Kal Raustiala 0:04

Okay, good afternoon, everyone. My name is Kal Raustiala, I direct the Burkle Center for International Relations here at UCLA. And it is really a pleasure and an honor to be back here for the first time in three years. So it's been a long time since we've been able to do a live event like this at this scale. Today, we come together, as we have every year to honor the life and work of Daniel Pearl. Almost exactly 21 years ago today, Daniel Pearl was murdered in Pakistan while working as a reporter at The Wall Street Journal. A free and active press has been an essential part of our democracy since our founding. As a journalist, Daniel devoted his life to seeking truth about the world. And he risked and ultimately gave his life in that pursuit. Today, we remember his work, and we honor his legacy.

For this year's Daniel Pearl lecture, we're fortunate to have a very special guest, someone who's worked tirelessly for many years on so many of the issues and values that Daniel held near. Garry Kasparov burst onto the world stage as the youngest ever number one chess player. At the height of the Cold War and beyond his playing captivated audiences throughout the world. Born to Jewish and Armenian parents in Azerbaijan in the former Soviet Union, he remains one of the greatest players in the history of the game. But for many years now, Mr. Kasparov has made authoritarianism his primary opponent. He has been a strong supporter of democracy and a vocal critic of autocratic leaders from Vladimir Putin to Donald Trump. Through his renewed democracy initiative, founded in 2016, he's worked with activists around the world to promote democracy to protect free speech and conscience and support equality, accountability, and free and fair elections. We are honored to have Garry Kasparov join us today for the Daniel Pearl memorial lecture. We'll begin as we always do with brief remarks from Judea Pearl, Daniel's father, and an emeritus professor here at UCLA. Immediately following Professor Pearl, Garry Kasparov will come to this lectern and give this year's Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture. When he is finished, he and I will sit down in those chairs, we'll have a brief conversation about his remarks, the issues that are raised, and we will open it up to questions from all of you. Please wait to be called on when we get to the Q&A period. I believe we have handheld mics. I'm not seeing them right now, but that is normally what we do. If we don't I'm going to ask you just to project when you ask your questions. I'm going to ask you to be concise with your questions. There are many people here, I'm sure, who want to ask them. So with that in mind, I'm going to hand the podium over to Judea Pearl.

Judea Pearl 2:56

Thank you, Kal, for your introductory remark and for introducing the speaker and me. Thank you friends, colleagues, students, sponsors, supporters, all of you, especially the UCLA community, for which this annual event has become a cultural landmark for shared values and aspirations. It was exactly 21, maybe 10 days ago, when the FBI team came to our house and told us to sit down. We asked, is it bad? They said yes. We asked is it sure? They said yes. And that's where the ground shifted, and the sun disappeared. That it was then that we made our commitment to fight the hatred that took Danny's life, a long fight of which this memorial lecture is a visible annual event. As I was preparing to introduce our illustrious speaker, it dawned on me that tonight is Purim night in synagogues and community centers all over the world. Jews will be reading the Book of Esther. And to celebrate this story and to celebrate the miracle is by a stroke of luck. One of the greatest calamities that threatened our people in our history, turned into a celebration of deliverance, a victory of good over evil. The connection to our speaker, Garry Kasparov shines through one passage in the Book of Esther, which reminds us that it wasn't really exactly a stroke of luck. But it was the courage and vision of two people who understood the call of history and risked their lives for that happy turn of events. I'm speaking of course of the urgent message that Mordecai sent to his niece Queen Esther. And he let me read you the exact words. Do not imagine that you of all Jews will escape with your life by being in the king's palace, so says Mordecai, for a few keep silent in this crisis, belief and deliverance will come to for the Jews from another quarter, while you and your father's house will perish. And who knows, says Mordecai, perhaps you have attained to royal position for just this moment. I cannot think of anyone who better embodies the the spirit of these words than Garry Kasparov, whose life long career has been one persistent reminder that silence in the face of evil is not an option. Not while we can speak out to evil. In fact, what Kasparov's life symbolizes is the idea that talent, prominence, fame and success in any field comes with responsibility to pay back one's debt to society by making our voice heard, despite the risks involved or we will all perish. And when we hesitate, and we all do, let us remember Mordecai's words. And who knows, perhaps you have obtained the royal position for just this moment, "וּמִי יוֹדֵעַ" in Hebrew, "אִם־לְעֵת כָּזא הִגַּעַתְּ לַמַּלְכוּת׃." Thank you, Garry, for inspiring us with your lifelong story and for honoring our son Danny, with your lecture tonight.

Garry Kasparov 7:53

Thank you, Professor Raustiala for the generous introduction and Professor Pearl, I'm still trying to digest your words. So adding this religious angle, though I do not look like a regicide I hope. And of course, I also want to thank the Burkle Center for International Relations, Hillel at UCLA, the Daniel Pearl Foundation and especially Daniel's family for the chance to celebrate Daniel's life. Daniel Pearl was an American hero, and his story is a fundamentally American one. As a journalist, he traveled around the world in search of truth, no matter the risk. This act, searching for truth, in spite of great personal danger is a critical component of defending the American values of freedom and democracy in the face of a coordinated authoritarian assault. It represents the best of us, and in the world beset by disinformation from all corners, truth is our first line of defense. Truth unifies. It's a common language that we can all understand. That is why it's often the first thing the dictators or wannabe authoritarians attack. And without people like Daniel Pearl, who are willing to take the hard paths and fight for it, they might very well succeed. Because as those of us from unfree regimes know, all too well, there are a million ways to lie, but only one way to tell the truth. And in the words of Abraham Lincoln, Daniel Pearl gave the last full measure of devotion to fight for that truth. Growing up in the Soviet Union, I aspire to the ideals of freedom, democracy and truths that Daniel Pearl embodied. Along with millions of others behind the Eastern side of the Iron Curtain, I aspire to the America that he represented. When the Soviet Empire rolled tanks into Hungary and Czechoslovakia to crush a popular revolt against the communist dictatorship, freedom loving citizens in these countries looked to the West for support. Even as the Soviet Union spread ideologically motivated lies, due to my privileged status as a chess prodigy, I had the rare honor to access sources of information from the free world unencumbered by Kremlin propaganda. The Soviet Empire oppressed its citizens and minorities. I helped evacuate Armenian families during the 1990 Baku Pogroms and I watched as 11,000 Soviet soldiers stood by while xenophobic mobs attacked my friends and neighbors. After the Pogrom, I met Mikhail Gorbachev in his communist party office in Moscow for the first and only time, I told the Soviet leader about the tragedy that I've witnessed in Baku, but instead of reacting, instead of thinking about how he could help, all Gorbachev wanted to do was talk about Communist Party politics. Meanwhile, Daniel Pearl, a proud Jewish American, and the countless dissidents from around the world who call America home, show everyone that it is possible to celebrate and champion people of all ethnicities, and faiths, while staying true to yourself and your own culture. It's hard to exaggerate how important these examples are to those of us born and raised in the unfree world. Seeing the values of freedom, democracy, and diversity of opinion in action, gave hope to people like me behind the Iron Curtain. Today they are the same values brave Ukrainians are fighting and dying for. But today's cultural warriors have forgotten the values that make this country a shining city on a hill. Ideologues like Noam Chomsky and John Mearsheimer and demagogues like Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump think America should retreat from the world stage and abandon the historic moral leadership that won the Cold War. They accept a bleak and morally blind version of realpolitik. Of course, they have different motivations for their sermons. But the tragic thing is that they end up in the same place. Some are motivated by a rigid ideological worldview, where only the US can be imperialistic and only the West can be guilty, even if that means carrying water for the likes of Putin. Others will say anything for ratings, views, and power. But at the Renew Democracy Initiative, we stand against both forms of extremism. The ideologues who think America is fundamentally and irredeemably oppressive, and the demagogues who cynically accumulate power at the expense of American values. In their haste to retreat, the forces of appeasement would return us to a world where might makes right. Where you can trade away Ukrainian lives like pieces on the chessboard. They would have us return to the scramble for Africa, criminal imperialism, and a world where great powers can make the so called hard choices to carve up the world in negotiations and diplomacy, with occupiers. We should all strive to be more like Daniel Pearl, and the truth seekers he represents and less like the Chomsky's and Trump's of the world. Today, one year into Putin's latest war, people are finally beginning to recognize that this is not only a war of conquest, but a war between tyranny and democracy. I should also note that this war didn't actually begin on February 24th last year. In fact, Ukrainians have been fighting and dying for their freedom for almost a decade now since Putin first invaded in February 2014. But that too, is not the true starting point of our current crisis. We can trace that back to 1991. As the free world was celebrating the end of the Cold War without offering a new vision for the advancement of liberal democracy, the forces of authoritarianism were regrouping. Over the last 30 years, they have attacked democracies, spreading misinformation, tampering with elections, invading democratic neighbors and attempting to assassinate dissidents. Meanwhile, too many democracies turned a blind eye, whether driven by naivety or greed, or believe that history has finally ended, we allow the cancer of dictatorship to spread almost unchallenged. Authoritarians interpreted Western happiness as weakness, and its prosperity as complacence. We made little effort to extol the values of liberalism in a coherent way. It's no surprise that according to Freedom House, democracy around the world declined for 16 straight years. And when democracy retreats, dictators see an invitation to advance. America's stampede from Afghanistan was the moment Putin decided to launch his full scale invasion of Ukraine. In our haste to run away, America threw millions of Afghani women who had experienced freedom for the first time under the bus. We abandoned interpreters, independent minded judges, and all those who shared our values and stuck their necks out for us. And at that moment, Putin sensed weakness. Appeasement will not work in this crisis. Dictators like Putin don't stop unless we stop them. And we can stop them, if we just decide to. The forces of democracy are always stronger than the forces of dictatorship. Ukraine's determination on the battlefield represents something that dictators can never understand; the will of a free people to defend their freedom. The example that Ukraine offers us is one that can inspire people, the world over, even in my home country, Russia. Ukraine today represents the frontlines of freedom. When Ukraine wins, democracy wins. So how can we fight to create the world that Daniel Pearl died for? What can we do to support democracy today? First, find and support those doing good right now. Find nonprofits, volunteer groups and other humanitarian aid organizations helping in Ukraine right now. And secondly, on an individual level, spread the message about the stakes of this war. Remember, and remind those around you that Ukrainians aren't just fighting for their own families, but for the millions of families around the world who also wish to live in freedom.

On a personal level, I'm proud that the Renew Democracy Initiative has committed $8 million in charitable aid to Ukrainians as they defend the free world. RDI's campaign has provided over 100,000 meals and 15,000 sleeping bags. Every day our five water filtration systems allow up to 150,000 Ukrainians to stay in their homes rather than become displaced due to lack of drinkable water. In addition to material aid, we're fighting back against Putin's disinformation campaigns. There is a lot more work to be done, not only globally, but also domestically. And we hope you'll join our fight against tyranny around the world and rising authoritarianism at home against those who would see our elections compromised, or freedom of speech suppressed. Material aid is vital, but we must also rally our fellow Americans around supporting the freedom, democracy, and truths that Ukraine is fighting for, the values that Daniel Pearl embodied, and leave war until the very end. Believe me, the culture war doesn't matter if you're trapped in authoritarian regime. And make no mistake, it could happen here. Democracy decline is like falling asleep in the snow. It happens slowly, slowly, and then all of a sudden. The threads are not just Putin's aggression and clandestine activities, but extremist ideologies right here at home. This is the message that RDI's 120 Freedom Fellows, dissidents from authoritarian regimes all around the world, have been carrying across the country. From the front pages of CNN to college campuses, like Dartmouth, John Hopkins, and now UCLA, our message is clear. There is more that unites us than divides us. Keeping our democracy intact is more important than any partisan fight. Dissidents like our Freedom Fellows remind us of the values that make America great, and why moral leadership is necessary to keep us great. Daniel Pearl was an American hero, not because of the color of his skin, or his gender, his ethnicity, his face or his political party. He is an American hero because he believed in the values of freedom, democracy and truths. And he was willing to risk his life for them. What can we do today to honor his memory? To paraphrase another US president, ask not whether these values still matter today, but ask whether we're still worthy of them. Thank you.

Kal Raustiala 20:27

Thank you so much for for your remarks, for being here. I want to begin, there's a lot that you covered. But I want to begin with maybe the sources of the dire trends that you described. So there's no question that autocracy is on the rise. Sadly, even in this country, polls show that support for democracy is dropping, and surprising numbers of Americans seem open to some kind of undemocratic system. So these are very disturbing trends, and you just laid out 16 years of declines according to Freedom House. How do you diagnose that? What do you think is driving that?

Garry Kasparov 21:06

Well, let's, let's start with America first. I think that people here when they doubt democracy, I don't think they understand what is at stake. Because you're just born and raised in a country that is free. So you think it's for granted. I think it's the moment you talk about democracy, I think you have to work on definition. Because there's so many things they believe they have just, you know, like, integrate parts of our life. So that's why making little changes here and there, you know, just voting some non Democratic politicians into office, you know, closing, not closing TV station, but basically suppressing the freedom of speech, that's not that's not going to undermine democracy. So it's, it's a slow process. So that's why, you know, the warning that comes from the authoritarian world is that it's not like, you know, just you have to see tanks on the street for your democracy to topple. It happens, you know, just slowly. I mean, look at Hungary, for instance, it's still a member of European Union, technically, it's still a democracy. So they're called illiberal democracy. But slowly and just but steadily, Viktor Orban took in one piece of legislation, legislation, it's, it's, it's a problem. And when people just don't feel that, you know, they are just, they are being threatened because part of the vital system of their body has been amputated, that's they're just living I mean look back at 1933. So this is not Nazi Germany, it was not the same as 34, then 35 and 36. I just recently finished, you know, listening to the book about William E Dodd, the professor of history, actually, he was the first ambassador in Nazi Germany, selected by FDR. And since 1934, he tried to communicate the message back to Washington that the war is imminent. It just again, nobody thought that it was just, you know, that it was real. So, and I think now we are facing the same kind of historical, historical amnesia. So it's the again, tell people that you know, oh, we democracy is over, you cannot vote. No, no, no, no, that's, that's, that's I need to vote, I have to watch my TV station. Uhh yeah, it's, it's, it's it's kind of complacency and laziness to understand what is at stake. And the global response to this American complacency and European complacency was very natural, because there's no vacuum. It's, you know, if America walks away, somebody gets in, and we know exactly who comes in. So whether it's in Syria, whether it's Afghanistan, so and and now, we should also recognize that in the globalized world, everything is interconnected. So it's, you know, we lose democracy here, you know, we just it affects things elsewhere, or we lose democracy elsewhere, it actually holds us back back at home.

Kal Raustiala 23:51

So is American leadership, in your view, a kind of critical, necessary, maybe not sufficient, but necessary element, because in a couple of ways, you've remarked, you mentioned Afghanistan on the retreat, leading to this vacuum. So it seems like you are suggesting that if the United States was more forthright, if we went back to maybe you and I talked about Truman, downstairs, we went back to a more forthright defense of democracy that might be helpful?

Garry Kasparov 24:17

But the problem is don't just you know, it's being forced, you know, forceful, so it's not just, you know, I'm not here advocating, you know just go and just make a war elsewhere. In chess, and in life, you have to make strategy first. Harry Truman had a strategy in 1946. And he faced not Vladimir Putin not Xi Jinping, he faced Joseph Stalin. And he built a strategy, the successful strategy that had been followed by consecutive year US presidents, you know, Democrats and Republicans with maybe some deviations, but basically, the strategy was institutions that he built at a time that granted America the victory in the civil war four plus decades later. So the problem after 1991, I briefly mentioned that, that there was no plan, so America, which was when I grew up as a kid in the Soviet Union, America was a factor. Again, Democrat, Republican, you know, hated or loved. America was a factor that every dictator in the world, every free loving citizen knew was there. Since 1991, is more like, you know, just it's who who is in the White House now, just it becomes like a pendulum. And that's you know, that's that's a problem because it's just simply sending troops elsewhere without having a plan, why they're there, because the world is more dependent than ever. So if you do something in Afghanistan, you affect other countries. If you do something here, it's just so we, you know, we have sliding into this into this abyss and it ended up with a war in Ukraine, because Putin decided that he could do whatever, as every dictator before him, he made a final mistake you know, miscalculating because he thought that the free world would not respond. Probably it would not, unless Ukrainians showed this heroism. So it's amazing that, you know, that's this contradicts the expectations of many, and it definitely contradicts the expectation of CIA and Pentagon, Ukrainians are still fighting. And you know, the Kiev, didn't fall in four days as predicted, and Ukrainian nation led by a former comedian proved to be this most resilient force against the aggression, and Zelenski undoubtedly became the the most vocal defender of freedom in the world today. So it's, it's probably you know this a smile of history. So just, you know, showing us that, you know, we, it's we receive support, you know, for freedom and democracy, and for our future from some, you know, unexpected corners. But again, as it took so many sacrifices, we already have, you know, the number of people that have been killed in Ukraine is in six digits. So and, and it's the war is not yet over. But it would not be as, it would not be possible for Ukrainians, despite the heroism and resilience to survive, you know, the the second and third thrust of Russian attacks without American leadership. And, again, who could have expected Joe Biden. So that's, that's, you know, and history to Kyiv, I mean, I would put, you know, this Joe Biden landing in Kyiv, in history books, you know, equal to tear down this wall of Ronald Reagan, or "Ich bin ein Berliner" of John Kennedy. So those are these things that happen, again, this is not it's not nobody expected Joe Biden to to become a leader of the free world, and not just helping Ukraine, but uniting NATO bringing the force of freedom and creating this very powerful, probably the most powerful Coalition since since a cold war to fight, fight the forces of darkness.

I want to come back to Ukraine, because it's such an important issue and the war is obviously, in many ways, overshadowing so many of the issues we've talked about. I just want to ask you about one other one other aspect of maybe the sources of this trend that's so, so troubling, because I know you've talked in previous I read many of your speeches and other other conversations you've had you often talk about technology. And do you think that part of the problem is that whether it's social media or other forms of technology, that these are actually fueling the tendencies toward towards autocracy that we've discussed? Or do you think that that's just kind of a maybe a makeweight? Maybe it's a sideline issue. It's not actually fueling it, it's simply broadcasting it.

Oh it's quite ironic, it's that the technology that has been invented in the free world to promote freedom for lately has been used effectively by the, by the forces of the force of democracy, to attack, you know, our core values. Again, the problem, we don't have a plan. So they actually saw an opportunity to use this technology to spread lies, misinformation, and for so long, we just, we thought it was just you know, it's, it's irrelevant. Before Putin decided to attack American elections back in 2016, he already had more than a decade of experience of spreading this lies, misinformation, building his internet, troll armies in Russia. So it was 2004, 2005, where when Putin regime looking for rising internet popularity in Russia, decided not to follow Chinese example of building the wall, but doing the opposite: flooding. So just you know, let's see, let's let's, let's lie, let's have dozens, hundreds of websites on new portals. And it's not simply now telling one story as newspaper probably, you know, the front page or nine o'clock news. So on Channel One of Russia on Russian television, but actually spreading this story spreading lies. It's a theme, you know, just but it's, you know, it's it's even more effective. And it's not ideologically motivated. Just you know, on one side, it's Putin found much more effective formula and I call him the merchant of doubt. It's not promoting one ideology, but basically an attacking the, the foundation of our world which is built on truths. So and the since 2004, 2005, they started this campaign in Russia then move to neighboring countries like Estonia, to Eastern Europe. So by the time where they decided that they could take on America, they already had more than a decade of experience. And the army of trolls ready to ready to spread these lies and and poison the minds of people who are totally unprepared for this kind of onslaught.

Kal Raustiala 30:42

With regard to Ukraine, are you optimistic that you're absolutely right, that NATO has coalesced in a way that really nobody could have anticipated that, that ironically, Vladimir Putin has done the best job of uniting the West that we've seen since the end of end of the Soviet Union, the end of the Cold War. All of that said, there's obviously a lot of concern that the American people are not going to continue to focus and support it, that Europeans may not continue to focus and support Ukraine in the way that Ukraine needs. And we've all we've already seen that a lot of governments in the world in other parts of the world are I don't want to say indifferent, but their support is limited. So how do you view the trajectory of the war right now, and specifically the way that the rest of the world has coalesced around Ukraine? Do you think that's going to continue? Are you optimistic?

Garry Kasparov 31:35

It's very important. You mentioned the other countries, yes, let's start with other countries. Not Europe, not the United States, not Japan, Australia, New Zealand, not democracies, but the other countries. They're not rushing to help Russia. So as you can see, China is now taking the hands off approach, they probably offer some help, but definitely not what we expected. So not as much. And most of the Chinese clients like the Central Asian countries, they are also taking very, very cautious approach. But they all recognize that the war in Ukraine is not just an old, imperialistic war. It's not just war of conquest. It's an ideological war. It's a war of principles and values. And it's, the problem is that in America, more than Europe, as a matter of fact, Europe is despite the fact that it's it's it's a coalition of countries, it's that they're 27 countries 28 in European Union. So they with the exception from Hungary, and maybe just you know, some other small countries like Cyprus or Moldova who are silent, the rest of Europe is united, because they actually saw the danger not just for Ukraine, but for them. So there's for for European Union. So that's why the sense of urgency in Europe, believe it or not, is just is more visible than then in the United States. But here is this is many politicians, even from the current administration, they kept talking about negotiated outcome. And that's the problem, because the idea that every war, you know, has to end up at the negotiating table. It's a false narrative. Nothing could be further from the truth, the wars of conquest may just end up at negotiating table. This gives you a little territory compensation. But the wars on principles and values do not end at negotiating table. World War Two has not ended at negotiating table. American Civil War thank God has not ended up at a negotiating table. It's about unconditional surrender of evil, as General Grant said. And that's exactly what FDR and Winston Churchill stated back in 1943, in 1943, just think about it is, January 24, Casablanca. So the German troops still occupied territory. So from Volga to to Atlantic, Japan was strong, Italy was in the war. And they talked about unconditional surrender, because they knew you couldn't negotiate with evil. So otherwise, you will be negotiating, you know, this, okay, what's, you know, maybe you do this and that you keep these territories, and who cares about Auschwitz? So that's, that's basically what's what is what was hearing now is the idea of, oh, Ukraine has to give up some territories. The territories, it's not a desert in Sahara, though some people live there, but obviously, it's the density is different from Ukraine. We're talking about millions of people that that live on these territories and will be forced to leave under the Russian occupation. And we know the horrors of this occupation now and and that's why I think it's very important for us to understand that this war has implications way beyond Ukrainian border. It's it will affect every quarter of the of our world so and, and see the effect of the outcome, this is the outcome of the war will create terms for for, for our ascent or descent because Taiwan is now watching, China's watching. And I think that every dictator in the world now is just you know, is trembling from North Korea to Venezuela, from Belarus to Zimbabwe. They know Ukraine wins, and they the people in these respective countries will rise. Look at Iran. It's it's there's not enough momentum to overthrow the regime. But I believe that the the mass demonstrations that have been inspired by one of my great friends through Instagram, so her account, but this these demonstrations, you know, they they will continue, because it's the wind of freedom blowing from Ukraine.

Kal Raustiala 35:55

I want to agree with you that there's a way to defeat evil in this case, but in your examples that you gave previously, we weren't opposing a nuclear power. And so it's hard to imagine a scenario in which Russia can be forced to end in the way that even in the case of Japan, there was, in fact, a negotiation of sorts. But certainly with Germany, it was simply destruction. But that's not that's not realistic here. So given that, you may not agree with the premise of my question, but given that, do you think that there is scope? I believe there will be some kind of negotiated solution eventually. Do you think that there's scope for some territory, you sort of rejected in your comments the idea that Ukraine should give up any territory? And I understand that, but there are places like Crimea, where there are many Russian speakers, ethnic Russians, is that a realistic scenario? Or is there some way in which you can envision some negotiated solution to the war that would satisfy maybe not Vladimir Putin, but some Putin successor?

Garry Kasparov 36:59

I'm a Russian citizen, though I have also Croatian passport that's how I travel. I have no moral right...

Kal Raustiala 37:05

You're still a Russian citizen.

Still Russian citizen yes. I'm still I'm very active in I believe my country will be, you know, will eventually become you know, the free country that will join Europe but everybody can read. I'm no more advised to offer any advice to Ukrainians at a time where my compatriots committing crimes on Ukrainian territory, so that's why you know, I stopped here about this this any any giving an opinion on giving territories, but now I can talk to you I can talk about the law.

Yes, sir. Yes.

Garry Kasparov 37:39

So should we close your department? We don't need international law. If somebody with nuclear weapons can actually take the territory. Why do we need international law?

Kal Raustiala 37:48

It's a fair question.

Garry Kasparov 37:49

Why do we need NATO? If Putin can dictate terms to to Lithuania, Latvia and other countries? So I have nukes you know, the moment you succumb to nuclear blackmail, you make it effective. Is it a risk? Yeah, technically is a risk. But you know, remember, they faced Harry Truman faced Joseph Stalin. He also had a nuclear bomb. And it's and he had the strongest army in the world probably at a time, not the ragtags that are just now being sacrificed by Putin and 1000s near Bakhmut. So unfortunately, we have no choice and Europeans know that. It's quite amazing that people who are concerned about nukes they live in California or in New York, and those who live nearby who will be actually suffering from this, they don't care.

It's, you should talk to Poles, to Baltic nations, of course, to Ukrainians, those who actually suffered from, from Russian imperialism, from Russian Empire, and they know that it's, it's, it's our chance now to make this war, the last war of the last empire on this planet. And it will be done by the way it will be done. As for nukes? No. The problem is this, it's of raising this issue is, as you know, it's, it's you bring the probabilities that are, in my view, a very, very low, they do exist, because they're nukes, technically somebody can push the button, but to to to make, you know, to make this low probability as a core element of your strategy is wrong. Again, it's not chess, it's more like poker, but I think the chances of of dealing with this with this catastrophic scenario, in my view, are miniscule. So if we talk about strategic nukes, that's it's not even an issue. So it's just I don't think that anybody is just, you know, in their mind and putting this out alone to make the decision. And I think, by the way, Russian generals, they think they have serious doubts about the quality of these weapons. You saw, you know, the quality of Russian weapons used in Ukraine and its conventional weapons, and now something underground for for decades. Okay, we know we know Russian corruption you know so they thank God you know, they stole probably one half of the trillion dollars they can spend on preparing this war for 10 years. So which made all the generals and admirals multimillionaires who are not willing to die for Putin. Russia is not classical dictatorship of the 20th century is not ideology it's more like a mafia. So I used to say that every state has its own mafia but in Russia mafia has its own state. And, and somehow, it's good news, because in mafia, it's all about loyalty in exchange for benefits, nobody is going to die for Putin. And they if they think there's a chance for American Tomahawk returning and hitting their ship or or warship or, or military base, I don't think they'll push the button. They're too rich, they still have the means to enjoy life. You know, they can think about their apartment in Prague and then the villa in Malaga. Swiss bank accounts or their granddaughter in Oxford. Yeah, they will not push the button.

Kal Raustiala 41:08

I mean, that's encouraging.

Garry Kasparov 41:11

We're dealing with probabilities. I wish we could we could we could play chess and I could say 100% information is available, I go there you go there. But it's a poker but the problem is Putin always played this poker before. He always had a weak hand. But in poker, you can bluff, you can raise the stakes. And every time he bluffed was a weak hand. The other side, whether it's just you know, this was Europe or America they kept folding the cards. So now we want to see that even Putin's nuclear blackmail is not is not as vivid as before. So it was in the beginning of his aggression, but now it's just it's they they they try to keep the flames alive. But but also, you know, when you when we you mentioned Nazi Germany, yes, it was destruction because the the way to win the war was to go to Berlin, to Tokyo. You don't have to cross Russian borders, all we have to do is to liberate Ukrainian territory, internationally recognized Ukrainian territories. Now, the argument about the population is more Russians live in Crimea. Sudetenland was German. So what? So I think it's we it's a very the moment you talk about the the the demographics in the area, or about historical justice, that's, that's an invitation for war and for crimes. And by the way, this is this, we could actually, you know, looking at the numbers that were available in, in democratic Ukraine prior to the invasion. So there was there was very little push for, for any, any independence in Crimea, at peak, again falling in the numbers that have been collected by by independent agencies prior to the Putin's vision in 2014 there were maximum 41% that were in favor of joining Russia, maximum 41%. By the way, the Crimea demographics, though, legally it's irrelevant, but still before the invasion was 65% of Russians 35% you know, I think split something like 20% Ukraine 80% Crimean Tatars, who by the way, this is the speaking about people who live there for centuries that's Crimean Tatars. So now the of course situation change. Now there are very few Ukrainians or Crimean Tatars but that's called ethnic cleansing and genocide. I will go to to honor the results of the genocide saying the Ukraine tanks, actually German tanks, or American tanks cannot cross cannot cross the Indo Crimean peninsula. Absolutely not. I work with many of my compatriots like Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and others. And we have very simple in our concept, our slogan is victory for Ukraine, freedom for Russia, because we believe that the beginning the beginning of liberation of our country, for Putin's fascism, will start will start with Ukrainian flag raised in Sevastopol.

Kal Raustiala 44:04

As a Russian citizen, how do you assess the support that Putin has now for this war?

Garry Kasparov 44:12

I don't know. Anybody who tells he or she knows, they're not telling the truth. So how can you verify support for dictators in the country where you cannot trust polls?

Kal Raustiala 44:25

You have other contacts you speak with people? Do you have a sense?

Garry Kasparov 44:28

What I can tell you that is I bet you that nine out of 10 people simply don't answer the question. I mean, somebody's calling you asking you about the war and or just you know, even worse, somebody's knocking on your door asking you about support for the war. So the wrong answer you go to jail. So for a tweet now you can just end up in jail for two or three years, just you know, for tweeting, you are protesting the war. So most people don't respond. If you ask my educated guess, I still think this is it's a it's a big chunk of population that supports the war. I don't know I don't think it's 50%. But it's a pretty big chunk, there's a small percentage that is against the war, it was 10, 15% always, it's this. And that's why you saw demonstrations in the beginning of the war, hundreds of thousands of people to the streets, nearly 20,000 have been arrested, you know, more than 1000 ended up in jail. So it was. So it's showing up on the streets of Moscow today, or St. Petersburg is the same as protesting against the war in Berlin in 1943. So that's why you don't expect people to go there. But you can look at other numbers. So this is how many Russians are fleeing. So we have most likely the highest rate of emigration since 1917. Nobody knows exactly how many Russians escaped most, of course, men, and it says that those who are successful, you know, just made some money. So also this they will, this is like in intellectual, the advanced part of the population, they run away. Some say it's 700,000, some say a million plus the number can go just as far as 3 million, we don't know, because most of them crossed Kazakh border, Mongolian border, other borders without proper notification. So what we know is, as we started looking at the neighboring countries, this, for instance, the dramatic rise of GDP in Armenia, or the many companies opening in the Republic of Georgia, or the surge of applicational credit cards in Tajikistan. So let's start adding these things together. You can see this, they are immigrating. So definitely the thinking part of the population, they hate the war. As for the rest, I think it's very difficult for us to get out of this bubble. Because if you look at the Russian television today, and that's that's that's one problem. You don't know what's really happening. You believe that Russia is winning, just you know following Russian TV. So whether the Russian speakers here, we just had a chance to look at the the news. So the moment you just you know, you are you drag yourself into this into this, you know, bubble. So you believe that oh, there's one more one more effort, you know, just one more push, we're winning, we're winning the war. And I think there's a sense Putin knows that he has to keep people inside this bubble, because from Russia history, we know that if the war look vulnerable, the Russian people are willing to make sacrifices. If the war look bad, it just went in the wrong direction. Typically, it ended up with a revolt or with revolution. So that's why I believe that Putin regime cannot survive the liberation of Crimea. So it will be viewed, of course, as a loss of Crimea from from their side, because every dictatorship is, you know, is built on a myth, and Putin's mythology has Crimea as a staple. So take it away, and I think we'll see, that's the house of cards collapsing.

Kal Raustiala 47:55

We're gonna go to audience questions in a moment. But let me ask you about two other places we haven't talked about. So China, you mentioned in passing India, huge democracy, but increasingly authoritarian. I would just be would be interested in your reflections on, China's obviously, incredibly powerful supportive of Russia. Quite authoritarian, very entrenched. Is there anything to be to be done? Is that something that you think should be a focus of people like yourself working on democracy, and likewise a place like India that seems to be maybe teetering towards greater authoritarian tendencies? What can we do? What should we do?

Garry Kasparov 48:30

Look it's it's yes, technically India is still a democracy yes, but we know it's it's the it may not pass few tests so but that's a democracy, because of the election and it's you know, you can you can make a you can argue that you know, some other countries that that that are democratic are also now facing the same challenges like was in the State of Israel now you have a direct assault assault on a legal system, obviously, I mentioned Hungary so it's these again. I mean, just look at look at Turkey 20 years ago, it was a democracy and look now it's it's, it's a dictatorship, you know, just five minutes to midnight. So this is to, to full blown dictatorship. So just where the acting or the sitting President dictator can actually incarcerate, you know, his main main political opponent just before presidential elections. So again, I think India is fine. And the fact that India is just playing this this dubious role. I think it's a it's about benefits. It's just it's the buying Russian oil at 40% discount, why not? So offering any assistance? Again I don't think there's any assistance it's, it's about just advancing the role of India and and leaders like Modi, they grab this opportunity why not? Probably he sees it as an opportunity to advance his negotiation with Americans on other issues, China is different. I think that Chinese leaders they will, they will definitely, they will they were considering attacking Taiwan if Putin had succeeded in taking over Kyiv. But Putin was not winning even more, he looks that he is on the losing side. And dictators they stay in power because they have great animal instinct. They don't want to be associated with losers. And that's why China's is offers very, very tepid support to Putin. Also, I think that from the Chinese perspective is, yeah, Russia, Putin's Russia wins. That's new opportunity, vis-a-vis Taiwan, Putin's Russia loses, and Putin region collapses, and it may lead to the, you know, just to turmoil in Russia, that may offer new opportunities for territories north of China. So I think from the Xi Jinping perspective, you know, trying to take an advantage of the depopulated territories in the north, full of not full of natural resources, it's probably more tempting than just attacking an island that is armed to teeth and potentially could be defended by American aircraft carriers. So that's why I think China is sitting on the fence coming up with this. It's, you know, the it's, it's a peace proposal, which was an empty shell, just trying to stay in the game. And obviously, China has been weakened by by by by the pandemics because at the end of the day, you know, for those who who told us that China will be just a rising power and will overshadow America this let's let's look at the facts. China gave us a virus, America gave us a vaccine.

Transcribed by https://otter.ai