(2 of 3)
On the problems of independence: We have so many, you couldn't list them all. The basic problem is how to change the mind-set of people. This is really the key to establishing a truly independent state. When the U.S.S.R. ceased to exist, all the newly emerged countries, including Russia, experienced a certain euphoria. But it soon became clear that political independence was not the most important goal for people. Economic independence has proved to be much more important.
On human rights: We favor an American presence in Uzbekistan and Central Asia as a guarantor of our democratic development, but you've got to help us, rather than assume moralistic poses. We will build democratic institutions -- but keeping in mind our own special circumstances. Do you think it was possible to create other political parties in a state long-dominated by the Communist Party? We aligned ourselves by the stars atop the Kremlin, and you suddenly expect us to have a democratic state in only two years? Why should this issue become a stumbling block in relations with Uzbekistan?
On nostalgia for the old empire: Once the people in Russia, Ukraine and Belarus experienced crisis and hardships, they started to have doubts about whether they needed independence at all. The more hardships crop up on the way of reform, the more ground Bolshevik forces gain. A major danger for us in Uzbekistan is the possible re-emergence of the Communist Party. We are going through the same crisis that everybody else is, but our people have not attained the level of political sophistication of Europe or even of Russia. Should a Bolshevik show up at a street corner again and promise to give the $ people back everything they used to have, they might be tempted to follow him. But we will see that it never happens here. An important factor is that we have rejected shock therapy. We have protected the young, the old and the poor. Ask anyone in the streets. They will tell you that no one has been left out.
On Zhirinovsky: I'm less concerned about Zhirinovsky than I am about the kind of environment that produces him. Zhirinovsky only says in public what's on the mind of many politicians and government officials in Russia. What really concerns me is that Zhirinovsky meets no ((official)) opposition, nobody opposes him in the legislative branch. I have asked Yeltsin to take a stand against these xenophobic and anti-Semitic statements. I must know where the state stands on this issue. Zhirinovsky's maniacal concepts reflect, in fact, the traditional goal of Russian imperialists to reach the Indian Ocean. As far as they are concerned, we are just some gray mass that happens to be in their way and has no value of its own.