Results of the Congress of Democratic Forces: antecedents and consequences

Congress decided whether the contradiction?
Drakakhrust: "contradictions among the opposition, which concerned first prepyadstviya leadership appeared almost immediately after the 2006 presidential election. Eventually they escalate — in fact, the Congress and convened to address them. Decided whether he does, or more precisely, he decided their How was such a natural outcome, including in the light of the experience of other states? "
Tsigankov: "Here — like look. When the task was formally Milinkevich deprive him of his status as the sole opposition favorite, it seems that this task is performed favorites certain parties. If the task was to show katigorichnye differences, it is also performed. When the task was to show that the opposition today is one part of the politicians, more status and more than impressive, and the second — more than marginal, and youth rallies, the Congress on this section was also true manifest.

V.Tsygankov: "If the task was to deprive Milinkevich status one favorite opposition, this task is performed favorites certain parties."

I think the phenomenon of the situation is that Congress sought just those who are most called for unity, but they certainly understand that in fact there is no unity, and that Congress would lead to a de facto secession. Then there is a question — whether they were sincere when called for unity in the Congress?
But summing has these words are not the most optimistic, I’d said that there should not really dramatize the situation. Cost to call a spade a spade: the political forces join voedinyzhdy if there’s a huge event, a big occasion. Were presidential elections — the Belarusian democratic opposition in handy single candidate. As international experience shows, after the election — or after a defeat or victory after, does not matter — the coalition always break. Roughly the same thing happened at the moment with the Belarusian opposition, only that dragged on for years. Ahead of presidential elections is not yet seen, will soon be the parliamentary elections, and for their single favorite is not needed. "
Drakakhrust: "Ms. Kalinkina Vitaly Tsigankov described outcomes of the Congress with a little bit of drama — you too as ironic attitude?"
Kalinkina: "No. I have a not very pleasant memory after the congress, but as for the leadership — I also think that no drama did not work.» About United Democratic Forces without Alexander Kozulin the presidential elections were not less of» United. Now without Milinkevich they too will not be the least of the» Joint.

S.Kalinkina: "Not a favorite around the need to» unite around the idea and, even more so that on this day there is no particular moral and political authority in the democratic forces."

Congress gave the opposition we have different, and if she can about the» combined, so it is only if the question is squarely: the struggle for power. And inside the opposition is very strong and a lot of different contradictions. I think that is not a favorite around the need to» unite around the idea and, even more so that at the present moment there is no specific moral and political authority in the United Democratic Forces for». And can it be better, if there is competitiveness, both sides may be more mobile, and this time it does not bring roblennya finally completed, and in this sense I am optimistic about the future. "
Drakakhrust: "Sp.Silitski how would you sum total result of this Congress? The details we will talk later."
Silitski: "What to say here … All year after the presidential election was the competitiveness between the favorites in principle lawn mowers who absented himself more, and it trimmed. As for the Congress of Democratic weaknesses — sorry, forces — then of course, that he met since one purpose: to redistribute the leadership inside the opposition. simply to legitimize the Congress was necessary to manage the opposition claim to move beyond present something to society, because society that stands for democratic change, but not in any way affiliated policy. was presented strategy expectations I agree with this assessment — and understand in order to be expected, do not need a Vyachorka nor Lebedko, nor even Milinkevich — even more so not Kalyakin. "

V.Silitsky "was presented strategy expectations — as to be expected, do not need a Vyachorka nor Liabedzka nor Milinkevich — even more so not Kalyakin."

Two strategies of action: similarities and differences
Drakakhrust: "In a sense, the sensation of the Congress was the performance Statkevich when he offered an alternative strategy. By him, this strategy acts as congress organizers offered, say, strategy expectations. And the first day votes were divided, and in the second day strategy paprapanavanaya organizers Congress won a landslide victory. Why did it happen and what really fundamentally unlike these 2-strategies? "
Kalinkina: "And I will tell you my point of view, since I, too, the first day is not beheld another strategy that was offered, and I think that in general is not enough of the delegates who beheld it, read it, and only listened to that of had read it. Later, when everyone took a printout of the evening and read, and already voted, it was a kind of material for analysis and reflection. fundamentally adroznenyav little, but most important: definitely raised the question of course Belarus — accession to the EU, and what opposition was offered with a single vertical favorite topping.

S.Kalinkina "major differences definitely raised the question of course Belarus — joining the European Union, and the opposition with a single vertical favorite headed."

As for activism, streets, etc., the strategy proposed consolidated party majority, provides pressure on the authorities, I understand it and the street pressure and moral pressure, and in any shares of the company, etc. etc. Because I do not see a big difference. Do not confuse strategy and action strategy — these are different things. "
Drakakhrust: "Vital Silitski for you word for objections to the fact that Svetlana said about these 2-strategies, their advantages and shortcomings."
Silitski "didn strategies — were two strategies.’s All. One strategy: Expectations, second — I would have said, not a lot of constructive action. And every Congress chose that as for himself, and the Congress party has been partially . Street, street resistance — now the case-independent society. "

V.Silitsky "didn strategies — were two strategies."

Tsigankov: "I’d said that quite a lot of differences. In his speech, Alexander Milinkevich, responding to a question about the differences recorded several Fri I agree with Svetlana Kalinkina, who noted two main things: first — vertical control or co-chairs, and the second — in the direction of Europe. Statkievich The strategy supported Miliknevich, marked by three things: democracy, independence and integration with Europe. A coalition in which the Communists are, could not fix at this thing, integration with Europe.

V.Tsygankov: "Coalition to what are the Communists, could not commit to its integration with Europe."

Milinkevich also noted several Fri: he does not agree with the conclusions made in the document entitled "Strate
gy Coalition." In 1-x, it is not so optimistic about the current situation and believes that there is no national outrage at the latest increase in the prices gas. Secondly 2, he believes that the nomenclature is not capable of an internal coup, she zastarshanaya — in contrast to what is written in its own strategy coalition representatives. And-3, Milinkevich believes that at the moment authorities are not going to make any talks with the opposition, since we, the opposition, the feeble, and the power to negotiate with us will not work.
A General-more vividly expressed it when they say it — the evolution of power, what is the evolution? If you have previously been convicted of one of the Young, Paul Seviarynets, now judged seven Malady — where evolution? "
Drakakhrust: "Tell me, please, as part of its strategy Statkevich hopes that changes in Belarus may reach only street? True I realized it?"
Tsigankov: "He’s in the framework of its own strategy pays more attention to the street and less attention — attempts to pressure on the government through the diplomatic pressure zabugornyh partners or pressure on the government by the structural opposition. He also believes that this power will not compromise.
And if we finish with our conclusions about the differences — in the hall there were very revealing scene when one of the Communists had read in his speech about the "brotherly Russian people", and it obviously does not enter the lexicon "Young Front". Hard to imagine for themselves that now brings the "Young Front" and the Communists. "
Last day the chairman of the Political Council
Drakakhrust: "And now — on the main dilemma, the most sonorous, the most scandalous in some sense — about leadership. During 1-x, why this issue was not even put to a vote, as suggested yesterday Stanislav Shushkevich? I ask you to reply on the merits and not the procedure. And, in-2, whether there will be a return of the opposition of the current situation in the state in which it was until October 2005, when its leadership was not only not a favorite, but even in the midst of the first equal? "
Kalinkina: "In essence the question of leadership treated exactly — just as the other strategy that offered. This strategy failed. I wish to remind you that there was a friendly agreement reached in Vilnius, when favorites completely stalled and generally could not resolve the issue of leadership. was then adopted a compromise: vote as regional meetings, and will refer the issue to Congress. I myself was an eyewitness when the agreement was concluded. All the favorites, including Alexander Milinkevich and Stanislav Shushkevich, gave friendly word, exactly what it will be so, and that whatever the outcome of regional meetings, whatever the results of the Congress — they recognize them and will work with all.

With Kalinkina: "Because this is fixed — well, we do not have a favorite in the opposition, it is necessary that he is still growing."

Well, but it came out because it turned out, not all can be really gentleman. Why did it happen? Hunt to be a favorite, many hunt, and it’s great when party political favorites have such ambitions. But these ambitions really need to win — win work. And the fact that there is some way you have appointed or not appointed or you yourself somehow made his way there — it is for a person or group of persons can solve personal problems or ambitions that person or group. But for all of us, for the country it does not solve the situation fundamentally. Because this is fixed — well, we do not have a favorite in the opposition, it is necessary that he is still growing. "
Drakakhrust: "Well so what — vorachivaetsya situation, so to speak, in September 2005?"
Kalinkina: "Well, almost so. Currently we still in the midst of an equal, and one — povroz."
Drakakhrust: "Vitaly Tsigankov you like Svetlana, were at the congress — whether you agree with its conclusions and with the way she treated" motivated "to vote and that the prognosis for the future management of the opposition?"
Tsigankov: "Why not put to the vote the proposal Stanislav Shushkevich? (I recall it sounded very directly — "let’s vote in this way: either we will have four co-chairman or chairman of one — Alexander Milinkevich.") There are two reasons. 1st — worldly: many did not like the Congress ended, people expect any debate, but suddenly after the adoption of the strategy was all over, the political council voted. The main argument, as usual, was that "the Regionals hurrying to train if we hold them, they do not move from» let faster rate." A second argument is that the concept of the political council voted for 365, against — 185 people. Supporters Milinkevich has not insisted on this very vote because they understood that it will not work.

V.Tsygankov: "From Milinkevich action sought by those who just tied it."

Well, as for that — is there a favorite … I’ve heard a lot and at the Congress, and for general this year reproaches the address Milinkevich, certainly, a significant part of their faithful, but they were often paradoxical. Milinkevich sought action from those who just tied him, stated that he "must act within the framework of the Political Council" should it denigrate their visits, creating their own movements. As soon as he began to do something they had read it, that it is incorrect, it does not do what he recommended the Political Council. That said, it is now one of the speakers — businessman and political prisoner Vasiliev, quoting the words of the 1st Russian film — "a good man, but not an eagle." And I have the memory — as he tries to get a falcon, it immediately, including at the congress, blame dictatorship … So you Determine either you want to, that he was doing something, or you really need to, so he did nothing. "
Drakakhrust: "Vital Silitski, how would you answer the question — will the currently de facto return to the state it was in before the last Congress, when the exact favorite opposition was not?"
Silitski: "In October 2005, the first Milinkevich defeated by civilian society. Now it is pushed. What came out in March 2006 — is also practically only reward civilian society. Political opposition from the state in which it is presently , never came out. "
Will split irreversible?
Drakakhrust: "Congress ended. What next? Either these words to all the favorites — they will continue to work together, that something will be done — all this is just" not bad mine is a bad game, "but this crack, which was yavna the Congress — it will be maintained and deepened, and the Belarusian opposition will be two streams, as was said Milinkevich — left and pranezalezhnitskuyu? Or they say they are really completely heartily and configure a friendly work together? "
Silitski: "The fact that a year earlier strategy was adopted — will expand the power crisis. Expanded crisis only opposition. Later adopted a strategy of dialogue. There was even discussion that something was made and that something about bargain. This is not only only has ruined, and this one was not going to do.

V.Silitsky: "In the following year will be parliamentary elections and will have to create some latest "Five +" … Who created the system of collective irresponsibility. "

Here we are discussing something, argue, and who a year even remember it? I do not see the subject of conversation. Perhaps, indeed, the next year will be the parliamentary elections and the need to create some latest "Five +&q
uot; or something to that same agree to work together. But, in my opinion at the moment created by the system of collective irresponsibility, and what not to ask anyone. Political opposition is living alone for themselves, society is independent — in itself, intellectuals — alone for himself in Congress quota of 21 people. People lives on for yourself. So be it.
No common goals. Sit and wait for the dialogue — it’s not a common goal. You can sit and wait in the coalition can sit and wait disconnected — it amounts to the same thing. "
Drakakhrust: "Vitaly, I quoted Milinkevich, who said that the opposition sees in two blocks — left and pranezalezhnitski. These blocks are really there de facto or not?"
Silitski: "No, I do not think so. Though Milinkevich supporters — people truly democratic. Yavna no ideological differences between Vyachorka and Milinkevich — but they take different sides in this scenario. On the other hand, which may be ideological unity between Lebedko and Kalyakin? But they are together.

V.Silitsky: "I would not call them all indiscriminately" left. "Well, what Lebedko Vyachorka Romanchuk or left? Whom they pro-Moscow?"

Here about ideology just funny read. Independence supporters in the coalition of the too short, so I would not call them all indiscriminately "left." Well what Lebedko Vyachorka Romanchuk or left? They pro-Moscow? Here alignment is different. So I have this issue with Milinkevich agree. "
Drakakhrust: "Svetlana, and you agree to Milinkevich that managed to crack the ideological circumstances? Maybe more a question — how things will go after Congress in opposition on?"
Kalinkina: "I completely agree Vitaliy SILITSKIY. Milinkevich That quote from you currently read — it is the call of the statement. I also think that it does not correspond to reality, and can not currently state that specifically on this ideological foundation: Left or right, pro-Russian or pro-European in opposition divided. I think that the main reason for what happened — not a» fair,» and sub impartial. It was a struggle of ambition, which ended so frustrating for us. "
Drakakhrust: "Svetlana, so what next?"
Kalinkina: "I have already said, that look to the future with optimism. If there are two competing directions of the democratic movement, it’s even good. Maybe it will be something specifically to accelerate some processes and make active. Until now, a day or in opposition was a single favorite. But this more than a year no activity increased. Whoever that was that someone someone interfered with, there were some provocation, but always answers the one who took the responsibility.

S.Kalinkina: "That confidence is given Milinkievich when his chosen one, he is not justified."

Alexander Milinkevich such responsibility took the last Congress. Because at the moment we are obliged to admit that he advance the trust that was assigned to him when he was elected one, it is not justified. Favorite — is the one who consolidates, and not the one who finds obedient executors and does not work with those who have other approaches. » Need to connect voedinyzhdy, and specifically need such a favorite opposition. "
Drakakhrust: "Vitaly Tsigankov, and I ask you to answer my two questions: so what happened in Congress irreversible split, and will continue to live as the opposition, as the democratic forces will live?"
Tsigankov: "Easy questions … But at first I thought of a definition that gave the emperor Milinkevich. Here is a case where I agree with their interlocutors and agree with Milinkevich. When he read about the left and independent units — this is the usual political rhetoric to intensify his supporters.
With regard to the fact that it had ambitions, we, namely, Svetlana already were that ambition in politics — this is a common thing, but at the right moments worth their mute. Maybe what really Milinkevich povinet either, but, for example,» On Joint plainclothes party views on many slightly helped him in the presidential election. And part of the responsibility she failed, and Milinkevich obliged to keep in mind, is it not erase from memory when there are discussions about a collaboration.
Well, about what will be, this political and spiritual opposition split although he was not formally approved by the Congress, was a natural. And the question is, is excellent or bad.

V.Tsygankov: "More young part of the opposition — for ideas and Milinkevich Statkievich voted mostly young members of Congress, will be more active and beskapramisnuyu fight."

Maybe I agree with Svetlana, it’s not so bad. One part of the opposition to bow to a more cautious, speak out so that the "parliamentary" strategy with elements of finding a compromise with the authorities and hopes for their evolution. But another, more youthful part of the opposition — for ideas and Milinkevich Statkievich voted mostly young members of Congress — this part will be more active and beskapramisnuyu struggle. The younger generation in politics is always more radical action it wishes, and from time to time it does not want to build these strategies, it does not read these texts. It takes a purely visual politicians differently. And this young generation did not want such a policy that was now in Congress.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: