IISEPS — Independent Institute of Socio-Economic and Politycal Studies

THE BELARUSIANS ABOUT THE INTERNATIONAL LAW

Must a state fulfill its international commitments even if the authorities of the country consider that fulfillment of the commitments does not correspond with the national interests? A question about it was asked in the course of the December national opinion poll of the IISEPS (Table 1).

Table 1. Distribution of answers to the question: "There exists the international law which is based on the agreements signed by the majority of countries including Belarus. Which point of view on the international law is closer to you?"

Variant of answer	%
Our state should act according to the international laws. To infringe upon the international laws is as wrong as to violate the internal laws of the country	61.5
If the authorities of our country consider that it is not in our national interests to act in accordance with the international laws, then it is not necessary for us to adhere to them	30.4
DA/NA	8.1

The question of Table 1 virtually completely coincides with the question which was asked in the course of an international opinion poll conducted from April to July of 2009
(see: http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/btjusticehuman_rightsra/643.ph).
WorldPublicOpinion.org conducted an opinion poll of 20.202 respondents in 21 countries who constituted together 64% of the world population. The sample included the largest countries – China, India, the USA, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia as well as Mexico, Chile, Germany, Great Britain, France, Poland, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan, Palestinian Territories and South Korea. The population of Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao was also questioned.

The results of the poll showed that the majority of the population of seventeen countries out of twenty one believes that their government should adhere to the norms of the international law even in those cases when they do not correspond with the national interests of their states.

A comparison of the data of Tables 1 and 2 proves that the Belarusian society is remarkable for a comparatively high disposition towards fulfillment of international commitments by the state. If we regard the problem in the regional context then the ratio of supporters of implicit fulfillment of the international law and adherents of the national interests’ rigorous assertion in Belarus almost precisely coincides with the Polish one. There is a close ratio in France and Azerbaijan, too. At the same time in Germany and Ukraine, the balance is shifted more in favor of supporters of the international law priority, and in Great Britain and Russia – in favor of supporters of the national interests’ priority.

Table 2. Distribution of answers to the question: "As you perhaps know, there exists the international law which is based on the agreements signed by the majority of countries and which regulate a wide circle of questions–from fishing to the use of the military force. Which point of view on the international law is closer to you?", %

Variant of answer	"Our state should act according to the international laws. To infringe upon the international laws is as wrong as to violate the internal laws of the country"	"If the authorities of our country consider that it is not in our national interests to act in accordance with the international laws, then it is not necessary for us to adhere to them"	ЗО
China	74	18	8
Germany	70	26	4
USA	69	29	2
Taiwan	68	24	8
Ukraine	67	19	14
Kenya	65	34	1
Nigeria	65	34	2
Egypt	63	37	0
Poland	62	29	10
France	61	35	4
Azerbaijan	60	31	10
Chile	58	27	15
South Korea	56	44	1
Great Britain	54	43	3
Russia	54	34	13
Indonesia	53	34	13
Macao	51	37	12
Palestinian Territories	50	46	4
India	49	42	9
Hong Cong	47	38	15
Iraq	46	31	24
Turkey	46	46	8
Mexico	44	53	3
Pakistan	38	56	6
On average:	57	35	7

How is the choice of this or that position connected with socio-demographic characteristics and also with political preferences of respondents? The data of Tables 3 and 4 give an answer to this question.

Table 3. Connection of the attitude to the international law with socio-demographic characteristics, %

Variant of answer	Attitude to the international law:
Variant of answer	"Our state should act according to the international laws. To infringe upon the international laws is as wrong as to violate the internal laws of the country"	"If the authorities of our country consider that it is not in our national interests to act in accordance with the international laws, then it is not necessary for us to adhere to them"
Age:
18-19	63.9	31.1
20-24	69.3	23.4
25-29	66.4	28.2
30-39	62.6	28.3
40-49	70.2	22.8
50-59	68.3	22.8
60 +	46.7	43.6
Gender:
Male	63.8	29.5
Female	59.6	31.2
Education:
Primary (up to 4 classes of a secondary school)	37.7	56.8
Incomplete secondary (including vocational schools without secondary education)	45.0	43.1
General secondary (secondary school, lycée, vocational school with secondary education)	65.2	25.0
Specialized secondary (technical school, college, etc)	71.7	22.7
Higher (including incomplete higher)	68.0	25.9
Do you use the Internet?
Yes, daily	60.4	29.9
Yes, several times a week	71.2	24.3
Yes, several times a month	72.0	21.8
Yes, several times a year	53.3	40.0
No	62.6	28.3
I do not know what it is	27.4	64.6

Table 4. Connection of the attitude to the international law with political preferences %

Variant of answer	Attitude to the international law:
Variant of answer	"Our state should act according to the international laws. To infringe upon the international laws is as wrong as to violate the internal laws of the country"	"If the authorities of our country consider that it is not in our national interests to act in accordance with the international laws, then it is not necessary for us to adhere to them"
Is it a blessing for Belarus, in your opinion, that it became an independent country in 1991?
Yes	63.6	31.3
No	53.8	38.5
What state symbols (the State Emblem, the flag) correspond more, in your opinion, to the historical and cultural heritage of the Belarusian nation – the ones that existed from 1991 to 1995 (with the "Pogonya" State Emblem) or the present ones (reminding of the symbols of the BSSR)?
Such symbols as the present ones	59.4	34.1
Such symbols as before 1995	63.9	30.6
How, in your opinion, the relations between the state and its citizens should develop?
The state should interfere as little as possible in the life and economic activity of the citizens	71.5	25.4
The state must determine unified "rules of play" for everybody and see to it that they are not violated	52.1	40.8
The state must take care of all its citizens providing a decent level of life for them	63.4	27.7
Do you trust the president?
Yes	52	39.8
No	72	22.4
Do you want restoration of the USSR?
Yes	46.7	41.2
No	66.8	28.6
There exist different opinions about what language should be compulsory for use as an official one in public offices (the government, the army, law-courts, schools, etc.) – Belarusian, Russian or both – Belarusian and Russian. And what is your opinion?
The use of the Belarusian and Russian languages should be compulsory	60.9	36.6
The use of the Belarusian language should be compulsory	60.9	31.6
The use of the Russian language should be compulsory	61.5	29.6
If protest actions against worsening of the economic position take place in your city (district), are you ready to take part in them?
No	69.0	22.2
Yes	59.9	33.4
What is the historical way of Belarus, in your opinion?
Its own, particular way	60.3	31.5
The common way of the European civilization	66.7	24.9
Return to the Soviet way	59.1	34.2
Are you for or against abolition of the capital punishment in Belarus?
Against abolition	61.2	33.6
For abolition	60.9	30.6
If you had to choose between integration with Russia and entering the European Union, what would your choice be?
Entering the European Union	73.9	21.7
Integration with Russia	50.0	42.2
Do you think A. Lukashenko coped with the responsibilities of the president well enough to be elected for this position once again, or do you think it is high time somebody else was given a chance to fulfill the responsibilities?
Give a chance to a new person	71.1	22.3
Elect A. Lukashenko once again	50.3	42.5
If the state violated your rights, whom would you address to for help?
There is no point in defending oneself, the state would win anyway	64.8	26.9
To the law-enforcement agencies (militia, Office of Public Prosecutor, law-court)	69.2	25.1
To the presidential Administration	51.6	39.9
To the officials (Executive Committee of the City, Regional Executive Committee)	53.9	36.9
I defend myself on my own	65.9	26.8
To a deputy	58.8	31.1
To independent newspapers	74.5	16.0
To state newspapers	50.0	42.0
To non-government organizations	72.2	19.4

The attitude to the international law is connected with age by a nonlinear dependence. The age groups of 20-24 and 40-49 years old are devoted to its priority to the greatest extent, and the respondents of 60 and older – to the lowest extent. Perhaps the point is that socialization of the polled at the age of 40-49 fell on the years of perestroika and independence formation when the ideas of the international law prevalence were quite popular.

It is paradoxical that men are a little bit more devoted to the priority of the international law than women are. It might be a manifestation of the connection with age noted above, as there are more people in their declining years among women who are more inclined to make their choice in favor of the national interests. Connection of the question under consideration with education is very tight, it has an almost linear character – the higher the level of education is, the more is the inclination to the international law. Among the people of little education, supporters of national interests’ assertion constitute more than 50%. When passing to the better-educated cohorts the share sinks and the balance changes into the opposite one.

However, the character of connection with the frequency of the Internet use is nonlinear – those who do not at all know what the Internet is are devoted to the priority of the international law to the lowest extent. At the same time the larger frequency of the Internet use does not lead to the larger devotion to the priority of the international law.

As for the connection with the political preferences, it is anticipated: adherents of the president A. Lukashenko, supporters of the USSR restoration, those who choose Russia in the dichotomy "RF-EU" and the present state symbols, those who consider that independence did not do Belarus good are to a greater extent inclined to believe that if the authorities suppose that fulfillment of the international law standards contradicts the national interests then preference should be given to the latter. Nevertheless, it should be mentioned that the share of the international law priority supporters exceeds 50% among them, too.

The character of connection with the ideas about the role of the state is quite interesting. Priority of the international law is advocated to the greatest extent by liberals – supporters of a state-"night watchman", however they are followed by supporters of a paternalistic state. Priority of the national interests is advocated to the greatest degree by "legalists", i.e. by those who prefer the state only to establish strict "rules of play". Perhaps due to the mentioned fact they are less inclined to these rules to be established for the country from the outside.

It is interesting to note that respondents who are ready to take part in the protest actions are less inclined to give preference to the international law than their more patient fellow citizens. It follows from this that not only people with liberal views are disposed to protests.

Connection between the attitude to the international law and possible addresses the citizens would appeal to in case if their rights are violated by the state also presents some interest. Those who give preference to the executive power and intend to address themselves to the presidential Administration or to the officials of the authoritative "vertical" give preference to the international law to a much lesser extent than those who would appeal to the law-enforcement agencies, to the independent press or to NGO's.

Summing up we should notice that the idea of the international law priority is quite widespread and popular in the Belarusian society. The balance between the international law and national interests shifts in favor of the latter only in the groups of citizens with the lowest possible education. As a whole, there is a quite tight connection between the devotion to the liberal values and preference given to the international law. However, even in the groups sharing more conservative and patriarchal values the balance of assessments is nevertheless in favor of the international law.

It does not follow from the above said that the Belarusian society is ready to make considerable efforts in order to assert the priority of the international law. After all, the Belarusian authorities determine which international agreements the country should participate in. Interpretation of Belarus commitments following from these agreements depends on them to a considerable degree, too. However, complete neglect of the commitments is unpopular in Belarus, and the authorities proceeding from their understanding of national interests nevertheless aim at giving their actions an appearance of international commitments fulfillment.