today
| ïîñëåäíèå íîâîñòè |
| 2023 |
| 2022 |
| 2021 |
| 2020 |
| 2019 |
| 2018 |
| 2017 |
| 2016 |
| 2015 |
| 2014 |
| 2013 |
| 2012 |
| 2011 |
| 2010 |
| 2009 |
| 2008 |
| 2007 |
| 2006 |
| 2005 |
| 2004 |
| 2003 |
| 2002 |
memorial
| memory book |
| lists |
| Politkovskaya |
similar
| Grishin, Alexey |
|
Ïàìÿòè Àëåêñåÿ Äìèòðèåâè÷à Ãðèøèíà Ñâåòëàÿ ïàìÿòü ïðåêðàñíîìó ÷åëîâåêó! Ìû ðàáîòàëè â ÃÌÏÑ, òîãäà îí áûë ìîëîäûì íà÷àëüíèêîì îòäåëà ìåòàëëîâ, ïîäàþùèì áîëü... |
| 14/11/23 18:27 more... |
| author Áîíäàðåâà Þëèÿ |
| Panteleev, Denis |
| Âîò óæå è 21 ãîä , à áóäòî êàê â÷åðà !!!! |
| 26/10/23 12:11 more... |
| author Èðèíà |
| Ustinovskaya, Yekaterina |
| Ïîìíèì. |
| 24/10/23 17:44 more... |
| author Àíîíèì |
| Bochkov, Alexei |
|
Òåððàêò â Ïàëåñòèíå, Ñåêòîð Ãàçà Ñåãîäíÿ â ãðàæäàíñêóþ áîëüíèöó Ïàëåñòèíû ïðèëåòåëà ðàêåòà, ïîãèáëè äî 1000 ÷åëîâåê, âåñü ìèð âçáóäîðàæåí. È ÿ îêàçàëñÿ í... |
| 18/10/23 02:13 more... |
| author Àíäðåé |
| Radchenko, Vladimir |
| Äÿäÿ Âîëîäÿ, ÿ òåáÿ ïîìíþ è áóäó ïîìíèòü âñåãäà! |
| 04/09/23 22:05 more... |
| author Åëåíà |
| What do we know about Anna Politkovskaya? |
| Written by Ïîëèíà Ìÿêèí÷åíêî | ||||||||
| Ñðåäà, 02 Èþíü 2010 | ||||||||
 On May 28th, 2010, the House of Journalists in the capital hosted a discussion of the topic: “What do we know about Anna Politkovskaya?” The International League of Young Journalists organized the discussion with the support of the Union of Russian Journalists. It turns out that we know very little, and we do not have a desire, and are unlikely ever to have a desire, to explore her works. The meeting, however, was able to discuss whether journalists were able to change the nation. Twelve people came to hear about Anna, and they learned about her from people who knew her: ‘Novaya Gazeta’ staff commentator Vyacheslav Izmailov, ‘Novaya Gazeta’ deputy editor Vitaly Yaroshevsky, and Vitaly Chelyshev, deputy editor of ‘Journalist’ magazine.The was supposed to be a Skype teleconference with students from the journalism college of Milan University, but it was constantly interrupted by an unstable Internet connection. Andrea Riscassi, professor at Milan University and a representative of the ‘Anna è viva’ (‘Anna is alive’) organization, was still able to speak with Moscow: “I am afraid that people will quickly forget everything. It is awful. No one should die, but there are some professionals who need to known and remembered.” “My mother always felt it her duty to work on topics that were serious and demanded scrutiny by the public, and, therefore, journalists,” said Vera Politkovskaya, her daughter, while sharing her views with ‘Novaya Gazeta’. “She only said one thing about the Chechen problem while explaining to us, her loved ones, why she involved herself in such a dangerous matter: no one is involved in this, and if I do not do it — then who will?” The profession is in crisis, experts said, and they compared freedom’s current state of affairs with events in the 1990s. Back then, even though journalists alone were unable to stop the Chechen war, close to the end there was a maximum of support for stopping it: at the time there was professional solidarity that was able to stir the public. One reason for today’s indifference is professional envy, while the second reason is that other journalists now occupy an opposing position. According to Vyacheslav Izmailov: “Anya irritated the Russian security services, and thereby irritated journalists who depended on them for their work.” Very few people nowadays are willing to give up comfort and financial well being for the sake of risk to life and dubious awards. “A person who once helps someone, and who once writes the truth, a river of will start people coming to him. If this person has a conscience, he will try to listen to all of them. This was the type of person that Politkovskaya was,” said Vitaly Yaroshevsky. The young people in attendance admitted they did not want to be like her, but that they were poorly acquainted with her work. At the same time they accused the journalist of only seeing one side of the truth and basing her work on rumors. The experts argued that she was always on the side of the weak, and she assumed responsibility for any error she made to prevent tragedy. One must at least try to make the country different, the guests explained to their younger colleagues. When we write the truth, we make people’s hearts a bit more sensitive: “In fact, as soon as the public feels that something is being changed because of us, it will start relating to journalists differently,” commented Vitaly Chelyshev. “Write the truth, but life is dear. I am not telling you to write the truth and fear nothing, because you will get nothing for this but gratitude,” continued Vitaly Yaroshevsky. Nowadays few, if any, react to journalists’ articles, and nothing changes. It seems a vicious circle, and credibility must return to the profession. In the emptying auditorium, the deputy chief editor of ‘Journalist’ magazine explained to the few The University of Milan is ready to maintain communication with the journalistic communities in different countries. “Young journalists should believe in themselves. We can change the situation using new technologies, but the main thing is to speak the truth and stick together,” was the inspiration given by Andrea Riscassi. Otherwise society runs the risk of becoming accustomed to the murder of journalists. The ‘Anna è viva’ association will publish essays from the panelists, as well as from members of the International League of Young Journalists. May 28th discussion in the House of Journalists: “What do we know about Anna Politkovskaya?” Organized by the International League of Young Journalists. Andrea Riscassi, Representative of ‘Anna è viva’ and professor at the University of Milan: Not many people in Italy know about what has been happening in your country. In Milan, we are trying to make sure that Politkovskaya is not forgotten. To do this, we asked permission to plant trees in her memory. I wrote the book ‘Anna è viva’, which means ‘Anna is alive’ because I believe that so long as people talk about people like Anna and Paolo Borsellino, about those who have been killed by the mafia, they will not be forgotten. She was invited to many rallies for journalists. There are many who knew about her, because her book about Chechnya was published here right after it was published in France. I am afraid that people will quickly forget everything after 3 or 6 months. It is awful. No one should die, but there are people who should be known and remembered and remembered every day, not just on October 7th. Vitaly Yaroshevsky, deputy editor of ‘Novaya Gazeta’: I have this persistent notion that people outside our country are more interested in our problems than we are. In 1989, I was working as a TASS correspondent in Prague and, praise God, I witnessed the ‘Velvet Revolution’. I saw it all and I wrote about it. It was a very inspiring and moving story. These were events that change the world, and students in Prague started this revolution. They rocked a very stable and prosperous boat. Then, almost immediately afterwards, I moved back to Moscow, still inspired by the events in Prague. Here, too, everything was seething and boiling over and many thousands were demonstrating in Moscow against the dictatorship of the Communist Party and so on. I was invited to the journalism college at Moscow University just to talk about what I had seen in Prague, and about the ‘Velvet Revolution’. Here I found myself in a totally different world, absolutely. I entered a world of totally apathetic young people who, presumably, had made their choice and chosen their profession. That is when I first realized with great sadness that if our profession is the future it has a very dim and very doubtful one. My sad feelings were confirmed more than once when comrades began to die, to be killed. ‘Slava’ (Vyacheslav Izmailov) and I and our colleagues at ‘Novaya Gazeta’ never detected much active support from the journalistic community. In other words, those whom I met in 1989 in the auditorium at the college of journalism, by the time of the death of, for example, Anna Politkovskaya, they had already become fully developed people and journalists, so I guess there is nothing to be surprised about. The small numbers of you here is extra strong evidence that the profession is certainly in crisis. Maybe this is a bold statement, since Russian and Soviet journalism was always famous for the personal participation of its journalists in events in the life of our country. It used to be important for those who chose the profession. Alexei Kvaskov, journalism student at the Dashkova Institute, Moscow: I am interested in this theme because I am interested in investigative journalism. Our government is a closed one, and what is hidden always attracts attention. At the moment for me it is more of a hobby. I would not say that I would do this in the future, because it is very dangerous. Pavel Koshkin, journalism student at Moscow University: Why is there such disdain for murdered journalists? Vyacheslav Izmailov, commentator for ‘Novaya Gazeta’: It seems to me that envy plays a considerable role here, because Anna could something that others could not. She did what others could not do, what prominent journalists could not do. In 2001, Anna was detained in the Chechen village of Khatuni, where there was a Russian air assault unit stationed. According to the Chechens, people were being kept in pits and this regiment detained Anya. That was in February 2001. At the same time, the commander of the air assault forces, General Shpak went there, as well as the So that is one reason: envy. The second reason is probably that they hold different (political) positions. This is the main thing. Anya irritated the Russian security services, and thereby irritated those journalists who were in that line of work and depended on the security services. There have been extra judicial executions. The President, during his last meeting with human rights activists, used instead the word ‘repression’. It could be ‘repression’, but it is more accurate to call it ‘settling scores’ and they have put people in jail for this not once, but many times. Vitaly Chelyshev, secretary of the Union of Russian Journalists, deputy editor of ‘Journalist’ magazine, and chief secretary International League of Young Journalists: Some soldiers, who back then detained Anna, later they had personal problems, and of course they did not turn to Leontiev: they turned to Anna Politkovskaya. As a matter of fact, every human rights advocacy group can be considered to be just another part of society, if you can call fascists and Nazis such. They tossed the mud on Anya very thickly, and after her death the Nazi websites featured demands that Politkovskaya’s ashes be sent to the United States so that she did not remain here. They also published a highly tendentious biography about her. Over here it is considered honorable and patriotic to discredit a person engaged human rights advocacy. Anna Leonova, chairman of the International League of Young Journalists and journalism student at Moscow University: There is an issue that has caused controversy for the participants in our discussion today, about how possible it is to equate journalism with human rights advocacy. Here is Anastasia Chibisova, who writes in her essay that she does not deny Anna’s merits, but she finds it hard to trust any journalist whose works “received so many complaints, and what was the most interesting was that not all the complaints came from the government.” Anastasia does not want to be a journalist like Anna Politkovskaya. Anastasia, could you comment on your statement? Anastasia Chibisova, student at the college of journalism at Moscow University: Whenever people ask me about her, I know that I cannot say a thing about her and it is a shame considering that I want to go into journalism. I started looking around for materials with which to write an essay. At first I read the good reviews and wrote my first version, but later at the journalism department I was discussing this with someone else and I met others who advised me to explore more deeply the source, because things are not so unambiguous and not so simple. I began looking at other sources on the Internet, and even articles by residents of Chechnya, and they wrote that yes, she was a good journalist, but she wrote mainly rumors and gossip, that is, she did not always verify her information. Since I found so many statements like this, I hesitated, but I came here ready to reconsider my position, if necessary. Vitaly Chelyshev: There is this great guy, journalist Dima (Dmitry) Florin. Now, I think, he works over at ‘Kavkazsky Uzel’ as their Moscow correspondent. He did a telephone interview with Natalya Estemirova. The line was not as bad as it is with Italy, but still it was not that great. Natalya wanted to name some people who, according to her information, according to rumors, as you just said, might suffer reprisals. Dima told her: “Let me call you back tomorrow morning” and so she did not give these names and by the next morning she had already been taken away and murdered. In my opinion, there are things for which a journalist should take responsibility. In order to prevent a tragedy, he should be ready to accept responsibility for mistakes and be ready to answer for them, let me put it that way. I did not know Anna as well as her colleagues over at ‘Novaya Gazeta’ did, but she worked like a torpedo: she flew there and back again. She worked independently. At many publications there are people who work like this, and this is not an accusation. I do not know if there will be a Sakharov Prize this year. That is where I usually ran into her. In real life she was a very gentle person, and often journalists who write harshly know how to speak softly. I have never seen her get upset or raise her voice. Perhaps there were certain situations that I never was present at, but again this is not an accusation. The fact is, she stepped on so many toes that when Putin said her death brought more misery to Russia than her work did, he was certainly not just expressing his own opinion, but the opinion of those whose sore toes she had been stepping on. They did not want to let her go anywhere. It is possible that Beslan might have ended differently, but you know she was evacuated to the emergency room at Vitaly Yaroshevsky: I think that Vitaly (Chelyshev) answered your question. They do not kill people who use rumors. They are not persecuted. Believe me, they do not beat them in the kidneys with rods. They murder those who learn something very dangerous about very dangerous people. This is what Anya knew a lot about. They killed her, not because she collected rumors about Chechnya. They killed her, perhaps, because she learned about the extra judicial killings, the abductions, and the torture. These are not rumors: this is professional work. I watched her. First off, I started working with her back when we were both at ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’, but people are not stools, they change, and often for the worse. I later worked with her at ‘Novaya Gazeta’. All of us, except for Slava, we are perhaps normal, sane journalists. Politkovskaya was different. She was different, I would say, in her high degree of not changing. I will explain what I mean. She would take on topics, which I would never touch, topics I would run away from because they were frightening, not so much for my safety, but because it was frightening and unpleasant to hear all these stories. They weigh on me. I am used to living a normal life. I am used to living peacefully. But who came for Politkovskaya? By the way, about her human rights activities: this was not defense of human rights, but just plain defense! She defended people. Mothers came her who had lost their children. Fathers came to her who had lost their families. Children came to her who had lost everything. It is very difficult. It is unbearably difficult. Anna Leonova: I am ashamed to admit it, but the first time that I read Anna Politkovskaya’s articles was in preparation for this meeting, in order to form an opinion about her work. They were about themes that journalists normally do not investigate. On the one hand, these materials made me pessimistic after reading them, that is, I read them and everything turns out not the way I might have imagined. On the other hand, I felt an immense respect for her, because, really, it is real journalism, because, for example, when I read articles from foreign journalists, they have a sharp pen. This is real journalism. A journalist’s work is to point out to the authorities that something is not right, and they always accused Anna Politkovskaya of this. But this is normal journalism — this is the style of writing that they perceive to be normal outside our country. My personal opinion is that Russian journalism nowadays is quite toothless and no one makes any commentary, not only because he is afraid, but also because he is too lazy to communicate on subjects that he finds difficult. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Absolutely. Slava (Vyacheslav Izmailov) would not say this about himself, but I will say it: Slava is already registered in heaven because he is a man who has saved people from death. He is a man who speaks directly with God, and please forgive the pathos. This is what real journalism is, this is what real defense is, not protecting rights, but protecting people. For this it is worth the risk. It is worth the work. Once, while talking with a journalist, I asked him a completely idiotic question: what materials, out of everything he had published, what materials did he consider to be his most important? He responded well: he said that it just some small note that led to an innocent man being released from prison. Maybe this is really so? Returning to your question. It was not just envy, absolutely not. The fact is that the current regime has fashioned society into its own form and likeness. Twice there have been civil wars in this country, well, if you count the terrible Russian civil war — three times. There have been two Chechen wars, and these were not Russia’s wars against Chechnya, these were wars by Russian citizens against Russian citizens. Can you remember at least one major statement by our fellow citizens against these wars? At least one mass demonstration where there more than five thousand people? It seems to me that it is probably naive to imagine that if only the mothers of soldiers who were drafted to Chechnya, if only the mothers of children who were killed by Chechnya, if they all took to the streets, then everything would collapse. This whole regime would fall. But nothing like this has ever happened. So, an outsider, and Anna was an outsider, this is how they relate to an outsider. This, after all, is not how one relates to a colleague. This is how society relates to those who do not embed themselves in this very harsh scheme of things. This is what we exist in. Three people from the audience (out of 12) raise their hands to the question: “Do you believe that the regime killed Anna?” Unidentified girl: Anna was bringing important information to the people, so why has there been no outcry? This was a valuable person for the Russian public. Pavel Koshkin: I do not agree that the regime killed her. Most likely, the terrorists and militants whom she wrote against did it. There is still Olga Allenova, a ‘Kommersant’ journalist who also writes a lot about Chechnya. Why have they not killed her? She is still writing. Most likely this has nothing to do with the regime. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Izmailov also writes about Chechnya, and, at least for now, he has not been killed. So, what do you mean by “why have they not killed Allenova?” Yes, Politkovskaya was not the only one to write about Chechnya. I do not exclude the possibility that Politkovskaya found out something. I cannot say exactly what, but I can guess. She came close to some very serious secrets. Perhaps Slava is aware of this, but if he knows, he probably will not say. Vyacheslav Izmailov: I do not believe that she found out some serious secret. In Chechnya there have been extra judicial killings by the FSB and the Interior Ministry and by the Chechens themselves. Anya wrote about it and talked about it, because people are supposed to talk about it, and somehow protect people, even if they are not completely blameless. She wrote about a fellow who disappeared in 2002. He raped and murdered a girl, and Anya wrote about it. She was not supposed to talk about it. No one was supposed to talk about it! Had she not talked about it, perhaps it would not have been as widely known. Much of what Anya talked about was not only done by specific persons, but by the authorities, or done with the approval of the authorities. The authorities, certainly, were dissatisfied with her. She was an enemy of this government. She wrote and the local gods, and about Ramzan Kadyrov. She got an interview with him. It was in 2004, after the death of Achmad Kadyrov. She wrote everything that he said to her. Unidentified girl: Why did Anna have such a thirst for problematic topics? She was, after all, a woman. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Any answer to this would seem banal. It was simply her choice. Firstly, I think it makes the blood boil. Secondly, these are themes that resonate on hearing. Anna Politkovskaya was a completely normal person and wanted glory. She was ambitious. She wanted her name known and so she took on topics that, of course, very few people would take up. Once again I want to say that we like to live comfortably, but there are people for whom this is not the point of life. They also want to live comfortably, but they have other priorities. Her growth began with the Chechen wars. At ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’ we would not let her go there on official travel. We felt something, even though one of our war correspondents, Nadya Chuykova, had already been killed there. This was the first demonstrative murder. Back then, by the way, a lot of journalists went there. Nowadays people do not even react, because they have become different. Bella Shahmirza, student of journalism of Moscow University and coordinator of the ‘Face to Face’ lectures on the peoples of Russia: It seems to me that Anna Stepanovna’s journalism was very feminine. She wrote about real stories, not about Alexei Kvaskov: I will tell you frankly: I have a rather ambiguous attitude towards her. It seems to me that she was a controversial person. She was certainly a bold journalist, but her human misfortune lies in the fact that she only saw one side of the truth. I read her articles, and in my opinion most of them related to Chechnya, and they had simply a Russophobe character, since Anna Politkovskaya highlighted the problem of only one of the peoples of Chechnya, of only the Caucasus peoples. She wrote about atrocities inflicted by Russian soldiers on Chechen women, and the fact that they remained at home without husbands and so on. But a real journalist has to be impartial in this respect and choose what they call a middle position, since in my opinion in war no one is right. She wrote more for the side of the Chechens. Anna Leonova: She talked with these people herself. Alexei Kvaskov: But these are not real facts, do you understand? Someone told her something and she wrote it down. Where is the evidence? A journalist must follow the evidence, not just words. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Academician Sakharov responded unequivocally to pretty much the same question. He said: “I am always on the side of the weak” and he did not worry about objectivity. Politkovskaya was on the side of the weak. We, the Russian people, came to Chechnya with a sword. Did they invite us there? Alexei Kvaskov: And that is why the Russian people could care less. End of story. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Correct. This here answers a lot of things. She was really an absolutely ambiguous person, as well as a journalist. And thank God for that. She is not some sort of an icon, certainly not. As for me, some things that came out from under her pen, I took an active dislike to them. I disliked them because they were not written as I would have, and so what? This is natural, but her position was very clear and unambiguous, and, by the way, she also defended Russians with the same fury as she did Chechens. If she never defended Russians, she would never have gone in to see the militants at Dubrovka. There were Russians sitting in that auditorium, but she went to see the militants because they said “we will talk with Politkovskaya” and you know why they said that? They really wanted to negotiate the release of the hostages. That is why. And similarly, it was for this same reason that she was flying to Beslan: not to defend the Chechens, but the Ossetians in this case. Or even Ukrainians. Tell me, does the nationality even matter, especially if 334 people were killed there, half of them children? Vitaly Chelyshev: I love her work and I liked her as a person, but that is not the issue. The issue is: why did she do what she was doing? Any person who has once helped someone, who has once written the truth, even if only once (or if twice — even better), then a lot of people will start coming to him. If that person has a conscience he will listen to all of them. I am talking now in the abstract, but I know that Anna Stepanovna found herself in precisely this same situation because people came to her just like they did during Soviet times, when they used to go see reporters. Now newspapers write that they do not correspond with readers and do not respond to letters. Who was she to keep office hours for such people? She was a journalist who would then write about it. These are different things: the shock at Dima Kholodov getting blown up was awful. Her love of Listyev was probably greater, since he was a media figure, but that was only the first shock, and then later, when they killed those four editors down in Tolyatti. Who remembers them anymore? Only people in down there in Tolyatti. They beat up this guy Domnikov, and at first they thought it was some personal dispute, but then it turned out someone paid to have it done. People are starting to get used to the fact that journalists are being murdered. In our next issue a girl from Yekaterinburg wrote us that one of her teachers said that all journalists are corrupt prostitutes who pull up their skirts for anyone who will stick money in there. She tried to argue, but the other students in the auditorium would not support her. Then she decided that perhaps they should fear the teachers, and began asking the other students: “Are you for sale?” They simply mentioned Anna, and said: “I don't want to end up like her,” because here she wrote the truth and she was murdered. This took place at one of our best universities. The girl later went to see the dean, and the dean spoke with the instructor. Terrible. But that is not the issue. This trend of journalists being killed, well, you know, the sea is wet (it is a dangerous profession). The public does not even notice it anymore. When Anna was murdered, there was a demonstration in Finland. In London, the union organized a demonstration. The union of journalists in Great Britain and Ireland did this, while in Finland it was the public that went out into the street. Unidentified girl: I would like to disagree with the young man (Alexei Kvaskov). I also read opinions about her articles and activities. Some support her, while others do not. She was not simply a bystander: she became a part of the family that she was writing about. Her emotions were justified. Ramzan Kadyrov called her a storyteller. I believe that these could not have been rumors. She was an eyewitness: she saw it all. She talked with these people, and she told the truth about it. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: How old were you in 1996? Four? I was a lot older. In December 1994, the first Chechen war began. We, the journalists, I now understand, we had this illusion that we could stop the war. I have to tell you that society back in the 1990s was completely different. Journalism was different. It was free. It was alternative. There was ‘Izvestiya’ and ‘Rossiyskaya Gazeta’, ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’, and even ‘Moskovskaya Pravda’, and though they all wrote it differently, clearly they all wrote the same thing: “Stop the war! You started it” — and by that I mean the leadership of the country — “So you must stop it.” Hundreds were dying down there. What other argument is needed for objectivity? We talked about specific things: “Stop killing people, stop it! Not a single one of your Unidentified girl: I got my answer from her articles. Chechnya is in Russia, and it is not as far away as everyone thinks. It is also a war. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Anya, definitely, made a mistake, and this can be said. She believed that it could not reach us. In this case I do not exclude myself from this trade, though I work for a completely different newspaper and this newspaper definitely has taken a harsh position. She thought that by talking about someone else’s troubles she might suddenly awaken something in the public. She thought: who, indeed, will take this up and go to demonstrate in front of the capital? Not three people with “Stop the War” signs, but three hundred thousand. But it never happened. A lot of people came to her funeral, though. We love to go to funerals. What kind of journalism is there a demand for? I will now give you a small example: Beslan, a terrible tragedy. There was a rally on the Vasilevsky Spusk organized by United Russia and its minions. They drove 200 thousand people over there, in the dark. I was in the crowd and I had heard such talk: “They promised me an extra month’s pay”, “They threatened to take away my bonus.” People were explaining to one another why they came, while next to us were people from the Union of Russian Officers, wearing black uniforms and distributing leaflets. On the leaflets were the words: “Arm the Russians down there, down with people from the Caucasus.” You see, this was supposed to be a rally of solidarity with the Ossetian people. We are such incorrigibles. In Rome, at the same time and on the same day, without United Russia and without Berlusconi, a million people came to a demonstration! A million! Moreover, the city government appealed directly to Romans: “Do not go to the demonstration, it is very dangerous.” They did not know where Beslan was, but they heard that 334 people were killed there, and the Romans took to the streets with their children. They told them: “A crowd is for a terrorist is like water is for a fish. You are not only risking your lives, but also the lives of your children.” They did not care. This is what is known as a civil society. This is a civil society, whether it is in Rome, the Netherlands, or Finland. By the way, in Finland 3 thousand went to demonstrate in front of the Russian Embassy (when Politkovskaya was murdered). Not the two hundred as they declared. They live there for their own pleasure. You know, people are ambiguous, and Politkovskaya was also ambiguous. This was her personal and professional charm. For her there were no such issues as whether or not she was objective. Generally, in principle, according to the Hamburg score, one must be objective, but when you see, excuse me for pressing this, a dead child on the road and beside him is his mother with an arm torn off and you know that it was not a fascist helicopter that just flew over, but one of our helicopters, and those are not the occupiers in that tank over there, but our own APC, when you see it and know it… She was not a robot. It was all there and she wrote about it. She did not have a cold mind. She was a person burning with the hottest of emotions. There were many times that we collided and the sparks flew from her eyes. Anna Leonova: What is the truth of the war? Many journalists say they do not understand where the truth is. Vyacheslav Izmailov: I am glad that you asked that question. As a matter of fact, my first profession was not journalism, but soldiering. I was in Afghanistan as a deputy battalion commander, and I served during the first Chechen war, for more than a year I was a staff officer at the headquarters of the 205th Brigade in Chechnya. You say that she wrote more about Chechens. What the heck, during the first Chechen war, I was not only there, I kept records of everything. Up to two thirds of our losses in the first war were not from Chechen bullets. At a minimum But I have seen it. I have seen such filth. Filth from our own people. Now, as to the fact that there are kidnappers, the fact is, they did not give Anya any interviews. Not just that, they would not talk about their work. They wanted to look good. Always. Even when they were kidnapping people, and so they stayed far away from the journalists. But Anna saw what the government was doing when it was killing people who were often guilty of absolutely nothing. She talked about it and how there was a lot more going on than what we could see on the surface, but all of this was forbidden during the second war. You could only travel to Chechnya if you were accredited. You arrived at Khankala and they would give you a guard and show things to you, but if you went off on your own somewhere, if you got caught, at best you would be sent home, at worst, I do not know what they would do. Anna did not want that. She wanted to see it. Therefore, when talking about rumors: there may have been rumors somewhere. For example, in1999 we were in Ingushetia. We were not allowed into Chechnya and so we were standing at this checkpoint in Ingushetia and these women were talking. She wrote down their words, yes, these were probably rumors. But she did not just write rumors: she also wrote what she had really seen. Did you know how she got there in order to see these things? In the trunk of a car. She was taken from Khatuni, where she was located, by the But there was also this: she went to Chechnya with official human rights advocates and journalists as well. She was a problem for everyone who went there officially. That is, she hid, while the others did not. She hid because she did not want to see what they wanted to show, but what they did not want to show and actually existed. Pavel Koshkin: There is no demand for biased journalism, at least among students of journalism. Anna Politkovskaya’s articles are still biased because there are so many emotions and there is no balance, and so many students tend not to trust her. But when I read a biased article from, say, a Western journalist, I always wonder: is this person trying to earn a living? That is, he highlights one point of view and it is to his advantage. Perhaps it is not. I have not read a lot of articles by Anna Politkovskaya because it seems to me that she cannot be trusted, because, on the one hand she is biased, while on the other hand, after all, I do not know her as a person. This is why the public was apathetic and unwilling to learn about her. Vitaly Chelyshev: I am afraid that society has changed greatly over the past ten years, and even more so over the last 12. Why is that? You do not find any discordance in the press. You have not seen the variety we used to have, when you wanted to stamp on one newspaper and read the other. In principle, every newspaper at one point or another has a certain bias. Today we are talking about Anna, and we can remember her exactly like this: I was very good friends with Galya Starovoitova, who was removed from office. She worked on ethnic relations for Boris Nikolayevich (Yeltsin). She was removed from her position because she was opposed to the impending war. I had a different relationship with Mikhail Nikiforovich Poltoranin, it was up and down, but for old time’s sake we were mostly friends. But then he took issue to the war, and he was fired and his issue was that there should be no war. Khasbulatov and Rudskoi went to Yeltsin and asked: “What are you doing? Tomorrow everyone will be hanging from lampposts.” They did that, and the various media looked on the war as a crime. Back then I was putting out this ecology daily, and it was way off schedule, but I made sure our paper was on Boris Nikolayevich’s desk. It closed soon afterward. We were driven into a corner, but we had to do it. Today, journalists know that: a) they cannot, and b) they will not only be shut down, they will probably also end up with a half Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Does anyone know how many Chechen civilians have died during the two Chechen wars? Nobody does. The following figures are circulating: 120 thousand, from 50 to 100 thousand, and Khasbulatov has come up with the figure of 200 thousand. What world are we living in? Where is this? This is our country and we do not know how many people have died here? Perhaps maybe we need to talk about this? Now I will give you some figures: the audience of ‘First Channel’ is 100 million. The audience of ‘Second Channel’ is 80 million, and NTV is 60 million. The circulation of ‘Novaya Gazeta’ is 270 thousand. So why bother to stifle it? How was it back during the 1990s? Think about it, and read about it. It is very important to understand where we live and with whom we are dealing and their feverish dash. You all probably have already been brainwashed. So, for her articles in ‘Novaya Gazeta’ Politkovskaya goes digging up topics in that minefield. She writes her material. Yegor Yakovlev, the editor of the ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’, he calls up Oleg Dobrodeyev, the chief information officer for NTV, who asks him: “What’s going on over there?” And (Yakovlev) says: “Politkovskaya here found something out!” “Okay, we’ll do a story. Here it comes.” And 150 thousand readers of ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’ overnight grow to 40 million. That was what television was back then, it was about professional solidarity. They killed our Nadya Chuykova down in Chechnya, and I have already mentioned this. Two journalists went down there and looked for her for a week, and they found her. How they managed to stay alive, I still do not know. They brought her back here and we buried her. But on the day we found her, I got a call from ‘Izvestiya’. Back then I was deputy editor of ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’. ‘Izvestiya’ calls and says: “We need something for the front page.” I said: “Guys, I have neither the strength nor the emotion for this.” “That’s your problem. We need a quote. In brief.” They tossed out their schedule and stopped the presses until they could put something on the front page about how a reporter for ‘Obshchaya Gazeta’ was found murdered in Chechnya. Can you imagine anything like this happening nowadays? I know some people very well, people who now serve the authorities with great pleasure. And even more: they were different back then. People change. I, too, apparently I am changing. At ‘Novaya Gazeta’ I work according to a very simple principle: I am not ashamed here. It may come as a surprise, but it plays a role. I am an adult, but working alongside me are very capable, very young people. Once I used to think: what is it that keeps them here? A career? No, that is a big, fat zero. Yes, that and hemorrhoids. Deputy chief editor for ‘Novaya Gazeta’ is one constant headache. Salary? Modest, and not even always paid on time. Benefits? Only recently did we even learn how that word is pronounced. There is nothing at all. It just turns that when I speak from the sidelines I am not at all ashamed. You can make a name for yourself, and here there is some hope. But no shame, and that is very important. Vitaly Chelyshev: They are like a Noah’s Ark that collects everyone. When ‘Obshchaya’ collapsed, where did they go? To ‘Novaya’. I do not know if they even get paid there, but I do know that if I suddenly get in a fight over at ‘Journalist’ and I need somewhere to go, I will go to Muratov and say: “Look, can I sign up with you? Because I don’t know any other place like this where you don’t feel ashamed.” Vitaly Yaroshevsky: ‘Vadya’ (Vadim) Rechkalov used to work with me over at ‘Obshchaya’ and back then he never even thought about not writing something. He would get scared if he remembered the things he used to write for Yegor Yakovlev back then. By the way, he went to Chechnya and wrote some very Anna Leonova: I received a letter from a Czech journalist. As far as I understand it, she works with ‘Memorial’. She said that for the first time the Czech Republic has a government committee to deals with resisting the return of Chechen refugees to their homeland. This is a question of just how much they can do at the government level to regulate this. The Czech Republic is in fact the first such country to claim that conditions for life do not exist in Chechnya. In addition, there are certain psychological issues: people who have spent any time in Europe are never going to be allowed to get jobs, they are going to be sent on over to the police station, and if they refuse they know what will happen to them. She sent me a press release about how they are now bringing together similar commissions and trying to evoke interest in this at the government level in other European countries. I do not know, since a lot of this smacks of international scandal mongering. Carlotta Mariani, a student of the college of journalism at Milan University: I think it is very important to talk about Anna and make sure that people know about her work, so that nothing like this ever happens again. People also need to know about what happened in Chechnya and other parts of the world. We also have a lot of journalists like her, for example, Walter Tobaggi and Roberto Saviano. Anna Politkovskaya told the truth, and thanks to people like her, people know the reality and can live in our society. I read her book about Chechnya and was very surprised, because what I saw on television was quite different. She was a great journalist, a great writer and a great person. A question to the auditorium: “Do you want to be like Anna Politkovskaya?” Vitaly Yaroshevsky: No, you all should stay alive. There is an unspoken rule: no article is worth the life and health of a journalist. Not a one, believe me, even the most acute issue. We have lost six (journalists). This is a terrible loss. We lost our best people, and that is that. They did their duty, of course. The kingdom of heaven is for them, but it is not even worth discussing: it would be better if they were still alive. Unidentified girl: Is Julia Latynina trying to do the same thing as Anna Politkovskaya? Vitaly Yaroshevsky: And she has already been threatened. There was a time when they even gave her bodyguards. She was directly threatened. Polina Myakinchenko, student of journalism at Moscow University: So what are young journalists to do, if on the one hand they want to write the truth, but on the other hand they hold their lives dear? Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Write the truth, but hold life dear. You are writing the truth so that the country can become different. It was once different, do you understand? I had wonderful times here. Things were absolutely crazy, we were I am probably supposed to tell you to write the truth and not be afraid of anything, because you will receive nothing but gratitude. If Politkovskaya wrote about people being killed in Chechnya, killed by the local authorities, then how is the federal government supposed to respond to this, can you tell me? Vitaly Chelyshev: Christ once spoke about people with uncircumcised hearts. Our society has been knocked around in so many ways that these feelings have been lost. I was once surprised by something. It was probably in 1994, when I was in Minnesota at some discussions on joint environmental programs. They talked about their troubles and I spoke about a strange situation we had, most likely caused by atom bomb tests, when we began having these blue and purple children being born who would die at about 3 months of age. There were many facts concerning this, so it was no coincidence, but while I was talking about it, I looked up and saw that half the hall was crying. For me that was my first such shock, because I never would have got such a reaction here. Over here people might react to some sensational article, but I would never see tears. Something else about reactions: last year, in the spring, several British newspapers were collecting information about expenses rung up by members of parliament, how much of the budget they were spending on themselves. One MP had an island built on his little lake, and so on. This was done using money that was supposed to be spent on social needs. Do you know how it ended? It ended with a series of scandalous resignations over a Andrea Riscassi: Everyone, not just young journalists, must believe in themselves. Journalists can change a situation, and especially with new technologies. Tell the truth, like Anna Politkovskaya did, tell people what you see. It is very important that all young journalists stick together, because they will try to divide you up. It is best to stay together. Not necessarily to go and get killed, in Italy or in Russia, it is important that in the future no one gets killed. The main thing is to tell the truth. Anna Leonova: I would like to quote from essays the participants here have written. In particular, Antonia Ciballos from Spain, who says that she first heard about Anna at an event called “the opposition, social movements, and the press in Russia.” There she listened to the speaker, Oksana Cholysheva. Prior to that she had never heard about Anna. These facts made her not just to think about issues, but also made her read, along with her colleagues, a newspaper entitled ‘The Caucasus News’. This all happened in Spain, as I recall. She began to study in detail problems of immigration and the Anna Politkovskaya case. She read her book on Chechnya and liked it very much. As she puts it, for her Politkovskaya was a person who was beyond any official announcements. The main thing for her was to look at the news so that she as a journalist could isolate something from the news flow, human stories and important stuff. My colleague expresses a hope that, in Russia and other countries, this case will not simply be forgotten. The only thing that seemed strange to me was the parallel she tried to make between the wars in South Ossetia (and Chechnya). She says that no one wants to broadcast information about what happened during this war, but this, in my view, it is a different matter because it is generally accepted that the initiation of this war was not entirely our fault. Certainly, we do not know the whole truth, I think, but Chechnya and Georgia make poor comparisons. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: Yes, there (in Chechnya) it is counter-terrorist operation, while here in South Ossetia it is genocide. That is the entire difference. If you want to listen to my advice, then do not do even go here. Everything else will be okay. After all, they have beaten this into our heads like a nail. Comrade Churkin was shouting in the UN General Assembly: “How many more victims do you need before you start counting?” The Western journalists got to him, I guess. As a result, our Prosecutor General’s Office found that 154 have been killed during the fighting, and this is what we are calling genocide. This, I must say, is a serious word, and it calls everything else into question. Try to look at it from a distance. Vitaly Chelyshev: You must understand that it not just in the government structures that there exists a war party, but also in society. There is a fascist terrorist underground that is killing people. Once someone named Popov, this Anna Leonova: In confirmation of your words, here is an essay from another participant, from Nigeria, who tells of a very similar case. Vitaly Yaroshevsky: God forbid, do not follow in anyone’s footsteps. Should any murder, you understand, concern you? Igor Domnikov was killed because he was investigating a corruption scandal in the Lipetsk region. Whoever ordered his murder is still at large. We have been publishing material about this man and published his photograph. My question is: why is he still at large? There should be at least one reader who is saying: “Come on, for a start at least question this man.” Vitaly Chelyshev: The position of the Russian Prosecutor’s Office is that an article in the press can be the basis for a case, but no one pays attention to this. In 1996, Yeltsin signed a decree amending Article 810 concerning civil servants. His amendment stated that a government employee is obliged to examine any statement in the press within three days, and respond to it within 10. President Putin extended this decree in 2000, but in 2005, even though no one said that it needed to be overturned, it ended up on the list of cancellations. There, separated merely by commas, were 20 pieces of legislation, including this one. In real life, the legal profession, and journalists, we still rely on old Soviet laws that still have not been cancelled. Most of the press does not use these, only ‘Novaya’ does when appealing to the Prosecutor General on our lack of success in getting the FSB to respond to something. Only when we do this do we start getting any answers, satisfactory or otherwise. The fact is, feedback from the public is discrete: sometimes there is, sometimes there is not, so I think that we still have to fight for the rights that we still have. Unidentified girl: Our Italian colleague said, “let us unite and make a free press.” But what should we do? I went into journalism to learn, and I have a very vague idea about how it is going to be when I finish. What society while I be living in? Because what is happening now is not good. Vera Kichanova, student at the college of journalism at Moscow University and activist in the Moscow student web: My opinion about Anna has not changed during this discussion, because everything that has been stated has been in line with the impression I have about her. In this case, the major facts have merely reinforced my opinion that what is left of our civil society looks rather pitiful. Our older colleagues compare the current state of affairs with how it was back in the 1990s, back when there was solidarity among journalists. They talked about what was going on abroad and about how people in Italy took to the streets to support those who were suffering, and Yekaterinburg was also given as an example. Unfortunately, even here in Moscow, it seems that people still need to build a civil society. Just this academic year, on October 7th, on the anniversary of Anna Politkovskaya’s murder, our journalism class lecture finishes with an assignment. We have to write a column, and the instructor says: “Today, you all know, is a special day, October 7th. Today is Vladimir Putin’s birthday. Write something on this topic.” I was furious and I wrote about it on LiveJournal, on the ‘Novaya Gazeta’ blog, by the way. After this I get a phone call from a different instructor, and he asks me: “Why do you need to write such stuff? This is the kind of civil society we live in.” Vitaly Chelyshev: I think everyone is different. Perhaps you have heard of a group called ‘The Sixties’. Back when they were all under the same bushel basket, under the same pressure, they all fought for the same thing, it would seem, freedom for all. They all did as much as they could. As soon as the pressure was off, there were the 33 prison camps. Getting into a college of journalism was the choice of mission. Roughly speaking, when a man chooses this profession, he says to himself: “I am going there to help people, I am going to tell people stories of interest so that people either receive enjoyment from my articles, or start to think and unite around something.” That is why a person chooses an undertaking. That is my I find journalism students, whatever they may be, interesting. When people enter into journalism from other professions, there is room for them over at the news agencies. They work better than journalism students at Unidentified girl: At the university they tell us that someone who enters the profession from the outside makes a better journalist than someone who only studies journalism, because the outsider supposedly became aware that he was interested in journalism. And secondly: he has already seen some things in life, so he will be able to write more interesting and have broader horizons. Vitaly Chelyshev: There is a point of view with which I disagree completely, that the colleges of journalism are producing an uneducated product. As a matter of fact, when I graduated from the journalism college at Moscow University, the only skill that I may have lacked but still needed I found at another institute of higher learning. This was the theory of drama. Journalism school gives you a good education, and a professional journalist should be prepared to for the unexpected. He talks with a specialist, but he should suspect that specialist. Yes, there are instances when there have been journalists who came from different professions, but I know for sure that the guy who wrote that the college of journalism at Moscow University is the “college of unnecessary things” graduated from the same college that I did, at age 30 I was a Vera Kichanova: You are speaking about the quality of the education, and I am not complaining. They teach us fine literature at the college, but I am talking here about this charge of emotional energy. To continue my story, on October 7th there was a demonstration over at Chistye Prudy, and I only found one of my instructors there. Where were all the rest? Why did it not matter to them? Vitaly Chelyshev: Yes, I understand. Instructors also have different attitudes toward Anna, just as other people do. I know this, and other relationships, but if I had to write an pressing column, I would write about three odd coincidences: the birthday of Vladimir Putin, about what he said about Anna Politkovskaya who was killed on his birthday, about how her death brought Russia more harm than her articles did, and how on that same day there was a fire and they figured it would burn down the college of journalism. They would have put money on it. There has been this desire to get rid of Mokhova over at the journalism college many times, but they have failed. That is what I would write as a proposed topic, and it is doubtful that any instructor would argue about it. Vladimir Vladimirovich (Putin) said something else that was very curious. He has a special attitude towards our profession. I would guess that this might be a little apocryphal, but it is meant to show everyone how he relates to us. Well, there he was in Australia, I think he was still prime minister, and the prime minister of Australia takes him into this conference room and says: “By the way, once there was another Russian prime minister here, Kerensky.” Putin said: “What do you mean? I never knew this, when was this?” And (the Australian PM) continued: “Yes, you know, he was married to an Australian journalist, and they were both here in this room.” Here Vladimir Vladimirovich made a stern face and said: “Prime Ministers, even former ones, should stay as far from journalists as possible.” Anna Leonova: And on this merry note I propose we end our discussion today. In ‘Novaya Gazeta’ Views: 10508 |
Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.6 |
||||||||
Be first to comment this article
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
| 2006 - 2024 © Ìåìîðèàë ïîãèáøèõ â Íîðä-Îñòå. Êíèãà ïàìÿòè |
|
|
|
|
|