|
Interview with Veronika Marchenko of Mother’s Right 2009 International Women of Courage Awardee (March 23, 2009)
March 23, 2009
 |
| Open World 2002 alumna Veronika Marchenko (center), head of the Russian NGO Mother’s Right, accepts the “Women of Courage” award from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and First Lady Michelle Obama in Washington, DC, on March 11. The State Department’s announcement of Marchenko’s award said that she “has demonstrated exceptional bravery and leadership in exposing the truth surrounding the disturbing peacetime deaths within the Russian armed forces.” | By Elina Karakulova
Open World Leadership Center
Washington, D.C.
Veronika Marchenko, a 2002 Open World Program alumna who heads the Mother’s Right foundation, received the prestigious International Women of Courage Award from Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and First Lady Michelle Obama on March 11, 2009. Ms. Marchenko was honored for “exceptional bravery and leadership in exposing the truth surrounding the disturbing peacetime deaths within the Russian armed forces” and for having “successfully sought justice on behalf of bereaved families of servicemen who died as a result of cruel and inhumane conditions.”
An initiative launched by Marchenko in 1990 has developed into a dynamic and successful NGO called Mother’s Right. Her courage, desire to help, and steadfast fight for justice have won the hearts of the organization’s numerous supporters. Currently, the Mother’s Right foundation provides free legal assistance to families of dead soldiers, informs the public about problems in the Russian armed forces, aims to improve laws relating to military service, does sociological research, and publishes materials substantiating the need to reform the Russian military.
On March 12, the day after the award ceremony, Ms. Marchenko visited the Open World Leadership Center, where she met with Executive Director John O’Keefe and members of his staff. This provided a remarkable opportunity to talk in detail with Veronika Marchenko and interview her about the State Department award and her activities in Russia.
(Unofficial Translation)
Open World: On behalf of everybody at Open World, allow me to congratulate you on winning this high award. What does this recognition mean to you?
Veronika Marchenko: It’s a great feeling, no doubt about that. The news of the award came unexpectedly. Even though I had been asked to provide information about myself, this was a routine thing and I did not expect something extraordinary to happen at all. That’s why the news came as a surprise, and a pleasant surprise as well, especially in view of the fact that I was to receive it from the leaders of a foreign country. I certainly understand that this is very high level, and my attitude toward this honor is one of reverence.
On the other hand, my situation, as an award winner from Russia, is somewhat complicated, because the history of American-Russian relations is complicated. I mean, whether we want it or not, whenever we talk about these two countries, we invariably find ourselves in the world of big politics, and it does impact our attitudes. When I talk about these relations I tend to remember the positive experience that we once had. I work with various issues pertaining to the armed forces and I always remember the photograph called “Meeting on the Elbe River,” in which a Soviet and an American soldier embrace each other as brothers, as friends, and as allies. This is the picture I have in my mind whenever I think about our relations, especially when I think about our armies. I believe this is the type of relationship between us that should prevail: one of friendship, warmth, and affinity.
At the same time, by virtue of being two of the largest countries in the world, we are facing a number of common issues related to our respective territories and to geopolitics. We have accumulated both positive and negative experiences. Our experience in Chechnya is undoubtedly similar to the U.S. experience in Vietnam. This experience is certainly negative but it is one both countries share. After the war in Vietnam, the U.S. did away with the draft and switched to a professional army and the contract system; unfortunately, Russia has not done the same. We are fighting for a transition to a professional army because the old Soviet army system, as an institution, has proved to be obsolete. Sooner or later we will introduce a professional army system, maybe with a few concessions, like, for instance, it is done in Germany, where they do have conscription but mandatory service only lasts a few months, new draftees live at home and go to military training pretty much like they would go to regular classes. We will certainly come to it, but at the moment the question is as follows: How many people have to die for this bright future to become a reality? We are doing our best to decrease this number and make our government heed us. We need to persuade them that the contract system would by no means weaken our defense capabilities. A professional army will make Russia stronger because it will be a stronger and more sophisticated army. This is what we should be striving for.
Open World: Have you or your organization received any awards from the Russian Federation?
Veronika Marchenko: We received our first award in 1998. It was the Public Recognition gold medal bestowed upon us by the National Fund bearing the same name—the Public Recognition Fund. It is actually a Russian foundation, and I was nominated for the award by an organization working in the field of developing civil society institutions. It was not a government award, although one of the three signatures on my award certificate belonged to Yegor Stroyev, the then Chairman of the Federation Council. The second award came in 2002. It was the Open Society Institute’s Podvizhnik (Devotee) award. I don’t even know who nominated me. It is possible that it had something to do with Novaya Gazeta and Anna Politkovskaya. We were friends and worked in close cooperation. She wrote a lot about our Chechnya-related court proceedings and she knew our work well.
I am aware of the fact that the award I received yesterday must be the highest status-wise, but there is another “award” that is closer to my heart. Some time after Anna had been murdered, I got a phone call from Ilya Politkovskiy, her son. He said the following: “My mother told me that yours is one of the best human rights organizations in Russia, and I want to support you.” It was very important to me that Anna felt that way about us. I believe it is my highest award. In 2007 I read in a newspaper that on November 26 a prize was awarded posthumously to Anna Politkovskaya in Germany. Anna’s children received the prize on her behalf, and Ilya Politkovskiy made a statement that the money component of the award would be handed over to the Mother’s Right foundation. I am very grateful to Mrs. Clinton and Mrs. Obama for the honor, and their award is truly outstanding in terms of the status, but this other award—in the form of the words said by Anna and her son—will live in my heart forever.
Open World: Will the State Department award make your organization’s voice sound louder?
Veronika Marchenko: I guess so. Perhaps we will make ourselves heard better because of our international contacts and cooperation with international organizations. As far as our international relations are concerned, let’s place our hopes on the [symbolic] red button [presented by the U.S State Department to Russia] and pressed by Hillary Clinton and [Russian Foreign Minister] Sergey Lavrov, resetting Russia-U.S. relations and giving them a new impetus
Open World: Drawing on your 2002 Open World experience, can you recall, how did that trip to the U.S. influence your activities in Russia? How did this experience impact your perception of the USA, its culture and politics?
I took my very first trip to the U.S. back in 1994, and those impressions happened to be the strongest for understandable reasons. Nevertheless, I cherish my very warm memories of my second trip in 2002. The program was planned along the lines of professional interests, and the exchange of information was truly exciting. We had very many business meetings related to the legal and judicial systems, and we also met with human rights organizations. We visited a legal clinic working free of charge for indigent people. Carved into my memory is the coatrack with suits and dresses to be used when they need to clad homeless or very needy people coming for legal aid in decent clothes before accompanying them to court. They kept a special wardrobe in order to comply with the dress code. It looked very strange to us; we would never think of changing people’s clothes before taking them to court. This looked very American to me and very interesting as well.
We also visited an affluent lawyer’s office and it was interesting to see how things are organized and what they perceive as their social obligations. The most exciting thing about this program, though, is the chance of direct communication with people. No propaganda and no PR efforts can have a stronger impact than what you feel and see with your own eyes. The program brings together people working in similar fields and they, as peers and counterparts, have a lot of common subject matters to discuss, and nobody is left indifferent. This is very important because, once you have established this line of communication, you would never believe that [a country] is your enemy because there is a person in a particular state and in a particular town who is your friend. The more colleagues, friends, and acquaintances like this you acquire, the more your perception of their country changes. This experience transforms the face of a country from being the face of politicians to being the face of people who live here.
Open World: What was most useful about the Open World Program?
Veronika Marchenko: From a practical point of view, it was great that we met each other. Representatives of various Russian organizations met each other for the first time in America. Now we know each other well and interact a lot.
Additionally, we managed to meet people whom otherwise we would have never met. It happened to be extremely useful because you extrapolate their experience onto your own and realize what you could borrow from their expertise. For instance, many of my fellow Russian participants in the Open World Program saw legal clinics for the first time. Students assist their supervisor in preparation for court proceedings and get hands-on experience, not just theory. It is a very interesting and appropriate approach to teaching law, because in our field practical experience is needed more than theories. I mean, theoretical knowledge is important too, but without practical experience it is deadwood. They took us to the University of San Diego campus, where we inquired how one could get enrolled and whether it is possible to obtain a grant or study free of charge. In San Diego we also visited a TV studio and talked to journalists. It was interesting to discover how life was organized there, and we made mental notes of what we felt was important.
Open World: What, in your opinion, could Russians learn from Americans, and what could they teach them?
Veronika Marchenko: What really amazed me at the ceremony with the participation of the Secretary of State and the First Lady was the fact that we communicated with top-level leaders and we did not see security. It surely was there but we were all surprised that security did not catch our eye. We were nearly awestruck by how democratic and informal everything was, going on even at this highest level. We did not feel constrained in any way; in fact, the atmosphere seemed to be very friendly and sincere.
Today, during our visit to the State Department, where Mrs. Clinton delivered a speech devoted to International Women’s Day, I enjoyed seeing that within 20 minutes any State Department employee could approach the Secretary of State and ask any question. There was a woman who stepped forward and said: “I am nine months pregnant. When will the issue of maternity leave finally get resolved?” I was shocked by the fact that this is still an issue in the U.S., while women in Russia got this entitlement a long time ago. I was truly shocked, because the U.S. is so very much advanced in everything else that such a shortcoming seems unthinkable. On the plus side, the very fact that one can raise this question—a spontaneous inquiry, not a rehearsed softball—tells a lot about the quality of communication. This goes beyond creating positive PR; the really important aspect is getting direct feedback. It seems to be important because people speak out about the issues that really exist, thus eliminating the danger that some assistants or secretaries could keep concealing something important from a politician.
As far as the Russian people are concerned, they could teach the world quite a few things. In particular, we have a wealth of experience in endurance and in putting ourselves together and focusing on a problem at the right moment. Say, we can cross the Alps and defeat Napoleon, or cover 350 miles overnight and make it to Yugoslavia before the NATO troops arrive. I mean, we can do unexpected and unpredictable things. We are capable of heroic and extraordinary deeds that nobody expects of us; this is pretty much a part of our character. In general, we are quite creative. Just think of the number of great scientists, writers, artists, and composers we gave to the world!
Although there is a tendency to believe that democracy is not a part of the Russian tradition, let’s not forget the Veche (Popular Assembly) of Novgorod, which governed in the 12th–15th centuries. It would not be right to say that Russia does not have a history of democracy; in fact, its roots in Russia just go much deeper into history than in some other countries. We just need to remember this tradition more often.
Open World: You have been active in the field of human rights protection for over 20 years, and even statistical data regarding your organization’s activities are extremely impressive. Nevertheless, in one of your interviews you mentioned that, to your great regret, your organization is very busy. Does this imply that the system is unshakeable?
Veronika Marchenko: The history of 70 years of violations cannot be rewritten within 10, 20, or even 30 years. You cannot just press a button and change things overnight. Definitely, we would like this process to go faster, but society tends to undergo changes in accordance with its own laws of development. Additionally, we need to raise a generation of our young people in absolutely new traditions. Their perception of certain phenomena should be different. It is a time-consuming process, but if we are goal-oriented and work in an efficient and steadfast manner, we will get the result.
Some examples of such results include new and better laws adopted because of our efforts, the court adjudications in our favor, something that was unthinkable in the past.
Before this trip, I was received by the U.S. Ambassador in Moscow (he congratulated me on the award), and it turned out that we both believe in a famous truism formulated by George Santayana, one of the most prominent American philosophers. I have this slogan hanging in my office and it reads as follows: “The Difficult is that which can be done immediately; the Impossible that which takes a little longer.”
story archive
|
