From time to time disputes about A. Lukashenko’s third presidential term flame up and abate being overshadowed by more important events, but they do not disappear from political agenda. According to the poll findings, today Belarus’ elite is almost unanimous in the opinion that A. Lukashenko will press for the third presidential term – more than 80% of the respondents gave a positive answer to such question, whereas only 3% answered in the negative (See Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question: “Will A. Lukashenko press for prolongation of the presidential powers for the third term?”, %
Most probably, such certainty is based on a good knowledge of A. Lukashenko’s political philosophy as well as real practice of governing the country over the last 8 years. Today retaining power becomes a forced step for the president, rather than a free choice. At present it is almost impossible to imagine that he quits power voluntarily. Also it is hard to name a politician who would have guaranteed the head of state after his resignation a calm political pension and who, what is much more important, A. Lukashenko would believe.
At that experts and public opinion leaders express a rather cold attitude towards practical realization of the idea of the third presidential term, abolition of the constitutional norm preventing A. Lukashenko from being elected the president for more than two times consecutively (See Table 2).
Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question: “What is your attitude to a possible abolition of the constitutional norm which does not allow A. Lukashenko be elected the president for more than two consecutive times?”, %
The same 83% spoke out against abolishing the norm (69% among representatives of public structures, and almost all representatives of private structures), and only 10% for the abolition (17% and 3%, respectively). An explanation of such attitude is obvious – the elite, as none of other social strata, knows the real state of affairs in the country and realizes that the present political and social-economic course offers no prospects. Its vivid outcomes – the international isolation from the West, deteriorating relations with Russia, growing non-competitiveness of the domestic economy –are likely to worry the Belarusian establishment.
In this respect, the respondents’ estimation of a possible reaction from a part of the elite, in particular, nomenclature, to the initiative of the third term is quite expressive. There is no unanimity in opinions, bare interests dominate here. More than half of representatives of public structures, i.e. the nomenclature itself, answers in the affirmative, a little more than one third of the respondents from the private sector shares this point of view (See Table 3). Although there are many those who gave no definite answer to this question, in general, one can draw a conclusion that, in the opinion of Belarus’ elite, so far the nomenclature has been more likely to support the idea of the third presidential term than to oppose it.
Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question: “Will the nomenclature support A. Lukashenko’s initiative to abolish the constitutional norm which does not allow him be elected the president for more than two consecutive times?”, %
The mood in the ranks of the nomenclature seems impressive. Obviously, many of its representatives directly bound up their political future with A. Lukashenko’s future. Therefore, for them changing power means not so much an inevitable end to the political career of the president, as of their own career. Such high degree of identification can be considered as an unconditional credit of A. Lukashenko. An official who “ensures” the necessary result at an election for fear of punishment can be relied on to a smaller degree than his colleague doing the same because he realizes his prosperity fully depends on prospects of the head of state. We shall admit – no matter what, so far A. Lukashenko has managed “to curb” the nomenclature, to make it obedient and support his policy, as well as understanding their fates are interdependent.
However, experts and leaders of public opinion from public and private structures have a directly opposite opinion of common voters (See Table 4.) More than 60% of the respondents from the public sector are certain that the population will support the initiative of the third term for A. Lukashenko (will not support 10%). Among their colleagues from non-state organizations the given ration is mirror-like – 16% and 52%, respectively.
Table 4. Distribution of answers to the question: “Will the population support A. Lukashenko’s initiative?”, %
It is hard to say what their certainty is based on, on their factual knowledge of voters’ moods or on their own vision of such moods. Here we can draw a parallel with an estimation of the future results of the local election from representatives of public structures. Perhaps, their certainty of the population’s support of the initiative by A. Lukashenko, as well as in the case of the election – such certainty of the victory of A. Lukashenko’s supporters, is based on the following – it is not so important how people vote, as who and how counts these votes. However, the position of the respondents from the private sector looks much more persuasive because it almost totally coincides with voters’ stance on the issue (See Table 5).
Table 5. Distribution of answers to the question: “If there were a referendum to change the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus to allow A. Lukashenko be elected the president again (in compliance with the present constitutional norm he cannot be elected the president for more than two consecutive times), how would you vote?”*
| Variant of answer |
%
|
| Would vote for such amendment to the Constitution |
15.5
|
| Would vote against such amendment to the Constitution |
50.6
|
| Do not know yet, will judge by circumstances |
25.4
|
| Would not take part in such referendum |
7.2
|
| NA |
1.3
|
* Data of the nation public opinion poll conducted by IISEPS in September 2002
We shall remind that in September half of the respondents claimed that at a possible referendum they would vote against introducing amendments to the Constitution to allow A. Lukashenko be elected the president for the third consecutive time. Considering a presumable reaction from the undecided (the overwhelming majority of whom, as a rule, joins the dominating group at the moment of voting), if such a referendum took place, from 52% to 60% of Belarusians, most probably, would have voted against changing the Constitution. In fact, over the past year the public’s negative attitude to the idea has intensified.
Table 6. Distribution of answers to the question: “Will A. Lukashenko be able to stay in power until the end of his presidential term?”, %
To sum it up we shall note that regardless of growing difficulties on the foreign and domestic fronts, the respondents say the president has had rather high chances of retaining his post until the end of the present term (See Table 6).
