Drakakhrust: "It is necessary to engage in unfair elections in parliament impotent? Today’s elections in Belarus — colorful illustration of this dilemma. On the one hand in the midst of PEC members, those who will actually count the votes, opposition representatives make shred percent, opposition candidates and their teams under strong pressure from the authorities. On the other hand most of the opposition candidates still registered until there is massive and significant obstacles to campaigning. However, it should be added that the Belarusian parliament has a surprisingly moderate opportunities. According to the Constitution Presidential Decree above the law so that the head of the country can manage, generally oblivious to the legislators. Now imagine for yourself (but that did not fact) that the new parliament will get 3-5-10 opposition MPs. And what will they do there? direct broadcasts No sessions, opportunities are moderate.
So what’s the meaning of roles in the elections to the parliament itself? Stephanie, do you think? "
Schiffer: "Indeed, such a question is asked and a harsh question. Belarusian colleagues understand that role in such elections — is not that the only chance for the opposition to come into contact with the population, because they are not represented in parliament and do not have access to municipal media. This company gives them the ability, however, is very limited, to formulate their proposals and convey them to the public. Although conditions unjust and unequal, but they decided to use this chance and it’s true. "
Drakakhrust: "Vitaly Portnikov you followed these elections in almost all countries of the post-Soviet space. What is your answer to the question — should participate in the unfair elections in powerless parliament?"
Portnikov: "I was covering besides congresses Deputies in the late ’80s and early ’90s and the first parliament of the Union republics, in which representatives potraflyali not what the opposition but rather people who were not quite agree with the Communist Party. Then chief argument was that, in the 1-x, during the elections could talk and read with a population that is unrealistic to say to other criteria and in-2, in the Parliament should be people who can come out with a point view differs from the view of the authorities. We presently we see, that the Russian State Duma lost by getting rid of the few opposition leaders who were present even in the Putin era.
In my opinion, the most presence of a few people who just call to obey the law is fundamental for at least some of the legislature, even one hundred percent controlled by the presidential administration. "
Drakakhrust: "Vitali, so it looks that all the" color revolutions "in the former Soviet space were actually inside komplota nomenklatura elites. So not even a small opposition faction in parliament to become a channel of communication with the real opposition peremptory elite of the country, with those that actually is able to initiate change? "
Vitaly Portnikov portraitPortnikov: "Then you must agree that at any moment the change of power in the former Russian republics — it was a struggle inside the very nomenclature that has been successfully decorated by popular indignation. Popular anger was certainly too, but the question is, who enjoyed its fruits.
Can be fully that the Belarusian "color" revolution, when people came to the square, did not work because even in the nomenclature of the no desire to get rid of Alexander Lukashenko. Here comes the question of why we believe that the change of power in Belarus will happen according to this particular recipe. I have a suspicion that after what happened in Georgia, and the fact that at the moment is happening in Ukraine, you may find that the best recipe — inadequate. We still have two recipes change of power in the former Soviet Union: a transfer of power to a successor (Russian recipe) and Independence (Georgia-Ukraine-Kyrgyzstan recipe). There is, incidentally, the third recipe — just elections, losing power in elections. It also once was, and in Ukraine, and Moldova, but this is all have forgotten, because it is clear that these were features of democracy.
I think it would be possible to Belarus State where they will find a third way, maybe something in between the receiver and the Maidan. "
Drakakhrust: "Radzikhovsky, the three of us discuss this issue at a theoretical level. And you were once the State Duma of Russia. And from personal experience, and according to your awareness — should participate in the unfair elections in parliament impotent?"
Radzikhovsky: "I really was a member of the short-lived time Dyarzhumy. One of the most fun and terrible memories, when I remember. So uzdryganusya. This was in 1993, the elections were relatively fair, honest vote count is comparable, and of parliament in Russia then was not such too powerless abomination he had panarabits pretty.
Because I can also read faster on a theoretical level. I agree that read as colleagues.
I would also add one ordinary judgment. And what about the opposition, if they do not participate in the election, the parliament is not in session and do not try to sit? Here’s an example for you to Russian opposition. From election pushed them — someone was not allowed due to the brand new law on political parties, who admitted, the votes have been counted so that everything has become stupid. None of them did not get into the Duma. And what did they do, poor man, having appeared at the threshold of the Duma? Vladimir showed mass rally and raise them to the revolutionary struggle?
Drakakhrust: "Jackals at foreign embassies" — in the words of Putin. "
Radzikhovsky: "Favorite ATP Pure white" jackals "not from foreign embassies and running a sports commentator on" Echo of Moscow ". Favourite GOP Ryzhkov leads historical transmission on the same" Echo. "Kasyanov generally not seen and not heard. Kasparov commented extensively presidential campaign exclusively in the United States. Word madhouse. With their policy thrown. no ability to influence something they are not. Their rolled into the asphalt.
If politics is a small chance to participate in a political process, it must participate. Profession Requests "
Drakakhrust: "And at this point we will return to Belarus and slightly extend the scope of the conversation. Conditions of parliamentary elections — is only one of the stakes of trade. Alexander Lukashenko began with the West. Other rates — more if less weighty. Not so long ago in the country were released all political prisoners , including personal enemy Lukashenko Alexander Kozulin. addition, after Our homeland recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Lukashenko, despite the expectations of many, for the "older brother" would not go.
So will the West — the European Union and the United States — in favor of normalization? All the same, and after the indicated steps, and even if the elections will be acceptable by the standards of decency of the CIS, Belarus still remains an authoritarian state. So will the West still to such a deal? Leonid, what do you think? "
Radzikhovsky: "I believe that the West would take Lukashenka with hands and feet, if one little mustache and hair combed translated from right to left. Temperate In my submission to you, what there Belarus
Democracy, Western politicians do not care. Western human rights activists and journalists, obviously will make noise, but it is up to them — to make noise. But divorced from the last ally of Russia and toss it with 2 allies — South Ossetia and Abkhazia, it would be a tremendous gift. would tear off with relish. But the problem is, Lukashenko that flirting with the West — this is just the traditional "dynamo", as they say. It "dynamite" the West, and the West is well aware of. During 1-x, Alexander Grigoryevich funds are needed. And they rolled him as much money as they rolled Our homeland in the form of loans or feral gas prices — well, not in the West will do it. Tear in Russian ally — not a bad thing, but for it to give pleasure billion — such eccentrics nowhere else, except Russia. Vo-2, even a small weakening in the case of contacts with the West will lead to a condition which read Mike S. — "the process has begun." And it is not under pressure from the West, but under the pressure of information transparency, new connections, and much more. Will the process and fly the entire regime of Lukashenko up feet. Why he needs it? Because on any harsh contact with the West, he will not go. But the cost for himself in the eyes of Moscow, he fills and right doing. What-what, but in the lack of reason and opportunity to bargain it seems no vinyl ever. "
Drakakhrust: "Leonid, I would ask you to clarify your two theses. You have said — the West would take. Took what? In the European Union, NATO, lifted sanctions that currently apply to Belarus cleared funds?
And second — that Lukashenko does not want to recognize the Georgian autonomies, does this mean that he is very risk that Russian deceived and humiliated love can very quickly transform into hatred with enough significant financial implications? "
Radzikhovsky: "About" took "it you’re right. Nobody him either NATO or the EU will not take. But sanctions would certainly have abolished. And began to fuss. Here, say, Ukraine or Georgia. They are not friends either NATO or EU. But they were being intensively and enjoyable novel. What does "take?" This mitigation of the trade, and it is a series of small, but nice pleasures. Admission to the British Queen, for example. Parukatstsa with the Father, to stand near the French president. They say that favorite "freedom" dictatorships very love to talk to "the world imperialist monster." Just do not feed bread. For such small joys Alexander G. would pay dearly. Well, the West would gladly. to be seen various Western favorites and so lift the sanctions — this they went. But funds commensurate with the money he receives from the Russian Federation, as he had not seen his own ears. With Merkel stand under the handle nicely, but the money is more important.
And about that, will not change the offended love bear inverse emotions — you know, feeling emotions, but Russian is not currently up to such subtle emotions. In Russia, at the moment there is no 1st ally in the world, except for weird Hispanics, who also have difficulty understanding what is our homeland, our birthplace as poorly understands what Nicaragua and Venesuela. And in such a situation to allow himself to pout Lukashenko …
Personal files with Putin in his clear what — not much better than Putin and Saakashvili. On a personal love is not talking, and never it was not. A break with the last ally — well, it’s for a very Russian. So now Our homeland is interested in Belarus even more than yesterday. "
Drakakhrust: "Stephanie, Leonid proposed interpretation in this style Realpolitik, a la Bismarck. He said that Western human rights activists will obviously make noise, but it’s nothing on impact. Here You just such western human rights and there. To reply to you on the question, whether the transaction Belarus-West "
Schiffer: "Europe has a lot of enthusiasm to Belarus, as there is enthusiasm to the neighboring countries of the EU were democratic and reliable partners. It — Your Enthusiasm EU. Because if they are severe and not flimsy signs of improvement of the situation in Belarus, while the European Union to fulfill those promises which he did — lift visa sanctions, and bring Belarus trade preferences. I believe that the West should look at very closely the situation and do not buy into the wrong signals from Belarus. For example, the release of political prisoners — this is definitely a positive step. second aspect — is walking elections. Very fundamentally, that is held in Belarus and state, and international monitoring of the election campaign by the European Union, the OSCE and the CIS. Only when the results of this monitoring will be positive, you can read about improving relations. This improvement — in the interests of Europe, and in the interests and in the interests of Belarus Lukashenko. clear that the West would wish for themselves, not of this partner, as Lukashenko. Lukashenko But if in fact change its policy, then I’m all for better relations will even President Lukashenko will remain. "
Drakakhrust: "Stephanie, I thought that you have brought in their own answer to the dilemma problem of political advocacy. But there are also political reasons. Geapalitychnyya There are reasons that read Leonid. There is the time factor: 14 years Europe conducted about this policy, which reads you. And what was the result? Besides that Belarus democratic standards as those were not, not. "
Schiffer: "But it’s not our business, not the business of the European states or human rights — to change the situation in Belarus, or in any other country. This is the work of our partners — in Belarus, Ukraine, advocate for human rights, for freedom and fair elections. West can only welcome and provide political support. I believe that these standards are important and they should be fine. A political games do not lead to positive results. Belarus — it is not a pawn in the game. geapalitychnaya Even if the situation changes, then Europe will not play like this before Bismarck in the XIX century. This, thank God, and distinguishes the EU from the German Reich and of earlier empires. European Union — it is such a bureaucratic structure, but it’s fine. There usually are conditions and it is clear and politicians and ordinary people — if the conditions are made, then the negotiations can be. Belarus should not be the object of the game in Europe or geapalitychnay Russia. So although we occasionally razdrazhnyaemsya on what Europe unhurried in their own decisions, that these aspects have gives us realize if they are satisfied.
In this — the majestic power of Europe. This distinguishes it from the empire, say, from what we now litsezreem in Russia. "
Drakakhrust: "Vitali, Stephanie Leonidas and posted almost two polar approaches. Which is closer to you? And what is your answer — held dealings between Lukashenko and the West, and on what criteria?"
Portnikov: "I’m at ease not sure that any of these approaches can be considered close to reality based on the belief that what happens in nature. If we beheld from Europe such as harsh reaction to the violation of freedom of speech in Georgia, where fellows associated with authorities, crushing only independent television, which remained at Misha Saakashvili, if we beheld an adequate response to opposition rally by force, I would agree with Stephanie. And I would wish, by the way, recall that it was up to the Georgian-Russian conflict, when there was no need to defend Georgia from invading Russian troops. I admit that what happened in Georgia at the moment, and is a consequence of the "consumption" of the democratic standards of the countries who are convinced that Belarus can react in one way, because Belarus — an ally of Russia and Georgia — the other, because Georgia is like sayuznitsa West. Essentially Georgia and Belarus — are the true allies of, because they are building their so
ciety or the post-Soviet Russian standard. priuchivayut And his population to dvaedumstva. Just in Georgia it goes even better than in Belarus. would I wished that we remember this when we talk about possible transactions Alexander Lukashenko to the West, that these deals as it can not happen, the only way as Belarus does not respect certain standards. It seems to me that now the United States and the European Union are not required standards in the usual sense of the word, and a typical film, which is necessary to cover the country, so as not to be seen what happens there underneath, and that it was possible tell tales of democratic transformation. The only problem is that Lukashenko itself for itself — not the person, which can be so beautifully packaged. He’s no different from Misha Saakashvili, who began his political activities with the Democratic demagoguery. And Lukashenko began his political activities with demagoguery Russian standard — the need unification of Belarus and Russia, the restoration of the Soviet Union, etc. I admit that the only thing he can reach the West, some weakening in exchange for what he does not recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia, do not let them into the country of the union. This will already be enormous feats.
But clearly another — that at least some of Lukashenko’s successor series nomenclature, regardless of whether he comes to power by "color" revolution or just by ordinary elections to be organized nomenclature — it will be announced Democrat favorite, who is committed to the democratization of Belarus.
And I will guarantee it is just. And yet no real democratization of Belarus is not useful, not useful as no real democratization of Georgia, that we witnessed comedy that we look after the "color" revolution in this country. "
Drakakhrust: "Vitaly, you have said that you are not satisfied Both approaches, and Leonid approach too. And what?"
Portnikov: "I had in mind the words of Leonid that Belarus remains alone with Russia, because the West will not pay her so much, how much to pay our homeland. It seems to me that this little utopian approach. West, if not the EU, the U.S. can find the resources to pay the costs, if not the country of Belarus, the cost of the Belarusian nomenklatura. And people in Belarus already not rich enough to think that they live only by Russian subsidies. During the Russian subsidies — in the form of gas prices, and in the form of direct funds perapampovvayutstsa through Belarus, could live much better lives than the average Belarusian. I’m not talking about energoelementov transit through Belarus, which will never stop, and intrigued by Russian Federation in connection with Belarus on many fronts. Can increment energoelementy prices, but certain economic ability Belarus still remain — everyday, ordinary, not ugly, even if it ceases to be a satellite of the Russian Federation and is just dabrazchlivym its neighbor. Why do we always think that can be either — or? Or satellite or enemy. Belarus could become a regular neighbor of, at least the way was time Ukraine Leonid Kuchma. I do not see an economic disaster for Belarus if it abandons Russian preferences. I am sure that in this case it has the ability to continue development and reforming the economy "
Drakakhrust: "Stephanie, you have to cast the accusation of" double standard ". What can you say in your defense?"
Schiffer: "This is not an accusation faster and padtsvyarzhenne what I said. If currently use a different policy towards Belarus since there are certain political interests, then it just can be read on the" double standards ". Vitaly right blames West that it supports Saakashvili, though really there and media freedom and freedom of assembly were big prepyadstviya. This faithful rebuke. I believe that this kind of reproach to Europe, and to the United States, there have very significant interests. I believe that the West should be afraid of such accusations, because I said, what exactly is currently Europe towards Belarus should find their very true standards and rely on its principles. Since unsafe to use various aspects to those who are close to you, and those who’s your long-range. "
Drakakhrust: "Leonid, you usually blame the cynicism, and Vitaly, contrary to the custom, referred to either approach utopian."
Radzikhovsky: "The world is diverse, who for the 1st cynic, for another — an idealist. This extra confirmation advantages of democracy. I believe that the European Union still has no ability at the moment to throw billion to maintain the Belarusian economy. Such jokes are likely in Russia, where the budget taken on orders from the Kremlin.’s Our homeland pays South Ossetia and does not know how much. Nobody knows, but everyone is happy. these things in the European Union do not pass.
I partly agree with Vitali that could be some kind of support from America. Here they give Georgia billion to rebuild, and Belarus could have something to give. But I, in 1-x, not sure what the Americans prevail in this tender, outbid Belarus in Russia. In-2, anyway, but now once again be accused of idealizme, but it seems to me that the South American funds more transparent than Russian. What there preferences of the Russian Federation Alexander G. gets and how to dispose of them, it is clear only to himself. If he even got the same funds from America, will have to keep their report to Congress, in front of some inspectors, to which he had no inclination. He is ordinary habit: got — my. Exchange contacts with Russia for him not only profitable oil easier. And as for that read Stephanie, I agree that in the XXI century, pragmatism is the best — it is idealism. If you are trying to cover anyone under democratic impale someone, and under it a good old engage in imperialism, then 5 minutes it is a good policy, but later she is to you and knocks. But politicians, much less politics in the post do not think more than 5 minutes. And so far this strategy is completely alien to them. And second — this is fundamentally a dispute with European human rights activists. I do not believe that the same standards are equally to be attached to the various states. Vitaly rightly read about limitation of democracy in Georgia. But I would add that it is very good that Georgia was limited democracy with Saakashvili. After all, with this limited democracy they were able to sculpt something that is similar to the government. During the Shevardnadze democracy was much more, but the people who live there, they say that there is nothing similar to the government was generally well strolling through the streets some thugs took that wished the law had occurred, the authorities were not, was anarchy — Mom order. Another thing is that this power is always on and spekulyuyuts they say that, they say, we have a special situation, in principle, we are for democracy and rights, but the coming 30 years, please sit in the camp. It is profitable for the authorities and they tend to exaggerate the difficulties. But in Georgia, as I understand it. democratic development difficulties were and what would Saakashvili was, but some government although he awkwardly, but was able to construct. In its predecessors and it does not go. "