INTO EUROPE, WITHOUT NATO

Where does homeland begin? In the opinion of the most part of Belarusian elite (80%), it begins from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This is XIII-XVIII cc. All other historic precedents are registered as merely the traces. Thus, the Belarusian Popular Republic (1918) received only 8% of votes, BSSR – 5% and the Republic of Belarus formed in 1991 – same 5%.

The roots are binding. This is the reason why the elite see the major national interest in state independence. (See Table 1). Merging with one of geopolitical giants – either in the West or in the East – is not popular. Such distribution of votes for a small country in the geographical center of Europe may seem surprising. Small political agents have little inner resources to develop and uphold their own path. As a rule, their successful survival strategies are choosing of a right ally. This is the world practice. It is entirely possible that patriotism of the Belarusian elite generates from the low level of its inner resources. The majority of the elite entered it yet under the Soviets and it is hard for them to adapt to the new life. One should not be misled by willingness of a half of the polled (40% from the public sector and 60% from the private sector) to work in an EU country. There’s usually a great distance between concourse of favorable circumstances (“... if you had such an opportunity”) and particular efforts taken to create them.

Value of independence as well leaves its mark on the attitude to Union State construction. In the opinion of the majority (88%), such a union would mean loss of national sovereignty for Belarus. There is no difference here between the answers of public and private sectors. As for the threat from the West, the Belarusian elite almost don’t feel it. Answering to the question “Do you think the West is hostile towards Belarus and the Belarusians should be very careful about it?” 83% of public and 97% of private sector employees said “No.” What’s more, there’s a significant positive dynamics in answers to this question. Thus, in May only 60% of public sector employees were to the same degree definitely pro-European.

The recent Belarusian initiatives on the search of new strategic allies are not considered at all among elite representatives. (See Table 2). One can see a rare unanimity on this issue. Unlike the public opinion which is very pliable to the official propaganda, the elite have intellectual basis to work out their own opinion and so they are able to separate wheat from tare.

The positive moment here is that despite the Soviet past of the Belarusian elite the answers pertaining to democratization and human rights observance in Table 1 go in the second and third place after independence. Nation opinion polls show absolutely different priorities. Thus, the first place is steadily given to the components of the living standard (in June of 2006 “growth of prices” received 60% while “human rights violation” was mentioned almost four-fold more seldom – 22%).

Being in general pro-European, the Belarusian elite don’t transfer its sympathies to the NATO. (See Table 3). However, the difference between the two groups is really big. What surprises is a different thing – the line DA/NA. When answers require knowledge beyond daily experience, respondents almost always feel confused which is displayed in growing number of those who find it difficult to answer (extremely politicized questions are an exception).

The question about the NATO is exactly a politicized one. It didn’t cause any difficulty during the nation opinion poll. However, it appeared difficult for … the elite! Not everything is that straightforward. It is possible that we see a classic example when honey is sweet, but the bee stings. The Belarusian elite are not free from the stereotypes which were built up for decades. Even filling in an anonymous questionnaire, 40% of respondents didn’t dare to make choice. They preferred to choose neutral from their viewpoint variant and their belonging to the public sector didn’t play any role.

Back   Top