«

»

RUSSIA-BELARUS RELATIONS IN THE EYES OF ELITE

As seen from Table 1, almost all polled experts and public opinion leaders (94%!), regardless the structures they represent, stand against the idea of Russia-Belarus unification into a single state. Half of them supports the idea of a close political and economic union between the two countries. Another half believes the relations should not differ from those with the other CIS countries. Representatives of the public sector prefer the first variant, while representatives of the private sector support the second variant.
Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question “Which variant of Russia-Belarus integration would you personally prefer?”, %

Variant of answer
All respondents
Public sector employees
Private sector employees
Belarus and Russia should form a union of independent states with close political and economic relations
47
56
38
Relations between Belarus and Russia should resemble those between other CIS member-states
47
38
56
Belarus and Russia should become a single state with a common president, government, army, flag, currency, etc.
3
6
About three fourths of the respondents (73%) express reserved optimism as regards maintaining Belarusian sovereignty in the near future (See Table 2). Reserved in the sense that they predict steady increase in the dependence from Russia. This opinion is especially widely spread in the public sector. There are only 11% of those who look at the issue with deep pessimism, representatives of the public sector prevailing among them. And 9% of the polled (all from the private sector) expect Belarus’ independence from Russia to increase within the next ten years.

Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question ” Will, in your opinion, Belarus in the near ten years:”, %

Variant of answer
All respondents
Public sector employees
Private sector employees
Remain a sovereign state but its dependence from Russia will grow
73
81
65
Incorporate into Russia
11
16
6
Remain a sovereign state but its independence from Russia will grow
9
17
Table 3 clearly demonstrates how, according to the polled, incorporation of our country into Russia will affect the living of the Belarusian people. As we see, over half leaders and experts (55%), almost regardless the structures they represent, are convinced in the negative outcomes of incorporation for the Belarusians. 18% more say it won’t at all affect the life of the people. And only 12% see the perspective as positive. Among the latter the majority are representatives from the public sector.

Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question “Will, in your opinion, incorporation of Belarus into Russia have a positive or a negative impact on the lives of people?”, %

What were the respondents guided by in their estimations of the incorporation? Those who positively regard the event are convinced incorporation into Russia will improve the state of affairs in economics (12% of answers), promote the improvement in the standard of living (12%) and foster democracy (8%) in the country (See Table 4).

Table 4. Distribution of answers to the question “If you believe Belarus’ incorporation into Russia will have a positive impact on the lives of people, then how positive?”, % (open question, more than one answer is possible)

Other motives dominate among those who see the outcome of the incorporation in the negative (See Table 5). In their opinion, it will, first and foremost, result in the loss of national morale and national culture (26%), growth of criminal activity and corruption (25%), decline in the standard of living (21%), necessity to fight in hot spots (20%), deterioration of the state of affairs in economics (15%) and of the relations with the West (12%) as well as growth of tension within the society (8%). There is a considerable, though expected, controversy in the viewpoints on some issues depending on the represented structures. Thus representatives of the public structures are, first of all, concerned with the possible growth of crime activity and corruption (29%), while respondents from the private structures – with the loss of national morale and national culture (40%). At the same time, there’s absolute unanimity among representatives of different sectors in some other positions. In particular, both are alarmed with the possibility of decline in the standard of living as well as participation of the Belarusians in such “activities” like the war in Chechnya.

Table 5. Distribution of answers to the question “If you believe Belarus’ incorporation into Russia will have a negative impact on the lives of people, then how negative?”, % (open question, more than one answer is possible)

Although the majority of the respondents expect only negative outcomes of the Belarus’ incorporation into Russia, it is noteworthy that absolute majority of the respondents (79%) believe Russia’s achievements in building a democratic state and a civil society are weightier than the Belarusian ones (See Table 6). And these are mainly respondents from private sector who stick to this viewpoint.

Table 6. Distribution of answers to the question “In your opinion, have Belarus and Russia achieved greater progress in building democratic states and civil societies after the collapse of the USSR?”, %

There are 2.5-fold more people among the respondents believing life is better in Russia than in Belarus (See Table 7). And the opinion depends not on the represented structures. Yet, there are more representatives from the public sector among those who claim life is better in Belarus than in Russia.

Table 7. Distribution of answers to the question “Do, in your opinion, nowadays people live better in Russia or in Belarus?”, %

As it is known, in late summer of 2002 the relations between Minsk and Moscow were characterized by arising tenseness caused by A. Lukashenko’s and V. Putin’s different conceptions concerning further integration of the two countries as well as the principles of settlement in reciprocal trade. Therefore, it is of interest to know the estimations of experts and leaders on the results of the summit talks that took place January 19-20, 2003.
As we see from Table 8, the overwhelming majority of the respondents (85%), almost regardless the structures they represent, consider that the relations between the two countries didn’t change after that meeting. But the personal relations between the heads of states, according to Table 9, have slightly thawed out: 23% of the respondents claim they have improved and only 7% insist they have aggravated. Two thirds said the relations hadn’t changed.

Table 8. Distribution of answers to the question “On January 19-20 the presidents of Russia and Belarus had a working meeting. In your opinion, have the relations between our countries improved, deteriorated or have remained unchanged after the meeting?”, %

Table 9. Distribution of answers to the question “Have the relations between the presidents improved, deteriorated or have remained unchanged after the meeting?”, %

At that, leaders and experts, equally from the public and private sectors, were alerted with the outcomes of the summit (See Table 10). Over half of the polled believes the probability of losing its independence for Belarus grew stronger after that meeting.

Table 10. Distribution of answers to the question “In your opinion, has the probability of losing its independence grew stronger, dropped down or has remained unchanged for Belarus?”, %

By the way, during the above meeting of the presidents in Minsk the unprecedented security measures were taken that greatly discomforted regular life of citizens in the capital. For a long period of time both vehicular and pedestrian traffics were closed in the thoroughfares. This had never happened before. Absolute majority of the respondents (70%) from public and private sectors don’t consider those measures justified (See Table 11).

Table 11. Distribution of answers to the question “During the mentioned meeting of the presidents in Minsk both vehicular and pedestrian traffics were closed for a long period of time in the thoroughfares – out of security but greatly discomforting regular life of citizens. Do you consider those measures justified?”, %

Finally, let’s have a look at the respondents’ estimation (on a standard 5-point scale) of the role of Pavel Borodin, State Secretary of the Russia-Belarus Union State, in the Russia-Belarus relations. There’s a full unanimity in the viewpoints of public and private sector representatives – 1.85 that is less than 2. As they say, first deserve and then desire…