Bookmark and share the address of UKRAINE ENGLISH NEWS on your social bookmarking website
Most users ever online was 229 on Sat Aug 08, 2015 11:03 pm
Michael Glukhov, "Commander in Chief"
The Russian media has decreased the degree of hysteria in relation to Ukraine. But by creating and maintaining the image of the enemy, Russian media people and their curators of the Kremlin refused. The main enemy of Russia in the media - is the United States, even though that may be in the United States about this and have no idea. Media sharpened so that they are completely unrelated to reality are not. This means that social consciousness has very little relation to reality. This point of view in an interview with "Commander in Chief" stated well-known Soviet and Russian journalist Valery Panyushkin. At one time he worked in such renowned publications as the "Kommersant", "Vedomosti", the portal "snob", the TV channel "Rain". In an interview to our edition Panyushkin explained why he does not think the conflict in the Donbas Ukrainian-Russian war, why Putin is not profitable to leave the Donbass, as well as on how the topic of pedophilia, raised by the Russian media, overshadowed by the deterioration of the real theme of life in the country.
The last day of the summer session and the last session of Parliament in Kyiv marked by tragedy, bloodshed. The Russian media comments could be seen, they say, the president of Poroshenko loses control of the situation in the country. Russia has raised a new wave of hysteria, how to interpret these messages?
You know, I do not watch Russian television. What happens to you - it's internal Ukrainian matter ... However, it seems to me, judging by the publications on the Internet, some degree of hysteria in Russia has become less about it (about the war in the Donbass). I think because people are tired all the time, it is impossible to be in a state of hysteria. This is my very personal experience.
In one of your interviews you said that the war in the Donbass can not be called a Russian-Ukrainian. Is Russian soldiers, Russian military equipment in the east of Ukraine does not confirm exactly what Russia committed an act of aggression against our country?
Facts presence certainly is. I am guided by a legal fact. Nobody has declared war, neither Putin nor Poroshenko. That is legally a war between Russia and Ukraine is not declared.
But Hitler invaded the Soviet Union, too, without a declaration of war, but it did not prevent the Soviet Union considered an act of aggression to the war, is not it?
When Germany attacked the Soviet Union, the war was declared in four hours. In our case, it took almost half a year. It is clear why Russia has not declared war on Ukraine. Because she can not win it, because Russia is not terribly profitable (to declare war). In general, it is clear and that is why Ukraine did not declare war. Because continuing trade (with Russia). This all all are in a state of uncertain legal status (of the conflict).
Who benefits the most from the situation, "and fighting, and trade"?
You know, in the Soviet Union it was to say that the war cashing capitalists, and ordinary people suffer. We now have about the same situation. Those in whose hands the money flows, gas, oil, and in Russia and Ukraine is profitable, and ordinary people is not profitable.
But in the hands of ordinary people on the Maidan had no money, gas and oil, and they still won the previous government, which just personified corruption. Why overcome evil ordinary citizens came out then, but does not work now?
Because Independence made simple people, and came to power Poroshenko that there is in power, and always has been. That is, of course, any change of power occurred, but not all.
Minsk agreements do not stop the war. What could replace them?
I do not think it's in the Minsk Agreement, I think that the matter is in oil prices. I think that the war has calmed down because no one has the resources to it (support). Neither Ukraine nor Russia.
There is a view that the lull at the front will continue only until the session of the UN General Assembly in late September, which brought together Vladimir Putin. In your opinion, what could serve as a change in the status quo in the Donbas after the Russian leader's visit to New York?
To situation has changed radically, Putin should stop being the president of the Russian Federation. I do not think the General Assembly of once a major impact on what happens. I say again that the lull in the war is not due to some strategic decisions, and with the economic situation.
But because of sanctions against Russia at the Russian money will not increase. Where is the abyss, down which the power will feel the reaction of ordinary people to the deterioration of life?
I do not know to what extent it is possible to squeeze out more, decant the money of the Russian economy, but I want to draw your attention to the fact that there is a tremendous resource, and this resource - it is 86% of citizens who support President Putin. In fact, Putin has not yet started to take money from the population, for example, raise taxes. Population in Russia, of course, poorer, but it is impoverished because of the fact that the fall in oil prices, rising dollar against the ruble, but not because the government was to introduce any new taxes on the war. Russians love Putin is that without street riots, revolutions, you can tear off the Russians still 20 percent tax, and they agree.
The downside is the deterioration of the lives of people around the mobilization of the population to some purpose. At the beginning of our conversation, you said that the level of hysteria in the media fell. What is then expressed this mobilization now?
Public consciousness - it's very slow, very inertial thing. Serious political analysts believe that the changes in his life was a statistically significant portion of the people says, somewhere, a year later. That is, we are now poorer by 20 percent, and some politically significant reaction to it will be a year later.
What will be the reaction?
Anticipate on a time in Russia it is practically impossible because there is the media, which greatly sharpened to ensure that any sort of theme to make a quick discussion, it is important fashion ... If you look at what they talked about the Russian media a year ago, then see what happens a terrible fight against pedophiles. It was a huge challenge, all talking about her, filming documentaries, conducted a talk show. If you glance at the Russian media today, you'll notice that pedophiles completely disappeared. Unfortunately, the Russian media are ground so that they are completely unrelated to reality are not. This means that social consciousness has very little relation to reality.
What topic has become a top issue in the Russian media to replace the theme of pedophilia?
We are at war with the United States right now (laughs). Of course, the theme of war remains a major. She moved to the Donbas to some problems of the world. For example, it turns out, we brought down the ruble America, refugees in Greece, for which we are very worried. Such are the themes. And in general, this is sort of the Cold War with the United States is, of which America does not know anything.
That may force Putin to leave the Donbass?
It is virtually impossible. He put himself in a hopeless political situation, that if he will stop this war, it will lose a large part of its popularity. And the last thing that it somehow holds (in power). It is clear that the economy is in a monstrous condition, the social sphere too. All that remains - a patriotic fervor. Therefore before, anyway, there will be a change of government, no significant political changes should not wait.
It is believed that Alexander and Oleg Sentsova Kol'chenko Russia could agree to exchange for Russian prisoners in the Ukraine or the West's recognition of the Crimea Russian territory. How likely is such a scenario, or it's more fantasy than reality?
It's like the joke about the elephant. (... - Is it true that the elephant eats up so much? - Eat it may be eaten, but who will give him). Russia, perhaps, would be able to exchange the two people on the international recognition of the annexation of the Crimea, but if I have not gone crazy, Europe will never recognize the annexation of the Crimea legal.
There Kremlin gateway to maneuver, whether these maneuvers, including in respect of Ukraine, to affect the modern Russian liberal community, despite the low ratings of the opposition?
Almost there (the field for maneuver). In Russia now only forced moves. You know how it is in chess, when you have to make forced moves. They're all bad, but you are just a few of the poor choose the least bad. This is true now and the authorities and the opposition. All make forced moves, tactically absolutely immediate. No one, neither Putin nor the opposition has no resources for some strategic planning for some far-reaching plans, and so on.
Why are the people who do not support Putin, do not go to the protests, as it was before? The Russians oppose the government, differ from the Ukrainians, who managed the previous government to resign?
The first and main reason - fear. Russians saw as an authority deals with disagreeable. When the Ukrainian people took to the Independence Square, no one had received a prison sentence in '22. There was a sense that (in Ukraine) softer somehow. The second reason is that we humans are much more there is to lose. Because the opposition to Putin - is, after all, a fairly wealthy people, then there is the middle class, people who have cars, apartments, jobs and so on. That is, people who are much better off than the people who came to the Maidan in Kiev. Third, the attitude to power in much of Sacred Russia than in Ukraine. The Ukrainians are much contemptuous of his power than the Russians, even oppositional.
Is this good or bad?
It has pros and cons. Pluses are that Ukrainians easier to change a bad government. A disadvantage is that Ukrainians believe that the government could be anyone, any kum president who does not think the damn thing in the economy.