Anpilov: The most striking feature is the fact that the communist movement -- I mean all the communist parties and organizations -- stand aside from the strike movement in the country. There hasn't ever been a single strike organized by the communists in the entire country. There is just one sort of exception -- the strike at the industrial tractor plant in Cheboksary, the capital of the Russian Federation Republic of Chuvashia. Even here, we owe everything to a brave worker on the strike committee. Now, you see that the administration is firing the members of the strike committee. It turns out that the workers' movement was not ready to face repression. And why? Because even this strike committee believed that one can work with the union and they believed that one can bring them to more progressive positions. The union as all the unions in general become the agents of the administration. The communists stand aside and the union does its work, in the service of the administration. The formation of new progressive unions is a hard process. Some unions are appearing in separate regions, but there are no attempts to form an all-Russia union. 

Q: Is the strike movement growing in the country? 

Anpilov: Yes, it's growing very rapidly. On the other hand, one can observe the relative growth of strikes that have a more desperate character -- for example, in the form of hunger strikes. Many miners in the Kuzbas, workers of power stations in the Far East and many others, are or have been, on hunger strike. Also, many workers commit suicide. In Rostov-on-Don in a single factory, already 20 workers have committed suicide. In Moscow, the other day, there was a tragic case where a worker jumped into the oven. There are also plenty of suicides in the army. This is an expression of a no-way-out situation. It would be good if the CPRF [Communist Party of the Russian Federation] did anything apart from working in the State Duma [Russian parliament]. In the gubernatorial elections, the CPRF candidates won, but life does not change. For example, we published a letter from a Tambov communist [Tambov -- a city near Moscow] where you could read: "The governor is a CPRF member, the mayor of the town is also a CPRF member, most of the town Soviets are in the hands of the CPRF, but in this region, unemployment grew by 40% last year, the standard of living keeps dropping, hospitals are shut down, social benefits are cut." Then people wonder, who is responsible for this? Zuganov doesn't want to take responsibility. He is afraid of committing mistakes. Zuganov stands in parliament and does his best to restrain people from social protests. The communist Duma fraction deputies have one main problem on their minds: how to get re-elected in the next parliamentary elections in order not to lose their privileges as deputies -- like a flat in Moscow, a car with driver ... The masses are becoming more revolutionary day by day. This fact has been pointed out even by the bourgeois press. The unions are afraid of talking about the mood of the masses. The masses are now more revolutionary than their leaders. We have now to come out to the masses. Go to the red belt around Moscow. Small towns find themselves in a much worse situation, the whole thing simply collapses. That is why we are now organizing a march on Moscow, departing from the red belt of Moscow. To summarize, the masses are becoming more and more revolutionary but so far, not a single party has been able to become the vanguard of these masses. 

Q: What is the form that this march on Moscow will adopt? 

Anpilov: The point here is that workers come according to a schedule to the town halls to protest and put forward concrete political demands. Not only demanding the payment of wage arrears, but demanding that the whole process of privatization be cancelled, the liquidation of the institution of the presidency, the restoration of Soviet power over the whole territory of the USSR, in essence political slogans to change the system. Our march will start from both Tula and Ryahan. We will go on foot. We plan to cover 30 km per day, for six days. We will go to all towns on the way to Moscow to agitate among the people. These two columns (from the two towns) will meet in Podolsk, a place where social tension is very high. From there, we will go to Moscow and there, stay three days in camps at the Kremlin, the house of the Government, and the TV tower. We have the experience of 1992-93. With these actions, we are planning to destabilize society. 

Q: You as a leader of a mass organization must have thought about the meaning and significance of the Albanian revolt. 

Anpilov: This is a very important example. One should take account of the fact that the Albanian masses instinctively organized themselves, without a political vanguard, and seized arms. This is an example on the one hand of the possibility of revolutionary creativity of the masses, but on the other hand, the rebellion did not achieve the main goal, political power, which shows the necessity of a political vanguard. On the other hand, something that encourages us was the behavior of the army there which went over to the side of the people; the army refused to shoot at its own people. In Russia, a similar behavior of the army will be a factor in favor of the people's rebellion. Political actions like the march on Moscow will pull up from the ranks of the people, popular leaders who will be in a position to lead a popular revolt. I don't agree with those who assert that the vanguard is made of 10 people. Otherwise, I would not believe in my own people. The Albanian rebellion is interesting in terms of the creativity of the masses: how the masses, having seen the possibility of seizing arms, without thinking much about it, take arms. In Russia, unlike in Albania, a peaceful foreign intervention under any banner, say that of the UN, these mythical peacekeeping forces, or NATO, will be understood by the people as a military invasion. The army would promptly carry out its duty of defending the country. A foreign intervention in Russia today is not possible. In the case of a foreign intervention, the revolutionary mood of the masses would rise sharply. This is why Yeltsin is so afraid of the expansion of NATO; it helps the development of the revolutionary mood of the masses. 

Q: Do you think a similar scenario is possible in Russia? 

Anpilov: You know, there have been cases when someone has fired a bazooka at the houses of the new rich or even burned them. However, this type of action has a sporadic character. All practical people in Russia have understood that these reforms have no future. Take for example the Mayor of Moscow, Yuri Luzhkov. At the last May Day demonstration, he spoke the way Victor Anpilov did 5 years ago. He now talks about the anti-human character of present reforms and so on. This is a direct result of the fact that particularly in the regions, a very strong anti-capitalist sentiment is growing. I am not afraid of pogroms, but I don't think they are likely to happen. 

Q: But why? You keep saying that the people are more and more in despair. 

Anpilov: A popular revolt, a spontaneous seizure of the house of the government and things of that sort are likely to happen. But disorganized pogroms, looting, etc., do not correspond to the character of the Russian people. For this, we need support in the regions. A popular rebellion will adopt harsher forms in the regions. Most probably, Soviet power will first be restored somewhere in the regions and then, like a fire, it will spread throughout Russia. 

Q: Do you rely more on the regions, then? 

Anpilov: If we manage to organize popular mass actions focused on a concrete political program, then popular leaders will appear in the regions, people from the ranks of the working class, who will lead the masses towards victory. The workers' movement in the regions is far more organized and compact than in Moscow. 

Q: You place the main revolutionary potential in the regions? 

Anpilov: If you take a look at the statistics of strikes, very few strikes take place in Moscow. They take place mostly in the regions. In Moscow, the strike movement has a more sporadic character, whereas in the regions, take for example, the tractor plant in Chuvashia, the strike committee was supported by the striking teachers and the workers of the chemical plants. In this sense, the situation there is easier for us. We hope that our march on Moscow will also be supported by the fleet, which is simply dying off. I am very sure that if organized mass resistance grows in the regions, there will definitely appear powerful popular leaders. And I don't rule out that some of these regional leaders may become national leaders. Then the situation in Moscow will become easier for us. Nobody can foresee the forms that the popular protest may take. Lenin once said: "Yesterday was early, tomorrow will be late." But this was a question of just three days. Today, our situation is different. 

Q: Let's return to the question of the last presidential elections. Serious people keep asserting that Zuganov in fact won the elections. Perhaps the difference (in the vote) was not great. But the very next day, Zuganov congratulated Yeltsin. The rank-and-file of the CPRF could not protest the results since their leader gave up? 

Anpilov: Yes, Zuganov congratulated Yeltsin long before the official results were made public -- the very next morning. I had proposed the formation of a popular committee for the counting of the ballots. The law permits this type of action. At that time, Zuganov was very afraid of this. This popular committee could call the people into the streets. We all felt that this possibility scared Gennady Andreyevitch [Zuganov]. I wish I was wrong, but Zuganov's priority is not to permit a social explosion to occur. We say: let a social explosion take place if it is politically focused. It should be conscious; the fewer victims and blood, the better. But he is, in principle, against any kind of social unrest. He is protecting the regime.