the decree number 1400 which led to opposition with parliament and have ended with bloody events on October, 3-4rd, 1993.
How after years your opinion on events of October, 1993 has changed?
Already it was at that time obvious that initiators and provokers of the conflict are Yeltsin and its command, but I had bases for the critical relation and to the Supreme body of that time, especially to its management. Soon after revolution it became clear that it not simply intraimperious conflict, but also change to the Native land - was to familiarise with a number of the decrees signed by Yeltsin («Questions of agreements on goods section …» and others) enough. Payment by our bowels with the strategic opponent for revolution support was obvious. After the lapse of time all private recedes, and clearer becomes that it was the fundamental historical fork. Have won the forces representing a unification of underworld and treachery. Here under their management we also try to "develop" further.
Whether so support of the USA of actions of Boris Yeltsin on power dispersal of parliament how confirmed in a patriotic press is important?
Whether that is they have consulted without this support? I do not know. Perhaps, also would consult, but, most likely, simply would not dare. Approximately as Erdogan now would not dare to force down the plane of the second nuclear power, not be at it behind the back of support of the USA.
The president of Russia Boris Yeltsin and the vice-president of Russia Alexander Rutsky on agriculture "Интерферма". A photo: Dmitry Donsky / RIA Novosti news agency
How you concerned the main characters in the Supreme body - to Alexander Rutsky and Ruslanu Hasbulatovu?
To Rutsky and its roles at that stage (later it was the governor, but it is other history), probably, better. He fairly tried not to be the silent doubler, and to do serious work - as was able. It inevitably led it to the conflict to Yeltsin and its command. Therefore it so it is persevering then tried to discredit: have organised the whole scale campaign of slander (about the western accounts and other). After all so it is easy, as from me, simple dismissal, of it was not to get rid - all the same the vice-president!
In one of interview you say that 11 from 12 well-known suitcases of "compromising evidence" Rutsky are the data about the corruption, collected by specialists of your management. He in interview to our edition asserts that all has collected, heading the commission on fight against corruption. True in the middle?
Is not inclined to underestimate a role Rutsky that he considers as the merit. I said about it not for superiority contest, and only confirming to that it there were not inventions. A considerable part - materials of our Control management. Here is important not what they initially, and that it zadokumentirovannye the facts.
One say that Yeltsin was the authoritative governor, others - that it the family managed, the third - that administered over it at various times different grey cardinals (name, for example, Burbulisa). What do you think about it?
Let's divide its role in the history and personal qualities. The role in the history, from my point of view, is unequivocal: the committed crimes before the country repeatedly outweigh a positive. Personal qualities? As any person, it is ambiguous. It is authoritative? Yes. Whether listened to councils? Sometimes. Whether had weaknesses? Extremely expressed. Whether wanted something good? First, can be. Whether has run into dependence on the environment? Yes, has chosen as a support not workers, and swindlers, has agreed to be the tied treachery and blood. Further - a way on descending.
By the way, what at you the personal relation to Yeltsin, you met, communicated with it?
Relations usual more or are less mutual. Close relations - at level together to go to a bath or to drink - at us was not, but in work there was any mutual respect. I afforded in interests have put some willfulness, independence in the powers, and an immediate penalty it did not follow.
For example, based on the results of testing the Main economic board of the president Yeltsin has charged to dismiss for the person, in our materials not appearing. I have asked again, whether the order it. Having received confirmation, has prepared the decree project about dismissal, but with the letter in which has specified that I carry out the order, but I report: for such dismissal Control management has no bases. It is clear that it is impudence, a working-to-rule strike. The president has read, has hemmed and has postponed, and after all as it was told in a joke, «could and slash». Yeltsin has dismissed for the person of it later, but not my hands.
On the governor of Krasnodar territory (and it then there was a figure - «the governor number one», our, "antinomenclature") I insisted: brought during half a year three representations (it is a question of Vasily Djakonova's resignation in the end of 1992 - a comment of "Lenty.ru"). Not silently, shepotkom, and before each meeting with the president directed a paper with number and date through all chain of passage of documents, and only then reported orally.
After the termination ("suspension") by the president of check across Moscow I three times in writing brought representations about necessity of its continuation. Repeatedly put a question on plum Gaydar's government of budget finances on the left through "AKKOR" (Association country (farmer) economy and agricultural co-operatives of Russia - a comment of "Lenty.ru"). Yeltsin with the similar was reconciled, the penalty did not follow. There were some more the examples confirming that at that stage (the beginning-middle of 1992) the president was ready and was able to work with the people serving not to it personally, affording to have the opinion on interests of the state.
And my dismissal - taking into account the shown obstinacy - was not quite typical. Many (for example, Galina Starovojtova) learnt about the resignation from the TV. With me the president spoke personally, has suggested to leave at own will and a post of the first zama at any minister. Such as Stepashin, on similar offers subsequently agreed, but it there was not my way. Yeltsin had to liquidate Management, and in March 1992 I have left in anywhere.
The deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Yury Boldyrev, 1995. A photo: Vladimir Fedorenko / RIA Novosti news agency
In the autumn 1993 you, together with Vladimir Lukinym and Grigory Javlinsky, create the selective block which then becomes party "Apple", truth in two years will leave it. Your occurrence in this company was casual?
No, not the casual. As well as now, then for the sake of a manipulation the society spread a black-and-white picture of the world. Or forward, in development, but only with gajdarami and chubajsami, or back, in is administrative-bureaucratic system, without an economic and political competition and removability of the power. We tried to present «the third way» - democratic, but not oligarchical.
Three leaders symbolised the names and reputation three ideas: the former vice-premier of government Silaeva Javlinsky - market, but not cannibal reforms in economy; the former ambassador in the USA Lukin - more independent (in comparison with kozyrevskoj "podamerikanskoj") foreign policy; and I - an elementary order, decomposition and corruption suppression. Tell now, after the lapse of twenty years what was in it incorrect? Or with what other bright public figures of that time you would try to implement such alternative?
In what then sights have dispersed?
Further the change history follows the declared ideas and slogans, but in scales already and changes to the Native land. The history of planting at us a colonial bankovsko-financial system is in detail described in my first book «About flanks of honey and tar spoons» in section about special action on dragging of the law on Central bank. To the West of all our natural resources by the gross (the law «About agreements on goods section») is told about attempt of delivery in my book «Abduction of Eurasia». So "have disaccorded" are it is softly told. Have dispersed irrevocably, at level «you for the country or for the another's?»
You - one of founders of Audit Chamber of Russia, modest department which acts extremely seldom and hardly noticeably in political life of the country. You so for yourselves it saw?
The Audit Chamber cannot be "modest" department in any way. Or it is (and then about any "modesty" cannot be and speeches), or it, as independent body, no, and there is only a simulation. Then determination "modest" is not quite pertinent, "timid" is faster.
Speak, there was in olden days an introduction: «the Good general, yes only in fight painfully timid». And the Audit Chamber - its mission consists in disclosing of any attempts of the power before a society to look better, than it is. Such the Chamber also was, but only first six years while it have not entered into dependence on those who should be supervised. Further (on a way of dependence from under control) - activity imitation, obessmyslivanie.
It not the question of love to exposures, is a question of the possibility of intelligent self-management in the country. The people or have the right see a true picture of an event (and then it is capable by itself to manage), or he agrees to go with shorami in the face of and cotton wool in ears and then it is inevitable with straw in a head.
Building of Audit Chamber of the Russian Federation. A photo: Igor Zotin / TASS
You worked in Audit Chamber till the end of 90 and have for certain understood corruption scale in Russia, share your resume.
The diagnosis is short: in present state-political system corruption - not a deviation, and rate, a basis of bases of a present mode. On a corruption basis the power is formed, functions, does not suppose the control over itself, the any responsibility and removability, leads the country to inevitable decline.
There is an opinion that the corruption system, all these "recoils" and other were born in 90th years. Whether so it, and whether was possibility something to it to contrast?
All was born earlier, in bowels and Soviet, and dosovetskoj systems, and here has got stronger in the end of the USSR. Remember, to "komsomolsko-youth" such "creative" collectives have granted the right to translate cashless in cash? On this parasitic basis everyones also were born "menatepy".
To contrast it was possible, certainly, will from above and trezvomyslie, comprehension of the interest and capability to ask from the representatives from below. But from above the will has appeared to opposite - we already spoke about it. From below there was a mixture in minds, nedoponimanie that a basis of bases at any creative system - though at a socialism, though under capitalism (truth if it socially focused) is an elementary order and responsibility. But bottoms, against aimed at plunder of the country of tops, have appeared are subject to a manipulation and consequently are incapacitated.
Were, in your opinion, at the country the moments when it could go some other way?
One we have already mentioned earlier in connection with slivom budget finances in "AKKOR". Earlier example - last congress of the CPSU, 1990. Gorbachev, wishing to leave itself from under the control, has declared that the batch should leave from a country government. It meant «to throw a steering wheel». But there was also an alternative: to divide the CPSU into the competing organisations, and I (at the same XXVIII congress) was among supported this idea. Unfortunately, on this way have not gone, and the CPSU remained "monolithic", and "monolitno", together with the president of the USSR Gorbachev, has been discharged of the power that was accompanied by state destruction.
Other fork - a series of the preliminary attempted coup performed by Yeltsin in the autumn 1992 - in the spring 1993. If then comprehension has come that such attempts - too crimes which should lead to punishment, September-October of 1993 would not become so bloody and fatal to the country.
Still a fork - revolution in September of 1993. Whether other turn of events was possible? Can be. Fatality of that has occurred, consists in two moments. The first: the Yeltsin grouping has crossed then through blood, having barred itself ways back. The second: she has addressed for support in usurpation of the power to the historical competitor-opponent - the USA and to the West (and at once began to pay off for this support by retraction of the country in servitude, transfer under the control of the opponent of strategic resources of the country). That is, the invisible front line then has been drawn accurately and unequivocally: the Russian power and historical opponents of Russia - on one party, the people and actually Russia - on another.
There were also other forks: presidential election of 1996, attempt of impeachment of Yeltsin in 1999 and others. But forces were unequal, and the society has appeared easily manipulated, as has predetermined at these stages our defeat.
In 90th years the power both executive, and legislative was advised by various foreign specialists and advisers, there were among them both the presents spetsy, and rascals. But Russia, despite all councils, has not come nearer to Europe and the USA, and and remained on periphery. In what the reason?
nesmotrja or contrary to? You seriously believe, what "councils" were given that Russia became stronger? Also what such to "come nearer" to Europe and the USA? China has come nearer? In my opinion, yes - it became the real competitor and, as consequence, equal peregovorshchikom. Became because to any "councils" did not listen. We have appeared under the fifth dictatorship dependent on the West. It were any more "councils", and direct dictatorship.
Another matter that dictatorship at that stage, except for the peak moments of race for power (the autumn of 1993 and others), has appeared soft, limited. Than? Those institutes which after revolution have been fixed in the Constitution only as a screen, as dictatorship cover (with what later, since 2000, them all the same have made). But then, contrary to everything, they really worked as the presents independent. At these originally independent institutes, such, as Audit Chamber (we created it seriously instead of as cover puppet in hands of the West of oligarchical dictatorship) no foreign advisers existing.
Participants of meeting on the October area, broken through a cordon of OMON at the Crimean bridge, move to the Smolensk area in October, 1993. A photo: Igor Mikhalev / RIA Novosti news agency
To you did not try to be implemented?
Why? To us addressed, offered, but we have put a question point-blank: to advise, how to us to do at itself, it is not necessary. If want to help to familiarise to us with how you do at yourselves, - please, we will tell thanks. As a result ourselves solved, where and that we want to look what to study, - for example, technology of the control over oil extracting in Gulf of Mexico. Studied, as the American department GAO similar to ours works. Its employees - at themselves, in Washington - with enthusiasm imparted experience with us, have given documents and materials on how they protect interests of the American citizens from the American government and the American corporations. But it as you understand, other kind of interaction, and its other orientation, rather than "advisers" in the Russian State Property Committee.
Whether it is possible, in your opinion, returning of similarity 90 in Russia?
What as it to understand? Poverty and gangsterism? So they already come back in process of development of two processes: decrease in the world prices for power resources and decomposition of all system our constant (as a matter of fact - from the very beginning 90) the authorities. Raspaltsovku «new Russian»? So stories with their children and children of high officials now again on hearing. If speech about an exit from present «stable hopelessness», about approach any present, not colorable public and political life, about possibility of a new choice of a way, not only «the Supreme governor», but also all society here to predict something it is difficult. It depends on interest and capacity of already new our generations with you of fellow citizens.
Alexey Sochnev talked
- 04-07-2012Russia cooking oil blockade and the collapse of the scenario of the 80-ies
- 23-12-2012The Vedic understanding of state policy
- 22-11-2013In the archives of the "world government"
- 08-01-2014Of a mega-Church and their communication strategies
- 08-11-2012The main threat to peace or a recipe for success