Vladimir Lukin, Deputy Chairman of the international Affairs Committee of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, co-Chairman of Organizational Committee on preparation and holding of events dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of Andrei Sakharov:
– Andrei Sakharov – the man who played a very important, and hardly even an exaggeration to say, unique role in how spun the wheel of human history and relationships between major countries in the world in the second half of the twentieth century.
to Speak of so extraordinary and unique a personality as Sugars, not just. People, quite rightly awarded only one Nobel prize, even more deservedly deprived of several top national awards (hopefully this injustice will soon be corrected), instead of in its relatively short life so many historically significant discoveries, initiatives, and humanitarian campaigns, in my opinion, was and remains one of the most striking personified incarnations during the second half of the 20th century – the era of the “bipolar world”. Our organizing Committee [on the conduct of the Sakharov anniversary in Russia] intends to promote a series of events in the run-up to may 21, 2021, the date of the centenary of the birth of Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov – and invites everyone to take an active part.
Remember the legacy of Sakharov should, in my opinion, based on at least four most important factors of his personal fate.
first, we must remember Sakharov as a phenomenon in natural science, physics. It is unlikely that we, scholars, can assess the extent of contribution to the science of modern physics (in contrast to ancient and medieval scientists synthetic), but it is clear that this contribution is huge and in theoretical and practical senses. Andrei Sakharov was not alone in the business. But he was one of the “most-most”.
second, he was a true political thinker. Detailed Sakharov’s essay “Reflections on progress, peaceful coexistence and intellectual freedom”, as well as the Nobel lecture “World. Progress. Human rights” are among the fundamental justifications of the theory of convergence. And if we look closely at those violent and controversial events that happen in our world today, the world beginning of the third Millennium, we can quite clearly distinguish in these works of Andrei Dmitrievich as elements that fail the test of time, and those that testify to the vitality and productivity of the ideas of integration and globalization, the best parties are ideologically split into two parts and ready to irreconcilable confrontation “bipolar world”.
Perhaps in theory the convergence can be detected some romantic-utopian ElAmenti. But, at the same time, after half a century, the idea of a gradual but persistent strengthening global and regional security institutions (such as the UN and OSCE), and in particular, the proposals to strengthen the role of the UN security Council on the basis of coordination of the positions of the five permanent members, and the idea of moving forward despite all the difficulties and conflicts, the “three baskets” of the CSCE is not exhausted. Me and now they seem much more constructive and forward-looking than happensa utopia the “end of history” on the basis of the post-Communist, in the Ptolemaic flat of a unipolar world. Even if it rests on three pillars. Future, emphasizes Sugars – in the ways of a pluralistic convergence and controlled scientific-technical progress.”
We can’t not to remember today as Sakharov and human rights activist. His selfless, heroic work in the field of human rights protection is a separate, huge topic.
Sugars remains one of the pillars of the founding fathers of the global nuclear balance that kept the world in the second half of the twentieth century, but by and large, our planet and dwelling on her humanity holds to this day. Very interesting and insightful its evolution from enthusiastic about their professional business of a prominent nuclear scientist who looks at the world with a very high, but his “departmental point of view” to large, strategic thinker, all the more clearly and deeply understands how undoubted stabilization opportunities and great danger of proliferation of missile and nuclear capabilities. The final point in this question can be considered his next statement: “nevertheless, I believe that the issues of war and peace, disarmament is so important, that in the very difficult situation they should have absolute priority and to use all existing capabilities to address them, to prepare the ground for further progress in the future… In this match the goals of all responsible people on Earth, including, I believe, and hope, and Soviet leaders…” And further: “Any negotiations about disarmament is possible only on the basis of a strategic equilibrium.”
the Modern world is, of course, much has changed since departure from the scene of giants of the last century, what was Andrei Sakharov. However, the surprising thing is not that the world has changed. What is surprising is how many of the past problems we have to solve the living generation. And I want to say words of Andrei Voznesensky: “Everything returns to its place. Only rotate the circles of these”.
One of the most stable factors in strategic equilibrium is the fact that 90 percent of the nuclear missile potential of the modern world is still under the control of our two States. Apparently, the comparable should also be recognized the level of responsibility Russia and the United States for the maintenance of global security in this field.
I think a public dialogue on these issues with the participation of authoritative representatives of all without exception of the nuclear powers would be useful now. And in the future will be critical. But let’s shake off the dust of the past. And remember, as were useful and sometimes productive in the past bilateral social dialogue to fuel the ideas of interstate dialogue. Let’s take, as expressed by Sakharov, look for “pluralistic convergence” on the Russian-American level scientists and experts. Because, as you said perfectly, another Nobel laureate Winston Churchill in 1941: “If we win, nobody will care, and if we lose, no one will worry”.
by the Way, our conference today is one of the attempts to resume on a new basis and under new conditions of public dialogue between Russia and the United States stem, in essence, the question of our relations is a multifactorial entirety of the strategic issues. This dialogue occurred in the most critical days of the cold war, and its usefulness and relevance in our days is also not in question.
