Andrey Zolotov

Russia Today: While the largest gathering of journalists, IFJ Congress, is taking place in Moscow now, what significance does it have for Russia?

Andrey Zolotov: Well, first of all it has significance as yet another platform to discuss issues that journalists around the world are facing today and the trends of their profession. There are plenty of challenges that are of global character, not just related to Russia. Secondly, it has to be understood that this Congress is on two levels. I mean, on the one hand it is a gathering of functionaries from unions of journalists around the world. And than around it there is a series of round-tables and wider discussions, and that is what is usually of greatest interest to journalists. So, I would not overestimate the importance of this congress, it is one of many congresses taking place in Moscow but since it has to do with our profession – of course we care.

RT: Absolutely. As you have just mentioned it has a lot on the agenda there. Speaking of some of the issues that are going to be discussed there, let us talk about one of the most important. Russia has been criticized for its lack of freedom of speech. In fact, the U.S. State Department put it on the list of one of the seven worst offenders along with Afghanistan, Venezuela, Pakistan, Philippines and others in terms of the press freedom. In your opinion, is this a fair assessment?

A.Z.: Well, it is always hard to estimate this kind of assessment because, of course, on the emotional level it certainly generates some sort of a rejection. On the other hand, when you start to examine it – there is some logic to that. I would say that, in general terms, of course, the situation with free speech in Russia is not as good as one would wish, but not as bad as some people try to paint it.

RT: What are the criteria that the countries are judged by?

A.Z.: On the one hand it is the number of journalists that have been under prosecution, it is a number of court cases against journalists, the foundations of economic independence, the share of those who are subjected to the government, and of those who are not, and many others, I do not know all of them.

RT: As we have also heard, Mr. Aidan White, the IFJ Secretary General, has criticized some countries, and Russia in particular, for its lack of action when it comes to investigating deaths of journalists. What is your opinion on that?

A.Z.: Well, of course I would want to see a greater activity there. And I want to see all these high-profile cases solved. My certainty is that these high-profile cases are actually of both journalists, who were the critics of the Kremlin, and those who were not critics of the Kremlin. In most cases, we see the deaths of journalists as deaths in other professions with people who, as we say, get in the way of big money. And of course, it is a horrible situation when journalists are killed, but is it less horrible than when people of other professions are killed? So, this dilemma is always there, and I think that we try to see ourselves really as a kind of a center around which the world spins. Some time that is the case, some time it is not.

RT: As you mentioned earlier, this congress and similar congresses are just an opportunity, a platform, to discuss issues that journalists are concerned with. Specifically talking about this congress that takes place every three years, how effective do you expect it to be, and what kind of issues will it solve?

A.Z.: Well, I do not think that it is going to solve any issues - which does not mean you should not sit down and talk about these things. Right now, I do not have in front of me the official agenda of the congress and there is a panel about the struggle for peace, tolerance and justice. I know there is going to be a special round-table on sexism in the media, and how that is to be fought. We - the Russian Profile magazine - have co-sponsored together with the Union of Journalists, a separate round-table that will examine the coverage of the Litvinenko case in the Western and the Russian press. So, there are plenty of issues around.

Earlier, Andrey Zolotov joined Russia Today to speak on the significance of Russian Orthodox Church re-unification, and the changes in that connection.

Russia Today: So, after such a long time - about 80 years - the two churches are coming together at last. Can you put it into context for us - how significant is it?

Andrey Zolotov: It is a really significant event. At first, because it marks the end of the civil war in Russia - because the split of the Church was a major manifestation of the division between the Russians who remained in Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution and those who were kicked out of the country. There was about a million people who fled the country after the civil war, and even more after WW2. In a way, the whole split of the Russian society is in many respects the result of this civil war which took many incarnations, if we can say, so over the past 80 years. I think that the re-unification of the Russian Orthodox Church, for the greater part, of society means just the re-unification of the people and the peaceful end of this civil war.

RT: I'd like to speak in more detail on its day-to-day basis for people. Are they going to notice mush difference, or the things will be basically the same?

A.Z.: What is going to change in the day-to-day basis is that in several hundred of parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, the name of the Patriarch of Moscow will be commemorated during the services, and there will be no barriers for concelebrating of priests for taking communion in each other’s churches.  What is also changing in its fundamental basis is that now the members of the two churches will be able to pray together and celebrate one Eucharist, thus enjoying the full unity of their hearts before God. In the administrative way, nothing is going to change. The Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia will remain fully autonomous in its administration, in its ownership, in exercising its property, and in its other internal matters. It will elect its own bishops who will only be confirmed in Moscow. But they will take part in the Councils of bishops in Moscow, and play an even greater role in influencing the policies of the Russian Orthodox Church than before.

RT: How much support has there been, how much wish has there been to see this happen both from within the Russian Orthodox Church and from outside?

A.Z.: It has been very difficult for some members of Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia whose whole self-consciousness was based on 80 years of opposing the ‘Soviet Moscow’ patriarchy. It has become a part of their identity. So now not everybody followed this path all the way through. We are learning with sadness that some of the parishes and convents of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia are going into schism over it. But it is a tiny minority. Of course, for the majority, it is a major and joyful event, and in Russia it has been overwhelmingly supported. It has been of some concern on the part of some Orthodox liberals in Russia that the traditionalist trend in the Russian Orthodox Church at large is going to increase, because the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia is a very traditionalist one. But I think that it is a very, very joyful event for all of us.