Thesedays, he sits in the State Archives. The man once widely considered asthe heir-apparent to Boris Yeltsin fell victim to the games of Moscow’spolitical elite some six months ago. He had come to Moscow reluctantlyat the personal request of the president to repay a political debt, whichalso cut short his gubernatorial term in the Nizhnii Novgorod Region.

It iseasy to mistake his boyish charm and exuberance for a lack of politicalexperience and immaturity.

But appearancescan be deceptive. Boris Nemtsov is a genuinely exuberant, outspoken anddirect person. But underneath that likeable persona lies a determined andbold politician with a rare clarity of political thought.

At thesame time, he has no air of snobbery or smugness so common among Sovietapparatchiks. Indeed, the first impression one has of Nemtsov is of hisgenuine and refreshing charisma and openness.

It iseasy to see why he is such a darling of the independent Russian media.From political discussions to talk shows to nightly entertainment programs- Nemtsov is everywhere.

And thatshows another side of his character. At the cost of over-exposure, theman is also determined to have fun and never backs away from an opportunityto debate or argue.

I almostoverlooked him in a crowd of young bankers buzzing outside his office andrealized how little he had changed over time. He still has a Gorbachevianprovincial appeal. There are other similarities (though there can not beany comparisons made between the two as politicians). After all these yearsin power, he can still look you straight in the eye and allow you to dothe same to him. Unlike Gorbachev, the intensity of the gaze is not impersonal.He still comes across as a driven, honest man with a sense of purpose.

Aftersizing up each visitor with a penetrating stare for a few seconds, he getsstraight to the point. An interview with Nemtsov can be anything from anargument on economic policies to a heckling match. Arguments bring outthe best in him. And the other thing that gets him going is the presenceof women. Women and the 38 year-old Nemtsov, I noticed, like each otherinstantaneously.

Withall the talk of political intrigues filling Moscow’s air, the future ofprime minister Primakov and his government and talk of parliamentary electionswhich are just nine months away, we thought it was time to get the opinionof one of the main democratic politicians in the country. Here are excerptson the state of the nation and its politics from an interview with BorisNemtsov.

Editor-in-Chief

Russia Journal: What are your politicalplans now that there are only nine months to go before the Duma elections?

Boris Nemtsov: "As far as our plans go,we've founded the liberal coalition, The Right Cause- which unites theleaders of more than 10 different parties and movements including EgorGaidar’s Democratic Choice of Russia, Boris Fyodorov’s Forward Russia,Young Russia and the Party of Economic Freedom."

RJ: What about New Force of Sergei Kirienko?

BN: "No, Kirienko is with us, but not the New Force- not yet. They've got some procedural problems."

RJ: And apart from Kirienko, who else is in theNew Force?

BN: "No one. That is to say, of course, there areother people, but no one well known."

RJ: Does this right wing coalition or bloc reallyexist - as a bloc or as a political party?

BN: "It really exists. We've already drawn up alist of candidates. If it turns out that we've got someone not very clever,but very ambitious in our midst, who threatens to divide us, then eitherwe sort things out with him, or we say goodbye to the whole idea. We haveonly those two options at our disposal.

People are ready to vote for us, that is what I'venoticed while travelling round the country. Yesterday I was in Vladimir,I met with people there and understood that people are going to vote forus only if they can be sure that we are all together."

RJ: So is it a new party with a politburo systemof leadership?

BN: "No, it’s not behind-the ‘scenes intriguesthat decide who’s first, second or third in the hierarchy. It all dependson public opinion, who’s most popular with the public. The list has tobe drawn up in such a way as to bring us the maximum number of votes. That’sour idea."

RJ: Are you saying you will elect your leader basedon opinion polls and ratings?

BN: Yes, and I hope that by the beginning of autumn,we'll have ratings based on the results of wide-ranging surveys that we-recommissioning from various polling institutes. We've even thought of callingon one of the Western polling institutes, say, the Gallup Institute."

RJ: But if you commission these surveys, peoplemight just say that you got "results to order."

BN: "We have our own procedure for dealing withthis a [laughs] You know, we've already thought of all these thingsyou-re pointing out. So this is what we-re going to do: The coalition,that is, all the leaders, will form a tender committee and select the ratingagency."

RJ: Apart from personal ambition, are there anydisagreements within the bloc, over ideology or the economic program?

BN: "No."

RJ: Just personal ambition?

BN: "Only in regards to one person."

RJ: Kirienko?

BN: "Yes, only in regards to that one person."

RJ: Do you really need Kirienko in your bloc?

BN: "The only thing I can say on that matter isthat on the 10th of December, when we held our first meeting at the PresidentHotel, if he had not been there, then the question would never have arisenas such. But, since we were all together there, all sitting round the sametable, and since he is in the coalition’s council, is present at all meetings,participates in the decision making, even makes his own proposals, thenwe have no wish to see him leave the coalition now. We can’t just say ‘we’llget by without him.’ Obviously, if he agrees to be a part of the coalitionand then leaves it, we could only qualify that as an attempt to divideus. That is another matter that he has no hope of getting past the fivepercent barrier."

RJ: But he’s probably already looking to the year2000 presidential elections.

BN: "Yes, he can look at what he likes, he stillhas no chance of breaking the five percent barrier, even if the ratingshe’s shown each day tell him he’s the most popular politician in the country.That’s what the ratings he sees say. Every politician - if he’s an idiot- believes he’s the darling of the public, it’s an axiom, a law of nature."

RJ: And what do the ratings that are shown to yousay?

BN: "The same thing. But I'm realistic when itcomes to the public’s professed love for my person. We need to carry outactive work, and that means meeting with people, not just with supportersbut also with ordinary people. In Vladimir, for example, there were pensioners,war veterans, businesspeople, unemployed people, communists and fascists.It’s with all these different people that we need to be working. Peoplehave had their heads filled with the most unimaginable mish-mash. Whatwe need now is plain old direct conversation, answers to questions. It’snot up to us to be doing all the talking. It’s important that people themselvestalk and that we answer them. We need this kind of real dialogue. Thenpeople will understand where we stand. Some people will share our views,others won't, but at least everything is clear.

Don't forget that in many regions, not just poweris in the hands of communists, often the media is under their control too.So often the liberal position on different issues is simply not known atall. That is why we need to travel round the country.

I'm going to visit a hundred different towns inorder to meet with people. That’s my plan."

RJ: Is that the campaign plan?

BN: "I would call it that - our main task is oneof propaganda. There are a great deal of problems here though, linked tostate-owned television, the fight against us and so on."

RJ: What do you think about the new regional blocled by (Samara Governor) Konstantin Titov? What chances do you give them?

BN: "None, it is a party of governors and theirwives."

RJ: What about the Luzhkov ¦ Yavlinskiitandem?

BN: "Without Yavlinskii, Luzhkov wouldn’t get morethan 7 to 10 percent maximum. People in the provinces don-t like Moscow.That’s the long and short of it. And what kind of love can there be when,on the one hand, there are the provinces mired in poverty, and on the otherhand, by Russian standards Moscow is living in luxury. It’s just not possiblefor the provinces to love Moscow. Moscow’s success can not all be put downto Luzhkov’s genius as a hands-on economic manager either. It’s not thanksto Luzhkov that Muscovites live better. So, Luzhkov’s chances of successare slim - he won't be elected president. It makes no difference eitherhow much he shouts about handing Sevastopol back over to Russia. He won'tbe elected because he’s wallowing in money that’s been sucked out of theprovinces. That is Luzhkov’s image in the country. That was what I sawclearly when I was in Vladimir; that’s what came out of the dialogue thattook place there. His only hope would be to simply buy up all the regionalmedia; to buy everyone in fact - just give everyone money. [All] hundredand fifty million [Russians] - give everyone a hundred dollars, you needa lot of money for elections."

RJ: And with Yavlinskii?

BN: "This getting together with Yavlinskii isn'ta bad thing for either of them, but it’s an unnatural alliance in termsof their respective futures. They think that Luzhkov would be presidentand Yavlinskii would be prime minister. It’s an unnatural partnership.Yavlinskii, after all, has a liberal, Western background, while Luzhkovis a pure Soviet product. A Soviet relic and a liberal won-t be able tolive together for long, even if the liberal is a part of the system andtries to adapt. A couple of stupid orders from Luzhkov and Yavlinskii willbe forced to resign."

RJ: Don't you regret not having struck a potentialalliance with such a popular liberal economist as Yavlinskii yourself?Is there any chance that you and he could come to an agreement?

BN: "First of all, Yavlinskii has never been ableto come to an agreement with anyone about anything. And I-m sure that heand Luzhkov won-t come to an agreement either. Overall, by Russian standards,he's a liberal politician, although some of his ideas are just so muchstupidity; measures he knows that he will never be able to put into practice.One example is his idea about having a single income tax rate of ten percentand abolishing all other taxes. The problem is that he’s too much of apolitician and sees everything in terms of whether it’s advantageous forhim or not; he calculates everything according to his personal, politicalinterests. It’s because of this that he is not able to cooperate with anyone.He’s got one other problem too, and that is he’s never had to take responsibilityfor anything. Despite all this, I don-t think he’s a lost cause for theRussian right wing movement. I think that his brief flirt with Luzhkovwill go the same way as the more dramatic love story between him and Gaidar."

RJ: And what do you think about the possibilityof Luzhkov and Primakov joining forces?

BN: "There’s no chance; you can-t have two Sovietbears sharing the same den.

RJ: Why not? Things are pointing this way at themoment and Primakov has not made his position clear yet.

BN: "No, you can-t have two Soviet bears sharingthe same den. In Vladimir, there’s a very interesting situation; the communistsare in power there, the governor is a communist and so is the presidentof the legislative assembly. And those two communists simply hate eachother - go to Vladimir and see for yourself. It’s a classical situation....[it] warms the soul. So there’s no chance of a Luzhkov - Primakov union."

RJ: Alright then, that all concerns the Duma elections,but next year, it is one candidate and not a whole bloc that will be calledfor.

BN: "I take the hint. What are you suggesting?"

RJ: Have you already decided that you will standas a candidate next year for president?

BN: "No."

RJ: "You have not decided yet or you will not stand?

BN: "I've decided that I won't be standing."

RJ: And will the right wing bloc be putting forwarda candidate?

BN: "We will decide that if we get ten percentor more of the vote [in Duma elections]. Then, I think, we have to putforward a candidate. If we get less than ten percent, then we won't beputting forward a candidate."

RJ: Is that just what you think, or does everyone[in the right bloc] share that view?

BN: "That’s what I think, but I think I've broughtalmost everyone round to my point of view. Why did they agree with me?Because they're not idiots; if we don't get many votes, then what’s thepoint of fielding a candidate?"

RJ: Maybe you won't get ten percent because peopledon't want to vote for your bloc, but maybe an individual candidate woulddo a lot better.

BN: "No, look, someone will get twenty percent,someone will get fifteen percent, and we'll get seven percent. Only Yavlinskiithinks he’s basking in the love of the people. As for us, we're realistsin our outlook."

RJ: In that case, what are your own plans for thefuture - for next year?

BN: "You know, I never tried to read the futurefor Russia while I was in politics. I never tried to look more than oneyear ahead. Only once, I tried to look two years into the future once.That was during my meeting with Yeltsin at the time when I moved from NizhniiNovgorod to Moscow. He asked me how long it would take to turn our robbercapitalism into democratic capitalism. I said to him then, give me twoyears and guarantee me a free hand. "I guarantee you two years,"- he replied.Recently, he gave Primakov some kind of guarantee too."

RJ: How reliable are the guarantees he gave Primakov?

BN: "In this respect, our president hasn't changed;he changes in every other respect, but not this."

RJ: Primakov stubbornly denies any intention ofstanding for president, even so, no one pays those statements any attentionand sees him precisely as a presidential hopeful.

BN: "There are rules of the game to follow. Everyoneknows that as long as Yeltsin is alive, he will want to be president andis going to be very jealous of anyone who tries to put himself forwardas a future candidate. Everyone knows that and understands that. Everyprime minister considers it his duty to stay away from such temptationsand the same is doubly true for those the next level down. But inside thereare other thoughts, in the family circle, amongst colleagues, with everyoneall around - there is all this speculation going on. Some journalists arealways fanning this speculation. They are right, too T life would be boringotherwise. They can not be expected to talk about starving teachers canthey? In the White House, it’s better to talk about whether or not theprime minister is going to stand for president. I've already been askedtoday what I think about Primakov and the possibility of his standing forpresident. Maybe my opinion is not very interesting, but concerning theyear 2000 elections, I said that Primakov would not be the worst choicefor Russia, for the simple reason that will at least guarantee that in2004 there would be another president."

RJ: There are rumors going round that Primakovis trying to bring the young reformers, especially you and Kirienko intohis cabinet.

BN: "I wouldn't join his cabinet for anything."

RJ: And Kirienko?

BN: "Yes, he would, but I wouldn't, not for anything."

RJ: Why not?

BN: "Because, I spent a long time explaining to[ex-prime minister Viktor] Chernomyrdin that budget money had to be allocatedthrough tenders, and the loans for shares scheme was a criminal business.I can not begin to imagine what I would have to explain to Primakov. ThatKGB officers don-t understand a thing about tax reform? I can not affordto waste all my energy on explaining the simplest things.

I think, anyway, that the government should becomposed of more or less like-minded people; a coalition is a luxury thatRussia can not afford.

Primakov has his Soviet-era outlook - this distrustof business and fossilised vision of the world. He’s not a stupid man,he’s well educated and so on, but I would find it hard to get along withhim. There is simply nothing I can do about that. It’s not that I needeverything to be smooth and easy, it’s just that I would be spending mywhole time explaining to him, as I did with Chernomyrdin - that Gazpromhas to pay taxes. Gazprom has to pay up and that’s that; it's the sameas for any business.

And how much energy would I have to expend to explainto him [Primakov] that KGB officers have little understanding of the press;that they spent their whole time putting a muzzle on it and never did athing to give it freedom. And that it is not necessary to have intelligenceofficers sitting in the ministry of finance when all we need there is honestpeople. Try to understand me, I can not put all my efforts into explainingthese things, and that is what I would end up doing. Kirienko is a moreflexible person, after all, he came from the Komsomol system and they wereall more flexible.

As for me, I-m outside the system; I was not acommunist, I was always anti-communist. I was never a part of any system."

RJ: Boris Yefimovich, we have talked about allthe known candidates and potential runners but are there any dark horsesone might see in the presidential race?

BN: "Nikita Mikhalkov could take part in the elections.So long as he does not reveal ahead of time who he plans to have as primeminister. But then the best definition for him would be an improved versionof Rutskoi."