‘If Lukashenka Promises Something To Putin, This Doesn’t Mean Belarusians Will Not Struggle’

• 1.03.2019, 20:24

The “Crimea option” will not work in Belarus.

The leader of the Interview of the Week program on Radio Svaboda, Russian opposition figure Vladimir Ryzhkov, also told why Russian society does not feel any enthusiasm and euphoria for the idea of accessing Belarus.

- Last week the “Belarusian theme” was quite actively discussed in the Russian press. It probably began after the December round of negotiations between the leadership of Belarus and Russia, when Russian Prime Minister Medvedev put out his famous “ultimatum”: they say, either let's really integrate, or - reduce economic preferences. In your opinion, is it just such the way to say to Minsk “roll back, there is no more money”, or does Moscow really want more integration?

- First of all, it is worth noting that at the moment both Russia and Belarus are authoritarian states. And there, and there is no public political sphere, when key policy issues are discussed widely, publicly, openly. And when decision makers are responsible.

We are dealing with closed, narrow negotiations in which several people take part on each side, and at certain key moments only two people - Putin and Lukashenka. And this is a very important point, since neither Belarusian nor Russian society is aware of what is actually happening, they cannot know about it and cannot participate in the discussion.

Meanwhile, we are talking about the future of Belarus and the future of Russia. And everything goes privately, when we can only guess what the two authoritarian leaders agree among themselves.

This is in itself an unacceptable situation that can lead to unpredictable consequences. Even if Lukashenka promises something to Putin there, this does not mean that the Belarusian society will accept this choice and will not struggle with it.

All these conversations on the Belarusian theme (at least in Russia) are taking place against the backdrop of the “problem of 2024,” when Putin’s second presidential mandate ends. According to the Constitution, he must leave the presidency.

Therefore, when in December Putin and Lukashenka began to meet as often as never before, rumors immediately arose that it was possible that Putin’s election as president of the “union state” was behind this, in order to prolong his power.

- And what is the stance of the Russian society to the “Belarusian theme”? Does it want Belarus to remain a friendly but independent country? Or does some part think that Belarus should be accessed? Does the “Crimea option” still work in society, or is the society tired of its consequences?

- Generally speaking, “the variant of the Crimea” will not work here. More recently, Russian sociologists have studied this topic, and it turned out the following. The attitude to the “Crimea” was very emotional. There are no such emotions with regard to Belarus.

Most Russians have a good attitude towards Belarus, consider it a friendly fraternal state, believe that the union between Belarus and Russia is good. But they will not support any radical steps - especially if it’s connected with the crisis in relations, mass protests, resistance, and so on.

In addition, there are voices among the people and elites, that this is a very expensive pleasure. For 5 years from the moment of joining the Crimea, people gradually understand that this is a very expensive toy. Now Crimea is in the top five Russian regions with the largest volume of subsidies, along with Chechnya, Dagestan and Yakutia. And people understand that any form of “accession” of Belarus will cost Russia a pretty penny.

Therefore, I sincerely answer your question - the enthusiasm and euphoria that were towards the Crimea, do not present with regard to Belarus, this is impossible actually.

- Is it possible in connection with this to say that in Russia “the refrigerator starts to beat the TV”? That is, issues of domestic life and the economy prevail over foreign policy. Putin’s rating is falling, and he obviously knows this, and he devoted his last presidential address to internal problems.

- Absolutely right. This trend began 2-3 years ago, when people began to grumble and get annoyed more and more that Putin was mainly engaged in foreign policy, while the internal situation was worsening.

I will say to our audience in Belarus that the real incomes of Russians are falling for the fifth year in a row. And on average, a resident of Russia has become 20 percent poorer than in 2014. People are increasingly accusing Putin and the Kremlin of being carried away by foreign-policy games to the detriment of economic development.

The government’s ratings are falling, today they are minimal for many years. However, Putin in his message to the Federal Assembly reacted to this, and therefore 90 percent of his speech was devoted to social promises.

Everyone noticed that he had never recalled Ukraine, Syria, Venezuela. One phrase was said about Belarus that integration is good. Although many expected that he would express himself in detail, what he wanted from meetings with Lukashenka, and what was the plan there.

This suggests that foreign policy has lost its popularity in the Russian society and it requires the authorities to start handling own internal affairs.