The attitude of the dwellers of a country towards emigration is an important indicator of its well-being or trouble, and of the citizens’ evaluation of their prospects in the home country. Talking about Belarus in this respect, we first of all have to point out a high emigration potential of the country. Only half of the respondents answered that they do not want to move anywhere, while more than 41% are ready to go to another country (See Table 1). At the same time we need to point out that the number of such people dropped by 11% during the last 2.5 years. One can understand the mood of the voters, especially of those with democratic views in October, right after the elections, when the hope for any change was destroyed. But half a year after, when September disappointments have already been forgotten, the ranks of those who are not going to look for a better lot in a foreign land have grown again. This gives evidence of the fact that the post-election line of the authorities is causing more and more disappointment to the voters.
Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question: “Would you like to emigrate to another country?”, %
It is curious that people manifest their readiness to leave the country which does not have any standard emigration causing reasons, namely, ethnic and religious conflicts, military actions, etc. This fact points out the existence of hidden social tension in the Belarusian society and clearly contradicts the authorities’ statements about harmony and stability in the country. The stability, which is constantly named one of the most important achievements of the existing regime.
Certain changes can be noticed in the list of countries our compatriots chose for emigration. Germany and the USA are still in the lead leaving other countries far behind. The third place, however, is for the first time occupied by Russia, that has taken the lead over Poland and the Baltic states. This indicator confirms the conclusion we made in our previous issues: the number of the adherents of the integration with Russia is not only growing, but also changing in quality. There are more “advanced” people in this group and less Lukashenko followers who logically do not need to emigrate. Earlier we observed a curious paradox – the Belarusians wanted to integrate with Russia and to emigrate to the West. Nowadays this contradiction is no longer so sharp.
An indirect indicator of the attitude to a country is sympathy towards its leader. Table 2 shows, in this respect the Russian leader is beyond comparison. Furthermore, his popularity continues to grow – more than two thirds of the questioned named the Kremlin master as the most corresponding to their ideal of a politician. On the one hand president Putin with his tough statements and decisive actions cannot but appeal to strong-arm adherents, who have always been abundant in Belarus. On the other hand many respect him for his foreign policies aimed at closer cooperation with the West and for his aspiration to liberalize the economy.
Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question: “Whom of the modern politicians of the top rank do you like most, who of them corresponds to your ideal of politician?”, % (more than one answer is possible)
0- The names of these politicians were omitted in the given poll
Parallel to the growth of Putin’s popularity the Belarusians are more and more reserved towards their own president who used to be an unconditional leader among all modern politicians only 2.5 years ago. The same is true for the ratings of other authoritarian leaders (S. Hussein, F. Castro), while the popularity of Western leaders is rather high and stable as is the case with German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder or is gradually increasing (T. Blaire, J. Chirac, A. Kwasniewski) and returning to the level where it was before the NATO’s mission in Yugoslavia.
Earlier, before the above-mentioned mission, the NATO’s eastward expansion was negatively evaluated by almost half of the population of the country. In autumn five more Central and Eastern Europe states are to join the NATO. Russia, going on with its formal protests against the mechanic (using its leaders’ terms) expansion of the Alliance, is in fact establishing absolutely different, much more closer relations with this organization. It is followed by other CIS states which have allowed the allocation of NATO forces on their territory. The standpoint of the Belarusian leader, however, remains unchanged. At first A. Lukashenko quite harshly reacted to the behavior of his Middle Asian counterparts on the Tashkent Treaty. Later in Moscow after signing the documents on the creation of the Tashkent Treaty Organization he was the only president from those who had signed the Treaty to characterize the new body as a military and strategic answer to the NATO.
Lukashenko’s fears concerning the bases of “the aggressive monster” in Middle Asia are shared by 37% of the respondents, while almost 39% are of another point of view. The explanations, to our mind, are numerous – first of all, the remoteness of the events has its effect. Besides, the 3 years of Polish membership in the NATO did not have any effect on the character of the bilateral relations. Moreover, after September 11 many people were assured that there are more dreadful and real hazards.
Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question: “Below is the list of possible assistance to Belarusian non-state public organizations from the side of foreign countries and world community. Which forms of it you think acceptable from the moral, political and other points of view?”, %
| Variants of answer |
Acceptable
|
Unacceptable
|
DA/NA
|
|
10’00
|
04’02
|
10’00
|
04’02
|
10’00
|
04’02
|
| Educational support (by means of seminars, conferences in Belarus and abroad) |
64.7
|
77.3
|
7.0
|
10.5
|
28.2
|
12.2
|
| Technical support (PCs, copiers, faxes, printers and other equipment) |
62.7
|
76.8
|
10.9
|
11.9
|
26.4
|
11.3
|
| Humanitarian aid (food products, medicines, clothes, etc.) |
58.7
|
74.3
|
13.8
|
13.5
|
27.4
|
12.2
|
| Financial support |
55.1
|
67.3
|
14.9
|
18.6
|
30.0
|
14.1
|
| Moral-political support (official statements, discussions at meetings with official representatives of Belarus, campaigns in mass media) |
44.9
|
64.1
|
11.8
|
15.9
|
43.3
|
20.0
|
| Informational support (providing newspapers, journals, bulletins, etc.) |
50.8
|
63.7
|
15.1
|
18.2
|
34.2
|
18.1
|
| Weight-average index |
56.1
|
70.6
|
12.3
|
14.8
|
31.6
|
14.7
|
The fact that the attitude of Belarusians towards the West is becoming more positive can also be proved by the data from Table 3. We know how the official Minsk regards foreign assistance to our NGOs. The position of the government, however, is in sharp contrast to the opinion of common citizens – the overwhelming majority of the questioned thinks quite acceptable various kinds of help from educational and technical to moral and financial. It is especially evident if we consider the dynamics of a the average indicator. In 1.5 years there has been a considerable (more than 2-fold) drop in the number of those who do not have any opinion on the issue. Thus, when these people determined their standpoint, the number of those who accept foreign assistance to NGOs increased almost 15%, while the ranks of their opponents grew very insignificantly. It is curious that since the last opinion poll the growth is most evident among the adherents of humanitarian aid. One cannot rule out that here we see the effect of the notorious president’s decree and of the experience of socializing with the officials from the corresponding Ministry.
