Echoes of Dissent: Pavel Litvinov Reflects on the Vital Role of Freedom of Speech Across Time and Borders

Pavel Litvinov, a prominent figure in the Soviet dissident movement and a human rights advocate, was instrumental in opposing governmental repression in the U.S.S.R.

In 1968, he was one of eight individuals who boldly protested on Red Square against the Soviet Union’s invasion of Czechoslovakia. This demonstration, which lasted mere minutes before KGB agents detained the protesters, led to Litvinov receiving a five-year sentence of internal exile.

Hailing from a distinguished political lineage—his grandfather, Maxim Litvinov, served as Joseph Stalin’s foreign minister during the 1930s—he remained a steadfast critic of Soviet policies until the collapse of the Soviet Union.

In 1974, Litvinov emigrated to the United States, where he continued his commitment to human rights advocacy.

Now residing in New York, the 84-year-old, who has retired from teaching math and physics, keeps a close watch on global affairs.

The Moscow Times recently interviewed him regarding freedom of speech in contemporary Russia, the Soviet Union, and the U.S., particularly in light of Donald Trump’s decision to dismantle Voice of America—a media outlet that Litvinov regarded as one of the few uncensored information sources.

This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.

«The shutdown of VOA may seem like a minor issue amidst the actions of the Trump administration, but it holds significant meaning for us. Throughout my life, VOA has been one of the most crucial sources of information and commentary.

What does VOA mean to us? In Russia, it was often referred to as foreign radio, which included outlets like the BBC, VOA, Deutsche Welle, and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. These were our gateways to information from outside—foreign radio, or as the Soviet regime labeled them, ‘hostile voices.’

Why was this so critical? Typically, people do not turn to foreign radio; they don’t see the need for foreign news. In the U.S., most citizens primarily consume American news sources. Conversely, Russia had essentially one newspaper and one radio station. Although they had various names—such as Pravda, Izvestia, or the magazine Ogonyok—each was ultimately controlled by a single entity: the Communist Party, which dictated what Soviet journalists and editors could report. Hence, when we tuned into foreign radio broadcasts, we knew we were receiving information unsanctioned by the government. It was one of the very few free information sources available, as our main outlet—the official press—was thoroughly censored. Individuals were tasked with reviewing every book before it was published to ensure compliance.

How did we manage to receive VOA broadcasts? We listened via shortwave radio, which was often a challenge because the Soviet authorities frequently jammed these ‘hostile voices.’ They would overlay noise on the same frequency or broadcast Soviet programming at higher volumes to obscure the signal. The ability to listen was nearly miraculous, typically requiring a high-quality radio receiver. Sometimes, we would even escape the city to find clearer signals, as the jamming was particularly intense in Moscow.

That radio was a lifeline for us. It enabled us to discover the works of [Nobel Laureate and Russian writer Alexander] Solzhenitsyn, even after he was banned in the Soviet Union, thanks to VOA’s broadcasts. We cherished Louis Armstrong’s music—his unforgettable voice was profoundly meaningful to us.

When I participated in the demonstration in Red Square in 1968 against the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, VOA and the BBC began to report on the event. That was when jamming resumed, something we hadn’t experienced for years. On the very day of the invasion, the jamming returned and continued until the end of the Soviet regime.

Today, I reside in a free country, in America. The fact that VOA is no longer considered necessary in America illustrates the unfortunate truth that it is actually needed within the U.S. itself.

Press freedom is fundamental; it is what sets free nations apart from those that are not.

For instance, Russia is currently engaged in a brutal and irrational war against Ukraine—one that Moscow initiated without justification. The official media cannot fully silence the truth about the conflict, so it resorts to lies.

Freedom—whether in Russia or America—hinges on the ability to access information beyond the sanctioned narrative. American presidents have typically shown disdain for critical press coverage—no one enjoys being harshly critiqued. However, they have seldom gone so far as to suppress it.

A free press is essential to life, and it is something we must actively defend.

I have championed this cause throughout my life and believe nothing is more vital.»