Reserves for the growth of A. Lukashenko’s electoral rating are sweepingly decreasing judging by the results of December survey. The rating steadily increased from September 2011 to September 2013, and gained altogether 22.1 points – from 20.5% to 42.6% (the decrease by 4.8 points in June 2012 should be regarded as an exception proving the rule). But the decrease by 7.8 points at once in December down to 34.8% should rather be called an implosion. The same rate of the state of head’s electoral rating decrease was regarded in 2011. But at the time it had not been decreasing in the splendid isolation, but following the decrease of the national currency known officially as “Belarusian ruble” and unofficially as “hares”.
There is nothing of the kind today. Even if the “hare” is “pawing nervously the ground”, he’s still not “galloping down the slope”. Thus, the dynamics of the electoral rating has outdone the ruble exchange rate dynamics. This is a new situation. If it is able to turn into a new trend is something we’re going to learn in the incoming year.
If we pass from the December electoral rating of A. Lukashenko to its average value in 2013 (Table 1), we won’t see any occasions for emotional feelings – either merry or sad (this is a matter of taste). The real incomes of Belarusians in January-October increased by 17% in comparison with the same period of the previous year, and this increased the average annual value of the state of head’s electoral rating by 6 points.
Table 1. Dynamics of the real people’s incomes of (RPI) (as percentage of the previous year’s values) and of the average annual value of President Lukashenko’s electoral rating (PLER)
|
Year
|
2000
|
2001
|
2002
|
2003
|
2004
|
2005
|
2006
|
2007
|
2008
|
2009
|
2010
|
2011
|
2012
|
2013
|
|
RPI
|
114
|
128
|
104
|
104
|
110
|
118
|
118
|
113
|
113
|
103
|
115
|
99
|
121
|
117*
|
|
PLER
|
36
|
41
|
30
|
29
|
39
|
47
|
55
|
46
|
41
|
41
|
45
|
29
|
32
|
38
|
* January-October
But the horizon of social memory is limited only by 3-4 month. That is why after the renewal of the growth of incomes most people forget the past misery quite rapidly and stop looking for the answer to the question “Who’s to blame?” But under the conditions of the change of a positive economic trend to a negative one, the opposite is true, which is documented in the December survey.
According to the forecast of the socio-economic development for 2014 the growth of household incomes should amount to 6%. If the plans will coincide with the facts (any deviation is possible) we can speak with a high probability about the repetition of the situation of 2002-2003. The possibility of repetition of the 2009 anomaly should be completely excluded. We do not idealize public opinion, nevertheless it is able to tell an apple from an orange, i.e. a contribution of the global financial crisis to the slowing down of the income growth from a contribution of the “state for the people” and its leader.
In December the sun was shining on the street of enthusiasts of the theory of a “new majority”: the share of respondents not trusting A. Lukashenko exceeded the share of those trusting him. The shares kind of switched their places (Table 2). The new “new majority” lacks 14.5% to reach the record of September 2011, but the prospects for the incoming year are quite alluring.
The answers to the question: “What is the political strategy of the country leaders headed by President Alexander Lukashenko in your opinion?” illustrate the logic of forming of the new “new majority” (Table 3).
* Data from “Levada-center” (November 2013)
22.6% of respondents believe that A. Lukashenko has the strategy of “improving the quality of life of citizens” and 15.3% believe in the strategy of “modernization”. When we consider that respondents could choose several variant of answer we can conclude that the shares of citizens believing in positive strategies are with a high probability lower than 37.9% (22.6% + 15.3%).
Among the respondents trusting A. Lukashenko variants “to maintain public order and political stability” and “to improve progressively the quality of life of citizens” were the most popular ones. But even these variants didn’t get the half of votes: 45.7% and 44.3% respectively (10.9% and 7.3% respectively among the respondents not trusting A. Lukashenko).
For the political opponents of the head of state his strategy associates in the first place with remaining in power – 47.5%, but this association is not alien even to every fifth supporter of A. Lukashenko.
The answers of Russians to a similar question are shown in the second column of Table 3. Naturally, there was the name of the Russian president in the questionnaire instead of the name of the Belarusian president. In general two “sister nations” evaluate the strategic priorities of their leaders in the same way. The only exception is the first variant of answer. Belarusians’ evaluation of A. Lukashenko’s aspiration to remain in power is higher by 12 points than the similar evaluation of Russians’ for V. Putin. And the matter is not only the difference in their innings. Much more important is the difference in the condition of economies in Belarus and Russia which directly influences the attitude towards the leaders. Thereupon we should note that the trust rating of V. Putin (according to “Levada-center”) is 1.6 times higher than the trust rating of A. Lukashenko (61% vs. 37.7%).
While public opinion expressed in ratings and concerning the attitude towards A. Lukashenko fluctuates sensibly, the attitude towards the possible changes after his retirement is quite stable (Table 4). This testifies that a major part of the society doesn’t see the direct connection between the politics and the level of well-being. The mass inability to see this connection is one of the main reasons of the political apathy of Belarusians.
In the last quarter of 2013 A. Lukashenko made a number of statements which were much talked of in the society (Table 5). Two of these statements were rapidly turned into laws (the confiscation of cars of drunk drivers and the state duty for the issuance of permissions for carrier vehicles to participate in traffic).
Table 5. Attitude towards the initiatives of president A. Lukashenko depending on the degree of trust, %
|
Variant of answer
|
All respondents
|
Trust to A. Lukashenko
|
|
|
Trust
|
Do not trust
|
||
|
Recently a law allowing confiscating cars of drunk drivers has been passed in Belarus. How do you evaluate this law?
|
|||
|
This is a right measure
|
61.1
|
74.8
|
52.3
|
|
This penalty is too cruel
|
25.8
|
15.7
|
32.4
|
|
It doesn’t matter to me
|
11.7
|
8.8
|
13.6
|
|
Many Belarusians are complaining about worsening of their economic well-being, some even talk about poverty. Thereupon the president said once: “People… steal recklessly. There are lots of cars, you cannot force your way. And they are mostly new. While people are indigent. How is that possible? Do they steal or evade taxes?” Do you agree with that?
|
|||
|
Yes, I agree
|
46.9
|
65.1
|
32.1
|
|
No, I don’t agree
|
47.9
|
31.0
|
62.8
|
|
In his end-of-the-year broadcast President A. Lukashenko said that the accelerated modernization of enterprises in 2013 is the pledge of strengthening of the Belarusian statehood and growth of people’s well-being. Some people think that the modernization had succeeded; others think that it had actually failed. What do you think?
|
|||
|
The major part of the plan for modernization of enterprises in 2013 had succeeded
|
25.4
|
50.8
|
7.1
|
|
The major part of the plan for modernization of enterprises in 2013 had actually failed
|
59.0
|
31.2
|
82.4
|
|
DA/NA
|
15.6
|
18.0
|
10.5
|
|
A new Palace of Independence was built in Minsk. A. Lukashenko said that “there is no single budget ruble” in it. Do you agree with this?
|
|||
|
Yes
|
21.9
|
38.3
|
10.8
|
|
No
|
60.0
|
34.7
|
80.0
|
|
DA/NA
|
18.1
|
27.0
|
9.2
|
|
Because of the worsening of the economic well-being Belarusian powers are planning to introduce a tax on unemployed (2.6 million rubles) and a state duty (up to 1.5 million rubles) for the issuance of permissions for carrier vehicles to participate in traffic. Do you approve these actions?
|
|||
|
Yes, I approve it
|
22.5
|
38.9
|
10.0
|
|
No, I don’t approve it
|
60.5
|
42.0
|
75.2
|
|
It doesn’t matter to me
|
14.9
|
17.9
|
12.8
|
|
According to the National Bank there is a significant growth of purchasing of foreign currencies by the citizens. In view of the aforesaid A. Lukashenko stated: “If you are going to run all day long from one exchange office to another and buy foreign currency, you yourself will lead to the weakening of the national currency”. Do you agree with that?
|
|||
|
I agree
|
34.7
|
55.8
|
18.8
|
|
I disagree
|
61.3
|
40.1
|
78.2
|
|
Recently A. Lukashenko has suggested charging a fee of $ 100 on every Belarusian citizen going abroad. What’s your attitude towards this suggestion?
|
|||
|
Positive
|
14.1
|
23.0
|
8.1
|
|
Negative
|
64.7
|
50.0
|
75.5
|
|
It doesn’t matter to me
|
19.6
|
25.1
|
16.0
|
The strongest backing was given to the suggestion to confiscate cars of drunk drivers. Even among the respondents not trusting the head of state it was supported by the absolute majority (52.3%). The ambiguity of such confiscations in respect to the modern ideas of legality didn’t embarrass a lot of people. Within the framework of Belarusian cultural tradition the end justifies the means, and in this case the end is noble. No one’s going to argue on that.
The opinions on accusations of inclinations to stealing and evading taxes were divided equally. In the soviet times stealing from the state wasn’t considered as something shameful (and there was no question of paying taxes in the conditions of centralized economy). Nevertheless this doesn’t mean that everyone was stealing. No, a major part of the society had no possibility to steal because of external circumstances. What could a school teacher steal? Or a pensioner? This inequality of possibilities is present nowadays as well, and this is documented in the survey.
Only every forth Belarusian evaluated positively the modernization activity of A. Lukashenko in 2013. The difference of evaluations between the supporters and the opponents of the head of state is quite impressive.
A record share of A. Lukashenko supporters wasn’t able to define their attitude towards the sources of funding of the Palace of Independence (27%). Life experience prevents from agreeing with the statement that “there is no single budget ruble”. But disagreeing with that means showing the idol up as a public liar. To settle this contradiction they had chosen the variant “difficult to answer”.
Introduction of additional taxes is never approved in any country of the world; therefore it is a drastic measure, used by leaders and legislators. Similar initiatives often lead to a loss of executive positions and statuses. Belarusians are not exceptions to this rule. But the originators of the introducing of new taxes are truly an exception, because these acts practically do not affect their careers.
In recent years A. Lukashenko made numerous attempts to shift the responsibility for the loss of the financial stability of the country on the society. A third of Belarusians is ready to plead people guilty. That’s the same story as the story with stealing. The main thing is that the power is not yet switching from abstract accusations of people to accusations of particular persons.
The weakest support was given to A. Lukashenko’s suggestion to introduce the exit duty. It’s not surprising that the matter didn’t come to practical realization. Introducing an exit duty is an example of a decision which automatically goes into personals. That is why it is the least popular initiative of the head of state.
How much did the listed offers contribute to the decrease of A. Lukashenko ratings? It’s hard to answer the question without ambiguity. The main reason for this decrease is undoubtedly the halting in the growth of population’s incomes. But the majority of the head of state’s initiatives acted in unison with the main reason.