It is safe to say that Belarus is now in a pre-revolutionary situation.
There are only three ways out of this situation:
Introduction of emergency dictatorship
Revolution proper
Broad concessions civil society on the part of the authorities, a radical transformation of the system, the transition from an aggressive authoritative monologue to a dialogue on an equal footing.
Of these three options, only one is good, the last one. If the authorities decide to choose not him, but the first, then he can very quickly move to the second. And the second, in turn, is an attempted occupation by a sworn ally. With all the perks that come with it.
Maidan is a negotiating tool
At the same time, the authorities are preparing for the fourth option - a repetition of the Ukrainian Maidan in Belarus. Which in our conditions is completely unrealistic.
You ask, is Maidan not a revolution? Maybe I will surprise someone with this statement, but no, Maidan is not a revolution.
It escalated into an uprising that ended with the flight of Yanukovych and the collapse of the ruling Party of Regions, more than two months after its inception.
It lasted so long not because a critical mass of people who were capable of bending power under themselves did not come out to protest. On the contrary, one of the most numerous protests was a rally against the dispersal of a group of students on 30 November. That is, at the very beginning of the Maidan.
In the view of the Belarusians, the release of such a number of people to protest means almost an automatic fall of power. And this is true - Yanukovych could have been swept away already on December 1.
If there was such a task.
There was no such task. Despite the claims of opponents of the Maidan, who say that it was a coup d'état, in fact, the Maidan was an instrument of opposition pressure on the government, a factor in partly public, partly behind-the-scenes negotiations.
Politicians deliberately not only did not lead people to storm, but also restrained the radicalization of the protest with all their might.
Because they achieved political victory at minimal cost. The political leaders of the Maidan were not opposition in the Belarusian sense of the word, that is, not semi-underground and eternally persecuted dissidents, but part of the power system in Ukraine.
At a certain moment, opposition politicians were ready to negotiate with Yanukovych, having received beautiful and large portfolios from him. But Maidan did not understand this and did not accept it. I was present there at the time of the announcement from the stage of this proposal. From the whistle and roar of indignation with which he was greeted by ordinary protesters, his ears were blocked. It seemed that now the stage, together with political leaders who had clearly ceased to be them, would simply be swept away.
That's when the angry crowd took the initiative into their own hands. And the Maidan began to turn from a factor of negotiations with the authorities into an uprising.
The impenetrable stupidity of Yanukovych led to him, who did not immediately understand that if you tighten the nuts in such a situation, then the thread will definitely break. Took off.
Be afraid not of the Ukrainian, but of the Romanian scenario
Sorvet and have us. Although Belarus is not Ukraine, people are about the same everywhere, everyone has self-esteem. Previously, this feeling did not hurt the general population, because the layer of fat did not give. And the repressions were perceived as directed against a narrow and alien stratum of the population.
But now, when Maksim Filipovich, the hero of the most popular social network Odnoklassniki, is being detained on live TV to the cry of his mother, this is perceived quite differently - as "ours are being beaten."
There will be no Maidan in Belarus. Because there is no politics in Belarus. There is no platform for negotiations. There is no negotiation. No one to negotiate.
There are no those who are able to provide support for the long-term existence of the protest camp. Belarusian Poroshenko and Klitschko, relatively speaking. Maidan consumed tons of firewood and food. Charter buses regularly ran from the regions, bringing those wishing to take part in the protests. And what was the cost of the non-stop work of a huge stage?
No and large groups people who enjoy the fight itself - the same football ultras. Which are able to savor and stretch the confrontation with the security forces.
It is almost impossible to fight a revolution, a large-scale popular uprising. Only if you suppress tanks like in China. But for this you have to be China.
Belarus is not China. In our country, a revolution can be prevented only by broad concessions to a society in which discontent is already seething. It cannot even be delayed by repression. On the contrary, they can only speed it up.
It would be better for the authorities to keep in their heads a picture not of Kyiv in 2013-2014, but of the Romanian revolution of 1989. More than suddenly. Lasted only a week. And ending is known what. Very bad for the ruling elite.
Among the Eastern European countries of the socialist bloc, Romania was the least democratic. "The most cruel" to use the terminology of the Belarusian president. With perfect order, raisins picked out of all the rolls. That is why the overthrow of communism was here very fast and extremely bloody. To paraphrase famous saying Nietzsche: "If you pick the raisins for a long time, the raisins start picking you out."
The more “velvety” the regimes were in the countries of the socialist camp, the calmer the changes took place in them. This is a completely logical pattern, which is strongly worth thinking about.
You need to be more careful with the people, more gently. Especially when he is very unhappy and angry.
A number of unfriendly signals that Russia and Belarus have been exchanging more and more often lately suggests: is it possible that another Maidan will happen in Belarus?
Most likely, there will be no classic “orange revolution” in Belarus under the current leadership. But this is not the worst crisis scenario that this situation is fraught with.
Orange Revolution and other variants
Why will there not be an orange revolution in Belarus?
The essence of the classic orange revolution is to force the leadership to voluntarily surrender power. This coercion is carried out not by a defiantly noisy crowd on the square (Maidan), but by a superior external force (usually global), behind the scenes delivering an ultimatum to the objectionable local authorities and twisting the victim's arms with all available means.
Threats and intimidation paralyze power. Power, in turn, paralyzes the entire state apparatus, which under normal conditions is perfectly prepared to neutralize those who disturb the order. As a result, the external force that has gained the upper hand appoints the right people, and all this is served as a victory for the crowd from the street. In a similar way(using the staged image of the people or the masses) these new, in principle anti-democratic proteges and appointees are legitimized.
Usually, a prerequisite for the development of the orange scenario is the existence of a significant dependence of the current local government on the dictating external force. As a rule, this is either direct personal dependence (accounts in foreign banks, property, a family living abroad, etc.), or economic dependence on external markets and resources, without access to which destructive crisis processes will inevitably begin in a given country. Another lever of pressure on local authorities can be banal intimidation (sanctions, harassment, persecution of family and loved ones, up to physical destruction, military invasion, etc.). These threats are more than real and have been repeatedly carried out in different conditions.
For some of the local leaders, even a hint of possible punishment is enough to make him complaisant (Shevardnadze). Someone has to apply the full range of coercive measures in in full(Gaddafi).
To understand the essence of the Orange Revolution, the example of Georgia is indicative: the hardened and unprincipled politician Shevardnadze was allegedly forced to give in to the crowd armed with flowers during the so-called “Rose Revolution”, and a few years after that, the democrat and common man Saakashvili, approved by the new leader of Georgia, cruelly dispersed without any extra sentiment the same street protest, when the naive local opposition tried to literally repeat the previous orange scenario in only one of its visible parts.
Belarus under Lukashenka in the course of previous electoral performances has shown its resistance to such external pressure. Lukashenka, regardless of personal pressure (when in the West he actually became “hands-shaking” and was subjected to harassment), or sanctions, he fundamentally went for a harsh dispersal of troublemakers, quite legitimately taking advantage of the occasions that presented themselves (riots, hooliganism, etc.). This is where it all ended.
Probably Lukashenka himself is far-sighted enough not to keep any significant savings in Western banks. Or maybe he's just a person of sufficient will to sacrifice existing addictions, if he had any. The scenario of a direct invasion for the forces that enforce Freedom and Democracy™ through coercion and dictatorship, in this case turned out to be somewhat problematic as long as Belarus is fairly closely integrated with Russia.
A change in this last factor can promise both Belarus and Lukashenka personally big troubles, fraught with the fate of Libya and Gaddafi. A serious conflict between Russia and Belarus can dramatically change the situation, and forces that have long been waiting in the wings will not fail to seize the opportunity that has turned up.
Objective prerequisites for the Belarusian-Russian conflicts
The main reason for all the strange petty conflicts and squabbles between the Russian and Belarusian sides is objective economic contradictions.
Just yesterday, in the days of the USSR, we lived in a truly unified country, where the national borders of the union republics were nothing more than the borders of territorial and economic units.
Today, Russia and Belarus are trying to reproduce a union state, but on a capitalist basis and without a single center, while maintaining national centers authorities. This is an extremely dubious undertaking. Such an alliance can exist only as a temporary transitional phase towards some more stable collective organization.
The fact is that in conditions where competition is the basis of economic relations, any union is fraught with conflicts. Each of the members of the union wants to maximize their own benefit, each pulls a limited blanket over himself. As a result, such an association, no matter how well-intentioned it may be, degenerates either into the “metropolis-colonies” system (where, while maintaining the outward appearance of the participation of many independent parties, one party actually manages and decides, dictating its will to the rest - this is the formation of a metastate with a characteristic for antagonistic societies, uneven and unfair distribution of income), or there is a conflict and a break, followed by a struggle and the search for new points of contact (then the cycle repeats again).
A typical example of a union built on capitalist foundations is the European Union. In theory, it is built on the promising liberal principles of removing barriers to the movement of capital and labor resources promising equality of opportunity for all members of this union. In practice, a prosperous core of the few largest economies (internal metropolis, primarily Germany and France) and a depressive dependent periphery with purposefully nullified industrial potentials have formed, serving as a reserve of resources for the core (internal colonies). It is not surprising that this union is torn apart by contradictions, and the further it goes, the more it is bursting at the seams. This happens because initially economically stronger participants inevitably subordinate to themselves and their interests the weaker ones and the entire union as a whole.
The situation with union associations in the post-union space is similar, the union of Russia and Belarus is no exception. Good intentions are based on: general history, removal of barriers, equality and independence of the parties, etc. But in reality, each of the parties is isolated as a market subject and pursues own interests. At the same time, the GDP of Belarus is only about 4% of the GDP of Russia. The share of Belarus in Russia's exports and imports is about 4% and 5%, respectively. And the share of Russia in the export and import of Belarus is about 40% and 56%. Do you understand what kind of equality we are talking about here?
When a conflict of interest arises (and it inevitably and systematically arises under conditions of capitalism and competition), Russia has much more opportunities to dictate its will. Belarus has almost none. Therefore, any seemingly purely economic conflict entails demonstrative signals in the political plane.
For example, the sanctions war between Russia and Ukraine is indirectly hurting the economy of Belarus, since the latter has traditionally been engaged in the processing and re-export of Ukrainian agricultural products. This used to be a perfectly normal practice. Now Russia is forced to respond to sanctions and limit supplies from Ukraine, including by blocking Belarusian channels under far-fetched pretexts. The inadequate quality of products supplied through Belarus is a myth, Russia does it purely political motives. For Russia, this measure is not burdensome and even beneficial, because it enlivens its own Russian production. For Belarus - apparently, quite painful. But Belarus cannot influence the development of the situation in any way. Hence the political signals and the demonstrative opposition.
By themselves, these political picks are not dangerous either for Russia or for Belarus, because they are purely symbolic and do not lead to any serious consequences. But a subjective factor can come into play, which played its extremely negative role for the same Gaddafi.
Subjective factor of Belarusian-Russian relations
All regimes that today claim political independence from the world center of capital inevitably represent a monopoly on political power with the nomination of a personalized political leader. Such regimes are denounced in the world media for the lack of a real political market, as authoritarian and anti-democratic. But this is the only way to resist the overwhelming external economic force that turns everything into a market and buys everything on it. And this approach of political consolidation is very effective, which is proved by extensive historical practice.
However, he also has a significant drawback or Achilles' heel, which in this case is the head. The leader or leadership at the head of a centralized political monopoly is the weakest link in the entire system.
If we turn to the recent history of the countries that opposed the West, we can see that, despite the objectivity of socio-economic processes, it was the moral and intellectual qualities of the leadership that largely predetermined the further way development followed by individual countries in approximately similar conditions (USSR, China, etc.). Similarly, the skill of the driver behind the wheel of a car in a dangerous traffic situation can greatly influence its likely outcome.
So, the peculiarity of a political monopoly is that the irremovable leader or the elite (the establishment) may eventually lose their adequacy. Every monopoly is subject to decay. Any permanent leader or member of the ruling elite experiences the deforming influence of power (constant praise from below, embellishment of the state of affairs, the ease of voluntaristic decisions, each of which is evaluated no less than “brilliant” and “sightseeing”, massive PR, wishful thinking, which in as a result, you yourself begin to believe, etc.). Which can, in especially difficult cases, lead to dizziness from success and a complete separation from reality.
American politicians can be so sure of their military and political superiority over other savages from around the world that even the threat of nuclear war. leader of a small North Korea may begin to seriously think that he can really survive in a full-scale military conflict with the United States. The leader of a prosperous Libya may believe that it is possible for everyone and everyone to openly tell the unpleasant truth in person and not necessarily have allies. The leader of Belarus can decide what happens to him in economic terms are not respectful enough (not as he is used to), and he can arrange a little on this occasion family scandal, slam the door and play on political nerves.
The Russian leader may feel offended in the best feelings by such "ingratitude" and wish to put the forgotten partner before the fact, even at the cost of losing significant strategic positions (already what in a row).
In this case, the subjective factor cannot be completely discounted.
Conclusion
So far, nothing strange and unexpected is happening in relations between Russia and Belarus, as well as in Belarus itself. Ordinary economic conflicts, aggravated in a crisis, the usual opposition fuss. However, the deliberate aggravation of such conflicts, leading to large-scale destructive consequences, does not play into the hands of either Belarus or Russia. The development of events according to such a catastrophic scenario (when Belarus goes to break allied relations, and Russia steps aside, looking indifferently at the defeat of the current Belarusian regime, and even contributing to this) will be simply a blatant fact of the incompetence and inadequacy of the Russian and Belarusian leadership, and therefore their inevitable impending doom (one who undertakes a serious and dangerous work, while not understanding what he is doing, sooner or later he will end up in a hospital bed without arms or right in the morgue).
Dmitry Vader
In Belarus, on March 25, 2017, another attempt was made to organize mass riots, which, according to their organizers, were to become a prologue to the beginning of the "color revolution" in the country.
On this day, the Belarusian liberal-nationalist opposition planned to hold large-scale political actions throughout the country, which were timed to coincide with the so-called Freedom Day, which is celebrated on the anniversary of the proclamation of the puppet Belarusian People's Republic (BNR) in 1918.
Belarusian "Svidomites" prepared for mass actions on March 25, 2017 for quite a long time and carefully. According to their plan, on this day, thousands of dissatisfied citizens were to come out against the regime of Alexander Lukashenko, some of them had already been destined for the role of "heavenly hundred". The role of the local "Right Sector" should have been played by Belarusian, as well as Ukrainian radicals, who arrived in Belarus in advance. However, more on that later.
Puppeteers and performers
During February-March 2017, a wave of protest actions swept across Belarus, the reason for which was the enactment of Decree No. 3 "On the Prevention of Social Dependency". The legislative act provides for the establishment of a special tax for non-working able-bodied citizens of the country. Large-scale actions, gathering up to 3000 participants, took place in all major cities countries. The frankly pro-Western opposition in the person of the so-called Belarusian National Congress (BNC), headed by former presidential candidates Nikolai Statkevich and Vladimir Neklyaev, as well as the first president of Belarus Stanislav Shushkevich, tried to lead them and in no way allow a dialogue between the protesters and the authorities. In addition, various radical groups were actively involved in rocking the situation - from anarchists to outright neo-Nazis, significant amount who were trained in special paramilitary camps, and some even took part in the hostilities in the Donbass on the side of Ukrainian punishers.
On March 21, 2017, the law enforcement agencies of the Republic of Belarus detained the leaders of the so-called "White Legion" and "Young Front" Miroslav Lozovsky and Dmitry Dashkevich, as well as their accomplices. Total number detained representatives of radical groups amounted to 26 people. The Belarusian special services also discovered a cache from which cold and firearms, including a Kalashnikov assault rifle, carbines, pistols, live grenades, body armor, helmets, symbols of Belarusian and Ukrainian Nazis, including UNA-UNSO and the Azov regiment, extremist literature, large sum of money in dollars and euros.
As President of the Republic of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko openly stated, anti-government actions in the country were financed from American and German funds. The mediators in this case were the neighbors of Belarus - Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine. These same countries became a springboard for the training of militants who were to become strike force Minsk Maidan.
Poroshenko overthrows Lukashenka
The Tsargrad TV channel is already on the invariably pronounced Ukrainian trace in the actions of the Belarusian opposition. In particular, we pointed to the close connection of Statkevich and Neklyaev with the Kyiv regime. In the course of preparing for the actions on March 25, they did not even try to hide it. Among the Ukrainian coordinators of the Belarusian Nazis, Verkhovna Rada deputy from the Popular Front Igor Guz, formerly one of the leaders of the Euromaidan in Lutsk and the leader of the far-right National Alliance group, is often named. Back in 2005, Guz traveled to Belarus, where he took part in the action of Belarusian nationalists "Chernobyl Way", was detained by law enforcement officers and expelled from the country with a ban on entry for a period of five years. In 2014, after the start of the punitive operation in the Donbass, Guz helped the Belarusian nationalists from the Chase detachment in every possible way, who took part in the hostilities as part of the Nazi battalions. On March 22, 2017, on his Facebook page, Guz called on the heads of city and district councils to raise March 25 above administrative buildings white-red-white flags of Belarusian nationalists to support the Belarusians "who are fighting and died for Ukraine." And in fact, on the "Freedom Day" itself, Guz addressed with congratulations to Belarusian language to the Belarusian "Svidomo", lamenting that Lukashenka "imprisons those who can defend Belarus in the event of Russian aggression" and that "a country with such power will never be a reliable ally of Ukraine."
Information about the upcoming penetration of the Nazis from neighboring Ukraine into Belarus, who were supposed to arrange bloody provocations during the actions on March 25, 2017, appeared long before Freedom Day. However, the security services and law enforcement agencies of the country were ready to receive uninvited guests. So, on the night of March 20, in the area of the Aleksandrovka border checkpoint in the Gomel region, a Jeep car, in which there were three people, tried to break through the Ukrainian-Belarusian border. After the use of weapons by border guards, the car was stopped, two violators were detained, one managed to escape. A TT pistol, ammunition, TNT sticks, grenades, detonators and an improvised explosive device were found in the car. The next day, commenting on the incident, Lukashenko said that recently attempts to illegally move dangerous goods across the border have become noticeably more frequent.
Belarus. Minsk. March 26, 2017. Protest in Minsk against detentions on March 25, 2017. Photo: Viktor Drachev/TASS
The incident in Alexandrovka seriously alarmed the Kyiv curators of the Belarusian nationalists, who assisted the radicals in moving across the border. So, on the eve of the anti-government action itself, an open correspondence appeared on the Web between Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine Serhiy Kislytsya and a deputy of the Verkhovna Rada from the Petro Poroshenko Bloc Oleksiy Goncharenko, in which the Kyiv regime is clearly involved in the organization of the Belarusian Maidan. In the correspondence, Goncharenko complains that due to the strengthening of the regime on the border after the incident in Aleksandrovka, the radicals cannot get to Minsk, and is looking for assistance from a representative of the diplomatic department. He notes that this was already the fifth or sixth incident in a month, and pointedly emphasizes that "the way is definitely closed from us." Kislitsa promises assistance in transporting radicals to Belarus through Poland and Lithuania. Interestingly, Goncharenko reports that in Minsk Statkevich prepared dozens of apartments for guests from Ukraine and booked hotel rooms, from which it is concluded that a "grand event" is being prepared. According to the deputy, militants from the Right Sector, Azov (banned in Russia), Chases, representatives of Samopomich and Svoboda, ATO veterans have expressed a desire to go to Minsk.
"It should be said in this regard that from the Ukrainian side, the territory of Belarus was influenced by both right-wing extremist groups, like Azov, and ultra-left ones, like, for example, Revolutionary Action, and the Center for Information and Psychological Operations of the Ministry defense of Ukraine. Repeatedly, somewhere since the autumn of 2016, attempts have been and are being made to interfere in the information field of Belarus. In particular, this is the discrediting of experts who speak from state positions, disinformation regarding Belarusian-Russian relations. We see that the Ukrainian side purposefully acts to drive a wedge between Russia and Belarus. And the latest appointment of a new ambassador of Ukraine to the Republic of Belarus only confirms this. For the ambassador is known for being responsible for Ukraine's relations with NATO. Western intelligence agencies,- Belarusian political expert Pyotr Petrovsky commented on the situation in an interview with Tsargrad.
According to him, the main goal of Kyiv is to discredit the Union State, prevent Eurasian integration and the possible deterioration of relations between Minsk and Moscow.
“Therefore, all identified members of extremist organizations who tried to legalize themselves with the help of military-patriotic camps and recruited young people are a consequence of precisely the actions of the Ukrainian side that it is carrying out in relation to Belarus, an ally of the Russian Federation,” Petrovsky added.
D-Day in Minsk
The Belarusian law enforcement agencies did everything to ensure that the “Freedom Day” passed peacefully and did not turn into bloody chaos according to the Ukrainian scenario, as Statkevich, Neklyaev, Guz, Goncharenko and other Ukrainian and Belarusian Nazis lured by Western architects of “color revolutions” wished. Thanks to preventive arrests of opposition leaders, radicals, journalists who sympathize with them and human rights activists, all provocations aimed at destabilizing the situation were nipped in the bud. The total number of people detained by the police, both before the start of the action and during it, according to the estimates of pro-Western human rights activists, amounted to 700 people. True, most of them were released after checking the documents. In Brest, on the night of March 25, Vladimir Nyaklyaev was also detained, but then he was released. Another organizer of the illegal action, Mikalai Statkevich, suddenly disappeared on March 24th. Opposition media immediately announced that he had allegedly been kidnapped by government officials. However, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the KGB denied the information about his detention. As of Sunday evening, March 26, Statkevich's whereabouts remain unknown. It is possible that he could hide in order to avoid being held accountable.
“There was a preventive detention of coordinators, leaders and organizers of illegal mass events from the radical liberal opposition, as well as those representatives of extremist ultra-left and ultra-right organizations who tried to organize mass riots, Petrovsky continues. - Political processes? I think they will. Because these representatives of extremist ultra-right and ultra-left organizations were detained precisely on suspicion of organizing mass riots. Chests of weapons, explosives, extremist propaganda products were found. Therefore, they may face, in accordance with the legislation of the Republic of Belarus, up to 15 years in prison.”
"This time, the city authorities at the very last moment agreed to hold the action on Bangalore Square, which is about a kilometer from the central avenue and two hours later than the organizers of the Sabbath requested, just at the time when, according to forecasts, it was supposed to rain with snow. As a result, the procession that the opposition held on the central avenue of Minsk turned out to be unauthorized. This served as the basis for it to be very severely suppressed by law enforcement forces, which many times outnumbered the forces of the protesters.”, - Belarusian political analyst Mikhail Malash explained to Tsargrad.
According to Petrovsky, the total number of participants in the anti-government rally in Minsk amounted to "up to two thousand, maximum". “The problem is that there were only about half a thousand journalists. Therefore, it was quite difficult to separate the protesters from journalists and passers-by. And the tactics of sectoral division and cleansing of each sector separately did not make it possible to qualitatively calculate the number of participants in the action. I emphasize once again that everything was cordoned off within a radius of a kilometer from the planned venue for the action, there were police cordons. And so count the number potential participants illegal activity is not possible. My figure is within two thousand.”, the expert notes.
It should be noted that approximately the same number of people took part in the Minsk "march of non-parasites" on February 17, 2017. In other words, all attempts by the pro-Western opposition to lead a social protest and, using dissatisfaction with certain actions of the authorities, to shake up the situation in the country have completely failed.
"The reason for the relative large number of the action is the false sense of impunity that the protesting Eurominority had after the previous two actions related to the Decree on Parasites,- Mikhail Malash believes. - They hoped that the authorities, being in a difficult situation, would be afraid to conflict with the West. These people believe that there is some kind of direct connection between the level of relations between the authorities and the West and the loyalty of the authorities to the protesters”.
The failure of the "mutiny" in the regions
According to Petrovsky, the opposition leaders committed a deliberate and purposeful violation of the law, abandoning the route of the procession agreed with the authorities, which served legal basis for the detention of violators by law enforcement officers. A few unauthorized actions took place in Gomel and Vitebsk. But in Brest and Grodno, the protest events were agreed with the local authorities and took place in a calm atmosphere. characteristic feature of all actions in regional centers became their scarcity and emphasized social character. So, in Gomel, the participants themselves in their resolution called the event "March of the Net-Eaters - 2", including in the list of demands the abolition of Decree No. 3 and the creation of conditions for the development of entrepreneurship.
Political expert Petr Petrovsky connects the failure of the Belarusian Maidan with the fact that its organizers acted under completely different slogans than those protesting against Decree No. 3. In addition, they tried in every possible way to prevent dialogue between the protesters and the authorities. "In this regard, law enforcement agencies infiltrated them, brought them to justice. And today, without the mediation of radical oppositionists, there is a dialogue between the local authorities and those disgruntled citizens who take to the streets in the regions. As for possible actions in the future, I think that now the protest wave will subside, and those round tables that take place in Gomel, Vitebsk, Brest and other cities will continue to function within the framework of a dialogue between disgruntled citizens and representatives of local authorities.”- concluded the expert.
We add that President Alexander Lukashenko also spoke quite definitely on this issue, emphasizing that the radical opposition tried to use the protesters in their own interests. People, realizing this, refused to participate in the activities of provocateurs.
"When they saw these arsenals, they said: no, we will not go. They began to refuse all these rallies and demonstrations. They realized that the authorities were not afraid", the president stressed.
As expected, the EU sharply condemned the actions of the Belarusian authorities, who dispersed the demonstrators and allegedly carried out "repressions against freedom of speech and assembly." As after the events of 2010, the detained provocateurs and radicals will certainly be recognized as "political prisoners" and "prisoners of conscience", and new sanctions will be imposed on Minsk. At the same time, Western "human rights activists" are unlikely to take into account the fact that the detained "freedom fighters" with the support of their Ukrainian "brothers" were going to plunge another post-Soviet country into bloody chaos, thereby creating another hotbed of tension in an already troubled country. Europe lately.
Andrew Wilson: The current turmoil can be partially attributed to the deplorable state of the economy, which has experienced three recessions since 2008
Andrew Wilson, professor at University College London and author of The Ukraine Crisis: What Does It Mean for the West?
What he did not expect was the reaction of ordinary citizens who showed unprecedented solidarity: about half a million people came out to rallies and protests.
These fines were supposed to be a contribution to the state budget. But in practice, only one out of ten fined actually paid the required amount. People often had to borrow money from friends or relatives, because we are talking about a country where the average salary is $380 per month.
Cases of bureaucratic incompetence exacerbated the sense of injustice, and on February 17, about 2,500 protesters took to the streets of Minsk, marking the beginning of a series of small actions across the country that lasted almost a month.
So far, the West has not prepared much for a response to oppression in Minsk or an invasion from Moscow. But one thing is clear: the status quo will not remain the sameAlmost for the first time in the 23 years of Lukashenko's rule, the majority of street demonstrations - ordinary Belarusians, the urban intelligentsia and the traditional opposition - were left out.
Lukashenka's opponents are isolated and ineffective, they can win Western grants, but this does not bring them one step closer to ordinary Belarusians. Moreover, their belated attempts to join the wave of protests only play into the hands of the president. Over the past two decades, Lukashenka has never tired of repeating that ordinary Belarusians do not trust the “cosmopolitan” and “Western-backed” opposition.
The current turmoil can also be partly attributed to the poor state of the economy, which has suffered three downturns since 2008: in 2009, in 2010 (after Lukashenka's re-election) and in 2015. The country's economy is still based on a neo-Soviet, state-oriented model; It is difficult to imagine how the situation could improve. The most optimistic forecast for 2017 is a barely noticeable growth of 0.4 percent.
Not so long ago, Putin regularly provided Lukashenka with subsidies in the amount of 15-20% of Belarus' GDP. But this model has been crumbling since 2014, when Russia began to experience a recession due to huge spending on Crimea, Syria and eastern Ukraine.
The dysfunctionality of the Eurasian Economic Union, of which Belarus is a member, has also contributed to the country's economic problems. Created in 2015, it has yet to come close to meeting Putin's promises to become a "second European Union." The benefits from trading are minimal.
With the decline in exports to Russia, Belarusian factories began laying off workers. The two countries are engaged in an exhausting trade war. As part of the conflict, Russia introduced limited passport controls at the border last month, even though both countries are supposed to be part of a common "union state."
Lukashenka, in spite of everything, keeps up well and even identifies himself with the state (this is, to some extent, true). But many in the country were alarmed Russian campaign against Ukraine, which raised fears that the Kremlin might do something similar in Belarus. Lukashenka's diplomatic distancing towards Ukraine is not too reassuring in this situation. After all, today's Kremlin wants to see only servility.
Lukashenka is excellent at using the carrot and stick method. He brutally repressed political demonstrations after the 2010 fraudulent elections. He also bribes people by raising salaries and pensions. He's not used to haggling.
Lukashenka's advisers also whisper to him about the dangers of the "Ukrainian scenario" and popular uprising. But the suppression of the mass protest will play into the hands of Russia, and perhaps give a reason to intervene.
Therefore, Lukashenka intensively uses the carrot and stick method. He suspended the parasitism tax and agreed to shelve a controversial building project near Kurapaty, the burial site of the victims. Stalinist repressions. But he also threatened to arrest the demonstrators in order to dampen the uprisings.
If the Belarusian president wants to survive, he will have to walk the narrow path, with his own citizens pushing him from below and the Kremlin biding its time.
So far, the West has not prepared much for a response to oppression in Minsk or an invasion from Moscow. But one thing is clear: the status quo will not remain the same.
“The authorities were frightened and therefore organized a mass grabber…”, “Dyktatar is afraid of the people and therefore caught up with the security forces to trample the nationalists, but he did not succeed…”, “The Belarusian opposition showed a triumph of will against the Kremlin occupiers…”, “The Belarusian opposition defeated fear…” and and so on and so forth - this is the content of the headlines and articles of the Belarusian opposition media covering the march of nationalists on March 25, 2017 in Minsk.
And only after about a week, the realities returned the minds of opposition journalists to their place, as can be judged by a quote from an article on Belpartizan: “... a horde of robot-like security officials dispersed the protest in Minsk.” Anyone who watched this action can confirm that this is exactly what happened. For which I express personally and on behalf of the Belarusian people gratitude and respect to all our security forces!
For reference: on March 25, nationalists are traditionally going to celebrate the so-called "Freedom Day", timed to coincide with the creation of the BNR in occupied Minsk in 1918 under the care and in the interests of the German and Polish occupation authorities and in opposition to the creation of the BSSR.
Then, during the years of the Great Patriotic War, Belarusian policemen became followers of the ideas of the Belarusian People's Republic in the service of the Nazi invaders. Then, with the collapse of the USSR and the onset of troubled times until the election of the President of the Republic of Belarus Alexander Grigorievich Lukashenko in 1994 and until the national referendum of 1996, which fixed the successive course from the BSSR to build welfare state and the return of national and traditional symbols for Belarusians - a red-green flag with folk ornaments near the pole and the modern coat of arms of Belarus - the successor to the coat of arms of the BSSR, since that time the Belarusian opposition and nationalists continue to stir up the people and carry out their subversive activities against our state.
It is interesting to analyze the actions of nationalists for the entire period of their celebration of the so-called "Freedom Day" since the independence of the Republic of Belarus, that is, for more than 25 years.
Every time, holding their processions, the Belarusian opposition and nationalists shout loudly about something, randomly wave their hands, stomp and clap, their faces express suffering and pain. We can state with confidence that these are signs of mass hysteria.
At the same time, over 25 years of such marches, the leaders of the Belarusian opposition realized that they would not succeed in provoking serious unrest and developing the situation to the Euromaidan. Based on this, the Belarusian opposition began to attempt to look for new and new ways to undermine the situation in our country and mimicry under various forms. It must be admitted that new forms are beginning to work out for them.
So, for example, this year, on March 25, Catholic Bishop Tadeusz Kondrasevich will perform a Catholic prayer service for Belarus in the main church of Minsk, in order to give importance to the so-called. "Freedom Day" and involvement in this action more citizens. At the same time, the authorities themselves are already succumbing to the demands of the Belarusian opposition and are planning to erect a memorial plaque in honor of the founding of the so-called BNR, and on the anniversary of this event they allowed the nationalists to hold a concert.
Thanks to the persistent aggression of the Belarusian opposition, which has been directed at the authorities for more than 25 years, some civil servants, probably due to instability or weakness of will, already in the form of a feedback, through sympathy for sick nationalists, begin to fall for their hysteria. And it must also be admitted that there are already enough such encroachments ...
Here is just one such example. On March 9, 2018, on the Polish TV channel BelSat, in the program “Kozhny z us”, dedicated to the topic of the BPR, the current employees of the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, a state scientific organization, took part.
From 28 min. 55 sec. this program, when the symbols of the so-called. BNR and its anthem sounds, everyone gets up, including employees of the Institute of History of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus (except for one person) and begins to sing along to the anthem of the so-called. BNR, which can actually be compared with an act of public oath.
By the way, to remind leaders of the so-called. The BNR is currently in the US-Canada maintained by US intelligence agencies.
They officially consider the Belarusian authorities and, accordingly, the Republic of Belarus illegitimate.
And their activity is to sponsor the Belarusian opposition and nationalists and is aimed at undermining the state foundations of the Republic of Belarus.
In this regard, a number of questions arise, whether the act of a public oath of allegiance is the so-called. BNR betrayal in relation to our state? To what extent does it correspond to the norms of morality, morality and business ethics such behavior of civil servants in relation to their positions? Isn't it time for them to move closer to America to those to whom they have publicly sworn allegiance? And what are those who trampled on the national anthem, coat of arms and flag of their country and swore allegiance to the structures, the purpose of which is the collapse of our state, generally called? In my opinion, everything is obvious.
But it is also obvious that the situation needs to be resolutely corrected and, presumably, will be corrected.
The main thing is that one should not fall for the hysteria promoted by the Belarusian opposition in the form of the so-called. BNR, but understand what is behind it. And behind it, the hysteria of the saints, is a fiction, treason against the Motherland and a battering ram against our state.
Along with this, an example of maintaining calmness, stamina and courage, I think, in once more our security forces will show us. They are like robots, if necessary, they will pack provocateurs, like automatic machines, and we will watch it at home on TV.
PostScriptum: since this year the traditional action of the Belarusian opposition and nationalists celebrates the so-called. "Freedom Day" mimicked the "concert" timed to coincide with this - so let our security forces find time for a musical pause - this video is dedicated to them.
Zabavsky Kirill Sergeevich, for "Russian Spring"
