Pavel Gyenadyevich Usow, born in 1975 in Mohylev, is a graduate of the Faculty of History on the Mohylev State University and a distinguished researcher in the field of public opinion in Belarus. Over the past three years he has been investigating the formation and functions of the public opinion, has published extensively on this topic, and has been a regular participant in conferences on contemporary political issues in Minsk.
The following interview took place in Warsaw on 9 November 2001.
CER: Two months ago, we witnessed a significant political event in Belarus—a presidential election. To the great surprise of the world's public opinion, the Belarusian nation has chosen Mr Aliaksandar Lukašenka to be their leader, a man perceived as an autocratic ruler. The governments of the Western democratic countries questioned the results of the election as, according to them, the election did not fulfill the basic democratic conditions and the entire process of election seemed to have been manipulated. [The OSCE final report regarding the Belarus elections can be found at www.osce.org.] What is your interpretation of the entire process?
PGU: In my opinion, the major and most striking issue was undoubtedly the process of the pre-election. Originally, as you know, the pre-election was meant to enable those who were going to be out of the country on election day to cast their vote beforehand. But tell me honestly, who would believe that about 18 per cent of all Belarusians were to go abroad between 16 and 19 September? Personally, I had no idea that my compatriots were so fond of travelling.
But to go back to your question: The voters had been induced to participate in the pre-election in many extraordinarily inventive ways. For instance, those who went to cast their vote early, ie in the period of the pre-election, were entitled to take any means of transport for free.
The vast majority of these voters [who voted in the pre-election period] consisted of policemen, soldiers and students. The students enjoyed a very special treatment, by the way, as the student halls turned out to be locked during the pre-election, the result of which was that these young people had no choice but to go home and take part in the election on the day.
[...]
CER: Do you have any idea where the international observers were at this crucial time?
That is a good question. Well, they were, in fact, in the right places at the right time. But the thing is that the OSCE assumed the number of 100 observers to be quite adequate for keeping an eye on the proper and smooth process of the election. Consequently, they were [only deployed] in the polling stations of the largest cities, whereas in smaller towns and in villages, especially those in the middle of nowhere, Mr Lukašenka was chosen by unbelievable 90 per cent of voters. It reminds me of the times of the Communist era when the leaders used to get over 99 per cent! It is simply objectively impossible!
Talking about the observers: as if the above was not enough, some polling stations refused entry to opposition-designated observers from Izbyercom [Izbyerimyj Komitet, the Central Electoral Committee].
[...]
CER: Did you vote during the pre-election?
No, I did not. I went later. But, to tell you the truth, the election was not better whatsoever in any sense. The level of the organization was extremely low.
It turned out that some people had not been registered; I was one of them. I complained, but I was told in reply that they were not responsible for the mess and that it was the administration people who were to blame. In the end, they let me vote—but can you imagine what would have happened had I taken the decision not to vote? They could have done so on my behalf!
CER: This can be seen as a breach of protocol...
Certainly, but we are still far, far away from the end of the matter.
Let me mention the election campaign. During the campaign, one could see and hear countless broadcasts contrasting the splendid and fabulous East with the filthy, immoral, unfair West. Mr Lukašenka was the personification of Goodness and a symbol of the East, naturally. On the other hand, the opposition embodied everything bad. The members of the opposition, Mr [Uladzimer] Gancharick in particular, were [said to be] paid by CIA, which [was meant to explain] why their political orientation is pro-West and why they constitute the greatest danger to the Belarusian nation.
In one-hour-long TV broadcasts entitled Rezonans, the Belarusian voter was being told whom he or she should vote for. No names were given, but even individuals with an IQ below 100 had no shadow of doubt. It is commonly known that TV plays a major role in shaping public opinion. Over 60 per cent of the villagers watch solely Belarus state TV channels, presenting only one side of reality. During the election campaign, [BT TV—Belarusian Television] did not show any proper political discussions; moreover, the opposition had more than limited access to airtime.
CER: How would you evaluate the election campaign?
It was very negative in both a political and an aesthetic sense. [...] Brutal steps had been taken in order to eliminate and humiliate the opponent. We witnessed a typical campaign against, not for. This bears testimony to the extremely low level of political culture [in Belarus]. The voters themselves had been treated as cattle that understand nothing, have no opinion and are easily influenced.
Thanks to the voters' ignorance, the politicians can reach their goals without any obstacles. Both sides played unfairly. For instance, during the election campaign, the opposition triggered an avalanche of information about people who disappeared under very mysterious circumstances. Many pages of the opposition's newspapers were covered by the stories of Mr Lukašenka's rivals [who met] with sad ends. Apart from that, society was purposely misled by the estimated results of the election.
The opposition camp leaned towards the Yugoslav solution. On the other hand, Moscow is well disposed towards Mr Lukašenka. Although during and before the election campaign Moscow kept the distance from the official public support, it is no secret that Mr Lukašenka is a puppet in Putin's hands. Russia treats Belarus like a transit area for the transport of gas and oil. Mr Putin does not even think about losing it and, consequently, influences Belarusian politics considerably.
I should also add that political movements such as the Russian Communist Party did not hide its support for Mr Lukašenka, amongst other things, because of Mr Lukašenka's pro-Eastern political orientation. He had turned his attention from the West towards the East at the very beginning of his political career.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, which was followed by an enormous enthusiasm and an opening towards Western structures, came the period of a national and economical revival of Belarus. It did not last for long time, however. Then came an economic crisis and inflation. People suffered incredible poverty. And then, Mr Lukašenka appeared with his promises to give money back to people. He won and his success was achieved thanks to his populism.
CER: According to some Western newspapers, Mr Lukašenka possesses a special power, a charisma that makes people fall in love with him.
First and foremost, we should underline the fact that Mr Lukašenka is "the president of his nation." "Nation" [in this context represents] the inhabitants of the countryside. Mr Lukašenka himself was born and brought up in a farmer's family with a strict patriarchal mentality. Batka ["Daddy"], as he is called by his people, used to be a "president" of a kolkhoz [collective farm], which, by the way, was destroyed completely.
Mr Lukašenka uses simple language; everyone can understand him easily. Moreover, his thoughts are simple. Usually, when problems appear that need solving, he does not hesitate to immediately accuse the bureaucracy and the members of the administration [of misconduct] and hold them responsible. To make things worse and sillier, those people who are so ruthlessly blamed for everything keep silent as Mr Lukašenka has appointed them himself. So, he and he alone has got the power to call them off whenever he feels like it.
As I have mentioned before, he has got limitless autocratic power. The members of the government, including the prime minister, are not being chosen in a public election as it is in Western countries. They are simply appointed by the president. And the president holds the opinion that "he is the nation."
CER: Why is the opposition so inefficient?
The opposition put forward both a political and an economic program. But Belarusians are politically apathetic these days.
Generally, Belarusians are natural born minimalists. They have got their way of life and they cherish it. All they want is peace. They are not eager to fight; moreover, they do not even dream about democracy and their entire attention is given to their material base. They are slaving away for peanuts in order to keep their children alive. Simultaneously, the parents have no time to educate the children, so they become wild. It is a vicious circle with no way out. As a result, the children are following in their parents' footsteps— politically ignorant. And ignorance is not blessed.
CER: What are the intellectuals doing about it?
Please keep in mind that we are talking about three to five per cent of the population. What are they doing? Well, generally, they tend to leave their homeland for countries that offer them better prospects, such as Poland, the Czech Republic, France, the United States. This especially applies to young people who resign in large numbers and go abroad in search of a better future.
Nevertheless, within Belarus the potential access to positions of leadership is [...] limited. Intellectuals usually remain in universities and theatres that are rather non-political. They have no factual power at all. Although people are thirsty for knowledge, the most important [thing for them] appears to be a diploma that gives them the chance of a better salary. Yes, unfortunately, we are dealing with an omnipresent materialism.
CER: So, if I understood you correctly, the materialistic goals of a person are more important than the enlightenment of society?
Yes. As a non-Belarusian president, Mr [Ronald] Reagan used to say: "Give a person a car, a flat and he will never be living on the streets."
On top of that, the Belarusians are probably the most patient nation in the world. There is an anecdote about it: During the Second World War, the Nazis take three people under arrest—a Ukrainian, a Russian and a Belarusian. They are to be hanged. On the day of the execution, the Ukrainian is the first to go, the Russian dies a couple of seconds later. Only the Belarusian is still alive. Time goes on and he seems to have no intention of dying. Finally, one of the Nazis runs out of patience and shouts hysterically: "What the hell is wrong with you!? Why are you still alive?" "Well," says the Belarusian, "in the beginning it hurt a lot, but then I got used to it."
CER: It sounds very fatalistic. There must be some light at the end of the tunnel.
Oh, undoubtedly, don't make me laugh. There is always some hope in every single individual that keeps him or her alive.
|
At the moment, Belarus exists in perfect isolation. But it is not "a splendid isolation." The closest relations it has got, besides Russia, are those with Kazakstan, Ukraine and the countries of the Third World. With the Third World the relations are military rather than commercial.
As you undoubtedly know, Belarus has got an enormous heritage [left by] the Soviet army and the weapons trade is the biggest source of national income. Not only the precise numbers but even the estimated ones are unknown. Maybe it seems weird, but the national budget is not being controlled by Parliament. The information about the state of the national budget is only at one person's disposal—and I believe you can guess who that person is.
CER: How do you see the future of your homeland?
I can see three scenarios leading to a better future. First: The period of stagnation will carry on until Lukašenka will not be able to keep the minimal social level any longer. The structure of society is maintained artificially—with support from Russia and [with money] from the arms trade. [When it collapses,] hungry people will go to the streets and rise in revolt. I would take a guess that it might come true in two to three years' time.
The second: Belarus will be conquered by Russia and will become, in fact, a part of the Russia. And the third solution, but the least realistic one: One beautiful morning, Mr Lukašenka will wake up with a unbearably guilty conscience and will publicly admit that the last election had been manipulated and that support for him had not been [as high] as presented. He will start a massive liberalization, reforms of the economy, he will open Belarus to Western investors. The economic opening will be naturally accompanied by political changes, the fresh air of freedom will enter the territory of Belarus, and the autocratic system will be overturned...
Agata Szczuka, 3 December 2001
Moving on:
- Archived articles about Belarus in CER
- Browse through the CER eBookstore for electronic books
- Buy English-language books on Belarus through CER
- Return to CER front page
