THE ABYSS WITH STABLE PARAMETERS

Before each election campaign the head of the Belarusian state declares that the election will run “honestly as usual”. This very “as usual” raises doubt among independent experts and opposition politicians. As regards the public opinion, a visible polarization has occurred in the assessments of the election honesty over the last eight years (Table 1). Whereas in 2003 the difference between the negative and positive answers made up 16.4%, in 2010 it has been as high as 25.9%.

Table 1. Dynamics of answering the question, “The opposition and independent observers state that in the course of the past local election there occurred numerous infringements of law and arbitrariness of election commissions. Do you agree with these statements?”, %

Polarization became possible due to almost double reduction of the percentage of those who found it difficult to answer. This is a common tendency. During “zero” years Belarusians have learned to doubt less frequently when answering most of politically-concerned questions. However, one should not conclude that the political competence of population has improved. It is simply the epoch of global changes which remained in the past together with its uncertainty. The time of post-perestroika stabilization has come, and no special knowledge is required now to interpret the signals transmitted by the authorities. The signals from the authorities are easily read by the recipients and do not cause a massive cognitive discord.

Analyzing the results of the March poll, we noted that the rate of trust in the honesty of the pending election versus election 2007 improved considerably. Many a year opposition has been seeking the electoral legislation to be changed. And alas, it was heard. But the authorities have not just introduced dozens of amendments to the Electoral Code; they have changed all their legislative work into a robust PR-campaign. The results thereof we can still see today.

The question of Table 2 is at first sight similar to the previous one, but it is without the word “opposition”. As a result, the percentage of those trusting the voting results proved higher than the percentage of those who disagree with the opposition statement about numerous infringements. It is clear that the trust rates in our traditional groups appeared to be, carefully speaking, different. The last line of the table is especially noteworthy. The percentage of those who found it difficult to answer among those not trusting A. Lukashenko appeared 2.2 times higher than among the trusting. One should have expected a reversed correlation, since by the educational level the former tangibly outrank the latter. This illogical correlation shows that among those not trusting A. Lukashenko there are many potential “renegades” ready to accept the official voting results.

Table 2. Dynamics of answering the question, “In your opinion, may the declared results of the Local Councils Deputies’ election be considered trustworthy?”, %

A major condition of fair elections is surely the absence of support of certain candidates for deputy on the part of the authorities. A challenging detail: 27.3% of respondents found the voting results trustworthy, while 32.4% confirmed support of certain candidates on the part of the authorities (Table 3). To put it differently, 5% do not think that such support violates the principle of equity. The percentage of those who found it difficult to answer the last question is so high that should be commented on.

Table 3. Dynamics of answering the question, “Did the authorities support any candidate in your constituency?”, %

We have had to note not once that the parliamentary and local elections are conducted in Belarus in a “dull” manner. The authorities do not organize information campaigns to promote their candidates. They indeed support nobody in public. The desired result is reached by the authorities through non-registration of the unwanted candidates and through the debugged mechanism of “vote count”. Therefore, the percentage of those who found it difficult to answer the question of Table 3 is so high.

The question of Table 4 may be considered a complement of the previous question. Again in this case as compared to 2003 one could note a shift towards commonly recognized democratic standards. All is right. The authorities are updating the electoral mechanism; well it is not without reason that since 1996 this mechanism has been revolving under control of practically one and the same solid team.

Table 4. Dynamics of answering the question, “In your opinion, did all candidates for Local Council Deputies have equal conditions in the course of the election?”, %

According to the leader of the movement For Freedom A. Milinkevich, during the April election the number of falsifications equaled to millions, “but through such falsifications authorities sentence themselves to death, as people clearly understand what is going on and feel the abyss between them and the power more and more intensely”. The national opinion polls do confirm the existence of an abyss between a part of the community and the power, however it is groundless to say that the abyss is widening.