Vitaly Tretyakov, the editor-in-chief of the magazine Political Class
By pure chance, this column will be published on the day when Vladimir Putin holds a Q&A session with "the nation" - those who were lucky enough to get through to the Prime Minister.
The Conversation with Vladimir Putin can be rightfully called today's political hit - all other texts appear pale in comparison with the Prime Minister's eloquence.
Following the rules of journalism, since I happen to be addressing the audience simultaneously with Mr Putin, I should focus on the main topic of the day - the Q&A session. It has two components. The first is Mr Putin's answers. The second is the questions asked; and I should say that, in fact, few people bothered to reflect on them.
Since I am writing this article on Wednesday, I know neither the questions nor the answers. So, in any case I am taking a stab in the dark.
Mr Putin's answers will be commented on for a period ahead; therefore it is impossible for me to be late with my notes. However, questions will already be forgotten by tomorrow, which is why I decided to reflect upon them today.
I have not seen the questions yet - neither the full list nor the highlights selected for the programme - but I assume that there will be no questions that I regard as the most pressing today (possibly by chance, but most likely it is because the economic crisis will push the rest of the matters into the background).
Do these issues worry a significant number of other Russian citizens? I am sure they do. Does Mr Putin consider them to be of vital importance? I would not like to do a lot of guesswork, but what I can say for sure is that I would like the Prime Minister to consider those questions to be important. Furthermore, it is desirable that he should answer them publicly, even if it happens after December 4. The crisis is a temporary phenomenon, and my questions are of a strategic and conceptual character. It is vital to know the opinion of the person called "the leader of the nation" at this very moment when the ill-fated crisis has broken out and when more often than not, public concerns, which abated due to political stabilisation and high oil prices, are surging disproportionately to the aggravation of financial trouble.
The latter statement is not a figment of my imagination. Even the other leader of the nation, this time the official one - President Dmitry Medvedev - sternly warned certain political forces in his State-of-the-Nation Address against taking advantage of the challenges this country is facing to destabilise it.
President Medvedev has recently made a few political statements outlining short-term, rather than strategic, aims. Still, today is the day of Mr Putin's public statement, and I presume that the leader of the United Russia party (which has been announced as Mr Putin's status during today's "conversation") has much more space for ideological manoeuvres and strategic estimations. After all, in case the President disagrees with them, his mandate gives him the right to neglect them.
So, here are my questions.
To begin with, I am going to focus on past, rather than future events, though my questions in fact have much to do with both the present and the future. I am certainly referring to Russian history; it is high time Mr Putin articulated his viewpoint on historical matters, and not only because our home and foreign policy are constantly stumbling over this problem. Russia has recently given its belated response to the "mythology of the Holodomor", but in 2009, Moscow is likely to find itself in another diplomatic quandary as the 70th anniversary of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact is remembered in August. One can hardly doubt that Russia's ill-wishers, including the heirs to the participants of the Munich collusion, will use the chance to "dance an anti-Russian polka" on that day. This is just one of numerous examples. It is absolutely necessary that the leaders of the nation express their views on Russian history - if not, others will do it for them.
Another intricate matter is interethnic relations in Russia. On the one hand, it is obvious that tensions are escalating, and on the other hand, interethnic problems have become a burden that one cannot imagine this country without. Moscow is supposed to profess and pursue the Soviet doctrine of "people's friendship", lacking only the Soviet effectiveness. However, no official says anything about it. This silence is natural - the topic is complicated and sensitive - but the leader of the nation has a good opportunity to show all his courage and authority by addressing it.
By the way, isn't Vladimir Putin tired of constant reproaches for deliberately overlooking the "Russian question" and shunning the word "Russian"?
Another problem that is permanently discussed by the public is the probability of global war and the country's readiness for such developments, namely its army and elite. Much is said about reinforcing and reforming the army. (I should say that army reform actually raises a lot of concerns among experts.) However, no conceptual and strategic aims have been outlined.
At the same time, there has been too much unnecessary speculation about another question - Russia joining Europe and achieving so-called Western standards and the development level of civilised countries. People regard it as a never-ending and pointless competition, with Russia having to catch up with the West. Perhaps it is time to say that, first, we are not going to catch up with anybody; second, even if we fall behind in a certain area, most likely, we leave everyone behind in another area; third, not every leader's position today can have positive results in the future. And what is more important, you must not exasperate a national inferiority complex. After all, if people are constantly thinking about catching up with others, they are really weak.
Two years ago, the Government made a brilliant step in its bid to address Russia's most critical problem - demography. It decided to encourage Russians who lived in the former Soviet republics to return to this country. A slight increase in birth rate followed, but then everything seemed to come to a standstill. I have recently learned how much money has been allocated to those who are ready to move to the Russian Far East, and it is in fact ridiculous, for this money is not enough to move to a neighbouring village. This is the question Russia's leaders should bring up more often than once in nine months.
I have a lot more questions for Mr Putin, but, unfortunately, the size of this column is limited and I have to finish my article.
***
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of Izvestia.
***
"You must not exasperate a national inferiority complex. After all, if people are constantly thinking about catching up with others, they are really weak"