A Law-Breaker or a Simple Researcher? Tokarev on his Deportation
Exclusive Interview
At the beginning of the month, the South Caucasus Media Forum organized by the Russian Presidential Foundation in Tbilisi became a hot topic, not least because a large part of society labeled the event a tool of Kremlin propaganda, with many of the Russians set to speak notorious for openly supporting the Kremlin narrative. No less furor was caused by the fact that three Russian speakers were refused entry to Georgia, as the Ministry of Internal Affairs stated, due to the violation Article 3 of the Law on Occupied Territories. One of those speakers is a scholar from the Moscow State Institute of International Relations, Alexei Tokarev, who claimed that his deportation had no connection to law or politics and that the border guards merely confused him with an NTV journalist. GEORGIA TODAY spoke to Tokarev to find out more.
“Of course, I knew the forum was funded by the Russian Presidential Foundation, something I personally have nothing to do with: I represent the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO); I am a scholar. As far as I know, the foundation does not force anyone to talk in favor of or against anything, including Kremlin policies. The funds of the foundation are spent on flights, hotels and similar organizational issues, but nobody is instructed on what to say and what not to. Paramount is the fact that this foundation does not carry out anti-Georgian propaganda. And while some of my colleagues might support what you’ve called ‘the Kremlin narrative,’ in my opinion, journalism – the issue we were going to talk about – makes it possible to listen to different sides, different opinions. I thought we would have discussions about this with the representatives of the Georgian media. I don’t think this event should have become a mouthpiece of the Kremlin policy.”
How can a discussion be held between parties who have opposing or at least different positions? The forum brought together hardcore and soft propagandists who, in general, voiced the Kremlin's vision and policy.
Can I ask you back? Where do you think I belong - to the Kremlin’s hardcore propagandists or the soft ones?
That would not be hard to find out. What do you think about Russia's policy in Abkhazia and Samachablo [Tskhinvali region, “South Ossetia”]?
There are many issues on which I personally disagree with the Kremlin. Myself, alongside other experts such as Sergei Markedonov, Nikolai Silaev, and Andrei Soushentsov, are all adequate, dare I say, competent people and we study the topic of Georgia. And, of course, we examine this policy critically in our research. Imagining that I, as an MGIMO scholar, would go out to a rally and start screaming “Russia without Putin, the Kremlin is deceiving us!” and so on is nonsense. We are academic researchers and we criticize what we disapprove of in forms that are acceptable to us. I cannot tell you that I fully support the Kremlin's policy in these regions; on the contrary, I have critical opinions and some advice on how this policy could be better implemented.
Would you say that what Russia is doing in Georgia amounts to occupation?
What we have here is the recognition of two independent states by Russia, which happened following military conflicts and after a period of Russia firmly supporting Georgia's sovereignty for 25 years. I certainly would not call it occupation. If the fact that I do not agree with the term occupation, that I emphasize that Russia has recognized Abkhazia after 25 years of unsuccessful support for Georgia's sovereignty, after the blockade of Abkhazia, only after yet another military conflict - if all this makes me a Kremlin propagandist, then I agree to be presented as a disseminator of the Kremlin propaganda.
25 years of support of the Georgian sovereignty from Russia? Do you not think that what Russia actually did was undermine Georgia’s sovereignty?
From 1991 to 2008, all Russian officials confirmed that they recognized Georgia's sovereignty over these territories. There are complaints about us: for example, we have distributed passports and it is mentioned in the Tagliavini report as one of the factors that contributed to the conflict. On the other hand, yes, we supported the Georgian sovereignty - an example of this is Abkhazia's blockade, and the Abkhazians still remember it and it remains a black spot in the Russia-Abkhaz relations. In addition, Russia committed itself to being a true peacekeeper and Russian peacekeepers were stationed there. I remember the photo in which President Yeltsin is holding the hands of both President Shevardnadze and President Ardzinba and I think it is a very symbolic and powerful image. In addition, I would like to highlight another important fact that no one seems to bring up anymore: Russia was the mediator in the process of transferring power during the Rose Revolution; Igor Ivanov, the Russian Foreign Minister, made Saakashvili, Zhvania and Burjanadze on the one hand and Shevardnadze on the other, sit at the negotiating table.
Ivanov rooted for Georgian statehood when Aslan Abashidze left for Moscow with him. Russia also contributed to strengthening Georgian sovereignty in Adjara. I’m sure you remember the situation in Adjara back then – they did not pay taxes, the customs service answered only to Abashidze, who had his own Armed Forces, and Adjara was actually not a region, but a fiefdom of sorts.
Many a Georgian, and likely many citizens of other nations, world say that Russia was not a moderator but an architect in these processes. But moving on. Do you agree with Mr. Malashenko, one of the key speakers of the recent forum, who quipped that the deportation of you and your colleagues was an act of Soviet-style provincialism?
No, because Georgia is a sovereign country and it is fully entitled to decide who it wants to allow entry to or not. No-one can deprive you of this right and I do not have any complaints here. As for the Soviet Union, there is a good Soviet Union and a bad Soviet Union. I will give the example of stupid Soviet provincialism - one of the Georgian journalists, I will not mention his name here, first alerted the authorities about my supposed “wrongdoings”, and then came over all swashbuckling onto my Facebook page and insulted me and my country - this really is Soviet provincialism.
Do not you find it ironic when the representatives of the country considered by the developed world as the ideological heir of the Soviet Union, accuse others of having a Soviet mentality?
I cannot judge Mr. Malashenko's statements - he said what he thinks. As for the Soviet Union, I think it is appropriate to mention President Vladimir Putin's famous quote here: “Whoever does not miss the Soviet Union has no heart. Whoever wants it back has no brain.” This phrase perfectly expresses my position. I do not think Russia wants to restore the Soviet Union because the Soviet Union cannot be restored.
Do you consider the collapse of the Soviet Union a tragedy?
This was a huge tragedy for my people: 25 million Russians broken into pieces by the collapse of the Union. Of course, there were black spots in Soviet history, such as the Stalin repressions, but at the same time, it was a country that won the most important war in human history and was the first to open the window into space. History does not consist of black-and-white images: it should be perceived as a whole. I accept the history of my country as it is; you, the Georgians, are trying to cut out the Soviet past and I don’t think it's right. In my opinion, Armenians go about it in a much more reasonable manner: they had the first republic, then the second, the Soviet republic and now they have a third republic. They do not turn a blind eye to their own past.
I disagree that Georgians are trying to cut out the Soviet past or are ignoring it. On the contrary, we try our best to remind the next generations of what kind of evil the Soviet Union was
As I said, the Soviet past has its black period, such as when the Soviet machine destroyed its own people. This was madness and a totalitarian regime and there is nothing good in it. But you ignore the fact that afterwards, this regime won the main war of Mankind and 16 years later sent the first person into space. This is the glory of the Soviet Union that we cannot ignore. As for the fact that you do not deny this past, I disagree. You have the Museum of Soviet Occupation, where a photo exhibits how the Bolsheviks demolished the Cathedral in Kutaisi. I cannot justify this action and the same thing happened here: in 1934, the Cathedral of the Savior in Moscow was destroyed. But in the same museum, there was no place for the photo showing Mikheil Saakashvili's government demolishing the memorial of the Soviet soldiers in the same Kutaisi in 2006. Why? It was the war in which we all fought together. The photo where the Bolsheviks destroy the cathedral found its place in this museum, and it tells us about the horrors of the Soviet era, and the photo where Saakashvili and the Nationals destroy another monument is nowhere in sight. This makes it a propaganda museum. I do not think that the destruction of the past and monuments is the right thing to do.
Let’s return to your deportation and the reasons for it. Were they explained to you?
I don’t know why they didn’t let me in. As far as I know from my sources, the opposition party European Georgia demanded that Alexander Tokarev, NTV journalist, not be allowed to enter Georgia. Afterwards, madness ensued: no one checked anything and ultimately it was me, Aleksey Tokarev, who was not allowed to enter Georgia instead of Alexander Tokarev. We have the same surnames, but I do not know the man. The Georgian policemen who carried out our deportation were very polite. They even apologized and I have no complaints about them. They themselves had no idea what was going on. I have the impression it was a political gesture, but I cannot understand what I am guilty of because I have never been detained before, I was not involved in propaganda and I have traveled nine times to Georgia without any issue and have met a lot of people there.
The Ministry said the reason for your deportation was a violation of the Law on Occupied Territories. Did you violate this law or was it Alexander Tokarev?
First of all, there is no such law: what you have is a legal norm that you use for political purposes. When any political party wants to score political points, it is then this leverage is used and people are not allowed to enter the country. A law is something that is mandatory for everyone and is applied to everyone: this is not a law. Second: one cannot study Georgia and post-Soviet conflicts and not to go to Abkhazia and South Ossetia, especially if you want to be a good researcher and understand the position of both sides.
Why did you and your colleagues not enter Abkhazia via Georgia? No one would have refused you, and you would not have had to break the law
I can only answer for myself: it is a matter of principle from the perspective of the Georgian authorities. For the first time in five years I was not let in, for a made-up reason. After this incident a number of Georgians, whom I did not know, swamped my Facebook page: an ill-mannered, rude crowd insulting me, my country and its government. They rejoiced at the fact I was not let in and also had a bit of a fascist lean about them. It’s nothing but foolishness to attack a person who does not spread propaganda, who has never said that Georgia should be divided, who has never expressed opinions against you, who does not call for the invasion of Tbilisi with tanks. You cannot find any such statement in my writings.
There are screenshots on your Facebook account which show you in Sokhumi at that time. This is the same Facebook page where you expressed your frustration over the deportation and where, as you say, Georgians verbally assaulted you.
I congratulate Georgian social media users if they have nothing better to do than dig into my Facebook account. I am overwhelmed by your attention to my Facebook status. I, personally, am more interested in how to maintain the relationship with those Georgian people who have in the past met me with open arms.
Did you break the law or not?
Georgian media and Georgian politicians are knotting up a big lie about this. An NDI survey shows that only 12% of the population is concerned about the relationship with Russia and the recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Their main concern is poverty, unemployment and a weak economy.
As to the law, I do not consider it a law, because I've been to Georgia nine times and no-one was worried about it. The fact that an academic researcher is asked where he has been in order to study a conflict is complete idiocy. Do you want to severe the remaining threads between two peoples? Yes, from a tactical perspective, it is bad for me and I feel very bad because of this, but from a strategic perspective, it will be Georgia’s loss. The relationship between the two countries will worsen by tearing even this one thread.
By Vazha Tavberidze