Belarus Tomorrow: Who will be Belarus’s next leader?
ERB moderator: Russian journalists often ask the Belarusian president about his attitude towards him being called “batska” (father). I noticed with surprise that it started to sound somewhat unusual. Perhaps, nobody in this country calls him this way any longer. The Russian journalists seem to have lagged behind a bit. Belarus has changed in such a way that it does not perceive the current president as batska.
Matskevich: I did not think this way before, but now I am inclined to agree with this version. This myth was created by journalists just in order to make interpretation more convenient. Later, this myth was reinforced and has continued to fly around.
Martsev: “After all, “batska” is just a nickname. When nicknames are adequate to perception, they survive. Afterwards, people are called with their nicknames without any connotation this nickname carries. At a certain stage, the Belarusian elite and the society in general were in need of a strong leader. This strong leader emerged and was recognized thus giving life to this nickname. Is he perceived as a strong leader now? I think, yes, he is. Another thing is that the situation around the country is changing. The conditions for the existence of our country are changing, too. So, people will start asking whether this strong leader is adequate to a new emerging situation.
Transition from totalitarianism to democracy and from socialism to the market is only possible in the form of totalitarian dictatorship. We received this dictatorship in 1994. But dictatorship is not determined by a leader. Leader is just a personality, a representative of a certain regime. No doubt, Lukashenka has played the role of such a representative extremely well. He sometimes overshadows all those positive things in this country.
Matskevich: It is noteworthy that when they talk about batska, they mean that he is the leader of a certain part of population. Perhaps, he is the leader of the archaic peasantry. But it was rather the elites which needed a strong leader the most. Nobody really asked the peasants, the patriarchic part of the society. They were definitely used in electoral processes, but peasants did not determine the nature of the current regime. There was an electoral demand.
ERB: There is a suggestion that Belarus has never seen a succession of power. Is it a problem?
Matskevich: “Belarus should be described as a country with cultural catastrophes. Every time when a new generation raises heads and begins setting out certain national tasks, it is either rooted out or replaced with another generation. Look at the wave of early 1990s when the parade of sovereignties dismantled the Soviet Union and reached Belarus as well. It seemed that Belarus had no elite which could be strong enough economically, intellectually and organizationally. Popular Fronts in the Baltic States seized power, while the Belarusian Popular Front focused on national cultural initiatives, pretending that it seriously eyed the political leadership. So, another generation is currently at power.
Marstev: “I think that the succession of power existed in a way. It was just simplified or utilitarian or of bad quality, yet it still existed. The ruling elite preserved the power, despite the fact that another president was elected. The rotation of the ruling elite took over 10 years. The Popular Front-period was exactly an attempt to destroy this succession. And we know that it did not happen. It was the nomenclature or the ruling elite that got the power. People supported Lukashenka, thus having preserved the succession of power.
ERB: How come the nomenclature backed Lukashenka who was not a man of the nomenclature?
Martsev: “Yes. But the nomenclature realized at that moment what the country needed. It was the nomenclature which created a program which Lukashenka was expected to complete as their mission. The situation now will develop in the same way: either the elites force the leader to implement this program or they will replace the leader.”
Matskevich: “Talking about why the nomenclature wasted Kebich, a weak-willed and passive man, and supported instead a non-nomenclature candidate, I think this proves to a certain extent the health of a certain societal community which aims at self-survival rather than extinction. But you can’t say this about a society in general.
ERB: You said about the need for authoritarianism during the transition period. Is there a need for a stronger leader now to push on the reforms?
Martsev: Not necessarily. Every transition period has its own stages. Any reform implies not just a set of orders. Rather, it is a dramatic blow at people’s conscience, their mentality and their understanding of life. It is a shock therapy. To implement this, there must be a man who is going to be trusted or feared. Later on when society understands the need for these reforms and understands to a certain extent the essence of these reforms, it always understands it in a simplistic way: prices should not grow, but if they have to grow, it must be done gradually.
Matskevich: …Even if prices grow, people need an explanation of why and when it will end…
Martsev: The unity and coordination within the elite play an important role here. This requires professionals, command methods, an understanding of tasks and mechanisms how to implement them. It is very good when there is a strong leader around in such a situation. You have asked whether it is necessary to have a strong leader. No! Reforms imply a team work.
Matskevich: In a period of quick and drastic reforms, the actions of the executive authorities come at a forefront. The thing is that it is the executive branch which has an understanding of what needs to be done. The parliament does not catch up with the processes, while the judiciary is busy with the other things. Here comes in the priority of the executive branch and its will. The situation is different when major decisions have already been made, and there is just a need to smooth them out. This requires a wise power. And when the wise power emerges, the significance and role of the mass media as a place for public debates begins to grow. The principle of the division of power starts being implemented.
ERB: So, it is important to say THANK YOU to the previous power which did a dirty job…
Martsev: Yes. The first stage is the most difficult.
ERB: Do you need to be a charismatic man to defeat an authoritarian leader?
Matskevich: Normally, authoritarian regimes led by a dictator give birth to the same opposition with a charismatic opponent. Everyone needs to have their own mythical winner hero. Paznyak performed this function for some time. Hanchar was next…It seems there were no more contenders. We can criticize the opposition for this and complain that we don’t have such a leader. But it seems to me that this situation also has a positive side. Opposition, even in the conditions like we are having in this country, is always a laboratory of the future. It develops certain features that we will see in the statehood of the future Belarus. This is about the absence of a charismatic leader and the absence of the need for a charismatic leader. I think there will be many leaders in the future of Belarus. But I cannot say when this change will take place.
ERB: Why then is everyone trying to spot a charismatic leader within the opposition?
Matskevich: There is no charismatic leader in Chile now. After Franco and Slazor, no charismatic leader came to power there. They are quite intelligent and strong personalities, but they are not charismatic and voluntarist dictators.
Martsev: Nobody ever knows whether there is a charismatic or not. Today, this person is just walking around somewhere. Tomorrow, he can turn out to be a man with a huge charisma. I don’t think that Lukashenka could be regarded as a charismatic leader back in 1993. Nevertheless, I agree that there will be many leaders in another political system. Most likely, it will be the time of political managers. Political and economic management will be more professional. It is inevitable, because the state will not survive without it. Talking about Milinkevich, he will be one of those new leaders.
ERB: This way or another, the government will try to preserve succession of power. In your opinion, will the next head of state emerge from within the present authorities or will he be a man from aside? Possible not from the opposition, but the one that is not part of the president’s entourage…
Martsev: “I can say that this person will come to power through elections. Most likely, he will be supported by the ruling elite. But I want to underline that when we talk about the change of power, the change of personalities, we must understand: the next head of state implies that Lukashenka must step down. Let’s talk this way. He is unlikely to step down by himself. I think that he, being a true leader, will try to implement reforms. What if he succeeds? We have always underestimated him. In 1993 we looked at him as a farm director. In 1994, we thought he was an accident. In 1996, we laughed. In 1997, we cried. Presently, we fear. Each of us, including the opposition, recognizes him as a professional politician.
Matskevich: It is impossible to imagine Lukashenka becoming today a Charles de Gaul. If the change of power occurs soon, the successor will most likely be appointed by Lukashenka himself. If this process gets delayed, it will require certain cataclysms. In that situation, a new man will emerge, of course. Even if a new leader wins popular support, this love will be of a different nature than today. As soon as this new leader begins with systemic changes, the political system will also change. But I think the political system will start changing even under the current president.
Martsev: Yes. The most important parameter is whether the change of power is driven by revolutionary or evolutionary changes. If it is about revolutionary changes, a man from the street can indeed get the power. Evolutionary changes can occur in two ways. For example, a new leader can be appointed. In this case, we can look into a possibility that the power will be passedover to heirs. After all, Victor Lukashenka is already a president’s closet aide and a member of the Security Council. And we don’t know him at all. Clearly, he is not like his father. On the other hand, it is good that he is not like his father. There is another option that a new leader can emerge from within the heart of the ruling elite. This will be a man well known by everyone, trusted and who will guarantee that the general course will not change. But, indeed, this could be a man from aside.
Matskevich: In fact, this does not exclude the succession of power.
Martsev: Absolutely correct.
ERB: Every time ahead of elections, journalists enter into cynical discussions about who will apppoint the Belarus president: West or Russia…
Martsev: Indeed, at the next presidential elections, the external factor will have a different meaning. There will be a situation when the next Belarusian president will be elected without foreign pressure. Apparently, the Russian factor has so far dominated. We are aware of support mechanism and know WHAT was requested for this support. The situation during the next presidential elections will change. Those will be more complicated games. From this moment, Russia will lobby the same thing that the West is lobbying. The West is not lobbying personalities. It lobbies values, i.e. the way of development. Russia used to support and lobby the man who promised it something for certain political reasons. Now, Russia will also support a certain political system. Their steps will become more systemic.
Matskevich: It is not that easy. In this sense, when I look at the elections in Ukraine, I feel proud for my country, because the Belarusians would not allow either in 1994 or later such a meddling like we can see in Ukraine. All political technologies in Ukraine are imported from either Russia or elsewhere. All attempts to impose a certain political process in Belarus have failed so far. The factor of Russia was very strong. But it will not work for Lukashenka’s support now. Appointment of a new president by the West is generally impossible. I would like to note that we all must be interested in strengthening the Western vector, because it will make our country more dynamic and more harmonic without an excessive roll to the East.
ERB: Which people who used to run their countries before would fit Belarus the best?
Matskevich: I am not hiding my conservative views, so I would talk about Churchill or de Gaul. In other words, there would those leaders who are able to stick to a certain strategy, without increasing their personal might.
Martsev: I would mention Rome Emperor Diocletian who indeed made all his citizens happy and refused from power voluntarily. We will allocate the best cabbage-growing plantations for this man. You have to understand that if Lukashenka becomes Diocletian, we will erect a monument to him. We just don’t need to divide the country into four pieces.
Photo: Photo.ByMedia.net і сайта царквы "Новае Жыццё"
