In the Fall of 2000, a parliamentary election is scheduled to be held in Belarus. It is not yet clear, how they will be organized and it is still far away. However, it was important to ask the respondents what parties and political blocs that would vote for if the election were held today. Often the opinion is voiced that people do not trust political parties at all, which is reinforced by survey data. However, many respondent would vote for representatives of political parties (see Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question “If a parliamentary election were held in Belarus today, what political parties and movements would you vote for?”, %
* The list of parties did not reflect the recent split in the Belarusian Popular Front, i.e. the BPF headed by V. Vyachorka was not on the list
It’s difficult to say to what extent the respondents’ choice is determined by their knowledge of party programs and activities. The Women’s party might have attracted respondents by its name, while leader of the Belarusian Social Democratic Union (“Gramada”) S. Shushkevich is a popular public politician. Still, about one third of the respondents have preferences among political parties. Why will the majority of the respondents vote for party candidates? Is it because people do not trust all political party, without exception, or because they are not aware of party platforms and activities?
The November 1999 survey also included a question on their hypothetical voting at the Russian Parliamentary election (see Table 2).
Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question “If you had an opportunity to take part in the election to the Russian State Duma in December, 1999, what party or political bloc would you vote for?”, %
The comparative analysis of Tables 1 and 2 explains the reasons for Belarusians’ distrust for political parties. Among Russian political parties, whose representatives are seen on the TV screen almost every day, 56.3% of the respondents were able to choose one they like. As for domestic political parties, only 39.3 percent of the pollsters have preferences. At the same time, interest for alternative viewpoints is rather high (see Table 3).
Table 3. Distribution of answers to the question “What of the following opinions about Belarusian TV and radio do you share?”, %
Thus, the overwhelming majority of the Belarusian populations would like to hear opinions different from those voiced by state officials. Even among the supporters of the current Belarusian head of state, the vast majority stand up for information pluralism. At the same time, the expression of alternative opinion accompanied by violence does not enjoy wide popular support. 56% of the respondents (48.3% of Minsk residents) evaluated negatively the opposition-sponsored March of Freedom on October 17, 1999. It should be noted that the respondents’ opinion was formed not only by the coverage of the event by the Belarusian TV. Data from Table 4 suggest that not only those who believed official propaganda gave a negative evaluation of the action.
Table 4. Distribution of answers to the question “What mass media, in your opinion, did the most accurate coverage of the Freedom March?”, % (the respondents could name more than one medium)
At the same time, 16.9% of all pollsters and 30.4% of Minsk residents evaluated the rally positively. This is an indication that potential for radical protest in Belarus and, especially in Minsk, is substantial. One of the factors determining the potential for radical protest is people’s questioning the legitimacy of the actual head of state in Belarus (see Table 5).
Table 5. Distribution of the answers to the question “Which of the following opinions do you share?”, %
| Variant of answer |
In 1994, A. Lukashenko was elected president for a five-year term, which expired July 20, 1999 |
A. Lukashenko remains the legitimate president after July 20, 1999, because his mandate was extended through a referendum in 1996 |
||
|
All respondents |
Minsk |
All respondents |
Minsk |
|
| Yes |
37.7 |
54.2 |
45.3 |
29.4 |
| No |
26.8 |
18.5 |
24.5 |
40.9 |
| DA/NA |
35.5 |
27.3 |
30.2 |
29.7 |
Between one fourth and one third of the respondents expressed doubts in Lukashenko’s legitimacy as head of the Belarusian state while answering the relevant question expressed in various forms. For Minsk, these figures are higher. Despite the failure of the alternative presidential election in Minsk on May 16, 1999, many Belarusian citizens are convinced that only a timely election can grant a legitimate presidential mandate rather than any other democratic procedures. At the same time, A. Lukashenko is still leading the polls (see Table 6).
Table 6. Distribution of answers to the question ”If a presidential election were held in Belarus tomorrow, who would you vote for?”*, %
* Other Belarusian politicians were named by less than 1% of the respondents in the November 1999 survey
Table 6 illustrates several important trends. Starting from September 1998, Lukashenko’s rating has been steadily falling, although slowly. Unlike previous integration campaigns, the recent one did not boost his popularity. Actually, the fluctuations of Lukashenko’s ratings through 1999 did not exceed the margin of error. He still remains unchallenged in the “first division” of Belarusian politics. Interestingly, A. Lukashenko’s rating in the capital is almost twice as low as his national average rating. However, this relative reluctance of Minsk residents to vote for Lukashenko do not transform to the desire to vote for somebody else since the popularity of Lukashenko’s opponents among Minsk’s residents is not different from that among the population of the entire country.
It should also be noted that with time elapsing after the May 1999 alternative presidential election, the ratings of two candidates, Z. Paznyak and M. Chigir dropped somewhat, the rating of V. Gonchar, the main organizer of the event, increased, which might have to do with his disappearances last summer. Again, the fluctuation of their ratings, as well as rating figures themselves for most opposition candidates, are insignificant. However, when alternative candidacies are offered, the ratings somewhat increase (see Table 7).
Table 7. Distribution of answers o the question “If you had to choose the president of Belarus only of the two following politicians, who would you vote for?”, %
| Variant of answer |
06’99* |
11’99 |
|
|
All respondents |
Minsk |
||
| Lukashenko vs. Chigir | |||
| – Lukashenko – Chigir – Against both – Would not vote – DA/NA |
52.0 |
49.8 |
28.4 |
| Lukashenko vs. Paznyak | |||
| – Lukashenko – Paznyak – Against both – Would not vote – DA/NA |
52.7 |
51.4 |
32.8 |
| Lukashenko vs. Gonchar | |||
| – Lukashenko – Gonchar – Against both – Would not vote – DA/NA |
48.4 |
29.4 |
|
| Chigir vs. Paznyak | |||
| – Chigir – Paznyak – Against both – Would not vote – DA/NA |
12.1 |
14.9 |
25.7 |
| Chigir vs. Gonchar | |||
| – Chigir – Gonchar – Against both – Would not vote – DA/NA |
11.2 |
18.3 |
|
| Paznyak vs. Gonchar | |||
| – Paznyak – Gonchar – Against both – Would not vote – DA/NA |
5.7 |
3.5 |
|
* In the June 1999 survey pairs with Gonchar were not offered
Similarly to the June 1999 survey, A. Lukashenko is well ahead of all his potential competitors, of which M. Chigir is the leader. In Minsk, however, Lukashenko’s lead is not so overwhelming. A comparison of Tables 6 and 7 shows that M. Chigir and V. Gonchar have pretty good chances to attract more supporters , especially in the capital. However, it would not be enough to be able to compete with Lukashenko, in any case, on the national level. Data from Table 7 suggest that a large part of Belarusian society do not agree to the possibility of a choice between two opposition candidates and refuse to make a choice in that situation.