Ideas - Putin Critic Garry Kasparov: Winter is Here

Episode Date: March 28, 2024

Nearly a decade after Russia annexed Crimea, Russia’s war on Ukraine is entering its third year. As Putin is starting yet another term — Russian opposition activist Gary Kasparov’s warnings from his book, Winter is Coming, are playing out in real time. Nahlah Ayed speaks with Garry Kasparov.

Hey there, I'm David Common. If you're like me, there are things you love about living in the GTA and things that drive you absolutely crazy. Every day on This Is Toronto, we connect you to what matters most about life in the GTA, the news you gotta know, and the conversations your friends will be talking about. Whether you listen on a run through your neighbourhood, or while sitting in the parking lot that is the 401, check out This Is Toronto, wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC Podcast. The world is far more complicated place than the chessboard,

because in chess we have rules. And in many parts of the world, especially Russia, for instance, there are no rules. Garry Kasparov was at one time the youngest ever world chess champion. That achievement gave him a unique platform that he would parlay into political activism and the prescience to predict the Soviet Union he represented back then would soon collapse. It's not because I had a crystal ball or had enough Nostradamus qualities, but because I just realized, you know, there's the trend. That's what we learn in chess. There's a trend and you have to understand it and then you can start making correct predictions.

And you have to understand it, and then you can start making correct predictions. Fast forward a few Russian elections with Vladimir Putin consolidating his power, and Kasparov, the pro-democracy activist, could again see several moves ahead, towards authoritarianism. So he left the country altogether. I think that we have to learn from history. Dictators always lie about what they have done, but very often they tell us exactly what they're going to do. Then, after Russia's brazen takeover of Crimea in 2014, Kasparov proved prescient once more, writing a book

entitled Winter is Coming, in which he sounded the alarm about Putin's expansionist designs. The price that we pay as humanity to stop dictators goes up every day. Every delay means we pay more, not just in money, in blood. And now, nearly a decade after Russia annexed Crimea, and the whole of Russia on a war footing, and Putin starting yet another term, Kasparov's warnings are playing out in real time. We are in the midst of this winter now. So do we have enough energy to melt the snow and ice? energy to melt the snow and ice. Welcome to Ideas. I'm Nala Ayyad, in conversation with former world chess champion and longtime pro-democracy activist, Garry Kasparov.

We'd initially arranged an interview with Garry Kasparov to talk about the opposition, or lack thereof, in the 2024 Russian presidential election. Kasparov knows Russian elections well. He even ran in one, briefly, until red tape stymied him into pulling out. That, and the danger of standing up to Putin, led him in 2013 to leave Russia altogether. More than a decade later, we met in Washington, just a few days after the world learned that imprisoned opposition leader Alexei Navalny was dead.

I was in Munich at Munich Security Conference. It was a very top-level panel with Ursula von der Leyen, Stoltenberg, some top German officials, and many prominent leaders. And natural, as everybody else, I was looking at my Twitter. At a quarter past noon, local time in Munich, just I could see. What actually immediately struck me, it's not that it was the news about Navalny's death, but it came from Russian official sources. You know, as I've trained, I, and I think a lot of people miss this, you know, we can't

tell exactly what's happened there. So, but he was killed. That's happened there. But he was killed. That's very clear. So he was killed. But it's a remote prison. It's beyond Arctic Circle. It's one of the most northern penal colonies in Russia. Those who committed this crime had no intention to informing us, especially in the first day of the U.S. Security Conference, about this tragedy.

They could have kept it for themselves for two or three days. What was the chance for someone to actually finding it? You think the timing was deliberate? That's what I think. I'm sure. I mean, it's official Russian agency announcing about this death, though. This is the only thing we know for sure. We still have many questions.

I think 27 times he was sent to solitary confinement, which is he spent hundreds of days there. And it's insane. And, of course, after this failed attempt to kill him, where he just, you know, he nearly died. He was in kind of a coma. He was a strongly built man, but even his body, you know, just suffered so many health challenges that it was emaciated. And sending men in these conditions to the penal colony beyond Arctic Circle in winter, that was already an indication that it would not go well for him. So if it's Putin who gave an order, which is likely, then what was the message that he communicated to all of us? The only one, only plausible explanation is basically screw you.

So I can do whatever I want. And also to show to other terrorists, dictators, and thugs around the world, do whatever you want. And also, it's basically testing America's resolve. President Biden, what did you say? There was steady consequences. Show me. Show me what you have. Actually, as we know, they had nothing, as Putin expects. So that's one story. It was a very gloom atmosphere in Munich because Ukraine was on the losing streak. So we know that. And compared to the year before, where everybody expected this is a miracle to happen, the Western weapons and money floating to Ukraine. So this year, it was all about, you know, gloom and doom.

And to add Navalny on top, that was probably, you know, that's his calculation. You were not at all surprised when you heard the news. Look, I didn't think Navalny would escape alive because they already wanted to kill him. So, Navalny's return to Russia was an act of heroism. Politically, I don't think it was a wise move. And I was asked many times about his decision to come back. And I said, look, I don't think I have moral rights to debate decision, which I believe was wrong decision politically. But, you know, decision made with full consideration of the risk for his own life.

So, Navalny believed, right or wrong, actually, I think it was a wrong decision, that the Russian politician must fight in Russia. He paid the highest price for this belief to prove that nothing, nothing could be done while Putin is in power. Because Russian regime today, it's a fascist dictatorship that does not tolerate even slightest protest. And of course, the person of that caliber couldn't survive. But again, it was the personal decision.

And that's how things change when people make big sacrifices. So again, as for Navalny, the only one thing we know for sure, that they somehow, whoever did it, whether Putin, which is more likely, or people behind Putin, they wanted the world to know about it at the beginning of Munich Security Conference to send a message. What message we still can interpret. You have known Navalny for a very, very long time. still can interpret. You have known Navalny for a very, very long time. We were just communicating more regularly from 2005 when I just moved to what people mistakenly call Russian politics, but it was more like a fight to restore Russian democracy. And he was among the young, the rising stars of Russian human rights pro-democracy movement. And I've been closely

working with him until I had to leave Russia facing imminent arrest back in 2013. So beyond losing an opposition figure, a very well known one, what is it that Russia and Russians lost with the loss of Navalny? Look, Navalny lost his life, actually. I doubt very much that we can say we lost hope because I think we lost our freedom. We lost our country to brutal dictatorship. To make things worse, many of my compatriots are still supporting Putin and his genocidal war on Ukraine. It's very hard to look for anything positive. But Russia got a martyr. That's very clear. And also,

for those who still had doubts about Putin's brutality and cruelty, though, for a long time, we knew Putin had no allergy for blood. And it's one death after hundreds of thousands of people died in Ukraine and tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands died in Syria. And again, anywhere Putin went and his cronies, you know, they spread deaths and destruction and misery for ordinary people. But it's like a saga. It's a legend. You know, you have a hero who just decided to make this huge sacrifice. That's how the human history was written.

That's how we got things changed. As I mentioned earlier, shortly after Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014, Kasparov wrote a book entitled Winter is Coming. The subtitle of his book, Why Vladimir Putin and the Enemies of the Free World Must Be Stopped. Here's an excerpt. Those who say the Ukraine conflict is far away and unlikely to lead to global instability miss the clear warning Putin has given us.

There is no reason to believe his announced vision of a greater Russia will end with eastern Ukraine, and many reasons to believe it will not. Dictators only stop when they are stopped, and appeasing Putin with Ukraine will only stoke his appetite for more conquests. It was published a year after Putin annexed Crimea. Yeah. And in the book, you very presciently warned that it was only the beginning. Why were you so convinced of that at the time? The answer is very simple. I believe Putin.

So I think that we have to learn from history. Dictators always lie about what they have done. But very often, they tell us exactly what they're going to do. Did he do that? Of course, he just, you know, he, we can just keep adding Putin's crimes, but if we look at his statements from the very beginning of his rise to the power in Russia, he was quite frank. The most often cited example of Putin's statements was his 2007 address to the Munich Security Conference, a gathering of mostly Western political, military and intelligence leaders, in which he gave the world a glimpse of his worldview, his rejection of a unipolar world, of the expansion of NATO,

all of which provided a hint back in 2007 about his intentions long-term. But even before that, so this is still being, you know, prime minister, you know, just leaving KGB. So he addressed his former colleagues, saying once KGB, always KGB. There's no such thing as former KGB agents.

It's a direct quote from Russia. What he did as the president of Russia, first act, he brought back Soviet anthem. You can say it's symbolic. Absolutely. Symbolism. That's how you build dictatorships. And he immediately went after free television and then, you know, the Khodorkovsky. So just it's the most independent business empire. And in 2005, he said, this is a statement. A lot of people in the West, you know, they couldn't misread it. They simply ignored it. Direct quote, the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe

of the 20th century. You know, when Adolf Hitler published Mein Kampf eight years early, 1925, who was Hitler? Head of the small nationalistic party just fresh out of jail. Vladimir Putin said it by being a president of Russia. It's already the second term. Controlling Russian nukes, but also enormous amount of money and finding a way to buy new friends and lobbyists around the world. So, for those who have not heard it clearly, he repeated it in Munich Security Conference in 2007,

telling NATO back to 1997 borders. They didn't understand that he was serious. And you remember the ultimatum in December 2021? So you want me to spare Ukraine? Back to the 997 borders. Give me back what I believe is mine. This is the Eastern Europe. So I want to restore the sphere of influence of the Russian Empire. So again, he did what he promised. And Crimea, for me, was just one step in this move, in this challenge, which I always believe

was an existential threat to the world order, because Putin wanted to take revenge for the Soviet Union or Russian Empire loss of the Cold War. So for Putin, it's not a question as whether we are in a world war now. People often ask, do you think there's a huge risk of World War III? I said, no, there's no risk of World War III because we're already past it. World War III was a cold war, the way that Putin thinks it. Now we're already in the middle of the World War IV, which Putin believes could be a revenge, not because he's stronger.

Yeah, he's not stupid. He understands that the West is much stronger economically and politically, but he believes that he can win by showing political will and strengths because the West is degrading, it's impotent, it's lost its will to fight. And unfortunately, again, every time Putin bluffed, he bluffed all the time. What's happened is he rose the stakes and the Western leaders, they folded the cards. Like any born autocrat, Putin respects only power. He takes a step, looks around, sniffs the air, and then, if there are no negative consequences, he takes another step. With each advance, he gains more confidence and becomes harder to stop. Muter expressions of concern from diplomats and foreign ministers are the greenest of lights to

someone like Putin. Such chatter is in fact designed to be meaningless in his interpretation. After all, if the United States were truly concerned, it would do something instead of just talking about it while doing nothing. The appeaser's motives range from ill-advised optimism about Putin's true nature to cynical political careerism that sees a belligerent and energy-rich Russia as too difficult a problem to deal with. It was easier for many Western leaders to pretend there wasn't a problem in Russia than to admit it would be difficult or impossible to solve it. Then there's a separate category for those leaders like Silvio Berlusconi and Gerhard Schroeder, men for whom cooperating with Putin was literally business as usual.

In your book and in many statements, you have said that the West is pretty much culpable, at least partly, in the rise of Putin. And you use the word appeasement, which we associate with Chamberlain in 1938. Can you talk about why you think that description is deserved when you look at Putin's rise and Western inaction as it was going on? It was all due respect to historical experience and the story of 1938 that we all learn in the books, you know, appeasement, Chamberlain, Daladier, Seoul, Czechoslovakia, in Munich. And Munich became kind of just, it's a name of, synonymous with capitulation of democracies. I always want to offer, you know, some comfort to Chamberlain's and Daladier decision. One, they didn't know what would come next.

Two, they had no intention of doing business with Hitler, unlike many Western leaders who just had in mind business with Russia. Three is that, and that's important, the military balance in 1938 was very questionable. Britain and France, they were not arming as aggressively as Germany. So they just, you know, made some big military orders in America, but they were not ready for major war. Some say Germany was ready as well, but this is not how you make calculations. From the perspectives of Britain and France,

they were not in a very advantageous geopolitical situation. The difference in 2014 is that the West had overwhelming advantages economically and militarily. So it's not that, you know, we were worried about military defeat. There are definitely two politicians that, in my view, that should share the greatest responsibility. It's Barack Obama and Angela Merkel. Because they blinked.

Because they had power to stop it. Again, it's another lesson from history. The price that we pay as humanity to stop dictators goes up every day. Every delay means we pay more, not just in money, in blood. So as Ukrainians are paying now. So in 2014, Obama and Merkel, they could have done more. Again, they decided not to. Actually, we can even go back to one year, 2013, Syria. I never had any doubts that Assad used chemicals under Putin's direct instruction to check. So what would come next? Also, Assad was losing the war.

He had nothing to lose. Just it was last chance. He threw this last card on the table. And the West blinked. I predicted it. I remember I was on table, and the West blinked. I predicted it. I remember I was on television, and they laughed at me. I said, the consequences will be felt all over the place. In 2014, for Putin, it was a very clear indication that he could go much further.

And in the last moment where Putin realized that he could do whatever, there were images from Kabul. I mean, American army running away. It's not Vietnam. In Vietnam, we knew the war was lost. The historical trend was negative. So they had to go. Still, they could do probably better job. But in Kabul, running away from rack attacks, the birthed hoodlums with Kalashnikovs and leaving behind hundreds of thousands of people who believed in America. And many of them perished in this medieval horror of Taliban's rule. Putin realized, ah, America is too weak.

And I think the Ukrainian fate has been decided when Putin looked at these images from Kabul's airport. The Russian president says a military operation is now underway in eastern Ukraine. Ukraine has declared a state of emergency. The full-scale invasion that intelligence officials had been warning about for weeks is now underway, And there are reports of explosions and attacks at several major Ukrainian cities. Starting in the city of Kiev, there has been reports of explosions. Ukraine's fate was to be invaded by Russian forces in February of 2022. was to be invaded by Russian forces in February of 2022. Alongside the war on Ukraine,

Putin's also been fighting a propaganda war. So Russian propaganda machine did a very good job both inside Russia and outside of Russia. In Russia, they succeeded convincing most Russians that this is war between Russia and the West. Even very decent people, pro-European, pro-Western, they stuck. So what can you do? It's a war.

And also, it's not a war against Ukraine. It's a war against NATO and the West, which means we are fighting overwhelming force and we're doing okay. So that's just one story, some of the story. Now, in the free world, you know, Putin definitely got new followers. Typically, the Soviet Union always relied on the far left, the peace movements, you know, Putin definitely got new followers. Typically, the Soviet Union always relied on the far left, the peace movements, you

know, the organizations that had these communist socialist tendencies. Now, he found even bigger support on the far right as a defender of traditional values. I mean, it's mind-boggling. It's so painful. I grew up in a world where we believed, back in the Soviet Union, Soviet days, yes, with Aaron Curtin, that if information can travel freely, if we can have access to information, that will solve all the problems. We believe that in modern communication, the technology, which again, let's just, was so primitive. We believe that when the day comes and the information is available,

that will be the big win for democracy. Today must be bewildering. No, it's so fast. It's amazing. It's painful. That technology that has been conceived, developed, manufactured in the free world, actually manufactured probably in China. So, this is... But definitely a product of a genius of the free world, free people, has been effectively

used by the other side, by dictators and all sorts of thugs and authoritarian leaders to undermine the very foundation of our free world. And so far, we proved to be almost impotent to fight back. So we just discovered that the fake news always wins. And the ocean of data that is available, I mean, creates an illusion that we can get to the truth. But as a matter of fact, people just have some of the preferences. They just go for this station, for this YouTube channel, for this social media outlet, and that's it. And they are just hooked.

And you look at the Russians and Chinese, they're doing a great job by swaying the mind of many people in the free world, especially youngsters. You watch this very closely, these trends. You watch these trends very closely. For me, it was a shocking discovery. And I've been thinking all the time, so how we can fight back? And again, let's give Putin credit. He was the first one who recognized that this technology could actually work in his favor. Because simply denying access to information, it's not effective. The trick that Putin discovered, Putin's regime discovered, is that you have to flood people

with information. And you have to start throwing things here and there. Putin is not lying all the time. So this is not a private newspaper, a front page, or 9 o'clock news in the Soviet Union that is the only version that you must follow, obey, otherwise you will be punished. No. He offers you a lot of data that is real, but then you have the grains of lies. I think the most correct description of Putin is he's a merchant of doubt.

A merchant of doubt. And now Putin is in his sixth term as president. Kasparov saw the first sign of this future in his past as a political activist, tracing it to the fall of the Soviet Union itself. Ironically, the roots of Russia's descent back into totalitarianism can be traced to the West doing too much to respect the legacy of the USSR as a great power, not too little. Russia was allowed to inherit the Soviet Union seat on the UN Security Council when that organization, which had been designed to preserve the Cold War status quo,

should instead have been reformed to reflect the new primacy of the free world. There were no demands for lustration, investigating and prosecuting, or at least ejecting Soviet officials for their crimes, while Gorbachev was practically canonized in the West. Soviet officials for their crimes, while Gorbachev was practically canonized in the West. Not exactly humiliation, unless you count the embarrassment of needing billions in cash and aid from a former rival, a rival that generations of Soviet propaganda had portrayed as heartless and destructive. The USSR lost the Cold War, and losing is painful. This sentiment, feeling like losers, was a consequence of failing to move on from the nation that vanished under our feet.

The USSR lost the Cold War, but it was a victory not just for the United States and the West, but for Russians and all Soviet citizens and everyone living behind the Iron Curtain. We were free to live, to speak, and to think for ourselves. The real loss came when we failed to uproot the KGB system and failed to put misremembered glory days behind us quickly, as most of the European Soviet bloc succeeded in doing. This left Russia and other former Soviet states vulnerable to the humiliation myth and to men like Putin eager to exploit it.

America failed to come up with a plan. It's as I always said, you know, the biggest problem was that at the end of the Cold War, we relaxed, we, the free world. And Fukuyama, fantastic book, The End of History. History doesn't end. The evil doesn't die. It could be buried under the rubble of Berlin Wall for a while.

The moment we lose our vigilance, it comes out. So in 1991, we believed that the world would be somehow reshaped in our liking because we won. Because it was clear that the democracy was a better form of governors and more productive, more effective, more creative. What we didn't understand is that the other guys can mimic. So they, by the way, they adopted our political language. So when you look around, with exception, probably North Korea, just, you know, maybe some other horrible dictatorships, most of them are just running collections.

Putin is running collections. You know, there's everywhere. But most of the guys on the other side of the virtual Iron Curtain, they talk about human rights. They just, you know, they blame us for it. They say, oh, look at America. America is not perfect. Again, same story. Doubts.

Former world chess champion and political activist Gary Kasparov. You're listening to Ideas. You can find us wherever you get your podcasts. We can also be heard on CBC Radio 1 in Canada, on US Public Radio, in North America on Sirius XM, in Australia on ABC Radio National, and around the world at cbc.ca slash ideas. I'm Nala Ayyad.

Hey there, I'm Kathleen Goldtar, and I have a confession to make. I am a true crime fanatic. I devour books and films, and most of all, true crime podcasts. But sometimes I just want to know more. I want to go deeper. And that's where my podcast Crime Story comes in. Every week I go behind the scenes with the creators of the best in true crime. I chat with the host of Scamanda, Teacher's Pet, Bone Valley. The list goes on.

For the insider scoop, find Crime Story in your podcast app. I'm in conversation with former world chess champion and political activist, Garry Kasparov, deeply critical of Putin, of his war in Ukraine, and of the West's handling of him. The war in Ukraine is not just a war to restore Ukraine's territorial integrity. It's not just a war to preserve Ukraine's statehood. It's a war between freedom and tyranny. Kasparov believes a new Russia is possible, but that it will come from outside its borders.

It's simply too dangerous to operate from the inside. That danger isn't theoretical. It's real. Just days after I spoke to him, Kasparov was placed on a Russian list of terrorists and extremists. He said it was an honor. On ex-formerly Twitter, he wrote, He said it was an honor. On ex-formerly Twitter, he wrote, Today would be a good day to add Russia, Putin, and all his cronies to the U.S. state sponsors of Terror List. Critics are also routinely imprisoned,

and at least two consequential opposition figures who returned from abroad ended up dead. What if I ask you this? After Navalny, now what? Look, the life goes on, because Navalny now has become a kind of mystical figure, so it's already a legend. But it's not just about one individual. It's about the policy.

So I have to admit, we had many disagreements with Navalny. But it's not just about one person now. It's about the free world actually recognizing that the war in Ukraine is not just a war to restore Ukraine's territorial integrity. It's not just a war to restore Ukraine's territorial integrity. It's not just a war to preserve Ukrainian statehood. It's a war between freedom and tyranny. It's a front line of this war now. And Ukrainian victory or defeat will have tremendous impact around the globe, from Taiwan to Venezuela, from Belarus to Zimbabwe.

So we're already seeing the effect of Ukrainian war. The Middle East is ablaze now. Venezuela, potential explosion. Maduro, what a coincidence. Now he's making his claims for Guyana Territory, neighboring country. China, Taiwan, North Korea. I'm not even mentioning Africa just because it's... And who is, by the way, who is doing it in Africa? It's, again, you find Putin's fingerprints almost everywhere where blood is being spilled, people being killed, you know, and countries being robbed of their national treasure. It's Vladimir Putin and his cronies. Everybody will feel the results.

So this is the outcome. And I can only hope that Navalny's death, this brutal murder, the slow motion murder, as I said in my Twitter, you know, Putin failed to kill him swiftly and secretly. And he killed him slowly and publicly. We'll eventually push Western leadership, Americans and Canadians, Europeans, to recognize that you cannot negotiate with evil, you don't negotiate with cancer, you cut it off. And you don't do that, it spreads out. Does the death of Navalny confirm that really the only effective opposition, Russian opposition, can really be built outside of Russia now? Absolutely. That's the again. I wish you could have agreed with me after Boris Nemtsov was killed.

Boris Nemtsov was yet another opposition leader who'd left Russia. He and Kasparov were close. So I had to leave early because again, Putin regime, they were selective. They just saw the most radical elements. So, and again, I was probably represented the most radical element. And they opened the case. They knew I would not come. So Boris was different. Boris also left. He knew there was a threat, but then he decided to come back.

He actually made the same move. Some of the, you know, some of these Russian, the liberals, bloggers, you know, they were attacking him. Boris, you run away, so you're covered. Boris couldn't tolerate. He came back. He was killed. I think that was a clear signal that any policy or any political view of the opposition leaders

that contradicted Kremlin. And at that time, imperial issue was the most important. So that's why they could tolerate Navalny for a while, because he was not attacking Crimea. I knew the day would come, his movement will be crushed as well. But now we just have to deal with simple fact. And by the way, Navalny is a widow. So she's, thanks God, she's not coming back to Moscow. So she understands that the only way to protect the legacy of her husband is not to do what he did heroically, but

by his personal life of fighting a regime which is no different from Nazi Germany in 1943, 1944. You had just, before coming here, attended a meeting in Vilnius of a number of Russian opposition figures. I'm wondering if you got the sense at all that the people at this gathering were seizing this moment. Is there a sense that there's a new motivation or new power behind this? Look, again, we don't have, you know, all the groups, major groups agreeing on everything.

Does that worry you? Yeah, look, it's natural, you know, so it's important that you agree on fundamentals. So the one simple thing that brings together various groups is that our motto, victory for Ukraine, freedom for Russia, in this order. Good thing is that now we are getting more and more united about the future. So I think this is the case to recognize this war must become the last war of Russian empire. And empire must cease to exist. Russian empire. And empire must cease to exist. Whether Russia will survive in its current geographical border, for me, it's less important. Others, let's say Michael Khodorkovsky or Navalny's supporters, they are more rigid in terms of the... But those are, in my view, those differences are not that significant. So it seems to me that our positions are getting closer.

And I believe that Navalny's death actually would be a catalyst to bring people together. Did you feel that at the meeting? Was that a sense that you felt? I think it's people recognize that it's the, you can sense history. And also

there's so much blood that's been spilled. But this cold-blooded murder, you know, it's in public. So, I think it's a lot of people recognize it's, this is, again, that might be a turning point. What I learned in the last 25 years of Putin being in power, that there's no limits of the impotence of the Western leaders. But I think this murder may be the last drop for them to recognize, I mean, stop worrying about regime change. Because this is a wrong question. What will happen if Putin goes down? And tell us everything will be okay. No, you cannot. I cannot guarantee that with Putin going down, Russia collapsing. So maybe something terrible

will happen. But I can tell you for sure that if Putin stays in power, the war will go on because Putin is war. Putin's regime cannot stop this war because of economic reasons. It's our economies of war footing and also ideological reasons. So this is this is the Putin's legacy. War is Putin's legacy, both politically and economically. One last thing about the meeting in Vilnius. I want to get a sense from you of what you think of ideas like those of Max and Katz, for example, who says that everyone in the opposition should get together and unite and bombard Russia with messages on every social media channel to let people know that there's a strong opposition on the outside. What do you make of that kind of idea? Nonsense. It's wishful thinking. So this is the look. It's the, if history of Russia

is any guide, we know that the change of the public mood in Russia always happened after military defeat and geopolitical disaster. Not before. As long as the majority of Russian public thinks today the war is going okay, yeah, we lost probably 400,000 dead. Bad news, but economy is fine. What's important, big cities, two major cities, Moscow and St. Petersburg, they can scarcely feel the heat of the war because very little mobilization there. Putin avoids mobilization from two major mega policies. So from the overall perspective, it's OK. And again, it's a war against the free world. So we have to fight because they fight us.

So just imagine, and I'm a pretty good speaker. We can have Maxim Katz or even Navalny if he was, by miracle, he was alive. One hour, prime time on Russian television would achieve nothing because they look at the map. Because Russia is doing well. The only way to move the needle of public opinion is Ukrainian success. The needle of public opinion is Ukrainian success. I always said that the only way for us to change things in Russia is Ukrainian flag raised in Sevastopol. People said, no, it doesn't mean Putin would go down.

I said, probably. But without it, nothing will happen. We had so many cases in Russian history. Going back to the 19th century, the middle of the 19th century, first Crimean War. And the disaster in this war led to the abolishment of serfdom. Russo-Japanese War, constitutional monarchy. 1917, the stalemate of World War I, the collapse of the Romanov Empire,

unfortunately, collapse of the Republic and Bolsheviks take over. 1989, Soviets retreat from Afghanistan. Nothing like American stampede from Saigon or recently from Kabul.

Yeah. It will orderly retreat. They kept the pro-Soviet government for a couple of years in Kabul. But if empire goes backwards, that's a very powerful signal. And people recognize that something is wrong. We need to kill the idea of empire in the minds of Russians, the imperial virus. Unfortunately, we can be only auxiliary force. We need Ukraine to win.

We need this military disaster that will be a shocking experience for Russians. So even if we all bombard the online or Russian internet, it will change very little, if anything, because they can do more. And again, people are just, they're pragmatic. They're trying to tell us what's right, what's wrong

from London, from New York, from Prague, from Madrid. No, we're here. Putin losing the war, that's our chance because Russians could tolerate any hardship if the war is going well. They never forgive their leaders for losing the war. So what is the role of the Russian opposition in the diaspora in achieving that goal? That's exactly this. We need to create an alternative.

It's a leadership that will attract people to leave Russia, and for the free world to recognize that it's time to do what Churchill did with the Free France. Don't pretend to be government exile. We don't want to look like clowns. Putin controls 140 million or whatever. But there are a few million Russians, maybe more than a few million, that don't want to live there. Problem is they cannot go anywhere. So this is this Russian passport is a curse now.

So create conditions where they could be recognized as a separate entity. As we say, if you in five seconds can pronounce the war is criminal, regime legitimate, Crimea is Ukraine, you should be given a chance to restart your life. What we need now is a free will to recognize that this war against Putin cannot be won without Russian component. We would like to be on this war against Putin cannot be won without Russian component. We would like to be on this side. I understand Ukrainians' reservations because no good Russians. But guys, you know, you just have to make sure that Russians who would like to cut the ties with

Putin, they should be given the chance. And by the way, let's not forget the simple thing. Most of the Russians who might answer our call, they are people involved in military industry by designing missiles, drones, doing finances. This is the core of Putin's war machine. He can evade sanctions. He can find supply from Iran, China, North Korea. He cannot replace 100,000 engineers and computer experts. So give them a chance to leave.

So just imagine, I told my American friends, in 1942, you could offer German scientists visas to leave Germany, and they could have travel. Oh, we would do it in a heartbeat, they say. Now, what's the difference now? Start thinking creatively and start depleting Putin's resources. Anyone receptive to that message? Look, the answer is no. Yes, there's some European nations that are receptive, but they are not powerful enough. This administration, American administration, is paranoid about regime change. Somehow they believe, you know, that the world, you know, is still, you know, lives, you know,

in this what I call Kissinger Triangle, Washington, Moscow, Beijing. So that's why anything that happens in the world should be viewed through this prism of this geopolitical configuration. So if Ukraine wins, Russia loses, Putin could go down, Russia collapses, China gets too strong, we have to control it. So and that's why Ukraine has not received weapons that could solve this problem, you know, even earlier. So I think it's time to become realistic. And also recognizing that there's more at stake than just Ukraine and sovereignty. It's a global battle. And if we don't win the battle, so there will be many more losses.

And America's moral leadership will be in total jeopardy. We have to send a message to many people in Russia that you can change sides. So being Russian is not a crime. Yes, we have a collective responsibility, but not the same guilt. So if you have a chance to cross the border, condemning Putin's war and supporting Ukraine, you can start afresh. And we can create this matrix, the foundation for future Russia. Let's create our Taiwan. I use the word Taiwan intentionally

because I don't want to say it's just a government in exile. It's like, it's a separate Russia. How is it different than a government in exile? Because it's another Russia. This is, you know, we have to be realistic. We cannot speak on behalf of 140, 135 million, but maybe we can speak on behalf of 5 million. Let's start. And then the rest, when the war goes well for Ukraine and bad for Russia, for Putin, maybe the rest will say, oh, it's time to reconsider. I don't believe, just to be honest, I don't believe that my compatriots, they share the

Western values by heart, but they do share them by stomach. It's a consumer society. So if they see that the Putin regime is losing and the choices, what choice Russia could have if the war goes bad? Chinese domination or finding a way to buy forgiveness

and go back to the Euro-Atlantic civilization? I think the majority of Russians, by having this choice, will definitely prefer the latter. So what would you call it if not a government in exile? No, it's a kind of quasi-state. So it's a foundation of new Russia. But you have to start growing somewhere. So since in Russia we denied any chance. So it's a digital world. So people do just transactions digitally.

So it doesn't matter that we don't have physical presence on the ground. So you can probably buy just one building and put a flag there. Actually, the flag, we already have a flag. The majority of Russians abroad, they were so horrified by the full-blown invasion. Russians abroad, they were so horrified by the full-blown invasion. And as you can find on the internet, that's the hand with a mop washing the red stripe. So this is the new flag, white, blue, white, with no red stripe on the bottom because no blood on the Russian flag. And again, it's not Navalny, Khodorkovsky, or Kasparov.

So it happened just instantaneously. So people feel that we have to start anew. And that's our chance. By doing so, we may actually address the concerns of Americans or Europeans. What comes next if Putin loses? We will have already the core of maybe future bureaucracy or future elite. Because these people, they are now in Russia, but they want to do something different. Listen to the dissidents, even if you don't like what they have to say.

They're the ones who reveal to us the dark realities of our societies, the realities that most of us have the luxury to turn away from. Listen to the dissidents, because they warn us of the threats that target minorities first and inevitably spread to the majority. Every society has its dissidents, not just dictatorships. They speak for the disenfranchised,

the ignored, and the persecuted. Listen to them now because they speak of what is to come. You have always been able to see further ahead. You predicted the fall of communism. You foresaw Putin's expansionist tendencies. When you look ahead and imagine the moment when Putin's rule is dismantled, what do you see? Look, A, it doesn't happen.

It will not happen without Ukraine and victory. So if Putin, God forbid, succeeds in Ukraine, even a partial success will strengthen him. And his collapse will be a result of military defeat. So it's the imperial energy should be totally exhausted for Russian people to turn away from Putin. So, what comes next? I think that there's a chance that some Russian territories may decide to go on their own. I don't think it's tragic. So, Chechnya, Tatarstan, God knows. I think it's very important for us to be open-minded. I think majority will stick together because of Chinese threat. Because, I mean, let's remind people,

China is the only country that has massive territorial claims to Russia. 1.5 million square kilometers. The entire Russian territory from Vladivostok, which is no longer Vladivostok on China's map, it's called Haishaven, to Lake Baikal. And it's based on Russian imperial conquest in the 19th century when Russia, using weakness of Chinese empire, acquired territories. So it's there.

It's on my Chinese map. So I think for a lot of people, you know, it will be almost mandatory. It's paramount that Russia stays together because that's the way to protect our identity and territories. I'm not so pessimistic about it, but I know that sooner it happens, better our chances that we can do something better. We can just, you know, rebuild our country and to bring it back to the family of civilized nations.

But there's the war in Ukraine, but then there's the political machinery and how that actually replaces one leader with another or one regime with another. How do you dismantle that regime? The whole Russian bureaucracy is operating in an old traditional imperial algorithm. This is a mistake we made back in 1991. We saw the end of the Soviet Union as the end of the oppression, not recognizing that the communism was on top of this foundation. It's like this is the few more stories built on top of the foundation, but the real root of the problem was an empire. If we are ready to dismantle the imperial mechanism, which based on the dominant relations between the center and the regions.

And if we start doing it from the other round, like, for instance, Michael Khodorkovsky suggested in his book, How to Slay the Dragon, it's an open conversation, how to build this federation, confederation, whatever it is. So this is how we can start rebuilding the country almost from the scratch by offering regions a chance to decide. So, what role they would like to play in this mechanism, that's how you clean up the ruling apparatus. Unfortunately, we have not learned from history, so probably we couldn't. We needed this negative experience to understand that, again, the communist ideology was not the core of the problem. Beneath that, we had imperial virus. So that's why we need to make sure that the Ukrainian war will be such a shocking experience

for Russian people that they will recognize the empire's debt, not just as an entity, but debt in their minds. Last question. You have been a tireless promoter of, you have been a pro-democracy activist for a very long time, not just in Russia, but writ large. What's your biggest fear when you consider what is going on in Western democracies today? I think there's something that people here don't want to understand, that globalization has many, many faces and many loose ends that are somehow connected. And one of them that you cannot defend democracy in your country, ignoring the rest of the world. the rest of the world. So by fighting for democracy in Ukraine or elsewhere, so you help to undermine the threats for democracy in your country. And it's not surprising. So Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, they are just, you know, they are part of the same challenge to democracy. And it's not surprising that they're working together. So they need each other because Vladimir Putin is challenging the world liberal order.

Donald Trump and people like him would be dictators. They recognize that the only way for them to acquire power is to do the same. So that's why instinctively, on ideological level, they are allies. And that's why we should recognize, you know, fighting war in Ukraine, it's like fighting to protect democracy at home. And it's not surprising. MAGA members of the House, they are, again, on an instinctive level, they understand they have to help Putin there because he helped him here. there because he helps him here. Winter is coming is a warning, not an inevitable conclusion.

The good thing about the seasons of political and social change is that we can affect them if we try hard enough. If we rouse ourselves from our complacency and relearn how to stand up to the dictators and terrorists who threaten the modern world we've built, we can alter our course. Anti-modernity is a dangerous virus, and to remove a virus, a reboot or reset is not enough. We have to build a values-based system that is robust enough to resist the virus at home, smart enough to stop it before it spreads, and bold enough to eradicate it where it grows. An excerpt from Kasparov's book, Winter is Coming, published in 2015. In 2015, you said winter is coming. Where are we now? We are in the midst of this winter now. So do we have enough energy to melt the snow and ice? I believe we do. But again, the outcome of the battle in Ukraine will answer the question about this winter. How long will it stay? And how soon we can just, you know, we can open a new chapter and to say the spring has come.

Thank you for taking all my questions. Really appreciate it. I wish I had a better story to tell, but I'm not a Santa Claus. Gary Kasparov, Russian pro-democracy activist and author of Winter is Coming. Our conversation was recorded at the CBC Washington Bureau by Bertrand Gaze. Thank you to Bertrand and to the entire Washington Bureau for making this episode possible. This episode was produced by Carmen Merrifield and myself, Nala Ayed. Readings from Winter is Coming by Greg Kelly. Excerpts of this interview also appeared on CBC's The National. For a link to that story, please visit our website at cbc.ca slash ideas or The National's channel on YouTube.

Ideas is a broadcast and a podcast. Ideas is a broadcast and a podcast. If you liked the episode you just heard, check out our vast archive at cbc.ca slash ideas, where you can find more than 300 of our past episodes. Technical production, Danielle Duval and Sam McNulty. Our web producer is Lisa Ayuso. Acting senior producer, Lisa Godfrey.

The executive producer of Ideas is Greg Kelly. And I'm Nala Ayyad. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.