COLLAPSE: FOR THE FIRST TIME DURING A. LUKASHENKO’S RULING HIS RATING HAS GONE DOWN TO 30%

As one can see from Table 1, it was a total collapse, all parameters down. Over the past five years the number of those who would vote A. Lukashenko at the Belarus-Russia Union presidential election has gone down by 20%, almost a twofold reduction of those who considers him an ideal politician, while the number of those who do not trust him outnumbered those who still have confidence in him, passing the 50% mark. Today A. Lukashenko’s convinced opponents outnumber his adherents 4.5fold, although five years ago the number of his convinced supporters (i.e. those who chose him with regard to all the four parameters) was way above the number of his convinced opponents.

It is none the less important to note that since then the “floating number” (i.e. those who would prefer A. Lukashenko in one group of cases and wouldn’t in the other) has in fact shrunk by more than 10%, in effect ceasing to be the majority. It is the first time that the convinced opponents of the president are in the majority (See Table 2).

Why was there no avoiding such a collapse? First, because the “grip” (of the deceitful and aggressive propaganda, tough pressure of the authorities on all non-state forms of life – political opposition, independent media, private business, non-government organisations) tightened on the society during the election campaign, has loosened slightly over the past six months. Second, new factors came into play.

The main cause of such a break-neck fall of the president’s political rating is the economic situation and the people’s well-being going worse: such was the reply of 71% of A. Lukashenko’s opponents; over 60% repeatedly faced the problem of arrears in salaries and pensions, while 35.5% said there was not way one could bear it any more. Generously thrown around on the election’s eve, the promises of “economic liberalisation” and a host of others remained unfulfilled. It would be quite demonstrative to see the rows of A. Lukashenko’s convinced opponents being replenished by individuals, who lent him their support just six months ago: today the number of these “fooled investors” has passed the 500.000 mark! For the time being, the share of the over-50s among A. Lukashenko’s opponents is equal 21.8%, although 5 years ago it was 13.5%, three years ago – 18.4%. The trend is observed among residents of small towns and villages, too – 47.9%, 45.3%, and 34.2% respectively. The tendency is obvious: the president’s most reliable electoral resource is running out steadily.

Another reason behind this is the loss of future prospects. Around 60% of the president’s opponents believe it takes moving to a foreign country for young people to make a successful career. Just as many would wish to leave for a foreign country themselves and settle down. You just think of that: at the beginning of the 21^st century over three million Belarusians are so dissatisfied with life in their home country that that would eagerly swap it for a foreign one! An overwhelming majority of the president’s opponents believe that “life standards in Belarus are worse that in the western countries” and put the blame for that on “the poor state management”. Such platitudinarian explanations as “we are constantly being interfered with by the domestic and foreign enemies” or “we do not have raw material resources” are not longer popular even with the convinced supporters of the president.

What is the forecast then? Relying on the findings of our recent public opinion poll, one may suppose that the president is in for serious trouble unless he changes something about his political guidelines. The traditional mechanisms to influence the authorities by means of elections are now frequently put to reasonable doubt by a great deal of A. Lukashenko’s opponents. The government’s tough grip on the electoral process not only invites negative comments from the world community (the condemnation which one could ignore but up to a point), but also causes people to lose faith in the freedom of will by means of elections. A third of A. Lukashenko’s convinced opponents either did not take part in the latest presidential election at all, or voted against all candidates. More than one third are determined to not go to the polls at the local elections next year, “for no matter whom you back, it is candidates supported by the authorities who will become deputies” (basic motive). If the absolute majority of pro-presidential adherents are determined to vote for candidates supporting A. Lukashenko in the belied that most voters will do the same, however, the convinced opponents would vote for candidates opposed to A. Lukashenko, although the number of those who believes that the majority of voters will do the same – is twice as little. The “spiral of silence”, of which we have said more than once, keeps strangling those who feel dissatisfied with the present policies of the government and the situation in the country in general: being in the apparent majority, they keep thinking they are in the minority.

The president’s public relations policy makers probably consider this as their victory. However, it may turn out to be a Pyrrhic victory against the background of the collapse fall of the presidential rating: deprived of the legal mechanisms to influence the government by means of elections, millions of disillusioned Belarusians may finally take to the streets. Today only 21.1% of those polled would agree that “things are getting right” in Belarus, while 55.5% reckon “things go wrong”. Six months ago, a fortnight after the presidential election, the replies were different: 36.7% and 38.1% respectively. Let’s take a risk to suppose that the pending social explosion will look much different from peaceful street marches staged by the opposition. Chances are that the opposition will have nothing to do with that. Then the president would have a fairly limited choice: either to switch off from the political process not only “the displeased ones”, but practically the whole society (by means of total control over any sort of elections and referendums, banning the freedom of speech and gatherings); or to change one’s policies and hold real reforms. All our neighbours have chosen the second alternative (take a note that Putin’s Russia tends to appeal to Belarusians more and more: it comes third on the list of countries after Germany and the United States where our compatriots would wish to go and settle down. Asked about their ideal politician, 68.1% point to Putin, while A. Lukashenko gained only 26%), which is why the first alternative is fraught with complete isolation for Belarus even in this particular region. So far the president still has time to make his choice, however, judging by how fast his rating is falling, it is running out.