Q: What do you think of the SALT II talks? What is likely to happen?

A: Our government understands the situation and does not want a great war. It wants political and internal results without war and with the help of Vietnam forces and Cuban forces. The SALT talks are essential. The talks are better than war. They deal with very essential things, but we must take care of arms control problems and other questions in these talks. I think the U.S. wants effective results in a short time and that is dangerous in some ways. The U.S. and the USSR must also discuss Chinese-American relations.

Q: What about that? How do you view the new Chinese-American relationship?

A: I am not a political expert, but this is not good from a moral point of view. The American-Taiwan treaty is broken. It may be essential from a practical point of view. But Carter's moral action is not good. What Goldwater says is right.

Q: What of the present situation in Iran? How might that affect Soviet-American relations?

A: The Soviet government will not profit from these events. The forces that have come into the open in Iran are illogical and irrational forces, which are not good for the Soviet and American positions. They are negative.

Q: How satisfied are you with academicians in the West who have defended human rights in socialist countries and in their own countries as well?

A: They are very good. Academic boycotts are good, but we must have other forms of support. I think the only way for our people who want to go the U.S. or to the West is some exchange of prisoners. It is the only way to solve the problem, but it will not happen in a short time.

Q: Do you think the dissident trials of Shchransky and Ginsburg succeeded in scaring off other dissidents and members of the Western press?

A: Governments have great power to do what they want. But it is impossible for the Soviet government to put all people who speak out into prison. The quarantine aspect is not essential, as long as the struggle of ideas remains.

Dissidents in prison are separated from the others, and live in the hardest conditions. I have tried to contact people in prisons. Korshnikoff--for a half year his family heard nothing. I sent telegrams to the officer in his camp about his health, paid two rubles for an answer, but received none. I will send telegrams once more.

Q: It seems in most countries the militancy, or desire for change, comes from the youth. Is it the same in the Soviet Union?

A: I don't know exactly; I have little contact with young people. Most of the young people I know are dissident. I wonder if they can be called typical Soviet youth. It is often impossible to contact the young. It is often dangerous. The Soviet student is in a dangerous position. If he is involved in any political activity, he is expelled from the Institute and nobody can help him. And it is not that easy to gain entrance to the university. There is much discrimination. Many students from the country cannot attend the university. Take Moscow University, for example. The percentage of people from the villages who go there is one half of one per cent. The students are mainly from Moscow. It is the same for other schools. For Jewish people it is impossible to go to the university. We have examinations and Jews are put in special groups. Examinations are much harder on Jews than other people. When an examiner sees you are Jewish, he strikes off points right away. It is the same in Czechoslovakia.

Young people have very little opportunity for political activity. Most dissidents are older. A large portion of them are young, but they are not in universities or in good jobs--they have nothing to lose.

Q: You once said to stop speaking out would be like turning down a blind alley from which there is no return. Yet you say change will come slowly and far in the future. Why do you continue to speak out?