What is the secret society of the political viability of Alexander Lukashenko and of his system? As it evolved in the course of his life? In the Belarusian system — from the president, and that — from the general political trends in the post-Soviet space? How to leave Lukashenko?
On these topics in the "Prague accent" talk the author of "Alexander Lukashenko: Political Portrait" Valery Karbalevich, Head of analytical projects BelaPAN Alexander Klaskouski and a columnist for the Russian newspaper "Kommersant" Pavel Sheremet.
Drakakhrust: This week's presentation of the book by Valery Karbalevich "Alexander Lukashenko: Political Portrait." This huge volume of 720 pages, full of facts, figures and quotes. But the concepts, answers to the vexed question of the Belarusian political life. I propose to focus on these mysteries, to talk about them in our books radioprezentatsii Valery Karbalevich.
Alexander Lukashenko many times have predicted the collapse. Yes nomenclature "wolves" will eat this "farmer", but it soviet economy will crash in a year, but where he is against all the might of the West, and the victory at the elections — a Pyrrhic victory, and last, but Moscow for such words and his deeds on the wall of the smear — all it is many, including you and me, wrote and spoke many years. But do not eat, did not collapse, and not smeared. Why? Forecasters did not invent these calls, they were and were quite serious. What is the secret of this policy and the vitality of his system?
Karbalevich: If the answer is simple and short, created by Lukashenko social model is not worn out. This means that it has a real support in the community, and ensured that the President of domestic legitimacy. And not much external challenges threaten the rule of Lukashenko as long as the inside, nothing happens, no mass
protests, the acute social conflicts, the split in the nomenclature. That is, the social model, based on state paternalism, proved more enduring than the experts predicted. And, of course, played a role in the ability of Lukashenko manipulation, maneuvering, balancing.
Drakakhrust: Paul, you are in a sense, passed the baton to Valery, you, along with Svetlana Kalinkina authors were perhaps the first solid political biography Lukashenko "Accidental President." You are in this book and beyond also searched for the answer to this question — why predictions about the imminent collapse of Lukashenka did not come true?
SheremetAlexander Lukashenko — a genius moment. I have always stressed that underestimate the talents given to him by nature to underestimate the degree of cynicism and flexibility can not be, it certainly is very strong opponent. And haughty attitude towards Lukashenka should his enemies who lives whom freedom, who profession. The book that we wrote with
Svetlana, can not be compared with the study Karbalevich. His detailed analysis of all of Lukashenko's history, we have the book was more emotional, purely journalistic, something even the reporter's.
Returning to the forecast, I would not say that analysts already were not wrong. The findings, which we did, and 5, and 10 years ago are just now — Belarus slow, slower than we thought, but steadily moving towards the abyss of social, economic, political. And the finale of Lukashenka's regime is tragic. But he's a genius moment. If not for his embrace of Russia, if not for his promise, if not brilliant operation "oil cancellations on the conversation," that Lukashenko would not have happened. But the space for these manipulations, it narrows with each passing year.
Drakakhrust: Flaws of many biographies of famous people is their telealogichnost — they had already village boy Sasha wanted to be president and that's the way it was. Is this true? Or does it evolved, changed? And if so, what were the key points fork of these changes?
Karbalevich: Of course, no predestination in the biography Lukashenko was not. The success of the policy — it is always a coincidence. If Lukashenka is not elected chairman of the anti-corruption commission, if the law of the president entered the border in 40 years rather than 35, if the CEC has not registered it as a presidential candidate for gross violations of procedure, he would not be president.
Lukashenko has repeatedly changed his political orientation. During Gorbachev's perestroika, he was a Democrat, then
entered into an image restorer of the old system. Since the early 2000s, he lived in a conservative way of the social status quo (state propaganda presents it as the idea of stability). Who is trying to take the image of modernizer. All his actions, he submits the task to retain power.
Fork: Presidential elections in 1994, a referendum in 1996, Putin's rise to power in 2000, and the actual end of the idea of unification of Belarus and Russia, 2010 (sharp conflict with Russia).
DrakakhrustAlexander, what do you think — has evolved Lukashenko? And always the main backbone of his behavior, his personality was a thirst for power?
Klaskouski: Of course, it has evolved and continues to demonstrate the ability to do so. The opposition was misled and continues to fail self-confidence, they say, we know it inside out, and it will never change. Thus, his principles, his populist methods it does not change, but he did, how did Paul, the genius of the time, the genius of adaptation, the genius of adaptation.
If you remember — it started with a "sharpening" of prices, called businessmen "lousy fleas", and now under option
Gingerbread cooking? Directive on the liberalization of number 4, he sets the task enter the top thirty of the most favorable investment economies.
A milestone stage care — is it coming to independence. Lukashenko has been and remains mentally Soviet Belarusians. Once upon a time, it seems that he genuinely wanted to restore the Soviet Union. But when Putin came and there was this "arrival", offer to join the six-Russian province — tress found here on the rock. And it is this unwillingness to sacrifice even a gram of power has led to such stubbornness, persistence finally to a systemic conflict with Russia. De facto today Lukashenko of Belarus protects from the imperial Russian pressure, which reflected a statement Grybauskaite. This evolution has occurred it is not influenced by the ideals of the ON and the republic, but it took place. And the objective is a positive factor for Bel
DrakakhrustValery, in his book, you print out the current features of the Belarusian social, economic and political systems of the features of the personality of your character. But if you take a quick look at all the post-Soviet space, it turns out that these systems have created a former intelligence officer and a party official, a university professor and a "strong" business manager, creating charismatic personality and quite dull. So maybe it's not the personality characteristics, and the inevitability of such a model for this space?
Karbalevich: The subject of my research was not the evolution of the political system of Belarus or political systems of post-Soviet countries, namely, the political portrait of Alexander Lukashenko. And the fact that you say it is absolutely clear. Certainly there were prerequisites for the establishment of authoritarian regimes in Belarus and other countries of the former Soviet Union,
Post-Soviet society was not ready to live in a democracy, the unavailability of post-Soviet elites to act in accordance with the principles of democracy. I agree with the fact that there were objective predictors of authoritarianism in post-Soviet countries, but the shape and extent of repressive regimes, which have largely depended on the personal qualities of those who lead them.
Drakakhrust: Paul, you ever been in a number of post-Soviet countries, you now live in Moscow. Do you think that there is in Belarus — as a result of the features of Alexander Lukashenko, and how much — the result of the general post-Soviet tendencies?
Sheremet: There is nothing unique about what is happening in Belarus is that Lukashenko does. He inherited, to our misfortune, and his happiness, unique country. Immediately after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Belarus was the most promising republic empire. Stock of the economic, social and political strength was so great that 16 years to build this socialism that still collapse. Thanks to experiment Lukashenko we most promising countries of the former Soviet Union became the country that all regret. Thanks to him from an industrialized country will become a country of farmers, because after a few years of his reign from these MAZ, BelAZ nothing left.
As for the overall assessment, it did not really do anything unique. The only thing that he is extremely cynical and knows no limits. Kuchma, at some point, did not dare to cross the border, Nazarbayev more subtly Asian-all it does, and Lukashenko — a European version of Turkmenbashi. Well, maybe he still manages 10-15 years, nobody touched him. He also does not invest a diamond heart, and with it eternal life. All the same, it's all over and the next generations will have to pay for that Lukashenka experiment.
DrakakhrustValery, Alexander Kozulin during your presentation Valery, the book said it was "very well manifested a collective portrait of a citizen of Belarus. Undoubtedly, we must understand that Lukashenko — in all of us." Can really the hero of the book corresponds to your ideas, aspirations, hopes and fears of average mass Belarusians, the majority. And it talks about the most is that we did not know and did not want to know?
Karbalevich: Of course, Lukashenko not only reflects the average Belarusian ideology, his ideas about politics, lifestyles, but also what to look for, the moral, the intellectual level of the Belarusian citizen.
Lukashenko — a reaction of fear of the Belarusian society facing the challenges of transformation, modernization and globalization.
Lukashenko is drawn to the bad sides of the consciousness of Belarusian society, what are hesitant policy in civilized countries.
On the other hand, there occurs a reverse process. Lukashenko does not only reflect the views of the average Belarusians, but also relays them back into society with the help of state media manipulates these views.
DrakakhrustAlexander, and your answer to the question — to what extent Lukashenko is the same as every one of us?
Klaskouski: We are all different. So you can not say that he is, as each one of us. One of the secrets to Lukashenko that he cynically put it on the majority, it is inherent in the neglect of the elite. Massa thinks primarily the stomach and not only here. Other
thing is that in the West for decades the established rules of the game, and indeed there is a taboo that no politician dares to break. The unique integrated system, which was created by Lukashenko, based on the fact that he had no complexes. In Kyrgyzstan, the Academy was trying to look like a liberal Akayev, Kuchma played these games, even Putin was limited shareware democratic legacy of Yeltsin. But Lukashenko, once came to power, the Soviet Union began to reincarnation. However, the resources come to an end, it is necessary to turn, play a game with the West and model, by the way, is changing.
At first there was a bet on the lumpen on the outsider. Now he has found a common language with the nomenclature. At first, he frightened, planted — who for corruption, for whom political "betrayal", he now proclaims — we are in the same boat. Recently, he said, referring to the bureaucracy, he said — it's not my choice, it's your choices, they say, we're in the same boat and another power you will not have such privileges, as it is now.
There is a layer lured business that satisfied the established rules of the game. On the middle class emphasis is on the pragmatic part of young people who want to make a career.
But the neglect of the elite remains. Here is the arithmetic reasoning — all have the same voice, or is it a cleaner, or a milkmaid, or disgraced professor. This neglect elite inhibits development of the country and can have a dramatic impact on her life.
DrakakhrustValery, in the preface to the book you have written that it is not only about the past but about the future. And the last part of the book is called "It will never go away." And yet, on the basis of such a thorough study of your character and through it — today's Belarus can you tell what will happen next, as he did leave? As Franco, Stalin or Mao, in the fundamental changes began only after their death? Maybe over power heir, Kim Il Sung, Assad or Aliyev? And maybe even a return to power after losing it, as Peron? Or suffer the fate of the victims of velvet (and not) revolutions? As from November 2010 it seems most likely?
Karbalevich: The least likely option seems the transfer of power to a successor, and the return to power after her loss. The latter seems quite unrealistic. Option revolution can not quite "velvet" is real for Belarus. What a life-long version of the board I would not rule out.
Sheremet: I think the most likely option life of government, but in this case I would not have believed Lukashenko longevity. It seems to me that the fundamental contradictions began between him and Russia — this is a very important factor, and began the fundamental contradictions between Lukashenko and a large part of the Belarusian elite. He is no longer
e new requirements of the times. Therefore, the option of revolution seems to me quite likely.
But there's a danger. If he is cornered, he can throw at the feet of Belarus in Moscow, to sell the country in exchange for a guarantee of their own safety, then Russia will support him and keep him, and the life and the ability to manage. But then it will be another Lukashenko. In the other options, too, I absolutely do not believe, because this man is drunk with power, he is sick of power, he did even with his sons, people of the same blood with him, will not divide.