«

»

IF A. LUKASHENKO’S COMPETITOR WANTS SUPPORT OF NOMENCLATURE, HE/SHE HAS TO ENLIST SUPPORT OF THE KREMLIN FIRST

Belarus’s elite, which in fact is split on many issues, enjoys a rare consensus towards independence of the country. More than 80% of state sector workers and 90% of non-state sector representatives called it a positive event (see Table 1). The disappearance of the federal center in most post-Soviet republics gave local nomenclature a good chance for self-realization, chance to exchange property for power, and in some countries – to come to power and retain property. Thus, it would be logical to seek more supporters of independence among state bodies’ workers, however, as one could see, in Belarus the situation is different. Partially the reason is that under the present authorities Belarus’s nomenclature is unable to achieve its interests, as it is going on in neighboring countries. Another part of the reason is that a great number of Belarusian state sector workers are Soviet-style managers, who felt more at ease as executive bodies, when Moscow bore responsibility for important decisions.

Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question: “Do you think Belarus’s becoming independent was a positive event or not?”, %

Table 2 shows that the majority of state workers consider economic interests a top priority, whereas non-state workers say the country’s independence is the major national interest. Ten years after Belarus became independent, elite’s vision of national interests have remained almost unchanged. That means that in the process of building a sovereign Belarus we have achieved rather modest results. The number of those who claimed that Belarus’s national interests are strengthening of independence and sovereignty of the country is 20% higher in non-state sector, than in state sector. In general, non-state sector workers emphasize such values as democratization of society, respect of human rights, whereas state sector workers are more practical – they note improvement of living standards and demographic situation.

Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question: “What do you think Belarus’s national interests are?”, % (more than one answer is possible)

Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question: “Do you think that Belarus’s present nomenclature could give birth to a real alternative candidate for presidency? “, %

Seven years ago A. Lukashenko’s victory at the presidential election became an anti-nomenclature revolution. In many respects A. Lukashenko came to power contrary to the ruling class will, at least, its top. And all seven years this class has been ill-treated. Could this humiliated and intimidated by show trials nomenclature, which lost its independence and is subject to strict control at elections, gain revenge? Is it ready to put forward an alternative to A. Lukashenko and under which circumstances? Table 3 allows to answer such questions. Respondents sounded rather restrained regarding such scenario, only one third of non-state sector workers and about 40% of their colleagues from state structures believe that the present nomenclature might give birth to a real candidate for presidency. However more respondents think in the opposite – 44.9% and 45.2%, respectively.

To be successful an alternative candidate, including from the nomenclature, if there is such a candidate, shall enjoy some support of that nomenclature, which is dissatisfied with A. Lukashenko. Naturally, this kind of support could be achieved only in proper conditions. Aside from electoral prerequisites – i.e. closeness of ratings of A. Lukashenko and his competitors – respondents cite, first of all, Russian leadership’s support to an alternative candidate, as well as nominating a single candidate from the democratic “five” before mid-August (see Table 4).

Table  4. Distribution of answers to the question: “Under which circumstances, do you think, Belarus’s present nomenclature could support an alternative candidate for presidency?”, % (more than one answer is possible)

It is noteworthy that more than 70% of leaders and experts think that over the last several months Belarus-Russia relations have been cooled (see Table 5). To put it differently, the Kremlin is not satisfied with A. Lukashenko and, it should not be excluded, that another candidate could be supported. It has repeatedly been mentioned that turning off three Russian TV channels on May 8 and 9 brought opposite results to those expected by Belarus’s authorities. Representatives of both state and non-state structures assess that incident negatively (see Table 6). From the point of view of Russian TV channels, including the state-run RTR, that was an unfriendly move, which contributed to cooling of bilateral relations.

Table 5. Distribution of answers to the question: “Have you felt cooling of Belarus-Russia relations over recent months?”, %

When it comes to election campaign slogans, under which victory at the presidential election is most likely, respondents did not mention integration with Russia or fight against corruption, on which A. Lukashenko’s election program of 1994 was based (see Table 7). Preference is given to economic slogans. It could be explained by the fact that to enlist favor of voters, who are facing the problem of basic survival, is impossible only by means of slogans about democratization of society, observance of human rights and separation of powers.

Table 6. Distribution of answers to the question: “It is known that on May 8 and 9 of 2001 broadcasting of three Russian TV channels (ORT, RTR, NTV) in Belarus was suspended to broadcast TV programs of Belarus’s national television. How do you assess it?”, %

Table  7. Distribution of answers to the question: “Under which slogans do you think a candidate for presidency could win the upcoming election?”, % (more than one answer is possible)

Variant of answer

%

Public sector employees
1. Improvement of living standards

45.2

2. Democratization of society

16.1

Private sector employees
1. Improvement of living standards

42.9

2. Democratization of society

24.5

3. Reforming of economy

22.4

Respondents adequately assess the real situation existing in the system of state management – about 90% of them are confident that today the parliament is, in fact, subordinate to the president (see Table 8). Nevertheless, the majority of respondents does not consider it normal. Almost 80% say that the president and the parliament shall be independent from each other (see Table 9). To all appearances, four years of “guided parliamentarism” and “cooperation and unity of power branches” publicized by official propaganda failed to mislead Belarus’s nomenclature. The parliament remains powerless, not internationally recognized, being a registration chamber of presidential legislature. Its members, some of whom remember old times, when the Supreme Council was a real legislative body of the country, are dissatisfied with the current situation. As well as experts and public leaders have no illusions over the All-Belarusian People Assembly. The overwhelming majority – about 90%, including 80.6% of state sector representatives – claimed the Assembly was unlikely to affect the situation in the country (see Table 10). Aside from that, 77.4% of state sector workers do not believe it is possible to raise average wage 5fold by 2006, if A. Lukashenko is re-elected, which proves that state elite does not trust official propaganda and takes a sober view of the current situation.

Table 8. Distribution of answers to the question: “What are real relations between the president and the parliament?”, %

Table 9. Distribution of answers to the question: “What shall relations between the president and the parliament be?”, %

Table 10. Distribution of answers to the question: “What could you say about results of the second All-Belarusian People Assembly?”, %

As for the future, i.e. personal prospects and prospects for children, we offer the following picture (see Tables 11, 12). If A. Lukashenko wins the presidential election, respondents say, there would be few reasons for optimism – about 50% of respondents claimed that in such case their material and social status is likely to deteriorate. Consequences of a democratic candidate’s victory are considered with more enthusiasm – 43.8% hope for improvements.

Table 11. Distribution of answers to the question: “Do you think that in case of A. Lukashenko’s victory at the presidential election:” (%)

Variant of answer

You social status

Your material status

Prospects for your children

All respondents
Would improve

3.8

5.0

15.0

Would not change

40.0

33.8

21.3

Would deteriorate

46.3

52.5

56.3

Public sector employees
Would improve

3.2

6.5

12.9

Would not change

51.6

54.7

45.2

Would deteriorate

22.6

25.8

29.0

Private sector employees
Would improve

4.1

4.1

16.3

Would not change

32.7

20.4

6.1

Would deteriorate

61.2

69.4

73.6

Table 12. Distribution of answers to the question: “Do you think that in case a democratic candidate wins the upcoming presidential election:” (%)

Variant of answer

You social status

Your material status

Prospects for your children

All respondents
Would improve

43.8

43.8

65.0

Would not change

28.8

23.8

8.8

Would deteriorate

2.5

3.8

5.0

Public sector employees
Would improve

19.4

19.4

41.9

Would not change

25.8

35.5

16.1

Would deteriorate

6.5

9.6

12.9

Private sector employees
Would improve

59.2

59.2

79.6

Would not change

30.6

16.3

4.1

Would deteriorate

As for prospects for children, opinions of leaders and experts seem more polar. If A. Lukashenko wins, 56.3% would expect worsening of such prospects (15.0% think in the opposite), if a democratic candidate wins – 5.0% and 65.0%, respectively (state sector workers – 12.9% and 41.9%). To put it differently, conservation of the present political regime is associated by elite with absence of prospects and possibilities for youth.

Thus, the overwhelming majority of public opinion leaders and experts views Belarus’s independence positively. National interests, as they see them, are interests of a typical state with economy in transition on the stage of state sovereignty strengthening and modernization of economy. Along with this state sector representatives stress practical needs, and non-state structures – basic values.

Belarus’s elite sounds rather restrained about a possibility of nominating its candidate for presidency. It says that the major prerequisite for the nomenclature to support an alternative candidate is Russia’s leadership positive stance towards such candidate. Respondents believe that in order to win candidates for presidency shall organize campaigning mostly under economic slogans.

Leaders and experts adequately assess the situation around relations of different power branches, but think it should be changed, and that the parliament and the president must be independent from each other. In connection with possible prospects, especially prospects for children, Belarus’s elite views A. Luakshenko’s victory at the upcoming presidential election quite negatively. At the same time, success of a democratic candidate serves as a basis for moderate social optimism.